August 8, 2024

Dear Readers,

In 2022, the Fluoride Subcommittee of the State College Borough Water Authority (SCBWA) in Pennsylvania published a report recommending the discontinuation of water fluoridation. This decision was based on a comprehensive study of factual and scientific evidence. The group of nine credentialed professionals unanimously supported this recommendation, although a tenth member resigned rather than end a practice that had been in effect since 1954. The subcommittee included nine "noteworthy references" in their May 19, 2022 report.

We believe the report titled, "Should we continue to fluoridate our water?" exemplifies due diligence and deliberate decision-making, serving as a model for other communities. However, we wish to clarify two points:

Minor Items of Fact:

1. Assumptions on Dental Decay Reduction: The subcommittee assumed, without evidence, that the reduction in dental decay in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities was due to fluoridated dental products. Evidence suggests that this reduction is part of a trend predating both fluoridation and fluoridated dental products, attributed to better nutrition, improved water infrastructure, and enhanced dental care, including dental sealants.

2. FDA's Role in Fluoride Recommendations: The subcommittee implied that the FDA recommends fluoride in bottled water. In reality, the FDA's role is to align bottled water regulations with the EPA standard. The EPA standard is influenced by Health & Human Services (HHS), which reportedly has an annual fluoridation promotion budget exceeding $100 million.

3. Omissions Regarding NRC Recommendations: The subcommittee omitted key points from the 2006 National Research Council (NRC) recommendation to the EPA that the fluoride Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) of 4 ppm was unsafe and needed lowering. The NRC also indicated evidence of harm at lower exposures and noted the absence of safety evidence for susceptible subpopulations at any water concentration.

Major Evidence of Political Machination:

4. Pressure from Fluoridation Supporters: Subcommittee members reported undue pressure from fluoridation supporters, including national organizations, to adhere to the American Dental Association (ADA) and the CDC's Oral Health Division recommendations, rather than conducting their own study.

5. Local Pressure from Organized Professionals: Outside fluoridation advocates allegedly organized local dentists, hygienists, and doctors to exert pressure on the subcommittee, relying on their "expert opinion" and status rather than fulfilling the mandate to examine facts and present a valid argument.

And there you have it in a nutshell. When faced with the daunting task of making a decision that will impact every person of a community, fluoridationists seek to subvert the most diligent and qualified committees by inserting themselves into the process in order to influence the outcome. 

Consequently, we applaud the SCBWA and hold them up as a model for other communities seeking to answer the same question of “should we or shouldn’t we.”

“A wise man makes his own decisions. An ignorant man follows public opinion.” -  Chinese Proverb

Karen & Brenda

August 2, 2024

Emerging evidence suggests a concerning link between fluoridated water and neurobehavioral issues in children. Stories are being collected about children who have removed fluoridated water from their lives and seen a dramatic reduction in their wild behaviors. One mother, Audrey Adams, observed a dramatic reduction in her autistic son's disruptive behaviors within days of removing fluoridated tap water from his diet. Later, eliminating fluoride from his showers alleviated his morning headaches.

As plaintiffs suing the US EPA over the neurotoxicity of fluoride in public drinking water, we're alarmed by recent findings. Experts have published studies showing fluoride exposure during pregnancy and infancy can lower IQ and increase ADHD rates. The NTP’s systematic review found no safe level of fluoride exposure. Although this publication has been blocked from release, it was subpoenaed in the case by Judge Edward Chen and made available as a draft.

Recent high-quality research funded by the National Institutes of Health and published in JAMA revealed that children of Californian mothers with higher fluoride exposure during pregnancy had nearly double the odds of neurobehavioral problems. These included emotional reactivity, anxiety, depression, somatic symptoms, and autism-related symptoms.

Given these findings, we urge immediate action to protect our children's neurological health. We call on local water authorities to suspend fluoridation practices until further research can guarantee its safety. We also encourage parents to educate themselves about fluoride exposure and consider using fluoride-free water for their families, especially during pregnancy and early childhood.

Brenda Staudenmaier

August 19, 2023 

Dear Readers, 

Motivated by a personal health crisis, I began my deep dive into the world of fluoride science and fluoridation policy in the summer of 2014. As an analyst, I was adept at doing that type of work and found the government websites like PubMed (database of published biomedical science curated by the National Institute of Health) and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to be wonderful assets. However, what I found on those websites, as well as the websites of the American Dental Association (ADA),  World Health Organization (WHO) and  other stakeholders in fluoridation was anything but wonderful. 

Initially, like most of fluoridation opponents, I was only interested in ending the practice in my own small city based on the evidence that even low concentrations of fluoride in water considered ‘optimal’ by proponents causes serious harm to the bodies, brains and bones of a significant portion of  consumers resulting in everything from arthritis to ulcerative colitis, From my reading, I estimate at least 15% of us receive a slew of medical misdiagnoses of what in reality is fluoride poisoning affecting us from womb to tomb. Moreover, I agree with Dr. Hans Moolenburgh that the chronic exposure to fluoride in water will “hasten health calamities” for all of us.  

Again, like most fluoridation opponents, I believed simply getting a group of credentialed people together to present a rational document that was easily accessible and supported by scientific citations to those in positions of power would begin the process of righting that wrong. How naive I was. 

Like fluoridation opponents in previous decades, I found that regardless of their altruistic mission statements, power structures from Main Street to the ABC Agencies of Washington defend their policies despite being presented with the proof that they are poisoning people and the planet - and that ordinary people will be whipped into a frenzy by paid public relations experts and other shills in order to defend fluoridation by attacking long-time neighbors and friends rather than actually do a modicum of science homework or consider the ethical violation of medical consent and bodily autonomy that fluoridation policy poses for those of us with medical reason to avoid this poison. 

Since 2015, I’ve authored multiple well-referenced petitions to those in positions of power, including to the CDC, National Academies of Science (NASEM), governors (through the National Governors’ Association), American Thyroid Association (ATA), politicians, etc. I’ve even had some very interesting and eye-opening responses. 

I met Brenda Staudenmaier in 2017. Her personal story is similar to mine. We each have written the CDC individually. In January 2022 we began a joint effort to bring the CDC to task. Per our correspondence on this website, we got their attention, but the CDC’s disingenuous and overtly manipulative non-responsive replies to us leaves no doubt that its leadership, like leadership in many organizations, is only interested in protecting its power, prestige and profitability. CDC turns a blind eye to scientific facts, ethical considerations, and justice. 

Brenda and I will not be giving up. We hope that the material made public on this website helps others of good conscience fight the good fight in their own ways, or at least take measures to protect their own health from this specific and insidious poison that the CDC champions.