Below is information about WHY EPA HEADQUARTERS UNION OF SCIENTISTS OPPOSES FLUORIDATION from a variety of sources. Please take a look at the materials that our team has selected for you.
https://www.conspiracies.net/water-fluoridation-conspiracy-america-rotting-fluoride-killer/#:~:text=In%201999%20the%20EPA%20headquarters%20of%20the%20Union,the%20hazards%20to%20human%20health%20from%20such%20ingestion.
https://fluoridealert.org/articles/epa-union/
The Environmental Protection Agency has stirred the hornet's nest of fluoridation by seeking to double the maximum allowable amount of the mineral in the nation's water supply - a move that is drawing sharp criticism as a possible health hazard. Related Studies: Fluoride & IQ: 74 Studies
https://fluoridefreesudbury.wordpress.com/2017/12/07/why-epas-headquarters-professionals-union-opposes-fluoridation/
Then, as EPA was engaged in revising its drinking water standard for fluoride in 1985, an employee came to the union with a complaint: he said he was being forced to write into the regulation a statement to the effect that EPA thought it was alright for children to have “funky” teeth. It was OK, EPA said, because it considered that condition to be only a cosmetic …
https://fluoridefree.org.nz/epas-headquarters-professionals-union-opposes-fluoridation/
The reason for this EPA position was that it was under political pressure to set its health-based standard for fluoride at 4 mg/liter. At that level, EPA knew that a significant number of children develop moderate to severe dental fluorosis, but since it had deemed the effect as only cosmetic, EPA didn’t have to set its health-based standard at a lower level to prevent it.
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Why+EPA%27S+headquarters+professionals%27+union+oppose+fluoridation%3a+Dr....-a093306313
It was OK, EPA said, because it considered that condition to be only a cosmetic effect, not ma adverse health effect, We found that the reason for EPA's position was that it was under political pressure to set its health-based standard for fluoride at 4 mg/liter (2).
http://www.fluoridation.com/epa2.htm
EPA scientists take action against EPA for failing to protect public health-- Important scientific and technical considerations were ignored when the Recommended Maximum Contaminant Level (RMCL) for fluoride was set (1986 Amicus Brief). The need for a Code of Ethics at the EPA became critical. Without an enforceable code of ethics with …
https://fluoridealert.org/issues/water/opposed/
The Union of Scientists and Professionals at EPA’s Headquarters Office, which represents over 1,500 scientists at EPA, has gone on record as opposing water fluoridation due to concerns about fluoride’s health effects. According to the Union, “In summary, we hold that fluoridation is an unreasonable risk.” Why EPA’s Headquarters Professionals Union Opposes Fluoridation
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Part+II%3a+why+EPA%27s+headquarters+professionals%27+union+opposes...-a098250310
EPA has stated (27) that it regards the use of waste hydrofluosilicic acid, recovered from phosphate fertilizer manufacturing, in fluoridation systems as "an ideal environmental solution to a long-standing problem," because "water and air pollution are minimized, and water utilities have a low-cost source of fluoride available to them."
https://fluoridealert.org/content/hirzy_portland/
Dr. William Hirzy, former VP of EPA’s HQ Union, Recommends Portland Flush Fluoridation Proposal. Dr. William Hirzy, a former risk assessment scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency, explains why EPA Headquarters Union of Scientists and Professionals oppose fluoridation. This letter, written in March 2013, was sent to Clean Water Portland — a group that …
https://fluoridefreesudbury.wordpress.com/2017/12/19/epas-dr-bill-hirzy-exposes-the-fluoridation-program/
I am not here as a representative of EPA, but rather as a representative of EPA headquarters professional employees, through their duly elected labor union. The union first got involved in this issue in 1985 as a matter of professional ethics. In 1997 we most recently voted to oppose fluoridation. Our opposition has strengthened since then.
http://fluoridepoison.weebly.com/research.html
why epa headquarters union of scientists opposes fluoridation The following documents why our union, formerly National Federation of Federal Employees Local 2050 and since April 1998 Chapter 280 of the National Treasury Employees Union, took the stand it did opposing fluoridation of drinking water supplies.
Did you find the information you need about WHY EPA HEADQUARTERS UNION OF SCIENTISTS OPPOSES FLUORIDATION?
We hope you found all the information about WHY EPA HEADQUARTERS UNION OF SCIENTISTS OPPOSES FLUORIDATION you were looking for and more.
