Received from 'acd'
Judge Gives EPA One More Chance to Do Its Job and Halt Fluoridation of Drinking Water
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/known-culprit/fluoride/judge-gives-epa-one-more-chance-to-do-its-job-and-halt-fluoridation-of-drinking-water/
In August, a landmark David-versus-Goliath
federal lawsuit brought by citizens against the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to end fluoridation of drinking water took another giant step forward.
The lawsuit—spearheaded by a coalition of
nonprofits and individual citizens—resulted in a two-week trial in
June (via video conference) that synthesized the findings of hundreds of
studies, including two landmark birth cohort studies funded by the National
Institutes of Health. The evidence, which included important admissions from
EPA’s own scientists, makes clear that the fluoridation chemicals consumed by
over 200 million Americans present an unreasonable risk of neurotoxic effects,
including reduced IQ and ADHD symptoms, particularly for babies in the womb and
bottle-fed infants. Buttressed by a 2,500-page Citizens Petition and
the expert testimony of
four internationally recognized scientists, lead attorney Michael Connett
asserted that the EPA has been derelict in its duty, spelled out under the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), to limit or ban toxic chemicals that pose
unreasonable risks—and especially, as this case underscored, risks to the
developing brain.
At the close of the June
proceedings—during which the EPA shunned its own in-house experts in favor of
testimony from unqualified “scientists-for-hire”—presiding
Judge Chen chastised the EPA for applying an improper standard of fluoride
neurotoxicity and urged the agency to work with the plaintiffs to
figure out a solution. Following more foot-dragging from the EPA, the judge, on
August 6, issued a new order that propels the still very much alive lawsuit
into encouraging but largely uncharted legal territory. Specifically, Judge
Chen directed plaintiffs to file a new petition with EPA that incorporates significant scientific
developments that have occurred since the original petition’s
filing. As for EPA, the judge has urged the agency “to give such a petition due
consideration on the merits in light of the substantial scientific evidence
proffered at trial”—including the powerful testimony of Philippe Grandjean,
MD, PhD, Howard Hu, MD,
MPH, ScD, Bruce Lanphear,
MD, MPH and Kathleen Thiessen,
PhD. The Court ordered the two parties to report back on November 5 and, in the
meantime, is holding the trial record open.
Those
who have been following the lawsuit’s progress will enjoy watching an
enlightening conversation between legal luminaries Michael Connett and Robert
F. Kennedy, Jr. , which highlights some of the more interesting twists and
turns that this groundbreaking legal endeavor has followed. Stay tuned!
