On a scale of 1-5, how significant do you think this ruling will be for future TSCA citizen petitions?

Answer Explanations

• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-678105
  It is time for a reassessment of safety, particularly in combination with other exposures.
• 4

  user-831795
  Govt officials should be aware of those dealing with water and health. At the same time, citizens are also responsible for it.
• 1 - Not significant at all

  user-550886
  Other methods outside of fluoride should be considered
• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-615004
  
  This is a very significant ruling for many reasons;

  
  

  First, it now makes it mandatory for the EPA to review and potentially change fluoride regulations, with emphasis on its neurotoxic risks.

  
  

  Secondly, it will likely encourage more public health challenges under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

  
  

  Finally, it draws attention to the growing issue of drinking water quality especially with the growing concern regarding nano particles and aging water infrastructure across the U.S.The fact that local water authorities are already rethinking their use of fluoride, with potential for widespread changes in fluoridation practices makes this ruling very significant
• 4

  user-449730
  This court decision will also affect other citizen petitions.  It will lead to an increase in citizen petitions for an update of the water fuloridation dose under TSCA.
• 3

  user-803256
  I am from India. I am not sure, how exactly this particular ruling will affect people in US.
• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-641932
  For the future of our children, we must have comprehensive assessments of fluoride in water.
• 4

  user-647031
  I would rate the significance of this ruling for future TSCA citizen petitions as a  4. The ruling sets a precedent for citizens successfully challenging EPA decisions, which could encourage more petitions and potentially lead to increased scrutiny and regulation of chemicals. However, the long-term impact will depend on how the EPA responds and whether other courts follow this lead.

  
  
• 2

  user-774962
  I have no idea how current TSCA petitions are handled or their effectiveness.
• 4

  user-295973
  Specifically, citizen petitioners request that EPA adopt a rule under Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA ), requiring that manufacturers and processors of E&P Chemicals conduct toxicity. The latter should be conducted at the level that human are being exposed to.
• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-658333
  It might well open the floodgates to similar citizen petitions on other toxicants.
• 3

  user-380980
  It is significant.
• 3

  user-919082
  Too early to tell, but increasing court insertion into regulatory proposals could lead to chaotic and inconsistent decisions on how to most appropriately address environmental chemical health concerns.
• 4

  user-850429
  The answer is  very  significant since it sets an important precedent for how scientific evidence is evaluated in regulatory decisions about chemical controls. The court's decision that water fluoride intake at recommended levels poses a "disproportionate risk" of reduced IQ in children underscores increasing scrutiny of long-established public health practices.
  This important decision not only highlights the public concerns that have been raised, but also highlights the importance of considering emerging scientific research to assess the impact of consumer products on public health policies is also emphasized as safe. Future petitions under TSCA could influence this decision, encouraging more stringent assessments of chemical hazards and potentially stricter regulations or reassessment of existing practices.
• 4

  user-640387
  I think the lack of fluoridated water is a significant issue for all individuals.
• 3

  user-573537
  Personal opinion
• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-293029
  Advocacy 
• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-762331
  Sentarán una base a partir de ahora
• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-868575
  Sets a precedent for additional petitions, which can create an enormous burden on agencies involved. 
• 5 - Extremely significant

  user-123942
  We should know the quality of drinking water 
• 4

  user-683654
  People will start taking a look at it from now onwards.
• 4

  user-876062
   Since high concentrations can present risks, such as dental fluorosis (spots on the teeth) and possible effects on children's development. 
• 1 - Not significant at all

  user-613901
  I dont know what this is?  TSCA citizen petitions 
• 1 - Not significant at all

  user-810586
  Not in my jurisdication