I liked George too. But as to the article? Why

Quote:

---

Groups that oppose fluoridation, however, are typically not content to make the freedom argument, but rather also distort the evidence to argue that fluoridation is not safe or effective, despite the actual evidence.

At the fringe there are also those who believe that the fluoridation of water is part of a dark government conspiracy to make us all into mindless slaves. (These conspiracy theories were famously lampooned in the brilliant movie Dr. Stranglove, when the character General Jack Ripper talks about the violation of his “precious bodily fluids.”)

There are many weaknesses to the epidemiological studies reviewed in the recent article – high heterogeneity, poor controlling for other variables, no indication of blinding of IQ assessments, and many others.

But even taken at face value they do not indicate any association between lower IQ and the fluoride levels added to drinking water in the US.

In fact, those levels of fluoride were used as the controls in these studies showing higher IQ. (There was a lot of variance of the effect size, but the net effect size on IQ in the meta-analysis was -0.45 standard deviations). Therefore, if anything, this review adds to the body of evidence for the safety of fluoridation.

The actual findings of the study do not show that there is any risk to public water fluoridation (if anything, they show that it is safe), but the study was seized upon by antifluoridation activists and distorted for their propaganda purposes. Unfortunately, the internet is now fertile ground for the spreading of propaganda.

---