Why the recent Canadian-led fluoride IQ studies are invalid
Juliet R. Guichon, Colin Cooper, Andrew Rugg-Gunn, James A. Dickinson
Published in: Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology
Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of record
Queen’s University Belfast – Research Portal:
Link to publication record in Queen’s University Belfast Research Portal
Introduction
Community water fluoridation (CWF) is a public health success in reducing dental decay safely, economically and equitably. Yet, CWF has continually faced opposition, mostly based on emotion, and using tenuous links to evidence to attempt to justify such opposition. Each alleged cientific reason for opposition has been refuted, but another allegation often arises, like a zombie from the grave.
A current false claim holds that even the recommended low level of fluoride in water can affect the brains of a foetus and child.
That claim is made by fluoride opponents to cease CWF, and was accepted by decision-makers who ceased CWF in 2022 in State College, Pennsylvania.3 The ‘harm to babies’ brain’ claim is the basis for litigation to end water fluoridation, potentially for the entire United States, in litigation underway (as of this writing) in the United States Federal District Court.4 Therefore, it is essential to appraise the quality of the evidence currently being used to oppose this valuable public health measure.