Unfortunately, House Bill 897 has been watered down to little, or virtually no effect. The bill would have aligned Tennessee with the Trump administration’s plan under the direction of new HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to restrict the process of artificially fluoridating municipal water supplies. And that move has gained traction in several states, especially Florida. With the passage of HB 897, Tennessee would have become the first state to implement a statewide ban on that practice.
But oftentimes what begins as a noble cause can become nothing more than a meaningless headline – a bill that does absolutely nothing. And that is exactly where HB 897 is headed.
Last year, the movement to ban the artificial fluoridation of water gained significant traction due to a federal case which found that fluoride levels above 0.4 mg/L present an “unreasonable risk” to the population, especially where it concerns neurological development in children. We do not know the specific and tangible outcomes from this case except to say that the EPA is now required to address its current recommendation of 0.7 mg/L.
In Tennessee, several water districts have elected to stop fluoridating their water completely, though these districts are in more rural areas of the state. To my knowledge, all of the districts currently fluoridating water follow the current EPA recommendations and on average do not exceed 0.7 mg/L. However, current state law caps the fluoridation of water at 1.5 mg/L (more than double the EPA’s recommendation) beyond which a water district must report to the public and mitigate their levels below that limit.
Due to the actions of lobbyists connected with the Tennessee Dental Association and other dental practices, bill sponsor Representative Chris Todd has decided to amend the bill to simply lower the state fluoridation limit to 0.7 mg/L, falling in line with current EPA recommendations and standards. In addition, penalties can now be assessed if a public water utility breaches that limit.
While this is a step forward regarding current law, it is a disappointing development. The amendment comes with the idea that a ban simply would not pass the legislature. And while that may be true, I would rather see the bill stand on its own merit and allow these state representatives to go on record and vote it up or down. But what we will be left with is the passage of a bill that in function will change nothing beyond today’s current practice.
Consider that we have unelected boards who run these public (some quasi-public) utilities, who get to determine whether or not the thousands of people they serve will have fluoride in their water. And unless you have your own private well on your property, you do not have options as to the water supply coming into your home.
The point of the bill was to bring the argument that artificially adding chemical compounds to our public water supplies is a serious issue, one that should not be left to unelected boards but regulated by elected representatives of the people of this state. Instead, in order to compromise with the dental lobby, Representative Todd has determined to put before the legislature a bill which simply codifies a federal agency’s recommendation and leaves the health and welfare of citizens of Tennessee in the hands of unelected and unaccountable boards.
All that said, we do not oppose the bill. But at the same time, it’s certainly nothing to get excited about. It is just another piece of paper which will garner the headline of restricting the fluoridation of water, but in actual practice, changing absolutely nothing. We strongly encourage you to learn more about the effects and risks of fluoridating water and petition your local utility districts to remove it. It’s time to stop ignoring this problem.
The effort to ban water fluoridation has been defeated by lobbyists, for now.
Unfortunately, House Bill 897 has been watered down to little, or virtually no effect. The bill would have aligned Tennessee with the Trump administration’s plan under the direction of new HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to restrict the process of artificially fluoridating municipal water supplies. And that move has gained traction in several states, especially Florida. With the passage of HB 897, Tennessee would have become the first state to implement a statewide ban on that practice.
But oftentimes what begins as a noble cause can become nothing more than a meaningless headline – a bill that does absolutely nothing. And that is exactly where HB 897 is headed.
Last year, the movement to ban the artificial fluoridation of water gained significant traction due to a federal case which found that fluoride levels above 0.4 mg/L present an “unreasonable risk” to the population, especially where it concerns neurological development in children. We do not know the specific and tangible outcomes from this case except to say that the EPA is now required to address its current recommendation of 0.7 mg/L.
In Tennessee, several water districts have elected to stop fluoridating their water completely, though these districts are in more rural areas of the state. To my knowledge, all of the districts currently fluoridating water follow the current EPA recommendations and on average do not exceed 0.7 mg/L. However, current state law caps the fluoridation of water at 1.5 mg/L (more than double the EPA’s recommendation) beyond which a water district must report to the public and mitigate their levels below that limit.
Due to the actions of lobbyists connected with the Tennessee Dental Association and other dental practices, bill sponsor Representative Chris Todd has decided to amend the bill to simply lower the state fluoridation limit to 0.7 mg/L, falling in line with current EPA recommendations and standards. In addition, penalties can now be assessed if a public water utility breaches that limit.
While this is a step forward regarding current law, it is a disappointing development. The amendment comes with the idea that a ban simply would not pass the legislature. And while that may be true, I would rather see the bill stand on its own merit and allow these state representatives to go on record and vote it up or down. But what we will be left with is the passage of a bill that in function will change nothing beyond today’s current practice.
Consider that we have unelected boards who run these public (some quasi-public) utilities, who get to determine whether or not the thousands of people they serve will have fluoride in their water. And unless you have your own private well on your property, you do not have options as to the water supply coming into your home.
The point of the bill was to bring the argument that artificially adding chemical compounds to our public water supplies is a serious issue, one that should not be left to unelected boards but regulated by elected representatives of the people of this state. Instead, in order to compromise with the dental lobby, Representative Todd has determined to put before the legislature a bill which simply codifies a federal agency’s recommendation and leaves the health and welfare of citizens of Tennessee in the hands of unelected and unaccountable boards.
All that said, we do not oppose the bill. But at the same time, it’s certainly nothing to get excited about. It is just another piece of paper which will garner the headline of restricting the fluoridation of water, but in actual practice, changing absolutely nothing. We strongly encourage you to learn more about the effects and risks of fluoridating water and petition your local utility districts to remove it. It’s time to stop ignoring this problem.
Like this article?
Gary Humble
Gary Humble