A U.S. government report expected to stir debate concluded that fluoride in drinking water at twice the recommended limit is linked with lower IQ in children.

The report, based on an analysis of previously published research, marks the first time a federal agency has determined — “with moderate confidence” — that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. While the report was not designed to evaluate the health effects of fluoride in drinking water alone, it is a striking acknowledgment of a potential neurological risk from high levels of fluoride.

Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.

“I think this (report) is crucial in our understanding” of this risk, said Ashley Malin, a University of Florida researcher who has studied the affect of higher fluoride levels in pregnant women on their children. She called it the most rigorously conducted report of its kind.

  • Bosht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    Is there even a reason the levels are that high to begin with? Does it have something to do with regular treated water vs water from a water treatment plant althat recycles wastewater? Or is this just dumb government?

    • Longpork3@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      Fluorides, like all trace elements, naturally occur in many water sources. The reason water flouridation caught on initially was because of the strong correlation between locations with water supplies naturally high in fluoride and better dental health.

      • ngwoo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        27 days ago

        It also caught on because the water treatment process removes the naturally occurring fluoride. If your water comes from an underground source rather than a lake they’re likely putting back less than was taken out.

      • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        27 days ago

        Yeah. You know how “hillbillies” are always portrayed as having bad teeth in old media? That’s because the water in Appalachia is low in fluoride.

        (And fluoridated toothpaste didn’t exist back then.)

      • addie@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        28 days ago

        Indeed. Here in the UK, people can request that their water company should add it in if their water supply is low-fluoride, for instance from a reservoir, and the water company must add it in.

        Back when I used to work in water, that was always the stuff that gave me nightmares. Concentrated hexafluorosilicic acid is what we’d use for dosing. We’d test all the equipment in the chemical room on plain water, drain it out and then literally brick up the doorway. Site would be evacuated during delivery - delivery guy would connect everything up in a space suit, hop in the shower afterwards. Lasted for ages and ages, since you only need the tiniest drip in the water supply to get what you need, but the tiniest drip on your skin would be enough to kill you as well; its lethal dosage is horrifically small.

        Made working with all the other halides much less of a concern - we use shed loads of chlorine, but that stuff is much much less nasty in comparison.

    • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral in water. Wells tend to have varying amounts of fluoride, while lakes have almost no fluoride. This is basically due to unsafe/untreated wells being used for drinking water.

  • NadiaNadine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    27 days ago

    While contact with teeth may be beneficial, there is no reason to ingest flouride. There is also no reason to wash your hair with flouride and water your plants and lawn with flouride.

    If you want to supplement for children, have swish packets at school. The money could be better spent for the desired outcome.

    • r0ertel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      This used to be common in “the olden days” in rural America. I remembered the school nurse would hand out the fluoride rinse to students who’s families signed up for it. I remember thonking that they were all the rich kids who’s families could afford the $5/year for their fancy oral hygiene. Well who’s laughing now? I’ve got the most expensive teeth after all my fillings, crowns, root canals and dental surgeries!

      Yeah, i’m leaving all the grammatical errors in there; it better illustrates my point.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        27 days ago

        Yep. Grew up in the unincorporated area of my town and had well water.

        Also have plenty of dental work today.

        It was obvious enough that the hygenist even asked if I’d grown up with well water.

  • Dorkyd68@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    27 days ago

    Conspiracy theorists have been saying this for years. One of the theories I felt was true but I’m no scientist so yeah

    One of the many reasons I love Conspiracy theories (the non right wing nut job kinds). It’s like half are most likely true but which ones? Pyramids, Antarctica, jfk??? The list goes on

    • seth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      No, they’ve been saying any fluoride in drinking water is bad, without providing any evidence, and that is not supported by the decades of actual evidence, or dentists, and not what this study says.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    28 days ago

    A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Commie works.

    – Gen. Jack D. Ripper

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    General Jack D. Ripper : Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk… ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children’s ice cream.

    Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake : [very nervous] Lord, Jack.

    General Jack D. Ripper : You know when fluoridation first began?

    Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake : I… no, no. I don’t, Jack.

    General Jack D. Ripper : Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Commie works.


    Welp. Truth is stranger than fiction, they say.

      • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        27 days ago

        Nah, they can use tooth paste and a brush or go get supplements under the supervision of a doctor.

        • Dearth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          27 days ago

          Ah so you’re a classist. I personally feel like even the poorest members of my country deserve tooth care. Ultimately flouride toothpaste and dentist visits are too expensive for a not insignificant number of people

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    I don’t think this is conclusive without either a mechanism or an analysis that definitively shows there’s no other water contaminants in these poorly regulated areas

    • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      Considering they specifically say “with moderate confidence” I don’t think they think it’s conclusive either

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      IQ is a real thing that has measurable effects and it’s very important if it goes up or down. It doesn’t directly measure intelligence (however you would even define that in the general sense) but it correlates strongly with many important outcomes.

  • ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    Maybe that’s why there’s a limit that’s lower than the danger point?

    • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      And also why water fluoridation is done at a level far below the limit. Lots of things that are good for you at one dosage level are bad for you at a much higher dosage level.

  • TBi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    27 days ago

    I once had an argument over someone who was anti fluoride. They said it makes you dumb. But they have also in the past commented that I was smart, so I said imagine how smart I’d be without fluoride? They don’t have a comeback for that one.

    Also too much oxygen (twice the limit) will also cause you harm and possibly kill you, do we ban oxygen?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      My son’s currently in the NICU. He recently came off his breathing tube, after receiving a DART steroid treatment to encourage proper lung development. Up until this point, he needed 30-40% oxygen (normal earth atmosphere has 21% oxygen) to survive. After the treatment, he was able to breath on a bubble-CPAP, which put significantly less strain on his lungs and reduced his oxygen requirement down into the mid-20s.

      Back in the 90s, the DART steroid treatment was considered a fantastic pharmaceutical innovation precisely because it encouraged this rapid recovery. However, long term testing of infants on the treatment revealed a high risk of cerebral palsy. This was much worse than the damage inflicted on the lungs due to prolonged ventilator treatment, and so use of DART was halted. But fairly recently (the last decade or so) a minimal treatment of DART was experimented with on children with sever breathing problems. The lower dosage over a shorter delivery window yielded much the same results as the original study (rapid lung development) without the mental health impact. Kids came off the vent sooner (which meant less lung damage from the vent pressure and high oxygen) while experiencing minimal side effects. Now DART is the standard for premature babies with difficulty breathing on their own.

      This is hardly the first time a medication has experienced such a historical arc. But the hysterics around industrial medicine, combined with the rather shitty history of experimental medical studies (Tuskegee Experiments, St. Louis slums radiation experimentation, Phen Phen and Oxycotin scandals, Theranos) and a fixation on “naturalism” as a panacea, do lead people to weird places.

      I can understand why people are terrified of fluorine in their drinking water, given how much lead ends up in there, too. But I do think the fixation on one serves to inhibit discussion of the other. Curious how guys like Alex Jones and Joe Rogan will peddle these conspiracies ad nauseum while staying well clear of the far more profitable toxic waste that ends up harming enormous swaths of the American lower classes.