Book Review: How Much Can Animals Communicate?
A federal judge last month handed a major victory to opponents of water fluoridation, capping a seven-year legal battle over whether the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has failed to protect the public from potential toxic effects of fluoride, which is added to the tap water of around 200 million Americans.
The decision is sure to invite further scrutiny of the contested science behind it — and of the highly unusual legal process that could transform a flagship public health practice.
Many experts say water fluoridation is a safe, crucial tool for preventing tooth decay. Critics say fluoridated water has little dental value, and they point to some studies suggesting that swallowing fluoride may harm developing brains.
The ruling from Judge Edward M. Chen requires the EPA to respond to those safety concerns, even though the science is far from settled. “It should be noted that this finding does not conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health,” Chen wrote. But, he added, “there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response.”
That regulatory response could dramatically revise community fluoridation policies in the U.S., or even end the practice altogether.
