SECTION 1.  The legislature finds and confirms all of the following:-

Whereas, fluoride’s purported benefits are topical, and therefore no reason exists for water fluoridation and ingestion. 

Whereas, in an ongoing trial in the 9th Circuit, Judge Chen has indicated the Environmental Protection Agency has lost in disputing that water fluoridation poses a substantive risk under the Toxic Substances Control Act (Food & Water Action, Inc. et al. vs. Environmental Protection Agency).

Whereas, the Environmental Protection Agency has claimed to Judge Chen that the Toxic Substances Control Act requires an impossible burden of proof to allow ending water fluoridation.

Whereas, a 2019 National Institutes of Health funded study in Canada found that babies fed formula mixed with fluoridated water averaged 4 IQ points less than those mixed with non-fluoridated water – losses of non-verbal IQ averaged 9 IQ points, reinforcing earlier studies (Till et al, 2019).

Whereas, a Canadian study found a nearly 300% higher risk of ADHD for children living in fluoridated areas, reinforcing earlier studies (Riddel et al, 2019).

Whereas, fluoride is the only chemical added to water for the purpose of medical treatment, despite a lack of full public consent, lack of dose control, and lack of consideration for vulnerable individuals such as those with impaired kidney function. 

SECTION 2. Section 8C of chapter 111 of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking out section 8C as appearing in the 2021 Official Edition and inserting in place thereof the following section:-

Section 8C. The department and commissioner shall recommend against the use of fluoridated water by infants and pregnant women, and recommend instead for improved dental care a focus on less sugar and greater nutrition. Each local board of health shall be promptly informed.

Across the commonwealth, fluoridation of municipal water supplies shall be promptly prohibited.