孕妇摄入的氟化物会降低孩子的智商 Fluoride ingested by pregnant women lowers IQ in their children

长期以来人们都知道摄入的氟化物会降低儿童的智商。 但本周在JAMA Pediatrics发表的一项新研究表明，喝含氟水的孕妇更有可能生育智商较低的孩子。

以前的研究表明，氟化物可引起一系列健康问题，包括免疫力损害，脑，肺，先天性缺陷。

该研究发现怀孕妇女每天怀孕1毫克氟化物与智商儿童智商下降3.7分相关。 男孩的智商下降甚至更高 – 这是一个4.5分的下降。

在许多国家，氟化物通常以百万分之一或每1克水0.001毫克的水平添加到公共饮用水系统中。 这意味着，如果孕妇每天喝1升或1公斤的水或其他含氟污染的食物，那么他们的孩子的智商会降低。

氟化物是一种已知的毒素，可以破坏神经元。 普通的水过滤器不能去除氟化物。 只有反渗透过滤系统（RO过滤器）可以帮助从氟化水中去除氟化物。 那些想要使用不含氟化物但没有任何设备去除这种毒素的人可以从沃尔玛商店购买RO水。

从甚至氟化水产生的蒸汽中收集的蒸馏水可以不含氟化物。 但蒸馏水会失去许多有益的矿物质。

It has been known for long that ingested fluoride can lower IQ in children. But a new study published this week in JAMA Pediatrics says that pregnant women who drank fluoridated water are more likely to have children with lower IQs.

Previous studies have demonstrated that fluoride can cause a series of health problems including damage to the immunity and the brain, the lung, congenial defects.

The study found pregnant one milligram of fluoride per day ingested by pregnant women was linked to a drop of 3.7 points in IQs children’s IQ. The drop in IQ was even greater in boys – which is a 4.5-point drop.

In many countries, fluoride is commonly added to public drinking water system at a level of 1 parts per million (ppm) or 0.001 mg per 1 gram water.  This means that if pregnant women drink 1 liter or 1 kg of water a day or from other fluoride tainted foods, then their children’s IQ will be lowered.

Fluoride is a known eurotoxin, which can damage neurons.   Common water filters cannot remove fluoride.  Only reverse osmosis filtration system (RO filters) can help remove fluoride from fluoridated water.  Those who want to use fluoride free water but do not have any equipment to remove this toxin can buy RO water from Walmart stores.

Distilled water, which is collected from vapors generated from even fluoridated water can be free of fluoride.  But distilled water loses many beneficial minerals.

Newsletter from fluoridealert.org

BREAKING: Government-funded Study Links Fluoridated Water During Pregnancy to Lower IQs

The world’s premier pediatric journal has published a new government-funded study confirming our worst fears, linking exposure to “optimally” fluoridated water during pregnancy to lowered IQ for the child.

You can repair a cavity, but you cannot repair a child’s brain.

The American Medical Association’s journal on pediatrics (JAMA Pediatrics) has published the second U.S. Government-funded study linking low-levels of fluoride exposure during fetal development to cognitive impairment.  The observational study, entitled Association Between Maternal Fluoride Exposure During Pregnancy and IQ Scores in Offspring in Canada, was led by a team at York University in Ontario, Canada and looked at 512 mother-child pairs from six major Canadian cities.  It was funded by the Canadian government and the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Science. 

The scientists assessed fluoride exposure two ways. They measured fluoride in women’s urine samples during pregnancy. They also calculated fluoride consumption based on how much is in a city’s water supply and how much women recalled drinking. They found that a 1 mg per liter increase in concentration of fluoride in mothers’ urine was associated with a 4.5 point decrease in IQ among boys, though not girls. When the researchers measured fluoride exposure by examining the women’s fluid intake, they found lower IQs in both boys and girls: A 1 mg increase per day was associated with a 3.7-point IQ deficit among both genders.

READ THE STUDY ONLINE / PDF VERSION

Making the publication of this study even more impactful is that it is accompanied by an editor’s note, a podcast featuring the journal’s editors, and an editorial from world-renowned neurotoxicity expert Dr. David Bellinger.  This reaction by the JAMA editors shows just how important the study is, as most studies in their journal don’t receive this treatment.

For the first time in his career, the editor of Pediatrics included an editorial note, knowing fluoridation proponents would attack the study without justification. He noted the study’s rigor, triple-checking of the data, and definitive nature of the evidence:

This decision to publish this article was not easy. Given the nature of the findings and their potential implications, we subjected it to additional scrutiny for its methods and the presentation of its findings. The mission of the journal is to ensure that child health is optimized by bringing the best available evidence to the fore. Publishing it serves as testament to the fact that JAMA Pediatrics is committed to disseminating the best science based entirely on the rigor of the methods and the soundness of the hypotheses tested, regardless of how contentious the results may be. That said, scientific inquiry is an iterative process. It is rare that a single study provides definitive evidence. This study is neither the first, nor will it be the last, to test the association between prenatal fluoride exposure and cognitive development. We hope that purveyors and consumers of these findings are mindful of that as the implications of this study are debated in the public arena.

A must-hear twelve-minute podcast featuring AMA Pediatrics Editor in Chief, Dimitri Christakis, MD, MPH, and Frederick Rivara, MD, MPH, Editor in Chief of JAMA Network Open, was also released alongside the study.  The editors express how “very concerning” and “startling” the evidence is against fluoridation, and how the neurological damage is “on par with lead.”  They praise the high quality of this study, and call for additional NIH funding of more fluoride research.  Before publication, the study was subjected to two statistical reviews, with the researchers combing through the data to make sure that the results were not skewed by the mothers’ education, income levels, or other factors.

Most importantly, they recommend that pregnant women avoid drinking fluoridated water, something FAN has been saying since the publication of the Bashash et al, study two years ago.

“The effects of this study are comparable to the effects of lead, and if these findings are true there should be as much concern about prenatal fluoride exposure,” Christakis told The Daily Beast.  “The question that needs to be asked to every pediatrician, scientist, and epidemiologist is what they’re going to tell pregnant women,” said Christakis, who says he will advise his pregnant friends and family to avoid fluoridated water.  “We can’t tell them to wait years for another study.”

In the editorial piece by Harvard Professor Dr. David Bellinger that accompanies the study he provides an overview of recent fluoride/IQ research, and highlights the strengths of the study and need for additional research.  Though he also gives the following warning:

The hypothesis that fluoride is a neurodevelopmental toxicant must now be given serious consideration…It is instructive to recall that the hypothesis that subclinical lead exposures pose a neurodevelopmental hazard was bitterly contested in the 1980s and 1990s, and it was only the weight of evidence that eventually accumulated that led to the now widely held consensus that no level of lead exposure is safe…If the hypothesis is true, the implications are worrisome. Exposure to fluoride has increased substantially in recent decades…If the effect sizes reported by Green et al and others are valid, the total cognitive loss at the population level that might be associated with children’s prenatal exposure to fluoride could be substantial.

Keep in mind that this study does not stand alone.  Instead, it confirms previous findings by Bashash et al. in 2017 and Thomas et al. in 2018 that low levels of fluoride during fetal development will cause cognitive impairment, as well as over 300 animal and other human studies indicating fluoride’s potential to damage the brain.

Bashash in 2017 addressed virtually all the criticisms of the many papers published previously from China, this new study (Green et al., 2019) addresses all of the minor criticisms of the Bashash study — pro-fluoridation commentators said they wanted the Bashash study reproduced this study does that they said they wanted to see a study in a North American population this study does that.

In fact, this study goes beyond Bashash because they included measures of total dose of fluoride in additionto a measurement of the mothers’ urine levels.

There has already been widespread media coverage of this research, which you can follow on our new trending topic on our home page dedicated to the study.  We will continue to update this page, as well as provide updates on our social media pages and with bulletins over the coming days.

PLEASE STAY TUNED FOR MORE COVERAGE AND ANALYSIS! 

Sincerely,

Stuart Cooper
Campaign Director
Fluoride Action Network