A new study has found that prenatal exposure to fluoride may contribute to lower IQ in children, the latest in a number of studies indicating health and cognitive issues as a result of fluoride exposure.
On September 19, the journal Environmental Health Perspectives published the study “Prenatal Fluoride Exposure and Cognitive Outcomes in Children at 4 and 6–12 Years of Age in Mexico,” examining the results of prenatal exposure to fluoride and the potential health concerns. The researchers called the study “one of the first and largest longitudinal epidemiological studies to exist that either address the association of early life exposure to fluoride to childhood intelligence or study the association of fluoride and cognition using individual biomarker of fluoride exposure.” The study was funded in part by the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
The research team studied participants from Mexico’s Early Life Exposures in Mexico to Environmental Toxicants (ELEMENT) project by measuring the amount of fluoride present in the mothers’ urine during pregnancy and again when their children were 6 to 12 years old. The researchers found that higher prenatal fluoride exposure was associated with lower scores on tests for cognitive function at age four and between ages six and twelve. The researchers acknowledge that their results are “somewhat consistent” with past ecological studies which indicate children living in areas of high fluoride exposure have lower IQ scores than those in low-exposure areas.
“Our findings, combined with evidence from existing animal and human studies, reinforce the need for additional research on potential adverse effects of fluoride, particularly in pregnant women and children, and to ensure that the benefits of population-level fluoride supplementation outweigh any potential risks,” the researchers write.
Dr. Leonardo Trasande, a pediatrician who studies potential links between environmental exposures and health problems at New York University Langone Health, told Newsweek the study was “well-conducted” and “raises serious concerns about fluoride supplementation in water.”
The Fluoride Action Network, an advocacy group focused on promoting an end to fluoridation, noted that the researchers made efforts to control for a range of variables that could skew the results, including socioeconomic status, smoking, alcohol use, and health problems during pregnancy. FAN also noted that the fluoride levels ingested by the Mexican mothers “was about the same as that in women in the USA.” More specifically, the organization notes that “the higher levels were similar to what is found in areas in the USA with fluoridated water, and the lower levels were similar to what is found in most unfluoridated parts of the USA.” Mexico does not have a water fluoridation program, but instead adds fluoride to table salt.
However, despite the new study and its provocative conclusions, the American Dental Association continues to ignore a growing body of evidence indicating the health dangers of fluoride. After looking at the study, the ADA “concludes the findings are not applicable to the U.S. The ADA continues to endorse fluoridation of public water as the most effective public health measure to prevent tooth decay.” Consumers should note that exposure to fluoride via dental cleaning is vastly different from exposure via water fluoridation.
What is Fluoride?
The substances added to municipal water supplies known by the name fluoride are actually a combination of unpurified byproducts of phosphate mining, namely hydrofluorosilicic acid, sodium fluorosilicate, and sodium fluoride. In the United States thousands of tons of fluorosilicic acid is recovered from phosphoric acid plants and then used for water fluoridation. During this process the fluoride ion is created.
This process of taking waste from the phosphate industry and putting it into drinking water has long been criticized for its effects on human health and the environment. It is well known that water fluoridation has led to dental fluorosis for millions of children. This discoloring of the teeth was called “cosmetically objectionable” by the Centers for Disease Control.
Beyond the cosmetic effect there have been several studies indicating overwhelming health issues related to fluoride, especially for children. Another recent study found a connection between exposure to water fluoridated at relatively low concentrations and a reduced IQ among children.
A study published in the journal General Dentistry warns that infants are at risk of dental fluorosis due to overexposure from fluoride in commercially available infant foods. The researchers analyzed 360 different samples of 20 different foods ranging from fruits and vegetables, chicken, turkey, beef, and vegetarian dinners. Chicken products had the highest concentrations of fluoride, followed by turkey. The New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF) reports that the fluoride levels were due to pesticides, fertilizers, soil, groundwater, and/or fluoridated water. The high levels found in the chicken and turkey can be attributed to “fluoride-saturated bone dust” involved in the process of mechanically separating the meat.
Another study published in Environmental Health found a potential connection between fluoride exposure and the prevalence of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children. The researchers studied data on ADHD among children age four to seventeen collected in 2003, 2007 and 2011 as part of the National Survey of Children’s Health, as well as state water fluoridation data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) collected between 1992 and 2008 . It is the first study to analyze the relationship between exposure to fluoridated water and ADHD prevalence.
The team discovered that children living in areas with a majority of the population receiving fluoridated water from public water systems “tended to have a greater proportion of children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD. ” The researchers concluded that:
this study has empirically demonstrated an association between more widespread exposure to fluoridated water and increased ADHD prevalence in U.S. children and adolescents, even after controlling for socioeconomic status (SES). The findings suggest that fluoridated water may be an environmental risk factor for ADHD.
Previous studies have shown rats exposed to fluoride chemicals also exhibit ADHD-like symptoms.
In addition to these studies related to fluoride and children, dozens of other studies have indicated a variety of health problems. A recent study published in the Journal of Analytical Chemistry indicates that fluoride ions found in fluoridated water and toothpaste may lead to an increase in Urinary Stone Disease (USD). The study was conducted by chemists from Russia and Australia, led by Pavel Nesterenko at the University of Tasmania. The team studied 20 urinary stones from patients at a Russian hospital and discovered fluoride ions in 80% of the stones. This could be due to high levels of fluoride in patients’ urine, possibly from drinking water containing fluorides and ingesting fluoride toothpaste.
A study published in the BMJ’s Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health confirmed fluoride’s negative effect on the thyroid gland and a possible connection to depression, weight gain, and other negative health effects. Researchers with the University of Kent in England examined thyroid activity for those in areas with fluoridated water and those without. The team examined 95 percent of the English population in 2012 and 2013 and found that high rates of underactive thyroid were 30% more likely in areas with high fluoride concentration. An underactive thyroid can lead to depression, weight gain, fatigue and aching muscles.
On top of that, a 2016 study from Ohio’s Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine also found a connection between water fluoridation and type 2 diabetes.
The reasons for opposing water fluoridation include: fear of a variety of health concerns; the belief that it is force to medicate the population without their approval; financial waste; and environmental concerns related to phosphate mines where the chemical is found. Whatever reason you choose for standing against fluoride, it is abundantly clear that fluoride is an outdated, dangerous process that should cease immediately.
Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist and liberty activist. He is the Lead Investigative Reporter for ActivistPost.com and the founder of the TheConsciousResistance.com. Follow him on Twitter. Derrick is the author of three books: The Conscious Resistance: Reflections on Anarchy and Spirituality and Finding Freedom in an Age of Confusion, Vol. 1 and Finding Freedom in an Age of Confusion, Vol. 2
Derrick is available for interviews. Please contact [email protected]
This article may be freely reposted in part or in full with author attribution and source link.
i try to avoid fluoride out of caution; i put vit C powder in my bath water to eliminate it. i filter my water to ingest. But I think this article errs by omission. The ADA did examine the Mexican study and it is worth noting why dentists would consider the study not applicable to Americans; “The intake of fluoride in Mexico is significantly different from the U.S. In Mexico, fluoride is added to salt (known as salt fluoridation) and it also exists naturally in varying degrees in community water. In the U.S., fluoride is not added to salt and it is only added to water in cases where the natural occurrence of fluoride is lower than the recommended level to prevent tooth decay.
The authors of the study suggest that prenatal exposure to fluoride may cause lower IQ in children. However, because it is unknown how the subjects of the study ingested the fluoride – whether through salt, water, or both – no conclusions can be drawn regarding the effects of community water fluoridation in the U.S. Moreover, according to the ADA, the best available scientific evidence shows no association between the U.S.-recommended amount of fluoride used to prevent tooth decay and IQ.”
I an think of no rational reason that dentists, who profit from tooth decay, would irresponsibly suggest the Mexican study is incomplete and therefore that conclusions based on it are questionable. From an economic point of view, dentists would oppose fluoridation. That they do not leads me to conclude they are acting from responsible health concerns.
Here is what researchers at Harvard report: “In a meta-analysis, researchers from Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) and China Medical University in Shenyang for the first time combined 27 studies and found strong indications that fluoride may adversely affect cognitive development in children. Based on the findings, the authors say that this risk should not be ignored, and that more research on fluoride’s impact on the developing brain is warranted.
The study was published online in Environmental Health Perspectives on July 20, 2012.”
And here is part of the abstract of a study published in the Scientific World Journal in 2014:
“This paper reviews the human health effects of fluoride. The authors conclude that available evidence suggests that fluoride has a potential to cause major adverse human health problems, while having only a modest dental caries prevention effect. As part of efforts to reduce hazardous fluoride ingestion, the practice of artificial water fluoridation should be reconsidered globally, while industrial safety measures need to be tightened in order to reduce unethical discharge of fluoride compounds into the environment. Public health approaches for global dental caries reduction that do not involve systemic ingestion of fluoride are urgently needed.”
Why then does the US Dental Association dismiss these findings? I have no answer. I tried to find links between the association and the fluoride industry but could not find it. But a report that seeks to answer the ADA reports: ‘•
“Fluoridation is not about “children’s teeth”. Rather, it is about industry ridding itself of crude hazardous waste
products, silicofluorides, for a profit. Silicofluorides are 85 times more toxic than naturally-occurring calcium
fluoride.
• Fluoride is more toxic than lead and like lead in minute doses, accumulates in and can be damaging to brain/mind development of children, producing abnormal behavior in animals and reducing IQ in humans, especially in conjunction with deficiencies of key nutrients such as calcium, iodine and vitamins. It can also contribute to many disease processes. Because it is almost as toxic as arsenic, fluoride’s ability to play havoc in the human body should surprise no one.
• There is as much, or more, dental decay in fluoridated communities as there is in the non-fluoridated areas; however, the dental costs are higher in fluoridated communities due to dental fluorosis. Drinking fluoridated water may delay decay, but it does not prevent it.
• Dental fluorosis is not simply a “cosmetic effect”. Dental fluorosis is the first visible sign of fluoride poisoning. Today there is an increased prevalence of dental fluorosis, ranging from about 15% to 65% in fluoridated areas and 5% to 40% in non-fluoridated areas in North America.”
What then is the link between the ADA and the practice of making money off of toxic waste products? I hope others can find evidence of such links……………….
via Au Government source: Swiss study, most Eu countries do not fluoridate:
https://www.swissdentaljournal.org/fileadmin/upload_sso/2_Zahnaerzte/2_SDJ/SMfZ_2010/SMfZ_12_2010/smfz-12_2010-forschung.pdf
Knew there was something in the water
When my daughter was a child, her pediatrician prescribed a daily multivitamin that had 1mg of fluoride in it, because our town water was not fluoridated. This was for the purpose of promoting strong healthy teeth. Well, she did have very good teeth with hardly not a single cavity all the while she was growing up. And from age seven to twelve she was enrolled in a martial arts school where she was first place locally and Statewide, and 6th Nationwide, only because she had to compete against 15 to 16 year olds when she was only 12. She finished high school and attained 3 degrees at the local community college. And she now works full time at a hospital. Despite all this, she has confided to me on more than one occasion that she feels she has some subtle symptoms of ADHD.