OK, it's time to put on your tin foil hats because every damn conspiracy theory is proving to be true. 

Sure, I still believe men landed on the moon and that the Earth is round, but I am beginning to doubt almost everything else. 

CBS LOS ANGELES - "A just-released University of Southern California study found that pregnant women exposed to fluoride have an increased risk of their child demonstrating behavioral problems." pic.twitter.com/ql7m5SjGvM

— Fluoride Action Network (@FluorideAction) May 21, 2024

When I saw a reference to this new study challenging the narrative that fluoride is an unadulterated good I wasn't particularly surprised because I have done a lot of reading about the research. What surprised me was that the study was done, the results were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, and there hadn't yet been a firestorm. 

What is at issue here is not some crackpot study or article by a homeopath but a study done by the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California. It shows a strong correlation between fluoride levels in drinking water and childhood behavioral problems. 

Children exposed to fluoride in the womb were 1.83 times more likely to show behavioral problems with emotional reactivity, somatic complaints (such as headaches and stomachaches), anxiety and symptoms linked to autism. #pregnancy https://t.co/rIjhJB1kTF

— Keck School of Medicine of USC (@KECKSchool_USC) May 20, 2024

Fluoride. Autism. Linked. 

The case for putting fluoride in water has always seemed particularly weak to me, not because there is no evidence that fluoride can strengthen teeth but because of its topical application mechanism. Consuming fluoride is actually bad for your bones and hence, your teeth, at least in higher quantities. It is called fluorosis. The NIH has a paper on the positive and negatives regarding fluoridation, which helps explain why it is very uncommon in Europe, where most countries have ceased the practice of adding the substance to drinking water. 

Antifluoride lobbyists start with the fact that fluoride is not an essential nutrient and no disease has ever been linked to a fluoride deficiency.[11] In fact, fluoride is claimed to be a cumulative poison and biologically very active even at low concentrations because it interferes with hydrogen bonding and inhibits numerous enzymes.[12] Only 50% of the daily ingested fluoride is excreted through the kidneys. The remainder accumulates in bones, the pineal gland, and other tissues. Initial studies on animals showed that fluoride accumulation in the pineal gland led to reduced melatonin production and an earlier onset of puberty. The same researcher then showed in later studies that fluoride can also accumulate to very high levels in the human pineal gland.[13] Fluoride toxicity can lead to renal damage in children. Researchers studied 210 children living in areas of China with varying levels of fluoride in water (0.61–5.69 ppm). Among this group, the children drinking water with more than 2 ppm fluoride – particularly those with dental fluorosis – were found to have increased levels of NAG and y-GT in their urine, both of which are markers of kidney damage. The children's urine also contains increased levels of lactic dehydrogenase – a possible indicator of liver damage. A diseased kidney is unable to effectively excrete fluoride, so individuals with compromised kidneys are at risk of developing fluorosis even at normal recommended limit of 0.7–1.2 ppm.

Fluoride has been shown to be mutagenic by causing chromosome damage and interference with the enzymes involved with DNA repair in a variety of cell and tissue studies carried out in animals.[14] Recent studies have also found a correlation between fluoride exposure and chromosome damage in humans.[15,16] The only government-sanctioned animal study to investigate whether fluoride causes cancer, in 1990, found a dose-dependent increase in cancer in the target organ (bone) of fluoride-treated, male rats.[17] This led to a 14-year research carried out by Harvard University that showed a significant link between fluoridation and a rare form of bone cancer called osteosarcoma in young boys, consistent with the results of the 1990 animal study.[18]

Fluoride as a neurotoxin has been proven in several animal studies. A 2006 National Research Council report stated that it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body by direct and indirect means.[19,20] This finding was confirmed by a study where groups of children exposed to 8 ppm fluoride in water were found to have lower average IQs, less children attaining high IQ, and more children affected by low IQ.[21] While 8 ppm is much higher than the fluoride level added to water in fluoridation programs (0.7–1.2 ppm), these results are in congruence with previous studies[22] from China that indicate that fluoride may affect IQ at lower levels.[23]

As you can see from this quote, the evidence that putting fluoride in water as opposed to mouthwashes or other topical applications is not just weak; research seems to indicate that too much fluoride is a positive danger. 

I bet you never read that. I have refrained from writing about the subject because any reference to the dangers of fluoride are used to automatically discredit you. In fact, I have long suspected that the American obsession with debunking fluoride skeptics is rooted in a desire to not admit that the critics were right. 

Well, the critics are right. Don't trust me. Trust the Keck School of Medicine. 

Nearly three-quarters of the United States population receives drinking water that contains fluoride, a practice that began in 1945 to help prevent tooth decay. But recent studies suggest that fluoride exposure can cause harm to a fetus if consumed during pregnancy, a critical period for brain development.

A new study, led by researchers at the Keck School of Medicine of USC and funded in part by the National Institutes of Health, analyzed more than 220 mother-child pairs, collecting data on fluoride levels during pregnancy and child behavior at age three. The researchers found that a 0.68 milligram per liter increase in fluoride exposure was associated with nearly double the chance of a child showing neurobehavioral problems in a range considered close to or at a level to meet the criteria for clinical diagnosis.

The findings were just published in JAMA Network Open.

“Women with higher fluoride exposure levels in their bodies during pregnancy tended to rate their 3-year-old children higher on overall neurobehavioral problems and internalizing symptoms, including emotional reactivity, anxiety and somatic complaints,” said Tracy Bastain, PhD, an associate professor of clinical population and public health sciences and senior author of the study.

These population-level findings add to existing evidence from animal studies showing that fluoride can harm neurodevelopment, as well as data from studies conducted in Canada, Mexico and other countries showing that prenatal exposure to fluoride is linked with a lower IQ in early childhood. The researchers hope the new findings help convey the risks of fluoride consumption during pregnancy to policymakers, health care providers and the public.

“This is the first U.S.-based study to examine this association. Our findings are noteworthy, given that the women in this study were exposed to pretty low levels of fluoride—levels that are typical of those living in fluoridated regions within North America,” said Ashley Malin, PhD, an assistant professor of epidemiology at the University of Florida’s College of Public Health and Health Professions and College of Medicine and lead author of the present study. Malin conducted the research in part as a postdoctoral scholar at the Keck School of Medicine.

The CDC, the ever-reliable health information organization paid for with your tax dollars, insists that water fluoridation is a top-10 medical achievement. A boon to everybody!

I am pretty sure they likely knew otherwise, but even if not that only goes to show you that they haven't followed the research that has shown the dangers for decades. 

Decades. Read that first excerpt. Studies going back decades proving the dangers of ingesting too much fluoride. 

And they put it in water. And have been harming people for decades. 

I am not joking about why I think they keep insisting that fluoride is good. Ridiculing people who disapproved of fluoridation was a staple of the "pro-science" crowd. It is about hierarchy, separating the good people from the bad, and has nothing to do with actual health. Just like the vaccines and masking. 

Social hierarchy. That's it. If fluoride helps teeth be less susceptible to cavities, it's in the toothpastes and mouthwashes. That is more than enough, and you don't swallow those. 

Forcing people to do things is, apparently, extremely important to the people in power. Putting fluoride in water was an early success for the public health establishment on which a lot of credibility was staked. Admitting it was a mistake will dent their credibility, so they won't. 

No doubt, there are some public health achievements that merit genuine admiration. Iodizing salt seems to have been a good thing, I think. But you can get salt that is not iodized (I use both). Some supplementation of vitamins that a lot of people are deficient in makes sense, I think. 

But it's obvious that there should be regular reviews of the evidence for widescale public health measures, and a recognition that you are infringing on people's right to informed consent. 

Fluoridation of community drinking water is considered unethical because individuals are not being asked for their informed consent prior to medication. It is standard practice to obtain consent for all medication, and this is one of the key reasons why most of Western Europe has ruled against fluoridation. It is a violation of human rights, a direct violation of the Nuremberg code that states that research or even routine medical procedures must be done with the voluntary cooperation of the subjects who must be fully informed of the risks or benefits of the procedure in which they are involved.[9]

Studies have shown an association between the use of fluorosilicic acid and its sodium salt to fluoridate water and increased uptake of lead into children's blood. Lead is acknowledged as a neurotoxin that damages the child's developing brain, and lead toxicity is unaddressed especially in developing countries. Sodium fluoride is an extremely toxic substance, just 200 mg of fluoride ion is enough to kill a young child, and just 3–5 g (e.g., a teaspoon) is enough to kill an adult.[28]

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has never approved of any fluoride product designed for ingestion as safe or effective is a popular claim by the antifluoride lobby but according to the EPA-FDA Memorandum of Agreement, the FDA's regulatory purview is limited to the safety and efficacy of food, drugs, or cosmetic-related products, as well as bottled water which is marketed as a consumer beverage. Thus, if bottled water has fluoride additives and is approved by FDA, then this comes under the category of fluoride product meant for ingestion.

Unfortunately, the people who run our society are increasingly hostile to informed consent. 

No doubt the next time there is a movement to get fluoride out of water the leaders will be vilified. Not because they don't have a case, of course. It will be because they are challenging the authority of the decisionmakers.