The New York Times Science Staff on Fluoridation
“… I understand that you disagree, but I think it’s fair to say
that most members of the science staff of The New York Times
consider this debate to have been decided – in fluoride’s favor –
about 50 years ago.”
Donald McNeil Jr., Science Correspondent, New York Times
April 2, 2015 email. Subject: READERS MAIL
See copy of email at 4:35 minutes into Our Daily Dose
Such a statement would have shocked most scientists, for whom no scientific debate is ever really settled. As Aldous Huxley pointed out, the tragedy of science is that a beautiful hypothesis can always be destroyed by an ugly fact. In the case of water fluoridation many ugly facts have emerged over the last 25 years, including 52 IQ studies.
While the effects on IQ from in-utero exposure to fluoride has shocked most of us, we are not sure if the study by Bashash et al. (2017), funded by U.S. government agencies has registered with the science staff at the New York Times because they have yet to report on it.
Please note the 12-year Bashash study reported an astonishing loss of 5 to 6 IQ points which correlated with fluoride urine levels ranging from 0.5 and 1.5 mg/L in pregnant mothers. These are the same levels in adults reported in U.S. communities with fluoridated drinking water (0.6 and 1.5 mg/L).
We should add that one of the references cited in the Bashash study is to another in-utero IQ study published in 2017 that reported cognitive effects on the offspring – more on this below.
In 2017-2018 there are at least three animal studies that reported adverse neurodevelopmental effects on the pups of exposed mothers – again, details below. But before we review these, there is some very disturbing news from Hawaii and Baltimore. Once again, we witness a single-minded focus on children’s teeth without regard to what the very toxic fluoride ion may do to other tissues, especially during pregnancy and infancy.
Intolerable Human Experiments with Pregnant Women and their Offspring:
In February 2018 a proposed Bill was introduced into the Hawaiian Legislature for a study of voluntary fluoride supplement use for pregnant women & children. And there is a clinical trial titled, Effect of Supplementation of Fluoride on Maternal Periodontal Health, Preterm Delivery, and Perinatal Well-Being, proposed to take place under the auspices of John Hopkins University. While it’s unclear whether this study is underway or still recruiting its victims, what is clear is that the “facts” used to support this study are wrong. For example:
“When supplied during pregnancy in small aliquots, as with water fluoridation, the fluoride is likely taken up in the mother’s bones and excreted by her kidneys so rapidly, that the fetus is denied a meaningful amount of fluoride, unless it is supplied in a pulse dose by supplement.”
The Second in-Utero IQ Study
This study by Valdez Jiménez et al. was published in March 2017 in the journal Neurotoxicology and titled: In utero exposure to fluoride and cognitive development delay in infants. This study, like the Bashash study, was done in Mexico with mother-child pairs. Some of the differences between the two studies are:
- this study had fewer participants (65 mother-baby pairs vs 300 mother-child pairs)
- the IQ testing took place between the ages of 3 to 15 months (vs 4 years and 6-12 years of age)
- Unlike the Bashash study, this study took place in an area with high naturally occurring levels of fluoride in the drinking water (called endemic hydrofluorosis areas). Over 81.5% of the samples of tap water were above 1.5 mg/l with the highest value of 12.5 mg/l.
- 33.8% of the births were pre-term. The authors stated, “We found higher levels of F in urine across trimester in premature compared with full term.” There was no mention of pre-term births in the Bashash study. (See more on preterm, Gurumurthy et al. 2011; Susheela et al. 2010; Hart et al. 2009).
Results: The authors state, “In this study near to 60% of the children consumed contaminated water and the prevalence of children with IQ below 90 points was 25% in the control group (F urine 1.5 mg/g creatinine) in comparison with the 58% of children in the exposed group (F urine >5 mg/g creatinine)… Our data suggests that cognitive alterations in children born from exposed mothers to F could start in early prenatal stages of life.”
Animal studies published in 2017-18 that reported effects on neurodevelopment in offspring of F-exposed mothers.
Sun et al. (2018) reported that “F exposure during embryonic to suckling stages impaired the learning and memory ability of the mouse pups.”
Zhu et al. (2017) reported, “These data indicate that exposure to fluoride and arsenic in early life stage changes ERK, p-ERK, CREB and p-CREB protein expression in the hippocampus and cerebral cortex of rat offspring at PND21 and PND 42, which may contribute to impaired neurodevelopment following exposure.”
Zigu et al. (2017) reported, “The results suggested that dietary calcium significantly affected hippocampal synaptic plasticity of offspring of mothers exposed to water fluorosis… The findings also demonstrate the important effects of maternal exposure to water fluorosis on offspring brain functions before water improvement.”
Please join us on the two biggest challenges we have ever faced.
- Getting a warning to pregnant women and infant-bottle caregivers.
- Raising the money to fund our* lawsuit against the U.S. EPA to end the deliberate addition of fluoride chemicals into our drinking water. See Resources below for more info.
Here’s how to donate:
We have raised $15,650 from 100 donors toward the goal of $75,000 by May 31. We plan to use all online donations we receive up to May 31 -with the exception of recurring donations made before March 1- for the TSCA Legal Fund. All donations are tax-exempt as Fluoride Action Network is a project of the American Environmental Health Studies Project, Inc., a 501(c)(3) non-profit and will go into a designated fund.
You can donate in one of two ways:
- Online at our secure server.
- By check, payable to the Fluoride Action Network. Send your check to:
Fluoride Action Network
c/o Connett
104 Walnut Street
Binghamton NY 13905
Please stay tuned.
Paul and Ellen Connett for the FAN fundraising team
______________________________________________
*The Plaintiffs:
The Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Food and Water Watch, MOMS Against Fluoridation, the Organic Consumers Association, the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT), and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine; as well as several individuals.
Resources:
- The full TSCA petition can be accessed here
• A shorter 8-page summary
• Follow the news reports here
• The Documents submitted into the court record
* The Timeline of the Lawsuit
Print 
PDF