Why I Modified My Thoughts on Water Fluoridation

Beneath is an approximation of this video’s audio content material. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, photos, and quotes to which Dr. Greger could also be referring, watch the above video.

Group water fluoridation not too long ago hit its seventy fifth anniversary, touted as a big development in public well being, however new analysis suggests the potential for adversarial well being impacts. There may be little query that supplemental fluoride strengthens tooth and reduces decay. However at what value? A lot of the older research have been snapshot-in-time research, trying solely at group-level information, or have been based mostly on higher-than-normal publicity. That has since modified with the publication of potential research following particular person publicity ranges from mother-child pairs over time.

The primary few have been from Mexico, and correlated increased fluoride ranges within the urine of pregnant girls with future developmental delay of their infants. They discovered worse cognitive efficiency at age 4, and decrease IQ from ages six by 12. However the fluoride was from fluoridated salt, or water sources the place fluoride was current naturally. Then, this research got here out of Canada, the primary potential research utilizing particular person publicity information dealing instantly with group water fluoridation receiving quote-unquote “optimally fluoridated” water. Not one of the municipal water fluoride ranges exceeded 1.5 components per million, and the overwhelming majority—over 90 p.c—was underneath the U.S. goal of level seven.

Regardless of ingesting “optimally fluoridated water,” the research of greater than 500 mother-child pairs discovered that increased fluoride publicity throughout being pregnant, as soon as once more, appeared to translate into decrease baby intelligence, measured at ages three to 4. The American School of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends pregnant girls drink at the least eight cups of water a day. Based mostly on the Canadian research, following this recommendation with water at U.S. goal fluoridation ranges may lead to as a lot as a 5-point loss in IQ.

The Canadian research was revealed within the American Medical Affiliation’s pediatrics journal, the longest working pediatrics journal within the nation. The editor-in-chief defended its determination to publish the research “as testomony to the truth that JAMA Pediatrics is dedicated to disseminating the very best science…regardless, of how contentious the outcomes could also be.”

The Canadian Company for Medication and Applied sciences in Well being issued a fast response report, concluding that there’s inadequate proof to conclusively conclude that fluoride publicity at optimum ranges impacts neurological growth. However that’s not what the Canadian research was saying. The researchers simply prompt the “potential want” to cut back fluoride consumption throughout being pregnant. Because the accompanying editorial concluded, based mostly on the brand new information, “a dispassionate and tempered dialogue of fluoride’s potential neurotoxicity is warranted.”

What was the response from U.S. regulators? Inside a month of the Canadian research’s launch, the Nationwide Toxicology Program, which is a part of the U.S. Division of Well being and Human Companies that evaluates substances for doubtlessly dangerous human well being results, launched a draft analysis of fluoride publicity and neurodevelopmental and cognitive well being results, and concluded that “Based mostly on a scientific overview of the proof, the NTP concludes that fluoride is presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to people”.

So, we’ve gone from dismissing individuals who questioned the security of water fluoridation as zealots or anti-science fanatics, to the official U.S. Nationwide Toxicology Program saying we should always presume it’s hazardous. Now, this was only a draft report. To make sure the integrity of its report, the NTP requested the Nationwide Academies, most likely our most prestigious scientific establishment, to overview it. The overview raised a bunch of considerations, which was portrayed within the dental literature as “discrediting” the IQ analysis. However that’s not what the Nationwide Academies stated. They explicitly stated that their misgivings don’t imply that the NTP conclusion that fluoride ought to be presumed to be neurotoxic is wrong; they only needed some additional evaluation. So, in 2020, they redrafted their draft, and as soon as once more got here to the identical conclusion, presuming it’s a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard based mostly on the extent, consistency, and robustness of the IQ information. The Nationwide Academies then re-reviewed their redrafted draft, concluding it’s a lot improved, however urged the NTP to additional enhance the readability of the doc. And we await the ultimate NTP report.

Please think about volunteering to assist out on the location.