logo
If Louisiana removes fluoride from water, officials should tackle ‘Cancer Alley' next

If Louisiana removes fluoride from water, officials should tackle ‘Cancer Alley' next

Yahoo28-04-2025

Getty Images
State lawmakers took a step last week toward removing fluoride from public water supplies in Louisiana, despite health care professionals attesting to its time-proven effectiveness in limiting dental disease.
Proponents of Senate Bill 2 from Sen. 'Big Mike' Fesi, R-Houma, leaned on data and research that blames fluoride for thyroid disorders and lowering the IQ of children (we'll circle back to that later). The proposal advanced last Wednesday from the Senate Committee of Health and Welfare in a 6-3 party line vote, with Republicans prevailing.
The results were the same for another Fesi bill to authorize the over-the-counter sale of ivermectin at pharmacies without a doctor's prescription. As with the anti-fluoride bill, ivermectin supporters had ample info to support their viewpoint (we'll get back to this, too).
Yet despite this apparent pro-science and pro-research mindset, overwhelming evidence of higher rates of cancer and other chronic ailments in communities along the Mississippi River's petrochemical corridor in Louisiana are routinely ignored – if not doubted – within conservative circles.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Just three years ago, a peer-reviewed Tulane Environmental Law Clinic study found the estimated cancer risk was highest in the River Parish communities right next to point sources of pollution. Most of these settlements are predominantly Black and low-income, inhabited in part by the descendants of slaves who toiled on the plantations where refineries and chemical plants now stand.
The same study found the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) issued permits to allow industrial pollution emissions at rates 7 to 21 times higher among Black communities than in predominantly white ones.
According to 2024 health data research from Human Rights Watch, people living in areas with the worst air pollution in Louisiana, including much of 'Cancer Alley,' had rates of low birthweight more than double the state average (11.3%) and more than triple the U.S. average (8.5%). Preterm births were nearly double the state average (13%) and nearly two-and-a-half times the national rate (10.5%).
State officials are not willing to acknowledge the disparities.
'LDEQ does not use the term Cancer Alley,' a department spokesperson told Human Rights Watch last year. 'That term implies that there is a large geographic area that has higher cancer incidence than the state average. We have not seen higher cancer incidence over large areas of the industrial corridor between Baton Rouge and New Orleans.'
Now let's go back to last week's Senate committee hearing to see if we can't connect that statement to why state officials can't – or won't – acknowledge verified scientific facts that are staring them in the face.
That includes state Surgeon General Dr. Ralph Abraham, who was by Fesi's side to support both of his bills. Regarding the removal of fluoride from drinking water, Abraham said there 'probably is a direct correlation between fluoride intake in pregnant ladies and lower IQs in their babies.' Crowley chiropractor Sandra Marks, who also testified in favor of the bill, made the same claim and cited a Harvard School of Public Health study.
What Abraham and Marks didn't share was that the Harvard study involved children in China with high overexposure to fluoride. They implied the lower IQs were tied to exposure to permissible levels of fluoride in the U.S.
Jeanie Donovan, New Orleans deputy health department director, shared details on the Harvard research with lawmakers when testifying against Fesi's bill. She also pointed out the lack of any reliable scientific research that connects fluoride with thyroid disease.
'We have many, many health issues in our city and in our state that we should address and that we should be spending time and money to address,' Donovan told the committee, making it clear that fluoride overexposure was not one of them.
Anne Jayes with the Louisiana Public Health Institute and Dr. Robert Delarosa, a Baton Rouge pediatric dentist for 41 years, both cited a University of Queensland study that found children with access to properly fluoridated water had higher IQs.
Marks, who said her research was sourced through Meta AI, also sounded the alarm over skeletal fluorosis, which can result in bone density changes and an increased risk of fractures. What she failed to mention was the bone disorder involves exposure to excessive amounts of fluoride.
Jayes later pointed out the potentially dangerous fluoride levels in the study Marks cited were 21 to 28 times the recommended amount for drinking water systems, and that skeletal fluorosis studies themselves have been 'widely challenged for their poor quality.'
Annette Droddy, executive director of the 1,900-member Louisiana Dental Association, noted to the committee a trend of states reversing their bans on fluoridated drinking water, including Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Tennessee.
Calgary, Alberta, removed fluoride from its water in 2011 but restored it in 2023, Droddy said. The reversal came after health officials noted a 700% increase in children hospitalized for dental inflections and abscesses.
In Louisiana, only 39% of the population is provided fluoridated water through their public utility – well below the 72% national average, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Removing fluoride will compound issues for the nearly 500,000 children in Louisiana who don't see a dentist regularly, even though they qualify for dental coverage through Medicaid, Droddy said. Without fluoridated water, she said the state will have to ask the federal government for more money to cover a likely increase in children's dental problems.
'Why would we take away the best public health measure of the 20th century?' Droddy said.
Yet Fesi stuck to his guns in his closing statement for Senate Bill 2, doubling down on the debunked low IQ and thyroid claims — and adding autism for good measure without any supporting evidence.
On Fesi's other bill, Abraham provided what he called a 'guesstimate,' saying 'a fairly large percentage of the population of the United States takes ivermectin on a daily basis.'
The most recent number available for daily ivermectin use in the U.S. is 185,550 people, according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, an arm of the U.S. Department of Health and Hospitals.
That's only 0.05% of the national population; it's not nothing but certainly not 'a fairly large percentage' of Americans. That poor grasp of health data might be cause for concern among Abraham's patients – animal and human.
The surgeon general and other backers of Fesi's bill frequently mentioned 'health freedom' during the Senate committee hearing. That concept apparently doesn't apply to neighbors of industrial facilities who no doubt would like freedom from toxic exposure linked to chronic ailments and a significantly lowered quality and length of life.
Fesi also referred to fluoride as 'toxic waste,' something that communities along the river could probably help him better define.
If Louisiana leaders are going to pull fluoride out of our drinking water, it stands to reason they should show equal concern for the health of residents in 'Cancer Alley.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned
Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned

USA Today

time32 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned

Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned Disputes inside the GOP about parts of Trump's major tax bill threaten approval in the Senate and past compromises reached by the Republican-led House. Show Caption Hide Caption Elon Musk 'disappointed' with Trump's tax bill Elon Musk told CBS he is 'disappointed' with President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful' tax bill. Republicans begin debate in the narrowly divided Senate with factions seeking to increase spending cuts or curbing tax breaks, which threaten the compromise needed for approval back in the House. Trump's billionaire adviser Elon Musk complicated the debate by urging lawmakers to kill the bill. Congressional leaders insist approval is still possible despite the fissures in the narrow Republican majorities in each chamber and the unified opposition of Democrats. WASHINGTON – Will President Donald Trump's 'big beautiful bill' go bust? The second-term president's highest-priority legislation is under attack from some Senate Republicans – and from his former billionaire adviser Elon Musk – for costing too much. Complaints are also mounting from Republicans who are opposed to cutting Medicaid health insurance and other popular programs used by many Americans, especially as a way to help pay for tax breaks that would benefit some of the country's highest-income earners. With Republicans holding the slimmest of majorities in both chambers of Congress and with Democrats showing no sign of wanting to help Trump notch a major win to begin his new administration, lawmakers from Trump's own party are sounding apprehensive about threading the needle before their self-imposed July 4 deadline to get something to the president's desk for signature into law. More: Trump and Musk's bromance ends after personal attacks over criticism of tax bill 'We're anxious to get to work on it," Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, told reporters earlier in the week as Republicans and Musk started publicly airing their complaints about the effort. Adding to the challenge: Some of the very House GOP members who last month voted in favor of their 1,100-page version of Trump's tax and policy plan started finding faults of their own that they say meant they'd probably have been a 'no' if they had the chance to do it again. Presidents often aim high to start terms Presidents often try in their first year to build on the momentum of their elections to get major legislation approved. For Joe Biden, it was an infrastructure bill. For Barack Obama, it was overhauling healthcare insurance. For George W. Bush, it was overhauling public education. Trump leapt into action in 2025 with an unprecedented pace of executive orders: 157 through May 23. When he turned to legislation, he persuaded Republican congressional leaders to package all his priorities into one bill, rather than splitting taxes and border security into two different bills, to complete the debate in one fell swoop. More: Everything's an 'emergency': How Trump's executive order record pace is testing the courts Lawmakers often shy away from piling too much into one bill because each contentious provision spurs its own opposition. But faced with the prospect of unanimous Democratic opposition, Trump opted for a strategy that focuses on GOP priorities such as tax relief and border security while personally lobbying reluctant Republicans to stay in line. 'Americans have given us a mandate for bold and profound change,' Trump told Congress in a speech March 4. 'I call on all of my Republican friends in the Senate and House to work as fast as they can to get this Bill to MY DESK before the Fourth of JULY,' he added in a social media post about three months later, on June 2. Musk opposition makes waves Trump's efforts worked in the Republican-led House, which after several days of negotiations and an all-night floor debate voted 215-214 in favor of a plan that had the full backing of the White House. Getting the measure through the Senate - even with the GOP in charge needing just a simple majority of 51 votes - is proving to be its own elusive challenge. Musk, the former head of Trump's bureaucracy-slashing Department of Government Efficiency, spent this past week unloading on the House-passed bill for spending too much money. He called the legislation "pork-filled" and a "disgusting abomination," and urged lawmakers to "KILL the BILL." More: The post-fight fallout from Trump-Musk battle could get even uglier While Musk's barrage ignited a war with Trump and left many Republicans cringing, deficit hawks in the GOP said they appreciated the world's richest man also pushing for deeper spending cuts from the U.S. government. "I welcome people like Elon Musk that try to hold our feet to the fire," said Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Missouri. "We often disappoint our voters when we don't do the cuts that we campaign on, when we're not fiscally responsible." But Rep. Don Bacon, R-Nebraska, who served in the Air Force for 30 years, said the division between Trump and Musk wasn't a good look for his party, especially when it's trying to advance the primary piece of legislation on the president's agenda. "It's just not helpful," Bacon said. "When you have division, divided teams don't perform as well." 'The opposite of conservative': Sen. Paul on bill Several pockets of Republican senators have voiced concerns about the House-passed legislation. Each group has their issue that they want addressed, and each one presents a hurdle for Trump and GOP leaders like Thune as they try to cobble together a winning 51-vote coalition that can also make it back through the House for another final vote. The Senate factions include one group seeking to cut more spending because the Congressional Budget Office said the House-passed plan would add $2.4 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years. Others are worried about cutting Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for low-income families. And another handful of senators say they are worried about the House-passed bill rolling back renewable energy tax credits for solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear energy. "There are many of us who recognize that what came out of the House was pretty aggressive in how it seeks to wind down or phase out many of the energy tax credit provisions," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska. "I happen to think that we've got tax policies that are working to help advance our energy initiatives around the country, as diverse and as varied as they are. Wouldn't we want to continue those investments? 'This bill is the opposite of conservative, and we should not pass it,' added Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, in a June 4 social media post that raised concerns about the nation's debt limit. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley is one of the outspoken Republicans taking issue with the House-passed bill's provisions that would cut nearly $800 billion during the next decade from Medicaid and, according to the Congressional Budget Office, cost 7.8 million people their health insurance. "I don't want to see rural hospitals close and I don't want to see any benefits cut in my state," Hawley said. Trump and his allies contend spending cuts of $1.6 trillion are the most ever approved in a House bill and that the tax cuts will spur economic growth to offset the costs. Trump got personal this week in calling Paul's ideas 'crazy' in a social media post and said the people of Kentucky 'can't stand him.' More: Trump lashes out at Sen. Rand Paul over opposition to big tax bill House Speaker Mike Johnson, a staunch Trump ally, told reporters June 4 that few people are going to like everything in an 1,100-page bill. But the Louisiana Republican said the measure he helped craft in the House was carefully calibrated to gain wide support. "I hope everybody will evaluate that – in both parties, and everybody – and recognize, 'Wow, the benefits of this far outweigh anything that I don't like out it,'" Johnson said. Senate dropping local tax deductions would be 'radioactive': Rep. Lalota Any changes made by the Senate will force another vote in the House before the bill can become law - and that's where the math can get tricky. Republican senators are talking about tinkering with a key compromise that Trump and Johnson signed off on in the House that raised the federal deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) from $10,000 to $40,000 for people earning less than $500,000 per year. That provision is important to GOP lawmakers from high-tax states such as California, New York and New Jersey who supported the House bill that passed through the 435-seat chamber by only a one-vote margin. More: Senate Republicans plan to amend SALT tax deduction in Trump's sweeping bill The Senate aims to cut back that provision. But Rep. Nick Lalota, R-New York, told reporters on June 4 that revisiting the tax issue "would be like digging up safely-buried radioactive waste." House members scouring through the bill they voted on weeks ago are also finding unfamiliar provisions in the version that they say they would have opposed. For example, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, said in a social media post June 3 that the Senate needs to strip out language she hadn't noticed earlier that would prevent states from regulating artificial intelligence. Rep. Mike Flood, R-Nebraska, said he opposed a section that aims to hinder federal judges from enforcing their court orders. Trump sought the provision to prevent judges from blocking policies largely spelled out via his executive orders. Senate could drop contentious provisions House members risked supporting Even though Republicans control both chambers of Congress, the Senate could drop or fail to approve contentious parts that GOP House colleagues in competitive districts already went out on a limb to support. It's happened many times before - with sizable political consequences. The concept even has a name: Getting BTU'd. That refers to a 1993 House vote on a controversial energy tax during the first year of Bill Clinton's presidency based on British thermal units. House Democrats lost 54 seats in the 1994 election – and control of the chamber for the first time in 40 years – in part because of supporting the BTU tax that the Senate never debated. John Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, has said a book about such votes could be called 'Profiles in Futility.' Another example was the 2009 American Clean Energy and Security Act, a bill which Obama supported as president that aimed to limit the emissions of heat-trapping gases from power plants, vehicles and other industrial sources. The Democrat-controlled House narrowly approved the measure 219-212 but the Senate never took it up. Critics said it would raise the cost of energy. The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a non-profit libertarian think tank that opposed the measure, counted 28 House Democrats from coal states who lost their seats in the 2010 mid-term election after voting for the bill. Fast forward to 2025 and Republicans are the ones facing a similar dynamic. Musk, who contributed about $290 million of his personal fortune to help Republicans including Trump win last November, slammed House lawmakers who voted for the president's legislative package.'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong,' Musk wrote June 3 on social media. But House Republicans who voted for the legislation, including some who also demanded deeper spending cuts when it was in their hands, said they're not worried about the package falling apart and coming back to haunt them. They say that's because they did fight for more budget cuts. "This wasn't a hard vote. It was hard going through the process to get more, and you can always do better," said Rep. Ralph Norman, R-South Carolina. "But look at what Donald Trump's done, the great things that are contributing to cutting the deficit." Rep. David Schweikert, R-Arizona, who represents a competitive toss-up district, noted that he's introduced multiple bills to trim federal spending. "If Mr. Musk wants to be helpful, what he should do is start to understand that those of us in a 50-50 district who have shown up with actual policy solutions that offset every penny of this bill," he said. Leaving Washington for the weekend, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force Once on June 6 that he wasn't worried about Musk and that he remained confident he'd get "tremendous support" in the Senate to pass the bill. 'I don't know of anybody who's going to vote against it," the president said, before adding: "Maybe Rand Paul." For his part, Johnson told reporters June 4 that he wasn't concerned about House Republicans losing seats in 2026. Predicting that the Senate would find the necessary votes on the president's tax bill, the speaker said he expects Americans will see the benefits of Trump's efforts before the next election. 'Am I concerned about the effect of this on the midterms? I'm not," Johnson said. "I have no concern whatsoever. I am absolutely convinced that we are going to win the midterms and grow the House majority because we are delivering for the American majority and fulfilling our campaign promises." Contributing: Reuters

House DOGE caucus leader says ‘everybody knew' Elon Musk was exaggerating his cost-cutting achievements
House DOGE caucus leader says ‘everybody knew' Elon Musk was exaggerating his cost-cutting achievements

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

House DOGE caucus leader says ‘everybody knew' Elon Musk was exaggerating his cost-cutting achievements

Elon Musk was exaggerating the achievements of the Department of Government Efficiency, and 'most everybody' on Capitol Hill knew it, a GOP lawmaker has said. Republican U.S. Rep. Blake Moore told reporters that, behind the scenes, many were skeptical about the bold claims of the world's richest man. "Most everybody knew Elon was exaggerating what he could do," Moore of Utah told reporters outside the Capitol on Thursday. "He was claiming to find $4 billion a day in cuts he was going to get. One time, he said $2 trillion, he was going to find." "It's a massive exaggeration, and I think people are recognizing that now," he added. It comes in the wake of the explosive fallout between Musk and the president on Thursday afternoon. The two men traded verbal blows from their respective social media platforms, culminating in Musk claiming that Trump was 'in the Epstein files.' Moore is one of three co-leaders of the House DOGE caucus, a bipartisan group of lawmakers who had hoped to support Musk's cost-cutting efforts prior to the blow-up. According to Business Insider, the group had intended to compile a report of potential cost-saving measures for DOGE at the end of the first quarter, but reportedly received little contact from the department. "We've always been a little frustrated that there was such limited interaction," Moore said. "We couldn't really identify where we were to lean in, and we had a ton of folks ready to support it, but there just wasn't that interaction." Moore is among many others in the government who wish to pursue cuts to federal spending through the bipartisan government funding process. '[There are] plenty of Democrats that recognize there's waste in our government,' he said. The bromance between Musk and Trump had been winding down in recent weeks after the tech billionaire criticized the president's "Big Beautiful Bill" – the spending bill that Republicans are trying to get through Congress. Musk is among those arguing that the bill would increase the deficit by trillions of dollars. "When I saw Musk start posting, just parroting false claims about the tax reconciliation bill, it was clear something's amiss," Moore said following the online bust-up. "And so it escalated, yeah. It escalated very quickly."

Why were so many Thai farmers among the hostages held by Hamas?
Why were so many Thai farmers among the hostages held by Hamas?

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Why were so many Thai farmers among the hostages held by Hamas?

BANGKOK (AP) — Israel says it has retrieved the body of a 35-year-old Thai hostage who was abducted into Gaza during the Oct. 7, 2023, attack that sparked the war. Nattapong Pinta was among 31 Thais taken by the Hamas militant group. Thailand's foreign ministry in a statement Saturday confirmed that Pinta, the last Thai hostage in Gaza, was confirmed dead. It said the bodies of two others have yet to be retrieved. The ministry has said 46 Thais have been killed during the war. Thais were the largest group of foreigners held captive by Hamas. They were among tens of thousands of Thai workers in Israel. Here's a look at what they were doing. Why are there so many Thais in Israel? Israel once relied heavily on Palestinian workers, but it started bringing in large numbers of migrant workers after the 1987-93 Palestinian revolt, known as the first Intifada. Most came from Thailand, and Thais remain the largest group of foreign agricultural laborers in Israel today, earning considerably more than they can at home. Thailand and Israel implemented a bilateral agreement a decade ago to ease the way for workers in the agriculture sector. Israel has come under criticism for the conditions under which the Thai farm laborers work. A Human Rights Watch report in 2015 said they often were housed in makeshift and inadequate accommodation and 'were paid salaries significantly below the legal minimum wage, forced to work long hours in excess of the legal maximum, subjected to unsafe working conditions and denied their right to change employers.' A watchdog group found more recently that most were still paid below the legal minimum wage. How many Thai nationals work in Israel? There were about 30,000 Thai workers, primarily working on farms, in Israel prior to the attack by Hamas. In the wake of the attack, some 7,000 returned home, primarily on government evacuation flights, but higher wages than those available at home have continued to attract new arrivals. The Thai ambassador to Israel, Pannabha Chandraramya, recently said there are now more than 38,000 Thai workers in the country. What happened after some left? Faced with a labor shortage in the wake of the exodus, Israel's Agriculture Ministry announced incentives to try to attract foreign workers back to evacuated areas. Among other things, it offered to extend work visas and to pay bonuses of about $500 a month. Thailand's Labor Ministry granted 3,966 Thai workers permission to work in Israel in 2024, keeping Israel in the top four destinations for Thais working abroad last year. Thai migrant workers generally come from poorer regions of the country, especially the northeast, and even before the bonuses, the jobs in Israel paid many times what they could make at home.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store