Since 1945, municipal water systems in the U.S. have been treated with fluoride (hydrofluorosilicic acid), a byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry. Sold unrefined, this substance has been added to municipal water supplies with the intent of preventing tooth decay. However, studies have shown that over-fluoridation of babies actually causes fluorosis of their enamel. There are also studies on current fluoride levels causing fluorosis of teeth and bones, leading to a weak skeletal frame, joint pain and stiffness.

In 2024, approximately 72.7% of American communities are subjected to fluoride. This toxic exposure is imposed on entire communities every day without the consent of the individual. This toxic exposure is deliberate and direct – a mass medical experiment that does not come with any relevant information on its long-term effects on cognition, brain development and skeletal degradation. Fluoride is also added to nursery water, and is often used daily as the base fluid for baby formula.

Now, emerging research suggests what ‘conspiracy theorists’ have known for decades: fluoride is not safe, particularly regarding its neurotoxic effects on children.

Fluoride ban could help improve IQ of future generations

A recent federal court ruling deemed the current levels of fluoride in water as posing an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health, significantly reducing IQ and impairing cognitive development. This landmark decision followed a lawsuit brought forth by the Fluoride Action Network and other organizations, pushing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reassess its stance on water fluoridation.

In 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) suggested lowering the recommended fluoride level in drinking water due to a surge in cases of dental fluorosis, a condition resulting from excessive fluoride exposure. By 2015, federal guidelines set the standard at 0.7 parts per million (ppm).

However, research from the National Toxicology Program indicates that even this level may adversely affect children’s health, lowering IQ in a dose-dependent manner. Moreover, animal studies have demonstrated that excessive fluoride exposure can lead to neurodevelopmental delays and behavioral changes, suggesting that the compound may affect the brain’s structural integrity.

Given this evidence, the question arises: why regulate fluoride at all if a complete ban may be the most appropriate public health measure? A fluoride ban would help improve the IQ of future generations, improving the mental acuity of new voting populations.

Former fluoride advocate changes stance after reviewing latest research

Former fluoride advocate Rick North has shifted his stance after reviewing critical studies. He remarked, “I always thought fluoridation was fine. But the science contradicted the statements from fluoridation promoters.” Since then, he has become a vocal opponent, serving on the board of the Fluoride Action Network and pursuing legal action against the chemical.

The lawsuit against the EPA, initiated in 2017, faced numerous delays as the agency sought to shield the reputations of long-time proponents of fluoridation. A pivotal moment came when the National Toxicology Program released findings linking fluoride exposure to reduced IQ in children. These findings played a significant role in the judge’s ruling.

Despite the scientific evidence, economic interests and professional reputations have reinforced the practice of water fluoridation. The EPA now has less than 30 days to respond to the court ruling, but the implications of this decision may prompt broader discussions about public health and regulatory practices.

In the wake of the ruling, some communities, including Abilene, Texas, and Yorktown, New York, have begun to reconsider their fluoridation policies. These moves demonstrate local autonomy in public health decisions. As North notes, many communities need not wait for the EPA’s response; they can choose whether to fluoridate or not.

There are currently no national regulations against fluoride, just EPA limits. If Donald Trump wins the Presidency in 2024, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is expected to take over the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), if approved by the U.S. Congress.

Kennedy recently stated: “On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water!”

This federal advisory will likely face rejection from democrat-ran cities across the nation, due to longstanding cult-like behavior, bias and other economic/industrial ties that continue to force fluoride on the population. This is why the evidence against fluoride must be presented in a way that goes beyond mere advisory principles. Toxic substances that threaten the health of the American population should be legislated against and banned outright, with fines imposed for polluters and dental associations that finance mass medical experiments without informed consent. The tide is shifting on this issue, and Americans of all political backgrounds can petition their local water authorities to stop poisoning them and their children.

Sources include:

Pubmed.gov

Pubmed.gov

ScienceDirect.com

AmericasHealthRankings.com

100PercentFedUp.com

FoodandWaterWatch.org [PDF]

NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov

Pubmed.gov

WLTReport.com

X.com

Publications.aap.org