Federal Lawsuit Victory over U.S Water Fluoridation!

  Federal Lawsuit Victory over U.S. Water Fluoridation!

In a major blow to the EPA,
a federal judge has ruled
that fluoride may pose a risk to children’s IQ.

A U.S. federal court has now deemed fluoridation an “unreasonable risk” to the health of children, and the EPA will be forced to regulate it as such.

For quite some time, professionals, researchers, and the general public have been concerned about the impact on developing fetuses and infants who might ingest fluoridated water with baby formula.

Arkansas has had a dreadful fluoridation mandate in place since 2011 and is currently adding .7 milligrams of fluoride per liter to our tap water. Most water districts caved to the pressure to feed fluoride into our drinking water supply, but Ozark Mountain Public Regional Water Authority (OMRPWA) didn’t comply, knowing it was a highly toxic chemical.

image credit

Chairman of Ozark Mountain Regional Water Authority, Andy Anderson said, ”This has been a 7-year-long battle, and I want to express thanks to those who have stuck with us, especially to the OMRPWA Board of Directors for their unwavering support.”

Here is the court ruling on our lawsuit against EPA:

Case 3:17-cv-02162-EMC Document 445 Filed 09/24/24 (80 pages)

Some excerpts from the above ruling:

From Page 15

b. Key finding

30. The hazard identification step of the hazard assessment here is satisfied; exposure to the chemical fluoride is associated with the adverse effect of reduced IQ in children, and particularly in boys

From pages 79 and 80

IV CONCLUSION OF LAW

121. Plaintiffs have proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that water fluoridation at the level of 0.7 mg/L – the prescribed optimal level of fluoridation in the United States – presents an “unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation under the conditions of use.” 15 U.S.C. § 2620(b)(4)(B)(ii).

122.  The Court thus orders the Administrator to initiate rulemaking pursuant to Subsection 6(a) of TSCA. See id. §§ 2605(a), 2620(a).

123.  The Court defers ruling as to whether Plaintiffs are entitled to recovery of their costs of suit and attorneys and expert witness fees. Parties are ordered to submit a proposed supplemental briefing schedule regarding costs and fees within two weeks of the date of this order.

Defendant shall respond two weeks thereafter. The Court will take the matter under submission unless it orders a hearing.

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in Plaintiffs’ favor.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 24, 2024 ______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Judge Chen wrote in his 80-page ruling Tuesday, September 24, 2024: “If there is an insufficient margin, then the chemical poses a risk”.

The following is from Fluoride Action Network (FAN):

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976

WE WON! Federal Court Rules That Fluoridation Chemicals Pose An “Unreasonable Risk” To Health  

History has been made. After 7 years of pursuing legal action against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the risk posed to the developing brain by the practice of water fluoridation, the United States District Court of the Northern District of California has just ruled on behalf of the Fluoride Action Network and the plaintiffs in our precedent-setting court case. A U.S. federal court has now deemed fluoridation an “unreasonable risk” to the health of children, and the EPA will be forced to regulate it as such. The decision is written very strongly in our favor, and we will share it in its entirety tomorrow. Below is an excerpt from the introduction of the ruling:

“The issue before this Court is whether the Plaintiffs have established by a preponderance of the evidence that the fluoridation of drinking water at levels typical in the United States poses an unreasonable risk of injury to health of the public within the meaning of Amended TSCA. For the reasons set forth below, the Court so finds. Specifically, the Court finds that fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (“mg/L”) – the level presently considered “optimal” in the United States – poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children..the Court finds there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response…One thing the EPA cannot do, however, in the face of this Court’s finding, is to ignore that risk.”

In this moment, I want to recognize attorney Michael Connett for pursuing this case and leading the effort every step of the way. He’s a true superhero to all of us here at FAN. Many other amazing team members were also involved in making this a reality and deserve great appreciation and thanks, including our co-plaintiffs and all of you who donated and spread the word about our case. Take a moment to celebrate this momentous occasion tonight, wherever you are. After 7 years, we all deserve it.

——————————————————–

Attention:

We are calling upon our Arkansas legislators to ban artificial water fluoridation in our state AND to provide “warning language” for any communities who have fluoride in their water from any source at or above 0.3 ppm which is the approximate break point where you begin to see noticeable ill effects on a wide array of the population. 

Years have gone by since Act 197 in 2011 needlessly MANDATED adding toxic fluoride to poison our public drinking water in communities over 5,000.

Secure Arkansas reached out to Jennifer Dillaha, Chief Medical Officer of the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH) twice on Wednesday, Sept. 25, 2024, and she was in the office but dodged commenting on the recent ruling of Judge Chen.

Here are the heroes of the Ozarks: The Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority (OMRPWA) is still currently being fined $500.00 per week by our Arkansas Department of Health for NOT adding the mandated poison to their drinking water! They will NOT be forced to fluoridate in their district, so they are still standing their ground after all these years (since the 2011 fluoridation mandate occurred). The court battles ensue to this day, but thanks to this ruling, things will change.

“We have got to get the law changed,” Andy Anderson stated. Also, Andy said, “It is a neurotoxin, more toxic than lead, and has been linked to autism, ADHD, and Alzheimer’s disease.”

Dr. J. William Hirzy, EPA scientist, said:

• If Fluoride gets out into the air, it’s a pollutant

• If Fluoride gets into the river, it’s a pollutant

• If Fluoride gets into the lake, it’s a pollutant

• But, If Fluoride goes straight into your drinking water system, it’s not a pollutant! Isn’t this amazing?

For those of you wanting to know more about this concerning and harmful issue we recommend these powerful reading tools:

• The Fluoride Deception and

• The Case against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics That Keep It There  

The book covers:

In addition, see this excellent and thorough article from the Children’s Health Defense regarding toxic exposures.

Excerpts:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can no longer ignore that risk, and must take regulatory action, Judge Edward Chen of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California wrote in the long-awaited landmark decision.

More than 200 million Americans drink water treated with fluoride at the “optimal” level of 0.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L). However, Chen ruled that a preponderance of scientific evidence shows this level of fluoride exposure may damage human health, particularly that of pregnant mothers and young children.

The verdict delivers a major blow to the EPA, public health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and professional lobbying groups like the American Dental Association (ADA), which have staked their reputations on the claim that water fluoridation is one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th century and an unqualified public good.

“The judge did what EPA has long refused to do, and that is to apply the EPA standard risk assessment framework to fluoride,” said Michael Connett, attorney for the plaintiffs. “In so doing, the court has shown that the widespread exposure to fluoride that we now have in the United States is unreasonably and precariously close to the levels that we know cause harm.”

And please note this from the article as well:

Philippe Grandjean, M.D., Ph.D., adjunct professor in environmental health at Harvard and chair of environmental medicine at the University of Southern Denmark, top researcher on fluoride’s neurotoxicity and expert witness for plaintiffs in the case told The Defender he thought the court’s decision was “well-justified.”

He said the ruling made it incumbent on the EPA to go beyond simply ending water fluoridation.

Be sure to read the rest of that article to read what he meant by his statement…
 

In closing, you may recall from our previous Secure Arkansas’ article:  ‘Govt Report: Fluoride Linked to Kids’ Lower IQ (and CDC Denial)…. that in August 2024, the National Toxicology Program (part of the Department of Health and Human Services/ DHHS) determined that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids.

Also, fluoride is comparable to lead in its ability to lower IQ in children. The report, based on an analysis of previously published research, marks the first time a federal agency has determined — “with moderate confidence” — that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. 
 

Let’s stand together for the future and health
of our children and grandchildren.

Let’s ban fluoridation and stop adding toxic fluoride
to our public water systems.

Let’s Make America Healthy Again!

As always, our articles may be viewed on our website at  SecureArkansas.com. Once there, you may:

• view current articles on the main page;
• view older articles by clicking “Posts & Articles” at the top left of the main page and scrolling down.
• view additional past articles by clicking the “Next Page” button at the bottom right.

To find information about a topic, just type it into the Search box on our website, and click Enter!

Click here if you’d like to sign up to receive Secure Arkansas email alerts.

Securing the blessings of liberty,

Secure Arkansas
securetherepublic.com/arkansas
info@securetherepublic.com

Disclaimer:

Legal Advice is Not Provided

The material in our emails/alerts and on our websites is only intended to provide general information and comment to the public. We make an effort to ensure that the information found in our emails/alerts and on our websites is accurate and timely, but we can’t and don’t guarantee that. Nor do we guarantee the accuracy or timeliness of any information contained on websites to which our websites or emails provide links.

Information found in our emails/alerts and on our websites should not be taken as legal advice. Legal matters can be complicated. For assistance with a specific legal problem or question, please contact a knowledgeable lawyer for assistance.