J. William (Bill) Hirzy, PhD
THE BULL CITY BULLETIN INTERVIEWS BILL HIRZY
During the 5th Annual Citizen’s Conference on Fluoride (September 2014), The Bull City Bulletin had an exclusive 45 minute discussion with world renowned toxics risk assessor and decades long Clean Water activist, Dr. William (Bill) Hirzy Ph.D.
Dr. Hirzy is especially known and respected for his keystone contributions as a whistleblower from within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) headquarters, where he was Senior Scientist, Risk Assessment, Toxics Office, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for over 27 years .
In the two part Bull City Bulletin video interview, Dr. Hirzy explains that the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) Chapter 280 – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Headquarters, a union he co-founded, was initially organized to protect EPA staff members from unethical, politically motivated pressure by EPA management.
When the Union of EPA Professionals became aware of the risks of public water fluoridation, it began working within the EPA, trying to make changes in EPA fluoridation policy. When that proved impossible, the Union went public.
VIDEO PART 1: The Bull City Bulletin interview with Dr. Bill Hirzy (September 2014)
VIDEO PART 2: The Bull City Bulletin interview with Dr. Bill Hirzy (September 2014)
WHY EPA’S UNION OF PROFESSIONALS OPPOSES WATER FLUORIDATION
On June 29th, 2000, Dr. William Hirzy was invited to testify before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water on behalf of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) Chapter 280 – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Headquarters. See the video, and read the transcript of Dr. Hirzy’s presentation: “Why EPA’s Union of Professionals Opposes Fluoridation.”
National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) Chapter 280, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Headquarters Office: Website of the EPA Headquarters Professionals Union
Fluoride and Children’s I.Q. Decrements: Risk Assessment for Reference Dose
and Health-Based Safe Drinking Water Level: a risk assessment to determine a safe dose for fluoride based on IQ studies, using standard safety factors. (PDF). A basic US EPA risk reassessment would force a MCLG of zero fluoride, and end water fluoridation. Presented by J. William Hirzy, PhD, former Senior Scientist, Risk Assessment, US EPA Toxics Office. 5th Citizens’ Conference on Fluoride, Hyatt Regency Hotel, Crystal City, Virginia (September 6 – 7, 2014).
Coalition of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Unions: Letter to EPA Administrator (8/5/2005), regarding setting “the maximum contaminant level goal for fluoride at zero, in accordance with Agency policy for all likely or known human carcinogens.“
Coalition of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Unions: Letter to U.S. Congress on Fluoride Regulation (8/5/2005), requesting “a moratorium based on science indicating a number of adverse health effects and out-of-control, excessive exposures to fluoride.”
2002 Statement of Concern about Fluoride by NTEU Chapter 280: Because “a full, open debate on the merits of the science underpinning fluoridation – and EPA’s drinking water standards – is long overdue, ” the EPA Headquarters Professionals Union attempts to stimulate Congress to a re-examination of United States government water fluoridation policy.
Why EPA’s Union of Professionals Opposes Fluoridation (1999): “This document was prepared on behalf of the National Treasury Employees Union Chapter 280 by Chapter Senior Vice-President J. William Hirzy, Ph.D.”