| While you are right that it is very rare that a water system will fluoridate their water to levels of 1.5 mg/L, I don't think it's true that all systems fluoridating their water have targets or achieve a level of 0.7mg/L. You can see in the EPA's analysis of their fourth Sixth Year Review (SYR4) (https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/syr4_fluo...) that there is a large variation in the fluoride concentrations of fluoridated entry points (from 0.6mg/L to 1.2mg/L, with the 0.6mg/L cut-off being artificial). The NTP monograph doesn't conclude that fluoridation at levels of 0.7mg/L are safe or unsafe, but it is better to be safe than sorry. With some populations receiving fluoridated water at concentrations of 1.2mg/L and an estimated 2% to 7% of the population receiving water fluoridated above this concentration, I think it's reasonable to be concerned in light of the NTP's monograph on fluoride (even if this just means to increase focus on de-fluoridation of water). As per the NTP:
> The moderate confidence conclusions may also be relevant to people living in optimally fluoridated areas of the United States depending on the extent of their additional exposures to fluoride from sources other than drinking water. Also just to note, the EPA's secondary maximum contaminant limit (SMCL) is 2.0mg/L. This isn't the federal limit as set forth by the MCL of 4.0mg/L, but notice is still required by the EPA here. Taking the recent Cochrane report in mind, which shows a small reduction of 0.24 decayed tooth per child in places practicing fluoridation, and fails to find high quality studies on the effects of fluoridation for adults, it is reasonable to question the EPA's limits and the US's policy of fluoridation. I can't find any strong evidence for the benefits of systemic ingestion of fluoride which makes me ultimately conclude that the policy is an ineffective one of forced medication (in the name of those who can't brush their teeth). With no evidence of it being a safe policy, I don't know why the CDC and EPA still advocate nowadays for water fluoridation. Although perhaps costly to change, neither do I know why the EPA sets their limits to levels above where known harms (such as dental fluorosis and neurodevelopmental effects) occur. As Judge Edward Chen says: > In all, there is substantial and scientifically credible evidence establishing that fluoride poses a risk to human health; it is associated with a reduction in the IQ of children and is hazardous at dosages that are far too close to fluoride levels in the drinking water of the United States. |