LOOKING for a COPY of the NRC REPORT?
The report is available to read and search for free online at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571
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)
You can help support our efforts to initiate legislative changes
and spread our message.