Showing 10 of 13:
Fluoride Report Confirms EPA Union’s 20-year-old Concerns
The NRC’s report “Fluoride in Drinking Water” vindicates the EPA Union’s expressed concerns about fluoride toxicity dating back to 1986, when we defined severe dental fluorosis as an adverse health effect as the NRC just did. The NRC Committee also found that it was likely that there is an increase in bone fractures and increased risk of Stage II skeletal fluorosis among people drinking water at the 4 milligrams of fluoride per liter (mg/L) level. Again, our union has been saying this for years.
EPA May Challenge Employee Right to Sue in Novel Fluoride Case
EPA may challenge the recent move by the union representing EPA’s professionals to join environmentalists in a suit over Safe Drinking Water Act health standards for fluoride, sources say, using the argument that the group has no “standing” to intervene because the workers are part of EPA itself. The National Federation of Federal Employees 2050 local has filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting a lawsuit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council seeking a vastly strengthened fluoride drinking water standard.
EPA gnashes teeth over fluoride
Dedicated EPA staffers have tried for years to stop the EPA management from raising the maximum allowable levels of fluoride that cities can put in their drinking water. The official EPA line has been to allow fluoridation, which proponents say helps prevent tooth decay. But many of the rank-and-file employees think fluoride is dangerous, and they don’t like being a part of any cavalier EPA policy.
The newer debate over fluoride in drinking water – which questions whether Mother Nature fluoridates water too heavily for good health in some parts of the country – has given rise to what an Environmental Protection Agency workers’ union calls a “precedent-setting” case of strange bedfellows.
Fluoride Report Softened
Between the draft report that was circulated among members for review and the final report that was presented to the Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, M.D., the committee’s most significant conclusions and recommendations were eviscerated.
’83 Transcripts Show Fluoride Disagreements
The year is 1983, nearly 40 years after fluoridation of U.S. water supplies began. The quotes are from a hitherto unpublicized transcript of the committee’s meeting obtained by Martha Bevis of Houston with the aid of her congressman.
Fluoride’s Revenge: Has this cure, too, become a disease?
An investigation of the health effects of fluoride, including two Freedom of Information Act requests that pried loose more than 10,000 pages of documentation, shows that a Government regulation intended to prevent fluorosis was derailed by a decades-old controversy between two agencies over a legally unrelated Government policy.
EPA Union’s Attempt to Join Lawsuit Opposing Fluoride Standard was Rebuffed
In an unprecedented move, the Environmental Protection Agency’s union of professional employees, Local 2050 of the National Federation of Federal Employees, attempted to file an amicus curiae brief in a lawsuit against the agency itself in 1986. The lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia was initiated by the Natural Resources Defense Council. It charged that the agency had ignored scientific evidence of adverse health effects when it set the recommended maximum contaminant level (RMCL) for fluoride in drinking water at 4 ppm.
The Science and Politics of Fluoride
Dental and medical groups have been battling anti-fluoridationists since the first dose of fluoride was metered into the water of Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945. For decades, it seemed that dentistry was winning those battles – that science was prevailing over the rhetoric of the antifluoridationists. Today the battle lines are not so clearly drawn.
How Much Fluoride Is Too Much?
The Environmental Protection Agency has stirred the hornet’s nest of fluoridation by seeking to double the maximum allowable amount of the mineral in the nation’s water supply – a move that is drawing sharp criticism as a possible health hazard.