The Future of Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Changing Debate
Experts suggest that the new court order issued last week may lead to increased regulations on fluoride in drinking water. Fluoride, which is typically added to drinking water to prevent cavities, has recently been the subject of increased scrutiny. Several cities have already stopped adding fluoride to their water supplies, but whether this will become a widespread trend depends on the actions of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
How Much Fluoride in Water Might Be Safe?
On September 24, U.S. Federal Judge Edward Chen ordered the EPA to enhance its rules regarding fluoride in drinking water. This decision was made in response to a report from The National Toxicology Program (NTP) in August, which suggested that 1.5 milligrams of fluoride in drinking water could pose neurodevelopmental risks to children.
The EPA uses a margin of exposure to establish a safety buffer between exposure and hazard levels. For fluoride, the exposure rate should be one-tenth of the hazard level, according to lawyer Michael Connett. Given that the NTP’s report identified 1.5 milligrams per liter as potentially risky, exposure risks could begin at 0.15 milligrams per liter, Connett noted.
Judge Chen wrote in his ruling that the current American exposure level of 0.7 milligram per liter, considered "optimal" in the United States, presents an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children. At present, the EPA sets the maximum level for fluoride at 4 milligrams per liter, significantly higher than the risk level cited in the recent study.
What Might the EPA Do?
According to Connett, who represented the plaintiffs, the EPA can either appeal the judge’s decision or take action to regulate fluoride. The EPA has 60 days to appeal the judge’s decision. Jeffrey Landis, a media representative for the EPA, stated that the agency is currently reviewing the judge’s decision. He pointed out that the court's opinion did not definitively conclude that fluoridated water is harmful to public health.
If the EPA accepts the judge’s orders, the agency would need to initiate a rulemaking process, according to John Strait Applegate, a law professor at Indiana University. He noted that this does not necessarily mean that a rule will be issued. The agency could conduct a thorough analysis and decide that the federal judge was incorrect and that there is not enough reasonable risk.
The lawsuit focused on a specific risk of fluoride exposure and developmental problems. However, the EPA would need to consider all risks and benefits, including the dental benefits of adding fluoride. The agency may also identify other risks related to fluoride and decide to issue warnings on fluoridated water consumption. Connett expressed hope that the EPA might issue a rule to ban the addition of fluoride to water.
Towns Going Off Fluoride
In the aftermath of the ruling, at least three towns have stopped adding fluoride to their drinking water. These include Somers and Yorktown in New York, and the City of Abilene in Texas. These towns are among the first in the U.S. to halt fluoridation following the judge’s ruling.
Yorktown had previously stopped fluoridating due to the need to upgrade its water system, but resumed in August 2024. The town's supervisor, Ed Lachterman, stated that the judge's ruling was quite decisive and gave him pause. Somers, which gets water downstream from Yorktown, also stopped fluoridation.
State-Level Considerations
Some cities that rely heavily on fluoride to control dental problems in their population may not find these considerations applicable. For instance, the city of San Antonio did not add fluoride to their drinking system until 2002. Since most of the city's population comes from a low socioeconomic background, fluoride was added to the drinking water to ensure a dental safety net.
Certain states, such as California and Illinois, have state mandates to add fluoride to their drinking water. In these states, cities would not be able to stop adding fluoride without overturning previous regulations.
More Research to Come
This new order is likely to stimulate more public attention and research on the topic. The NTP report only found an association between fluoride exposure and neurological risks, leaving the exact level at which fluoride becomes risky unclear. An October 4 Cochrane review found that the addition of fluoride to drinking water may have fewer health benefits compared to before.
Bottom Line
The debate around fluoride in drinking water is changing, with new research and court rulings prompting a reevaluation of current practices. As we continue to learn more about the potential risks and benefits of fluoride, it's crucial to consider all perspectives and evidence. What are your thoughts on this issue? Share this article with your friends and let's keep the conversation going. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is available every day at 6pm.
The Future of Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Changing Debate
Experts suggest that the new court order issued last week may lead to increased regulations on fluoride in drinking water. Fluoride, which is typically added to drinking water to prevent cavities, has recently been the subject of increased scrutiny. Several cities have already stopped adding fluoride to their water supplies, but whether this will become a widespread trend depends on the actions of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
