Does your county put fluoride in its water? Let's find out.
HHS cancels funding for Moderna vaccines to fight pandemic flu
A good portion of DMV counties and localities were already adding fluoride in the water supply, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report in 2024. While some larger counties like Fairfax County, do add the dentist-recommended mineral, others do not.
Check if your county puts fluoride in the water supply
In Prince George's County, Rivers Edge subdivision, Bexley Park and Prince George's Woods Estates are among those that don't manually add the mineral. Other sites in Loudon County, Prince William County and Spotsylvania have scattered spots where fluoride is not used.
Meanwhile, notable areas like Fort Belvoir in Fairfax County does include it.
States like Florida and Utah have already removed the mineral from the state's public water supply, receiving praise from RFK.
Fluoride is a mineral that is naturally present in many foods as well as dietary supplements. The mineral is often added to public water supplies as it has been proven to help reduce tooth decay and stimulate new bone formation, (NIH).
Some toothpaste and dental products also contain the ingredient in order to reduce cavities.
Among adults, about 50% of fluoride is retained, with nearly all of it being stored in bones and teeth, according to NIH. Young children retain about 80% of fluoride.
In general, most people get enough fluoride from what they drink, eat and their dental products.
Surveys show that children and teenagers who drink fluoridated water have fewer cavities, according to NIH. Also, adults who drink fluoridated water have fewer decayed and filled teeth and lose fewer teeth.
Woman dies from brain-eating amoeba after using tap water to clear sinuses: CDC
There is still controversy regarding possible negative health effects — a main arguing point for RFK Jr.'s reasoning for wanting it gone.
While most studies have not found a strong link to cancer, a 1990 study by the U.S. National Toxicology Program found possible evidence of bone cancer risk in fluoridated drinking water in male rats. This was based on a higher-than-expected number of osteosarcomas. Female rats and both male and female mice were not impacted.
Osteosarcoma is already a rare cancer, according to the American Cancer Society. In order to be studied, research was conducted before and after the fluoridation of the water supply. However, since so many other factors can play a part in cancer rates, there's no consistent data to support one way or the other.
Infants and children can develop a condition called dental fluorosis if they consume too much fluoride, although this is rare and 'not caused by standard amounts of fluoride in public tap water,' according to the NIH.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
17 minutes ago
- USA Today
Psychedelics have promise. But after losing my son, we can't ignore the dangers.
Psychedelics, while potentially therapeutic, are also powerful, unpredictable and not right for everyone. I know this firsthand. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently sat in a congressional hearing to discuss departmental cuts. But what caught the attention of many were his comments about psychedelics, which he has long and publicly supported. Kennedy later posted on X: 'We're accelerating clinical trials (of psychedelics at the Food and Drug Administration) with urgency – and working to ensure safe, science-based access within 12 months.' This suggestion was made even more concrete on July 22, when the FDA began accepting applications for its new accelerated-approval program for drugs that address national health priorities, like mental health. Many see a turning point: a chance to accelerate research, expand access and legitimize the use of psychedelics ‒ not only in medicine but also in culture. There is real promise in these substances. Veterans report healing from post-traumatic stress disorder, cancer patients speak of end-of-life peace, and some people with depression or addiction find relief where nothing else helped. But as access grows and the public becomes more curious – if not enthusiastic – we must urgently pair this moment with clear-eyed public health safeguards and education. Because these substances, while potentially therapeutic, are also powerful, unpredictable and not right for everyone. I know this firsthand. In 2020, my 21-year-old son, Will, died in an accident linked to psychedelic-induced delusions. He was a college senior – curious, thoughtful and much loved. He believed what many of his peers believe: that psychedelics are 'safe,' 'natural' and 'the least harmful drug.' That night, every safety net failed – or wasn't there in the first place. What do psychedelic drugs do? Know the facts 'Before You Trip.' Today, psychedelics are moving from subculture to mainstream. About 8 million American adults used a psychedelic in the past year. Use of psychedelics among 19- to 30-year-olds has more than doubled in the past decade, and it has surged sevenfold among adults ages 35 to 50, numbers that represent historically high levels. Yet, clinical trials and legal therapeutic use represent only a small fraction of that. An increasing number of people report taking these drugs outside of medical settings for recreation, to improve well-being or for spiritual or self-exploration. Opinion: Ketamine bros are giving psychedelics a bad rap. That's a problem for those who need them. Many are first-time users, ostensibly beckoned by the headlines but often lacking community knowledge or harm reduction guidance. The contemporary media narrative has emphasized breakthrough therapies and personal transformations. But it rarely mentions contraindications, risk factors that make use inadvisable – like certain mental health conditions – or the need for supervision, preparation and integration. That's especially concerning for young people, who often hear only one side of the story. We've gone from 'Just Say No' to near silence. My Gen Z kids never had drug education that reflected today's landscape. They came of age amid cannabis legalization messaging that emphasized it as natural and healing. Now, psychedelics are being framed similarly – without balanced drug education to match. That leaves young people to navigate in the dark. We can do better. A nonprofit coalition recently launched Before You Trip, a public health campaign led by Generation Z voices, as a pilot project in Colorado – where psilocybin (hallucinogenic mushrooms) and other psychedelics were decriminalized in 2022. The campaign encourages young adults to pause, learn and reflect before deciding whether psychedelics are right for them. It offers clear, accessible and research-backed guidance on effects, contraindications and risk-reduction practices. The campaign promotes open dialogue, critical thinking and informed decision-making about these substances. It's about honest, harm reduction-oriented education, delivered in a voice that meets young people where they are, on social platforms. More is needed, but it's a building block. Opinion: I'm a doctor and a recovering addict. America can't lose ground on the opioids fight now. In addition to education, we also need public health infrastructure: trained first responders, accessible crisis resources and support, widespread harm reduction and better data collection. Too often, psychedelic-related crises are met with criminalization or stigma rather than care and understanding. Psychedelic drugs can offer healing, but they still come with risks I think often about a moment that haunts me. It was when I caught Will vaping during a college break. I panicked. I got angry. I didn't ask questions or try to understand. I shut down the conversation because of fear and because I didn't have the tools to approach it more skillfully. That could have been a moment to build trust. I wish I had used it to begin an honest dialogue. We now have an opportunity to open that dialogue – with families, communities and the public at large. Psychedelics can indeed offer healing, but they also bring complexity and risk. About 1 in 10 people who have used a classic psychedelic − such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), mescaline or psilocybin − report having experienced an adverse event related to their use. And of those who used a classic psychedelic, 2.6% report having sought post-trip psychiatric, psychological or medical care. As these substances are scaled up in the population, these proportions will represent several hundreds of thousands of people. As public interest and use increase, we should care very much about improving outcomes and reducing preventable harms. Let's build a culture of accountability, care and curiosity – not one of hype or silence. The future of psychedelics depends not only on access but also on responsibility. Let's make sure we're ready for both. Kristin Nash, MPH, is a public health professional specializing in harm reduction and health communication. She is the executive director of the William G. Nash Foundation and cofounder of the Coalition for Psychedelic Safety and Education (CPSE).
Washington Post
19 minutes ago
- Washington Post
‘I'm not a politician,' says NIH director. But it's not that simple.
'I'm not a politician,' the new director of the National Institutes of Health, Jay Bhattacharya insists. 'I'm not going to get involved in the political fight over things.' Easier said than done. The great challenge facing the former Stanford University doctor and economist as he guides the world's largest public funder of biomedical research is that science and American politics have become intertwined as perhaps never before. There is little ideological distance between NIH headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland, and the White House in nearby D.C.
Axios
7 hours ago
- Axios
D.C. Council waters down I-82, affecting local restaurants
The D.C. Council voted Monday to gut Initiative 82, settling on what lawmakers billed as a compromise between fair-wage advocates and many in the restaurant industry — and sparking intense backlash. Why it matters: The city has struggled with I-82's implementation for years. The new measure aims to balance working wages with business survival — especially for independent D.C. restaurants, which are struggling. Driving the news: Eliminating the tipped minimum wage — as the original ballot measure promised — is off the table. Instead, the I-82 amendment introduced by Council members Christina Henderson and Charles Allen preserves the tipped minimum wage and stretches base wage hikes over the next decade at a fraction of the standard minimum wage (currently $17.95/hour). The measure passed 7-5 during a tense hearing that began with protestor interruptions and ended with a lockdown of council chambers as protestors shouted and banged on doors. 📅 New timeline: Now through July 2026, a $10/hour tipped wage (56% of regular minimum wage). That'll increase every two years, capping off at 75% of the minimum wage in 2034. Catch up quick: The hospitality industry struggled to adjust to I-82. Many cited skyrocketing labor costs that coincided with inflation, rising rents and plummeting patronage due to mass DMV layoffs. Workers complained of diminished tips, especially as businesses implemented service fees to cover costs. Meanwhile, the city has been inconsistent with I-82's rollout. Mayor Muriel Bowser recently pushed for a full repeal, which the council voted down. Friction point: Tempers in the council chambers ran high as I-82 supporters chanted, "Blood is on your hands." After the vote, the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington hailed the decision as a "win for the industry," one that "brings immediate relief to operators" in a statement sent to Axios. One Fair Wage, the primary lobby behind I-82, called it a "betrayal of democracy and a gift to the restaurant lobby" in another statement. Meanwhile, there was concern over going against voters' will. "The voters told us what they wanted. And this is not it," said Council member Brianne Nadeau, who voted against the amendment. "This council should stop telling voters they don't know what's best." How they voted: ✔️ For the amendment: Charles Allen, Christina Henderson, Brooke Pinto, Phil Mendelson, Kenyan McDuffie, Wendell Felder, Anita Bonds ❌ Against: Brianne Nadeau, Janeese Lewis George, Robert White, Matt Frumin, Zachary Parker What's next: The amendment aims to provide more wage transparency. Starting in 2026, pay stubs must list all sources — including tips, bonuses, service charges, etc.
