Legal Scholar: Is Fluoridation an Illegitimate Human Experiment?

Legal Scholar: Is Fluoridation an Illegitimate Human Experiment?

from NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.

NEW YORK, Sept. 3, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — “The cessation of all compulsory water fluoridation schemes should be the goal of all public health agencies, ethical lawmakers and informed citizens,” argues Rita Barnett-Rose, Chapman University Associate Law Professor, (online August 2014), reports the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF).

Evidence of fluoride’s harm is ignored, downplayed or not studied; benefits exaggerated and informed consent disregarded. “Claims that fluoridation is not mass medication are unpersuasive,” she writes.

After scientists disproved the 1945 theory assuming ingested fluoride was essential for healthy teeth, fluoridation promoters newly speculate, without evidence, that fluoridation benefits low-income children who have the most decay and least access to dental care – a problem that persists today despite 7 decades of fluoridation. In fact, dental socioeconomic disparities have increased.

The National Research Council acknowledges significant fluoride health research has yet to be done – especially fluoride’s effect on the young brain.

Using case law, legal opinions and scientific reports, Barnett-Rose argues that fluoridation schemes allow public health officials to experiment on human subjects without their informed consent.

“Adding a drug to the water supply to treat or prevent the disease of tooth decay is unquestionably a medical intervention, and the fact that the risks of this drug are still being determined by public agencies, supports an argument that water fluoridation is an ongoing human medical experiment,” she writes.

“Continued imposition of compulsory water fluoridation schemes violates numerous legal and ethical human subjects’ research protocols,” argues Barnett-Rose.

“It is no longer acceptable for public health officials to simply dismiss the accruing negative data and to continue to insist that the levels of fluoride children and adults are receiving on a daily basis are without any serious health consequences,” she writes.

Attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President says, “Politics plays a heavy hand in fluoridation policy and promotion which seems to protect special interest groups, corporations and government agencies instead of the American public who are unwitting guinea pigs in this ongoing fluoridation experiment.”

Barnett-Rose writes: “Taking politics and long-entrenched agendas out of the mix, the risks of tooth decay, while perhaps still significant for a minority of individuals, are significantly outweighed by the human rights burdens, economic costs, and risks of other bodily harm for the majority of those affected.”

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law

From the SelectedWorks of Rita Barnett-Rose

Fall 2014

Compulsory Water Fluoridation: Justifiable

Public Health Benefit or Human Experimental

Research Without Informed Consent

Rita F Barnett


Most Americans are under the impression that compulsory water

fluoridation is a safe and effective public health measure to fight tooth

decay. Pro-fluoridation campaigns by the American Dental Association and

the Department of Health and Human Services have ensured this per-

ception, successfully obscuring the more disturbing reality that a signifi-

cant number of leading scientists, medical and dental professionals, and

educated members of the public continue to repudiate both the medical

necessity and ethical legitimacy of compulsory water fluoridation. 1 In

truth, scientific evidence is steadily mounting against water fluoridation,

with emerging studies showing that not only is fluoridation not effective at

achieving the stated public health goal of combating dental caries, but also

that excess exposure to fluoride contributes to a host of far more serious

health concerns, particularly in the very population the public health mea-

sure was originally alleged to benefit: children. 2 With growing evidence

suggesting that systemic intake of excess fluoride is linked to dental and

skeletal fluorosis, endocrine disruption, hypothyroidism, bone cancer,

and lowered IQs in children, it is not surprising that hundreds of U.S.

and Canadian cities and towns have now opted to either reject or cease

fluoridating their water supplies, joining over 97% of Europe and most of

the developed world in rejecting compulsory water fluoridation…….

Rita Barnett-Rose is an Associate Professor of Legal Analysis, Writing and Research at the
Dale E. Fowler School of Law at Chapman University.

Water Fluoridation: A Violation of Human Rights, the Health Care Consent Act and the Nuremberg Code

One thought on “Legal Scholar: Is Fluoridation an Illegitimate Human Experiment?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s