Quantcast
Environmental News for a Healthier Planet and Life

Drinking Fluoride-Treated Water During Pregnancy Could Lower Your Child's IQ, Study Finds

Health + Wellness
PhotoAlto / Frederic Cirou / Getty Images

Drinking water treated with fluoride during pregnancy may lead to lower IQs in children, a controversial new study has found.


According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, many adults and children have seen the dental health benefits of drinking water treated with fluoride over the past 70 years, including stronger teeth and 25 percent fewer cavities. Currently, more than 66 percent of Americans receive fluoride-treated water.

But according to researchers at York University in Toronto, the higher the concentration of fluoride present in a mother-to-be's urine, the lower her male child's IQ score.

For the study, which was published this week in JAMA Pediatrics, the researchers tracked 512 mothers, measuring their fluoride exposure by comparing how much was in their community's drinking water, how much tap water and tea the mothers drank, and the amount of fluoride in their urine throughout their pregnancies. Their children received an IQ test between ages three and four.

The researchers found that for every increase of 1 milligram per liter concentration of fluoride in a mother's urine, the child's IQ score dropped 3.7 points. Male children saw a 4.5-point lower IQ score for each 1 milligram per liter, while there was no significant link when it came to female children, though the researchers could not point to why.

"At a population level, that's a big shift. That translates to millions of IQ levels lost," study author Christine Till, an associate professor in the Department of Psychology at York University in Toronto, told CNN.

The results appear to back up the findings of the few previous studies showing an association between increased fluoride exposure and reduced IQ in children, though this is the first study that looked at populations receiving 0.7 milligrams of fluoride per liter of drinking water, CNN reported, which is what the U.S. Public Health Service has deemed the optimal ratio.

However, some of the previous studies have been questioned by health experts, The Daily Beast reported, and this one was met with equal skepticism.

Jama Pediatrics editor in chief Dimitri Christakis, a pediatrician, added an editor's note saying the decision to publish this latest article was "not easy" and it had been subjected to "additional scrutiny for its methods and the presentation of its findings."

The researchers acknowledged the study wasn't without limitations. They did not measure fluoride exposure for the children after they were born, nor could they have accounted for amounts of fluoride consumed just before samples were taken.

Other experts called into question weaknesses in data collection and measurement, and expressed doubt regarding the gender differences in the findings.

"Whilst the authors are just reporting what they found, I find these sex differences difficult to explain. With a neurotoxicant you might expect both sexes to be affected," Alastair Hay, a professor emeritus of environmental toxicology at the University of Leeds, who was not involved in the study, told the Daily Mail.

Groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics also warned against altering public health policy based on this study before its results have been replicated.

"I still stand by the weight of the best available evidence, from 70 years of study, that community water fluoridation is safe and effective," Brittany Seymour, a dentist representing the American Dental Association, told The Washington Post. "If we're able to replicate findings and continue to see outcomes, that would compel us to revisit our recommendation. We're just not there yet."

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Derrick Jackson

By Derrick Z. Jackson

As much as hurricanes Katrina and Maria upended African American and Latinx families, the landfall of the coronavirus brings a gale of another order. This Category 5 of infectious disease packs the power to level communities already battered from environmental, economic, and health injustice. If response and relief efforts fail to adequately factor in existing disparities, the current pandemic threatens a knockout punch to the American Dream.

Read More Show Less
President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable meeting with energy sector CEOs in the Cabinet Room of the White House April 3 in Washington, DC. Doug Mills-Pool / Getty Images

By Andrea Germanos

A coalition of climate organizations strongly criticized President Donald Trump's in-person Friday meeting with the chief executives of some of the biggest fossil fuel companies in the world, saying the industry that fueled climate disaster must not be allowed to profiteer from government giveaways by getting bailout funds or preferred treatment during the coronavirus pandemic.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Pexels

By SaVanna Shoemaker, MS, RDN, LD

An Important Note

No supplement, diet, or lifestyle modification — aside from social distancing and practicing proper hygiene ⁠— can protect you from developing COVID-19.

The strategies outlined below may boost your immune health, but they don't protect specifically against COVID-19.

Read More Show Less
Pexels

By Zak Smith

It is pretty amazing that in this moment when the COVID-19 outbreak has much of the country holed up in their homes binging Netflix, the most watched show in America over the last few weeks has been focused on wildlife trade — which scientists believe is the source of the COVID-19 pandemic. Make no mistake: Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem and Madness is about wildlife trade and other aspects of wildlife exploitation, just as surely as the appearance of Ebola, SARS, MERS, avian flu and probably COVID-19 in humans is a result of wildlife exploitation. As a conservationist, this is one of the things I've been thinking about while watching Tiger King. Here are five more:

Read More Show Less
Pexels

By Hector Chapa

With the coronavirus pandemic quickly spreading, U.S. health officials have changed their advice on face masks and now recommend people wear cloth masks in public areas where social distancing can be difficult, such as grocery stores.

But can these masks be effective?

Read More Show Less