flouride is poison

[Large Sarge]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqQkqZKBuV4

[Blink]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqQkqZKBuV4

[Cebu_4_2]

Take a look at the comments under that video. I can't believe how many paid shills are posting how good fluoride is.

[Serpo]

Take a look at the comments under that video. I can't believe how many paid shills are posting how good fluoride is.

They must be well fluoridated

[Cebu_4_2]

Looking into a bone char system. Is it worth a whole system or just drinking water? I will have to add (with no area to add) 3 more jumbo blue 20 inch deals. I figure it should be capable unless something is better.

[Shami-Amourae]

Take a look at the comments under that video. I can't believe how many paid shills are posting how good fluoride is.

I don't think they are paid. A lot of people really are that clingy to their enslavement.

[Glass]

There's a ton of threads on Flouride. Dont want to start another one.

This head line was in the news today. I'm stunned. It's great though because I was thinking on this and a story I heard about Queensland.


Studies linking fluoride in water to health issues prompt Australian review

Australian health authorities are reviewing the case for fluoride in drinking water amid concerns scientific evidence supporting the benefits and risks to people's health may have shifted.

While most Australians have been regularly consuming low amounts of fluoride since it was added to drinking water in the 1960s and 1970s to prevent tooth decay, several controversial studies in recent years have suggested the mineral may be linked to low intelligence in children and thyroid problems that can cause weight gain, fatigue and depression.

On Tuesday, the National Health and Medical Research Council revealed that a 2012 study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/?a_aid=3598aabf) linking very high levels of fluoride to low IQ among some Chinese children prompted it to commission a new review of the health effects (http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health-topics/health-effects-water-fluoridation) of the celebrated public health intervention.
A spokesperson for the NHMRC said while the Chinese study increased concern about the safety of fluoride and potential neurotoxicity for children, it was conducted in a country with very different naturally occurring levels of fluoride that are not seen in Australia, meaning "care needs to be exercised in interpreting the results".
Furthermore, the study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives identified drinking water with fluoride concentrations up to 11.5 mg/ L in China. In Australia, the recommended level is 0.6-1.1 mg/L.

Nonetheless, the NHMRC established a fluoride reference group last year and has commissioned Sydney University researchers to assess new evidence by mid 2015. A draft statement on their findings is due by the end of the year.

Until then, the NHMRC says its 2007 review of fluoridation stands (http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/eh41_statement_efficacy_safety_fluoride.pdf), showing it is safe and effective for preventing tooth decay and that there is insufficient evidence to support any other "measurable harm to human health".

"The only potential harm associated with water fluoridation is dental fluorosis [mottles or flecks on the teeth], and this can be minimised by the careful regulation of the concentration of fluoride in fluoridated water at levels aimed to prevent tooth decay," the spokesperson said.

But on Tuesday, British researchers called for health authorities to reconsider its water fluoridation program after a new study (http://jech.bmj.com/lookup/doi/10.1136/jech-2014-204971) linked fluoride to higher rates of hypothyroidism - low thyroid function that slows the metabolism down and can cause fatigue, weight gain and depression.


You cant post a comment though, which is typical. Although I get censored heavily with about 1/2 to 1/3 of my comments getting posted up.

I also think this is one of those stories they are deploying, to make it look like they are going to decide to get rid of it, but I think there could be a hidden backstory. I know of municipalites in Queensland where the people have forced the authorities to stop flouridating. They did this using the same method the police, govt, taxman and courts use to get us. A 3 step maritime process. I think they set the fee at $150,000.00 per year? I think it was per year. Council rolled over and stopped flouridating.

The Age (http://www.theage.com.au/national/health/studies-linking-fluoride-in-water-to-health-issues-prompt-australian-review-20150224-13nr33.html)

[keehah]

NPR!

NPR: Can Maternal Fluoride Consumption During Pregnancy Lower Children's Intelligence? [Yes] (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/08/19/752376080/can-maternal-fluoride-consumption-during-pregnancy-lower-childrens-intelligence)

A study published Monday suggests that fluoride consumed by pregnant women can decrease the IQ of their children...
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2748634

A 1-mg/L increase in MUFSG was associated with a 4.49-point lower IQ score (95% CI, −8.38 to −0.60) in boys, but there was no statistically significant association with IQ scores in girls (B = 2.40; 95% CI, −2.53 to 7.33). A 1-mg higher daily intake of fluoride among pregnant women was associated with a 3.66 lower IQ score (95% CI, −7.16 to −0.14) in boys and girls.

So Till and her colleagues tapped into a study of more than 500 Canadian women and their babies, focused on six cities.

"It turned out that about half of the sample were cities, like Toronto, where they add fluoride to drinking water," she says, "and the other half, like Montreal and Vancouver, were cities where they do not add fluoride to drinking water."

That mix gave her a sample of more than 500 women with a whole spectrum of fluoride exposure...

We would feel an impact of this magnitude at a population level," Till says, "because you would have millions of more children falling in the range of intellectual disability, or an IQ of under 70, and that many fewer kids in the gifted range."

The study was funded by the Canadian government and the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Science.

"It's actually very similar to the effect size that's seen with childhood exposure to lead," says David Bellinger, a professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School and Boston Children's Hospital. He reviewed the paper before it was published and wrote a commentary about it.

[Amanda]

August 25, 2020
Judge Gives EPA One More Chance to Do Its Job and Halt Fluoridation of Drinking Waterhttps://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/judge-gives-epa-one-more-chance-to-do-its-job-and-halt-fluoridation-of-drinking-water/

Print


By the Children’s Health Defense Team

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 (http://fluoridealert.org/articles/epa_fluoride_petition/) of nonprofits and individual citizens—resulted in a two-week trial (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/known-culprit/fluoride/fluoride-toxicity-trial-update/) 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 (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-02/documents/tsca_fluoride_petition.pdf) and the expert testimony (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/known-culprit/fluoride/the-fluoridation-trial-science-4-epa-0/) 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 (https://business-ethics.com/2016/12/13/1724-big-companies-in-legal-scrapes-turn-to-science-for-hire-giant-exponent/)”—presiding Judge Chen chastised the EPA for applying an improper standard of fluoride neurotoxicity and urged the agency to work with the plaintiffs (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/known-culprit/fluoride/fluoride-toxicity-trial-update/) 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 (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/more-evidence-that-fluoride-lowers-iq-will-the-cdc-keep-ignoring-it/) 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 (http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/EPA-trial-Grandjean-Declaration.pdf), MD, PhD, Howard Hu (http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/EPA-trial-Hu-Declaration.pdf), MD, MPH, ScD, Bruce Lanphear (http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/EPA-trial-Lanphear-declaration.pdf), MD, MPH and Kathleen Thiessen (http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/EPA-trial-Thiessen-Declaration.pdf), 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!


FLUORIDATION ON TRIAL: RFK, Jr.’s Conversation with Attorney Michael Connett
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=E80yl_3fE-E&feature=emb_title

[keehah]

Horrible terrible western public servants!


theguardian.com: Fluoride will be added to UK drinking water to cut tooth decay (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/sep/23/fluoride-will-be-added-to-uk-drinking-water-to-cut-tooth-decay#:~:text=Fluoride%20is%20expected%20to%20be,m ineral%20would%20cut%20tooth%20decay.)

2021/sep/23
The health bill going before MPs will give Sajid Javid, the health secretary, the power to order fluoridation across the country. However, any move towards centralisation is not expected soon.

fluoridealert.org: BRITISH SCIENTISTS SLAM UK FLUORIDATION PLANS; ACCUSE CMOS OF IGNORING SCIENCE (https://fluoridealert.org/content/bulletin_10-2-21/#:~:text=This%20week%2C%20the%20UK%20government%20 announced%20plans%20to,Scotland%2C%20and%20Norther n%20Ireland%20%E2%80%94%20endorsing%20the%20practi ce.)

October 2, 2021
This week, the UK government announced plans to mandate fluoridation of public water supplies. A statement was made by the United Kingdom’s Chief Medical Officers – from England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland — endorsing the practice. This will be accomplished using the Health and Care Bill currently being considered by members of parliament, and would give the Health Secretary, Sajid Javid, unilateral power to force communities throughout the country to add fluoridation chemicals to the public water supplies.


PRESS RELEASE:Three British Scientists Slam CMO’s Statement On Fluoridation Of Drinking Water And Have Written To Boris Johnson

According to three British scientists (Vyvyan Howard, MB, ChB, PhD, Spedding Micklem, PhD, and Paul Connett, PhD) who have followed the debate closely for many years, “This is not a good time for the British government to mislead the public on the dangers posed by the practice of water fluoridation.”

They point to a recent statement from the four Chief Medical Officers of Health for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, which was given prominent coverage in the British media. Their statement extols the weak benefits of this practice for teeth but ignores the far stronger evidence that fluoride damages the developing brain...

Most significantly, in ignoring these studies on the brain, the CMOs failed to acknowledge the several high-quality US government funded studies published since 2017 (Bashash 2017 (https://default.salsalabs.org/Teab3b273-aa7a-469a-84b2-c43a20e40e1a/229b4429-cacf-48af-87ba-5c92fb25a9dc), 2018 (https://default.salsalabs.org/T98ad36cc-ce72-432b-b9cb-3973b47d9505/229b4429-cacf-48af-87ba-5c92fb25a9dc); Green, 2019 (https://default.salsalabs.org/Te17aeecb-7128-4833-9aa2-8be966fd4ca9/229b4429-cacf-48af-87ba-5c92fb25a9dc) and Till, 2020 (https://default.salsalabs.org/T235ef123-6a6c-44b4-bcc5-737083be5696/229b4429-cacf-48af-87ba-5c92fb25a9dc)) which have found effects on the developing fetus and infant at the very fluoride levels used in artificial water fluoridation schemes. These effects include lowered IQ (between 5 qnd 9 IQ points reported) and increased ADHD symptoms. These findings make complete nonsense of the CMOs claim that health effects only occur “at much higher levels.”

The three British scientists added that, “In our view the way the CMOs treated the health effects posed by fluoridation is a gross dereliction of their duty to protect the health of the British people.”

Some background on the UK Health Minister reponsible:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sajid_Javid

Javid had an 18-year City career, during which he rose to become a Board member of Deutsche Bank International. Javid joined Chase Manhattan Bank in New York City immediately after graduation, working mostly in South America and overselling Mexican government bonds prior to the Mexican peso crisis... He returned to London in 1997, and later joined Deutsche Bank as a director in 2000. In 2004, he became a managing director at Deutsche Bank and, the following year, global head of Emerging Markets Structuring.

In 2007, he relocated to Singapore as head of Deutsche Bank's credit trading, equity convertibles, commodities and private equity businesses in Asia, and was appointed a board member of Deutsche Bank International Limited.

He left Deutsche Bank in 2009 to pursue a career in politics.

[keehah]

childrenshealthdefense.org: REPORT LINKING FLUORIDE TO LOWER IQ IN CHILDREN MADE PUBLIC AFTER CDC, HHS TRIED TO BLOCK IT (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/ntp-report-fluoride-lower-iq-children/)

03/16/23
The National Toxicology Program (NTP) on Wednesday released a draft report linking prenatal and childhood fluoride exposure to reduced IQ in children, after public health officials tried for almost a year to block its publication.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initially blocked the NTP (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/fluoride-toxicity-drinking-water/) from releasing the report, according to emails obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

But a court order (https://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/2023_01_20_Court-Order.pdf) stemming from a lawsuit (https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/20-71554/20-71554-2021-12-16.html) filed by Food and Water Watch against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) forced the report’s release this week...

The report, containing a monograph and a meta-analysis, went through two rounds of peer review by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Comments from reviewers and HHS and NTP’s responses also were included in the report released Wednesday.

According to its website, the NTP “removed the hazardous classification of fluoride” in response to comments in the peer-review process. Yet, the report states:
“Our meta-analysis confirms results of previous meta-analyses and extends them by including newer, more precise studies with individual-level exposure measures.

“The data support a consistent inverse association between fluoride exposure and children’s IQ …

“The results were robust to stratifications by risk of bias, gender, age group, outcome assessment, study location, exposure timing, and exposure type (including both drinking water and urinary fluoride).”

...The controversial report will play a key role in determining the outcome of a lawsuit brought in 2017 by several nonprofits against the EPA to end fluoridation of drinking water, plaintiffs’ attorney Michael Connett told The Defender.

“We had to fight hard to have this report even made public,” Connett said. “They [CDC and HHS] buried this. If they had gotten their way, this report would have never even seen the light of day,” Connett said.

Since the trial began in 2020, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen has been waiting for the NTP to complete a systematic review of fluoride’s neurotoxicity before ruling on the case.

Groups like the American Dental Association publicly pressured the NTP to “exclude any neurotoxin claims” from the reports.

Connett said during the trial, the EPA repeatedly claimed that the plaintiffs’ allegations about toxicity could not be verified because there was no “systematic review.”

The documents released Wednesday fill that gap...

According to the NTP report:

“The current bodies of experimental animal studies and human mechanistic evidence do not provide clarity on the association between fluoride exposure and cognitive or neurodevelopmental human health effects.”

Yet, the report’s summary contradicts this statement by summarizing the evidence informing this conclusion, stating that nearly all studies examined for this literature review found evidence of cognitive or developmental issues associated with fluoride...

“We have stressed in our monograph that our conclusions apply to total fluoride exposures rather than to exposures exclusively through drinking water.”

“What the NTP is pointing to here is that in some communities, where the dose of fluoride in the water is 0.7 mg/L, the NTP has found levels of fluoride found to be associated with lower IQ,” Connett told The Defender...

“The margin of safety here just doesn’t exist — it is precariously small,” Connett said. He added that the lawsuit is “basically a risk assessment of fluoride.”...

Then the agency determines in a given case whether the margin between the existing hazard levels and the human exposure levels is unacceptably close, which would make a toxin pose a risk to human health.

Connett said that in EPA’s previous risk assessments for other chemicals, such as methylene chloride or bromopropane, evaluated according to the 2020 risk evaluation method that guides this case, the agency found the hazard level exceeds the human exposure level by much higher margins — “usually in a range of ten to 20 times higher,” yet it has deemed those chemicals to present an unreasonable risk to human health.

In other words, the substances were found to be toxic to humans at levels significantly higher than what people may be exposed to in regular use, yet the EPA determined them to be risks.

When it makes that determination, the EPA must then take steps to mitigate the risk.

That can also be the finding in this case. According to a pre-trial document, both sides in the case agreed to the “undisputed fact” that the “EPA does not require that human exposure levels exceed a known adverse effect level to make an unreasonable risk determination under TSCA.”

The NTP documents also raised flags about the implications of seemingly small neurotoxic effects:

“Research on other neurotoxicants has shown that subtle shifts in IQ at the population level can have a profound impact on the number of people who fall within the high and low ranges of the population’s IQ distribution.




“For example, a 5-point decrease in a population’s IQ would nearly double the number of people classified as intellectually disabled.”

...The monograph and meta-analysis released yesterday on the NTP’s website are both labeled “draft.”

“Unfortunately, fluoridation promoters and high-level government officials have continued to label it a draft,” North said. “It wasn’t.”

Experts associated with the lawsuit against the EPA will now analyze and interpret the report in future hearings and then Judge Chen will rule.

The next hearing date is scheduled for April 11, 2023. At that time, the judge will set a date for the next phase of the trial

ntp.niehs.nih.gov [pdf]: DRAFT NTP Monograph on the State of the Science Concerning Fluoride Exposure and Neurodevelopmental and Cognitive Health Effects: A Systematic Review (https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/bsc/2023/fluoride/documents_provided_bsc_wg_031523.pdf)

September 2022
Results: The current bodies of experimental animal studies and human mechanistic evidence do not provide clarity on the association between fluoride exposure and cognitive or neurodevelopmental human health effects. This systematic review identified studies that assessed the association between fluoride exposure and cognitive or neurodevelopmental effects in both adults and children, which were evaluatedseparately. In adults, only two high-quality cross-sectional studies examining cognitive effects were available. The literature in children was more extensive and was separated into studies assessing intelligence quotient (IQ) and studies assessing other cognitive or neurodevelopmental outcomes. Eight of nine high-quality studies examining other cognitive or neurodevelopmental outcomes reported associations with fluoride exposure. Seventy-two studies assessed the association between fluoride exposure and IQ in children. Nineteen of those studies were considered to be high quality; of these, 18 reported an association between higher fluoride exposure and lower IQ in children. The 18 studies, which include 3 prospective cohort studies and 15 cross-sectional studies, were conducted in 5 different countries. Forty-six of the 53 low quality studies in children also found evidence of an association between higher fluoride exposure and lower IQ in children.

[woodman]

Been getting a tooth prepped for a gold crown. The dentist used a compound to build the tooth up that releases fluoride. Kind of gives me the creeps. I can’t find any info online about how much is released and how toxic it is. It is getting hard to find anything Thant is not ‘approved’ information anymore

[ziero0]

Do a search for the MSDS on fluoride. It gives you the LD50 (amount that is lethal in 50% of the population that does is give to. It is measured in grams per kg bodyweight.

Quick calculation tells you a tube of toothpaste fed to rats will kill 8 rats and make 8 more really ill.

[Amanda]

Been getting a tooth prepped for a gold crown. The dentist used a compound to build the tooth up that releases fluoride. Kind of gives me the creeps. I can’t find any info online about how much is released and how toxic it is. It is getting hard to find anything Thant is not ‘approved’ information anymore

fwiw- I recently watched a quick video w/holistic/biological dentist who provided links to university study on graphene oxide being in a common dental anesthetic.

Holistic dentist- graphene oxide in dental anesthetic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAjRojPSj9I
the University of Colorado confirmed the presence of graphene oxide particles in a very common anesthetic. Further testing and research will be needed to understand the implications of these findings.
https://www.fargodentist.net/holistic-dentistry/anesthetic/
https://c1-preview.prosites.com/84968/wy/docs/Anesthetic%20Raman%20Microspectroscopy%20Final%20R eport.pdf
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/breaking-news-graphene-confirmed
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/cp/136256247
Here is another doctor, Dr. Len Ber publishing his research on mixing dental anesthetic with blood and finding nanobots.

[monty]

I had read read that dev ntal anesthitcs ow contain graphine order. La Quita Columna (laquintacolumna.com) lists some brands in Spain that do not.

[woodman]

Scary stuff. I will talk to my dentist. I wonder how many dentists are in the know. Does any one have any idea why, other than evil intent, they would put graphene oxide in anesthetics?

[woodman]

I am considering having the compound removed and the tooth pulled if that is the way it must be. I don't want flouride in my mouth.

I will also confront my dentist. If he doesn't know what is in the shots, he should.

It seems the GO heightens and lengthens the effects of the anathesia. Found this in a cursory search:

We found the primary motivation for this study in the recent experimental work by Li et al. [2], where it was demonstrated that the anesthetic effect of LID could be prolonged by slow release from graphene oxide (GO)-based hydrogel.

[keehah]

AP: Fluoride in drinking water poses enough risk to merit new EPA action, judge says (https://apnews.com/article/fluoride-ruling-drinking-water-ccdfa11138600ab0838ebf979cbaead2)

September 25, 2024
A federal judge has ordered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water because high levels could pose a risk to the intellectual development of children.

U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.

It’s the first time a federal judge has made a determination about the neurodevelopmental risks to children of the recommended U.S. water fluoride level, said Ashley Malin, a University of Florida researcher who has studied the effect of higher fluoride levels in pregnant women.

She called it “the most historic ruling in the U.S. fluoridation debate that we’ve ever seen.”
eenews.net: EPA ‘in a really tough spot’ after landmark fluoride ruling (https://www.eenews.net/articles/epa-in-a-really-tough-spot-after-landmark-fluoride-ruling/)

10/18/2024
The decision — precedent-setting for Toxic Substances Control Act citizen petitions — represents a rare occasion in which a judge disagreed with federal officials on the science, forcing EPA to regulate against its wishes...

Fluoride in drinking water — at levels public health officials consider “optimal” for preventing tooth decay — “poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children,” Senior Judge Edward Chen wrote in his Sept. 24 decision (https://subscriber.politicopro.com/eenews/f/eenews/?id=00000192-2982-d614-a3ba-39cf36bd0000) out of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

“It should be noted that this finding does not conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health,” but that a risk sufficient to trigger rulemaking under TSCA exists, Chen continued.

That conclusion grants many of the requests a coalition of anti-fluoride groups asked of the agency in a 2016 petition, which EPA denied on both scientific and procedural grounds...

TSCA gives EPA a menu of “methods to neutralize the risk, ranging from” a public notice to a full-on ban on adding fluoride to tap water, Chen wrote in his decision.

“One thing the EPA cannot do, however, in the face of this Court’s finding, is to ignore that risk,” the decision continues.
x.com/michaelpconnett (https://x.com/michaelpconnett/status/1943644043776283032)

After several extensions, the Trump Administration has decided to appeal the federal court decision ordering EPA to address the risk posed by water fluoridation. EPA will be filing its appeal next Friday, July 18.

Rather than use the court's decision as an opportunity to finally end water fluoridation (as most of Europe has already done), the EPA will spend its time legally challenging the court's order. And it won't be alone. The American Chemistry Council (a trade organization that represents the chemical industry) has just filed a motion asking for permission to file a brief. And so has the American Fluoridation Society, one of the most noxious lobbyist groups pushing fluoridation across the US.

The decision to appeal the court's order was not made by the HHS or @SecKennedy. It was made by the Solicitor General of the Department of Justice [John Sauer], who reports to Pam Bondi and the White House.
Jul 11, 2025
thelastamericanvagabond.com: Trump’s EPA Continues Biden Admin Appeal of Historic Fluoride Ruling (https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/trump-epa-fluoride-appeal/)

July 24, 2025
While claiming to support the MAHA movement, the EPA under Trump has now taken steps to undo last year’s historic ruling which found that fluoride poses a risk to the neurodevelopment of children.

On Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency officially appealed a federal court ruling which ordered the agency to take action against the risks posed by fluoridation chemicals.

The EPA staked their appeal on three main arguments, including a belief that the plaintiffs’ lack standing, the judge improperly considered new evidence, and the district court went beyond its authority in its management of the case.

The EPA’s appeal is the latest development in a nearly decade-long legal saga between the EPA, and parents of children impacted by water fluoridation, as well as the Fluoride Action Network (https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/michael-connett-interview-2-5-24/) (FAN)...

Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the Fluoride Action Network and plaintiffs, said the EPA is arguing the court should have ignored relevant science published after 2016.

“I think most people would find that to be at odds with the public interest at stake here. We should be having decisions made in 2024 that reflect the science that is in existence in 2024,” Connett told The Last American Vagabond (TLAV)...

Unfortunately, the fact that Donald Trump’s EPA is deciding to appeal a court ruling rather than seek a ban or limiting of public exposure to fluoridation chemicals is only the latest in a recent string of betrayals for the MAHA movement...

In the 6 months since Donald Trump came into office, the Food and Drug Administration has approved (https://ir.arcturusrx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/arcturus-therapeutics-receives-us-fda-fast-track-designation-0) three separate mRNA injections (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mnexspike-moderana-new-covid-vaccine/), most recently COVID injections (https://archive.ph/zZdWv) for 6 month old children. HHS Secretary Kennedy has also sent mixed signals regarding his position on vaccines, calling for studying the connection between vaccines and autism, as well as promoting the MMR injection (https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/rfk-jrs-mmr-attack-free-speech/) which he previously campaigned against. Just this week the House of Representatives approved a measure (https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2025/07/22/house-committee-advances-bill-to-keep-public-in-dark-about-pesticide-risks/) which would keep the EPA from labeling pesticides (https://thefreethoughtproject.com/government-corruption/the-great-betrayal-of-the-maha-movement-trump-administration-wages-war-on-organic-agriculture).

While each of these decisions are not directly the responsibility of Kennedy, they do highlight how the Trump administration is not united on the MAHA agenda. Unfortunately for the American people, that means continued exposure to toxins like pesticides and fluoride.