[PLUG-TALK] Another fluoride cite

Denis Heidtmann denis.heidtmann at gmail.com
Tue May 7 04:57:52 UTC 2013


On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Rich Shepard <rshepard at appl-ecosys.com>wrote:

> On Mon, 6 May 2013, Keith Lofstrom wrote:
>
> > "Fluoride in Drinking Water - A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards"
>
>    EPA is not a scientific agency but a political one. I could tell you in
> detail about their process for reducing the drinking water arsenic
> threshold
> concentration from one that had raised no questions for 50 years until Al
> Gore wanted an issue on which to run for president. It was rather pathetic
> (to put it mildly) and some of their PhDs told us in public fora that they
> didn't care about the science and experiences of cities such as Fallon, NV,
> with natural As levels of 125 ppm and no differences in morbidity or
> mortality than any other city of the same size. They cherry picked from
> badly flawed "science" to justify their political decision.
>
>    Many of the threshold concentrations of water chemistry constituents
> have
> no published scientific support other than the original EPA Red Book which
> was based on "best professional judgement" from the mid-Atlantic states and
> applied to the entire country. Feh!
>
> Rich

I have not read any of the referenced material, but the review Keith talks
about is not an EPA publication, so I do not see why you take this
opportunity to discredit their "science".  In fact, the report could very
well confirm your opinion of EPA's science.

-Denis
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pdxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-talk/attachments/20130506/f722c480/attachment.html>


More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list