Federal Judiciary Determines that Fluoride Compounds Present Potential Health Hazard
In a landmark decision, the United States District Court of the Northern District of California has ruled that the fluoridation of drinking water poses an "unreasonable risk" to the health of children. The ruling, which was made in the case of Food & Water Watch, et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al., was celebrated by the Fluoride Action Network and its supporters as a momentous occasion.
The case, which was pursued by attorney Michael Connett and his team, including co-plaintiffs and donors who supported the cause, has been ongoing for seven years. Judge Edward M. Chen handed down the ruling on September 24, 2024, finding that the fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L), the level presently considered "optimal" in the U.S., poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children due to neurotoxic effects.
Judge Chen's 80-page ruling thoroughly reviewed the EPA’s hazardous chemical review process and summarized extensive scientific data showing fluoride’s harmful effects on children’s neurodevelopment and overall health. The ruling emphasized the vast size of the exposed population: approximately 200 million Americans receive fluoridated water, including about two million pregnant women and over 300,000 formula-fed infants exposed directly to fluoridated water. This heightened concerns about widespread neurotoxicity.
Scientific evidence supporting harm from fluoride exposure has been growing, including studies linking fluoride to IQ loss and neurobehavioral problems in children published in JAMA Pediatrics and JAMA Open Network during 2024.
Following the ruling, the EPA announced plans to appeal the decision in July 2025, causing ongoing legal battles and delayed regulatory action.
The ruling is significant as it requires the EPA to engage with a regulatory response regarding fluoridation. The EPA will be forced to regulate fluoridation as such due to the court's ruling. The court's finding is that the EPA cannot ignore the unreasonable risk posed by fluoridation.
In summary, the 2024 federal court decision in Food & Water Watch v. EPA declared EPA-approved water fluoridation at current levels as an unreasonable health risk due to fluoride's neurotoxicity, especially affecting children’s IQ and development. The EPA is appealing this landmark ruling as of mid-2025.
For more information on the ruling, please visit this link:
- The court ruling in the case of Food & Water Watch, et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al., determined that the fluoridation of water at current levels presents an unreasonable health risk, particularly for children's IQ and neurodevelopment.
- The decision, which was made in September 2024, emphasized the need for science-based policy and legislation related to health-and-wellness, mental-health, and environmental-science to protect the public, especially children and pregnant women, from potential neurotoxic effects.
- The ruling also spotlights the widespread use of fluoridated water, with over 200 million Americans exposed, including about two million pregnant women and over 300,000 formula-fed infants.
- While scientific evidence supporting harm from fluoride exposure has grown, including studies published in mainstream journals such as JAMA Pediatrics and JAMA Open Network in 2024, ongoing legal battles continue due to the EPA's planned appeal in July 2025.
- Despite the ongoing legal battle, the court's decision has broader implications for the general-news and politics sphere, as it questions the role of science in shaping public policy decisions and the balance between industry interests and public health concerns.
