Study explores association between fluoride exposure in pregnancy and neurobehavioral issues in young children
Press release from UF Health
BY JILL PEASE
GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Higher fluoride levels in pregnant women are linked to increased odds of their children exhibiting neurobehavioral problems at age 3, according to a new study led by a University of Florida College of Public Health and Health Professions researcher.
The findings, based on an analysis involving 229 mother-child pairs living in a U.S. community with typical fluoride exposure levels for pregnant women in fluoridated regions in North America, appear May 20 in the journal JAMA Network Open. It is believed to be the first U.S.-based study to examine associations of prenatal fluoride exposure with parent-reported child neurobehavioral issues, which include symptoms of anxiety, difficulty regulating emotions, and other complaints, such as stomachaches and headaches.
Fluoride, a mineral, has been added to community water supplies since the 1940s as a way to reduce dental cavities in children and adults. Nearly three-quarters of the U.S. population receives fluoridated tap water from community water systems. The impacts of fluoride on human health, both positive and negative, have been the subject of much recent debate and ongoing scientific scrutiny.
The study’s lead investigator Ashley Malin, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the department of epidemiology in the UF College of Public Health and Health Professions and UF College of Medicine, said that taken with other recent studies conducted in Canada and Mexico on the effects of fluoride on young children’s IQ, the findings suggest fluoride may negatively affect fetal brain development.
“There is no known benefit of fluoride consumption to the developing fetus,” Malin said, “but we do know that there is possibly a risk to their developing brain. We found that each 0.68 milligram/liter increase in fluoride levels in the pregnant women’s urine was associated with nearly double the odds of children scoring in the clinical or borderline clinical range for neurobehavioral problems at age 3, based on their mother’s reporting.”
The fluoride levels found in the study participants’ samples are typical for people living in communities with fluoridated water, the researchers say. However, according to the paper, authors do not know whether findings observed in this study are generalizable to other U.S. populations or are nationally representative, and therefore more research is required to address that question.
Individual differences in a person’s fluoride exposure can be attributed to variances in dietary consumption, such as drinking and cooking with tap water versus filtered water, or consuming food and drinks naturally high in fluoride, including green and black tea, certain seafoods, and foods sprayed with fluoride-containing pesticides.
For the new study, investigators used data from the Maternal and Developmental Risks from Environmental and Social Stressors, or MADRES, study conducted at the Keck School of Medicine of USC. MADRES is led by Tracy Bastain, Ph.D., the senior author of the current fluoride study and an associate professor of clinical population and public health sciences, and Carrie Breton, Sc.D., a professor of population and public health sciences. The MADRES study follows a group of predominantly Hispanic low-income women and their children living in Los Angeles County from pregnancy through childhood.
Researchers collected urine samples from MADRES participants during their third trimester of pregnancy. Urinary fluoride is the most widely used measure of individual fluoride exposure in epidemiological studies, including those assessing effects on fetal brain development. Because fluoride, when combined with disinfecting agents, may cause lead to leach from lead-bearing water pipes, the scientists conducted various analyses to be sure any neurobehavioral effects could not be attributed to lead.
When their children reached age 3, study mothers completed the Preschool Child Behavior Checklist, which assesses children’s behavior and emotions. The investigators found that women with higher fluoride exposure during pregnancy tended to rate their children higher for overall neurobehavioral problems.
The study team hopes their findings spur policymakers to create specific recommendations for fluoride consumption during pregnancy.
“I think this is important evidence, given that it’s the first U.S.-based study and findings are quite consistent with the other studies published in North America with comparable fluoride exposure levels,” Malin said. “Conducting a nationwide U.S. study on this topic would be important, but I think the findings of the current study and recent studies from Canada and Mexico suggest that there is a real concern here.”
Malin’s research is supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health. The MADRES study is funded by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Hell yeah
The first plandemic? Making more malleable future voters?
They dump Hexafluorosilicic acid (a classified hazardous byproduct waste from the phosphate industry, nearly always from The Mosaic Company right here in Fla) in our public water supply and call it natural fluoride for your teeth!!! Unforgivable and ridiculous.
Fluoride and flouride-like compounds have long been known to have detrimental effects…in short it makes you more docile and dumber. Sounds like a governments dream!…shut up slaves, drink up
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ntp/about_ntp/bsc/2023/fluoride/documents_provided_bsc_wg_031523.pdf
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/
Slice – that’s simply not true. Water fluoridation is at such low levels that there is no risk for toxicity and huge benefits for oral health.
https://www.ada.org/en/resources/community-initiatives/fluoride-in-water/fluoridation-faqs
Are you denying the science in the study cited above? Or do you only like the science that supports your predetermined conclusions?
Alachua Moderate: natural fluoridation does seem to have a positive effect on certain peoples teeth and bone density. I do not care to debate that. Those certain people are those who, for whatever reasons, have a measurable deficiency in fluoride levels…typically due to their deficient diet. I’ve never heard of a public water rep or a dentist who tests the fluoride levels of their population or clientele…
So is it worth it to BUY and dump the neurotoxic Hexafluorosilicic acid, NOT NATURAL FLUORIDE, into our public water supply EVEN IF it truly does improve the oral health for a small number of people?
This isn’t about teeth or bones…get that notion out of your head. What good is a mouth full of bear teeth if you and your children are drooling all over the floor.
Now you need to read thru the studies I provided above and think real hard about what’s more important:
1. Strengthening teeth for a very small subset of the population – who could personally supplement natural fluoride or fix their diet. (damn at this point, I agree with even taypayer funded if it’s cut from water)
Or
2. Dump Hexafluorosilicic acid, a classified hazardous waste product and known neurotoxin, into the public water supply?
“Water fluoridation is at such low levels that there is no risk for toxicity and huge benefits for oral health.”
One of the best examples of cognitive dissonance I’ve ever seen! Wow.
Study the clot shot! No vax passports ‼️‼️
I knew the anti-vax whacks would show up here.
This is precisely the issue…if people like you didn’t drink so much Hexafluorosilicic acid you’d be able to clearly discern the major and undeniable problems with over-vaccination. Now please – let’s continue our discussion from above on fluoridation – no need to jump down here to avoid my fluoride-related points just to yell at people who despise vaccines
The State of Florida misleads on this issue:
“Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral released from rocks into the soil, water, and air. All water sources such as rivers, lakes, and oceans have varying amounts of fluoride. Fluoride has been shown to decrease the rate of tooth decay or cavities when added to toothpaste or water…”
https://www.floridahealth.gov/programs-and-services/community-health/dental-health/fluoridation/index.html
Yes, technically the generalized info on natural fluoride quoted above is accurate, but it has little to do with the actual water fluoridation programs. They are obfuscating the fact that natural fluoride isn’t used but industrial hazardous waste is instead the product of choice.
Receipts:
CDC.gov Water Fluoridation Additives Archived Page: https://americanfluoridationsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/f-Water-Fluoridation-Additives-Engineering-Fact-Sheet-CDC-2011.pdf
CDC.gov archived fluoridation fact sheet:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150221093801/http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/factsheets/engineering/wfadditives.htm