“but (the till study) said that this is a neurotoxin and that it will lower children’s iq and that, unfortunately, is undermining public health policy that has been widely advocated by the u.s. federal government, the united nations, the world health organization and many others for decades.”
while no parent would want it, a four-point drop in his or her child’s iq wouldn’t represent a significant impediment, christakis said. however, the total cognitive loss at a population level “would be a different story.”
during his training, christakis was taught people opposed to fluoride “were a bunch of whack jobs and that there’s absolutely no science at all to suggest that fluoride is dangerous.” the york study, he said “was sort of an eye-opener for me.”
“i was like, ‘hold on a minute, is this wakefield,’” he said, referring to the british physician who, in 1998, published a paper claiming a link between the mmr vaccine and autism. it was bunk, the paper was retracted and wakefield lost his licence.
christakis said the fluoride paper was subjected to extraordinary scrutiny. “this was not wakefield making up data on eight patients, by any stretch,” he said. “this is a very respected group of researchers.” anyone who tries to liken this to a wakefield-esqe study shows just how much vitriol and misrepresentation there is, on both sides, he said.