11 EPA Unions Request Immediate Moratorium &
Full Congressional Hearing on Fluoridation Provided by Jeff
Green
August 6, 2005
This is a request for your immediate action that can result in
a major impact on public perceptions and support for a more
transparent focus on the available science on fluoridation,
and federal government intervention to stop this insanity.
For those of you have not followed the recent reports in more
than 80 newspapers, including the Wall Street Journal
and the Washington Post, some of the nation's major
media have added to their coverage of NIH scientists having
unreported financial links with industry, by boldly reporting
the attempted cover-up of recent science showing dramatic
increases in bone cancer in young males due to fluoride
exposures, and the Environmental Work Group's call for an
immediate investigation.
For those of you who have difficulty opening attachments, I
have included the texts of the two letters from the 11 EPA
Unions to Congress and EPA, and slightly modified the action
alert formatted by Lynne Campbell below. I urge your immediate
attention, and the support of EPA employees who have once
again placed themselves on the firing line to stop this
absurdity and affront to ethics in science:
New developments in the bone cancer/fluoridation flap (see
www.fluoridealert.org/news/2323.html) give us an
opportunity to effect change at the national level.
Read on.
A coalition of eleven EPA unions, representing "a
substantial portion of the [EPA's] nation-wide work force,"
have written Congress and theEPA on August 5, 2005 asking for
the following:
1) That Congress immediately place a moratorium on
fluoridation to "remain in place" until a full
Congressional hearing "on the wisdom of continuing the
practice is concluded."
2) That EPA's administrator, Stephen Johnson, "direct the
Office of Water to issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking setting the maximum contaminant level goal for
fluoride at zero" based on the likelihood that it is a
carcinogen. {This would effectively end the practice of water
fluoridation.}
Attached are copies of the EPA unions' letters sent to Mr.
Johnson and to Senator Tom Harkin.
THE UNIONS NEED OUR HELP Now that the unions have taken such an
important step, they urgently need our support. They ask that
we immediately contact our two federal senators and
representative to echo their request for a moratorium and
hearing (and that we ask others to do the same).
In an email to safe water organizations, NTEU 280's Dr. Bill
Hirzy writes, "It is VITAL that political pressure be
brought to bear on Congress from constituents. When the
fluoridistas get wind of our action, you can bet they will be
in those Congressional offices pushing their agenda and trying
to denigrate our unions' actions, and we need to have tons of
people calling and writing to second the call our unions have
made."
He continues, "The EPA unions have done what we can do...now
its up to the citizens who want this nonsense stopped to once
more exert themselves and support our call to stop it until a
full hearing is held."
CONGRESSIONAL CONTACT INFORMATION Here is a link to access the addresses, email
and telephone contact for your Senators and Congressional
Representative:
www.congress.org/congressorg/home/
SAMPLE TELEPHONE and/or EMAIL
MESSAGE: I am one of your constituents concerned about
nationally publicized research linking water fluoridation to
bone cancer in young males. I understand that eleven EPA
unions are calling for an immediate moratorium on fluoridation
and a full Congressional hearing into this and other studies
showing adverse health effects. Because of the unavoidable
exposure due to publicly fluoridated water's contribution to
our dietary sources, even if a person chooses to drink bottled
water, this issue is crucial to my health and the health of
the nation, and I urge your support for both the moratorium
and hearing.
KEEP US INFORMED
Let us know you've written by sending us a blind copy of your
email, or an email note from you letting us know who and when
you called (and possibly their response).
Letter from 11 EPA unions
to their Agency Administrator August 5, 2005
RE: Bone Cancer-Fluoride Link
Hon. Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Dear Administrator Johnson:
We, the undersigned representatives of a majority (eleven) of
EPA's employee unions, are requesting that you direct the
Office of Water to issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking setting the maximum contaminant level goal for
fluoride at zero, in accordance with Agency policy for all
likely or known human carcinogens. Our request is based on the
overall weight of the evidence supporting the classification
of fluoride as a human carcinogen, including new information
from Harvard on the link between fluoride in drinking water
and osteosarcoma in boys that was conveyed to you in a meeting
with union officials on May 4, 2005.
We appreciate that the Agency anticipates a report next year
from the National Research Council on the propriety of its
current drinking water standards for fluoride. But it seems
highly inappropriate for EPA to do nothing now that it is in
possession of this science, while millions of young boys
continue to be exposed unwittingly to the elevated risk of a
fatal bone cancer as the Agency waits for the NRC to issue its
report, then for the report to undergo peer review, and then
for the Agency to undertake its own deliberations.
By issuing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking the
Agency would inform the public and local health authorities
about the results of the doctoral dissertation from the
Harvard School of Dental Medicine by Elise Bassin without
committing the Agency to a formal rulemaking until all those
other steps are taken.
It is noteworthy that when industry becomes aware of important
new scientific findings like this, it has (depending on the
specific statute) a very brief time to notify EPA. The Agency
is then expected to take timely and appropriate action based
on the specifics of that notification. In the present case EPA
is aware of important new, high quality evidence of
potentially serious danger to young boys drinking fluoridated
water, and we believe EPA has an ethical duty to send an
effective warning immediately about this hazard.
It may in fact be appropriate for you to direct EPA's Office
of Criminal Enforcement to investigate why Dr. Bassin's study,
which was of sufficient quality for her to earn her doctoral
degree, remained hidden from EPA for four years.
Alternatively, you could request that the Department of
Justice undertake the investigation.
As you know, the apparent cover up of the link between water
fluoridation and a seven-fold increased risk of osteosarcoma
in young boys, shown by the research of Dr. Bassin, is now
national news. Major newspapers, including the Washington Post
and the Wall Street Journal have covered the story. The
Environmental Working Group has petitioned the National
Toxicology Program to classify fluoride as a human carcinogen
based in part on Dr. Bassin's work. (We recommend EWG's
petition as a succinct and authoritative overview of the total
weight of peer-reviewed evidence supporting the classification
of fluoride as a human carcinogen.) EWG has also caused an
investigation of the cover up to be started by Harvard and
NIEHS, which funded the research.
The eyes of the nation are on the federal science
establishment because of a host of scientific integrity
issues. Former EPA Assistant Administrator Lynn Goldman and
Roni Neff have just published a paper in the American Journal
of Public Health on the cost of delayed adoption of
health-protective standards that illuminates the real public
health costs of the government's failure to act on sound
scientific evidence.
We believe our Agency can make an important statement about
its commitment to scientific integrity and its application to
public health protection by taking the precautionary action we
are recommending.
We at EPA can be ahead of the curve on this important issue or
behind it. We do not think the latter choice is in the best
interest of the public, the Civil Service, or EPA, and we
fervently and respectfully hope that you will agree with us.
As a wise man once said, "The science is what the science is."
We will be happy to discuss this with you and your advisers at
your convenience.
Sincerely,
Dwight A. Welch, President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters
J. William Hirzy, Vice-President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters
/s/Steve Shapiro, President
AFGE local 3331
EPA Headquarters
/s/Paul Sacker, President
AFGE Local 3911
Region 2 Office, New York
/s/Larry Penley. President
NTEU Chapter 279
EPA Cincinnati Laboratory
/s/Nancy Barron, President
NAGE Local R5-55
Region 4 Office, Atlanta
/s/Wendell Smith, President
ESC/IFPTE Local 20
Region 9 Office, San Francisco
/s/Patrick Chan, President
NTEU Chapter 295
Region 9 Office, San Francisco
/s/Henry Burrell, President
AFGE Local 3428
Region 1 Office, Boston
/s/Alan Hollis, President
AFGE Local 3611
Region 3 Office, Philadelphia
/s/Frank Beck, President
AFGE Local 2900
Ada Laboratory
/s/Mark Coryell, President
AFGE Local 3907
Ann Arbor Laboratory
cc:
Sen. James Inhofe
Sen. Mike Enzi
Sen. Saxby Chambliss
Sen. Ted Stevens
Sen. James Jeffords
Sen. Edward Kennedy
Sen. Tom Harkin
Sen. Daniel Inouye
Rep. Joe Barton
Rep. Sherwood Boehlert
Rep. Paul Gillmor
Rep. Nathan Deal
Rep. Henry Waxman
Rep. John Dingell
Rep. Bart Gordon
Rep. Hilda Solis
Rep. Sherrod Brown
Letter from 11 EPA Unions
to Senator Tom Harkin
Coalition of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Unions
August 5, 2005
RE: Bone Cancer-Fluoridation Cover-Up
Hon. Tom Harkin, Ranking Member
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry
SR-328A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-6000
Dear Senator Harkin:
Our unions represent a substantial portion of the nation-wide
workforce at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and we
are writing to ask for a moratorium on the national program of
the U.S. Public Health Service to fluoridate all of America's
public water supplies.
One us us (Dr. Hirzy, of NTEU Chapter 280) testified before
the Subcommittee on Wildlife, Fisheries, and Water of the
Senate on June 29, 2000 on this subject on behalf of his
headquarters union. At that time the union called for a
moratorium based on science indicating a number of adverse
health effects and out-of-control, excessive exposures to
fluoride.
We now join NTEU Chapter 280 in renewing the call for a
moratorium, based on startling and disturbing new information
that confirms the worst fears expressed in the earlier
testimony.
Work done at Harvard College's School of Dental Medicine by
Dr. Elise Bassin, which has been hidden since 2001, shows that
pre-adolescent boys who drink fluoridated water are at a
seven-fold increased risk of osteosarcoma, an often fatal bone
cancer. We ask that the moratorium take effect immediately and
remain in place until a full hearing by the Congress on the
wisdom of continuing the practice is concluded. The last such
hearing was in 1978.
Dr. Bassin's work, done as her doctoral thesis, was completed
and accepted by Harvard in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for her Ph.D. in 2001. It is a landmark
investigation of age-specific exposure of young people in a
case-control epidemiology study of the incidence of
osteosarcoma. The thesis remained sequestered until 2004, when
her research adviser, Chester Douglass, inexplicably reported
to the funding agency, the National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences, that no connection was found between fluoride
and osteosarcoma. This discrepancy between Chester Douglass'
written report and the actual findings of the funded study is
under investigation by several entities, and we believe should
be looked into by the Congress as well. It appears to be yet
another instance of federally funded science gone awry to
protect special interests. Chester Douglass edits Colgate
Company's Oral Health Report.
Chapter three of Dr. Bassin's work (enclosed) cites the
impressive weight of convergent evidence for the
carcinogenicity of fluoride in young boys (but not girls):
fluoride is a mitogen, increasing the rate of cell division;
it has been shown to be mutagenic, damaging chromosomal
structure; it accumulates primarily in bone, site of the
cancer; several previous epidemiology studies have found
heretofore unexplained increases in osteosarcoma in young men
(but not young women); a National Toxicology Program animal
study found statistically significant increases in
osteosarcomas in male (but not female) rats. And she discusses
why several other epidemiology studies found no association
between fluoridation and osteosarcoma; principally, those
studies did not consider age-specific exposures and
development of the cancer.
It is simply unconscionable that her federally funded work was
hidden for four years while millions of young boys continued
to be exposed to increased risk of this disease, whose best
outcome involves amputation. Several federal statutes express
Congressional intent regarding timely warning about such
risks. These include, for example, the Toxic Substances
Control Act, section 8(e) and the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act section 6(a)(2). We believe
another area for Congressional investigation is: who knew
about the results of Dr. Bassin's work besides herself and
Chester Douglass? And was any federal statute violated by
keeping those results hidden for four years?
Another reason for a Congressional review of fluoridation is
the recent work of Dr. Richard Maas of the Environmental
Quality Institute, University of North Carolina-Ashville,
which shows that use of chloramine disinfectant and
silicofluoride fluoridating agents with excess ammonia
increases lead concentrations in public water supplies. This
may explain at least some of the increased lead levels seen in
the District of Columbia's water supplies and in the blood of
children drinking water fluoridated with silicofluorides. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that ninety
four percent of fluoridated water systems use silicofluorides.
Dr. Hirzy is available to meet with your staff to pursue this
matter, and we hope that you will find it of sufficient
concern to initiate a full investigation of fluoridation,
which we believe is long overdue.
Sincerely,
Dwight A. Welch, President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters
J. William Hirzy, Vice-President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters
/s/Steve Shapiro, President
AFGE local 3331
EPA Headquarters
/s/Paul Sacker, President
AFGE Local 3911
Region 2 Office, New York
/s/Larry Penley. President
NTEU Chapter 279
EPA Cincinnati Laboratory
/s/Nancy Barron, President
NAGE Local R5-55
Region 4 Office, Atlanta
/s/Wendell Smith, President
ESC/IFPTE Local 20
Region 9 Office, San Francisco
/s/Patrick Chan, President
NTEU Chapter 295
Region 9 Office, San Francisco
/s/Henry Burrell, President
AFGE Local 3428
Region 1 Office, Boston
/s/Alan Hollis, President
AFGE Local 3611
Region 3 Office, Philadelphia
/s/Frank Beck, President
AFGE Local 2900
Ada Laboratory
/s/Mark Coryell, President
AFGE Local 3907
Ann Arbor laboratory
cc: Hon. Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
