|
National
Research Council (2003-2006):
Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards
DIRECTORY: Health
> EPA
Fluoride Standards > NRC Review (2006)

NEW: NRC
Panel Members to Present Findings at 2nd CITIZENS CONFERENCE ON
FLUORIDE
LOOKING for a COPY of the NRC REPORT?
If you are a FAN member and wish to obtain a free
copy of the NRC report, please
email us. The report can also be purchased
online at the NAS
website.
NOTABLE QUOTES:
The report "should be a wake-up call."
- Dr.
Robert Isaacson, NRC Panel Member.
“The difference between
the levels of fluoride causing toxic effects and the levels added
to water to prevent tooth decay is vanishingly small and deeply
troubling.”
- Dr.
J. William Hirzy, Vice President, Environmental Protection
Agency's Headquarters Union, Washington DC.
"l personally feel that
the NRC report is relevant to many aspects of the water fluoridation
debate... [T]he report discusses the wide range of drinking water
intake among members of the population, which means that groups
with different fluoride concentrations in their drinking water
may still have overlapping distributions of individual fluoride
exposure. ln other words, the range of individual fluoride exposures
at 1 mg/L will overlap the range of individual exposures at 2
mg/L or even 4 mg/L. Thus, even without consideration of differences
in individual susceptibility to various effects, the margin of
safety between 1 and 4 mg/L is very low."
- Dr.
Kathleen Thiessen, NRC Panel Member.
“The crucial message
of this report is that the highest scientific authority in the
US has determined that low levels of fluoride in drinking water
may have serious adverse health effects."
- Dr.
Paul Connett, Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network.
"In my opinion, the evidence
that fluoridation is more harmful than beneficial is now overwhelming
and policy makers who avoid thoroughly reviewing recent data before
introducing new fluoridation schemes do so at risk of future litigation."
- Dr. Hardy
Limeback, NRC Panel Member.
REPORT's FINDINGS:
PRESS COVERAGE:
- Fluoride
foes get validation - Portland Tribune, March 24
- Warning
Sounded On Fluoride - Chemical & Engineering News, March
23
- Government Panel Raises Concern
About Fluoride - Wall Street Journal, March 23
- Report Confirms EPA Union's
20-year-old Concerns - EPA Headquarters Union, March 23
- Report
raises flag on fluoride - USA Today, March 23
- Study:
Too much fluoride in water dangerous - Metro West Daily News,
March 23
- Report:
Children at Risk From High Fluoride Levels - ABC News, March
23
- Too
Much Fluoride on Tap? - ScienceNOW, March 22
- Some Local
Drinking Water Contains Too Much Fluoride - Health Day, March
22
- Too
much fluoride in water endangers bones: study - Reuters, March
22
- National
Academy Calls for Lowering Fluoride Limits in Tap Water -
Environmental Working Group, March 22
BACKGROUND:
On Wednesday, March 22, the National
Research Council (NRC) relesed its report: "Fluoride
in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards."
The NRC began working on the report in 2003 following
a request
by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review the latest
research on fluoride toxicity and assess the adequacy, or lack thereof,
of EPA's current safe
drinking water standards for fluoride.
The EPA standard that NRC has reviewed is called
the "Maximum Contminant
Level Goal" (MCLG). The MCLG is the maximum concentration
of fluoride that EPA considers safe for all subsets of the population,
including the most vulnerable.
EPA's current MCLG for fluoride is 4 parts per
million (ppm), or 4 milligrams fluoride per liter of water (mg/L).
The standard was first established in 1985
amidst considerable
controversy, as it was designed to only protect against crippling
skeletal fluorosis (an extreme effect of fluoride) and not earlier
effects such as dental
fluorosis (a white, brown and black discoloration
of teeth with pitting and cracking of the enamel).
As noted to EPA in 1983 by Dr. Stanley Wallach,
a member of the Surgeon
General's health committe on fluoride: "You would have
to have rocks in your head, in my opinion, to allow your child much
more than 2 ppm.
EPA's decision in 1985
to enact the 4 ppm MCLG was thus harshly criticized by the Natural
Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Headquarters Union
of EPA
scientists and professionals.
Even today, twenty years after it was first enacted,
EPA's 4 ppm standard remains highly controversial.
Current controversy over EPA's standard has been
fueled,
in part, by EPA's use of the standard in a recent
decision to grant DOW
AgroSciences approval to spray a new fluoride fumigant on a
wide series of foods prepared in the US.
Thus, in addition to the implications for EPA's
water
standards, the NRC review will also have a strong bearing on
EPA's tolerances for fluoride
pesticides.
LINKS for FURTHER INFORMATION:
Background on EPA's Fluoride Standard
Being Reviewed by NRC:
- NRC Countdown Report
- Paul Connett, March 13, 2006
- A Political History
of EPA's MCLG - Fluoride Action Network, March 15, 2006
- How Industry Influenced EPA’s
Fluoride Safety Standards - Fluoride Action Network, March
18, 2006
- Critique
of EPA's MCLG - Fluoride Action Network, Environmental Working
Group & Beyond Pesticides, December 16, 2005
- For more background information on EPA Fluoride Standard,
click
here
FAN's Submissions to NRC
review committee (2003-2005)
|