This article originally appeared on The Defender and was republished with permission.
Guest post by Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.
Over nearly three days of testimony, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) first key witness in the landmark fluoride trial, David Savitz, Ph.D., downplayed the link between fluoride and lower IQ in children.
However, the plaintiffs’ attorney and federal Judge Edward Chen pushed back on some of his conclusions.
Fluoride Trial Context:
Part two:
Why So Many Scientists Are Finally Paying Attention to Fluoride (Part 2)
Attorney Michael Connett: “The conclusion [of the NTP report] is that the human evidence on fluoride and IQ is consistent.”
Full video: https://t.co/MtLs9oExD3 pic.twitter.com/506Zdat8po
— Derrick Broze (@DBrozeLiveFree) February 6, 2024
Savitz, professor of epidemiology at Brown University School of Public Health, worked with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines (NASEM), reviewing the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) draft report linking fluoride to lower IQ in children.
The report is one of the key pieces of evidence in a lawsuit brought by Food & Water Watch, Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Moms Against Fluoridation and other advocacy groups and individuals, against the EPA in 2017, after the agency denied a petition to end water fluoridation under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Savitz’s testimony supported the EPA’s three