Search Results for: Green et al

Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 2: Green et al (2019)

For part 1 of this series see Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 1: Bashash et al (2018). Paul Connett, director of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), now claims “You only have to read four studies…” to come to the conclusion … Continue reading

Canadian studies confirm findings of Broadbent et al (2015) – fluoridation has no effect on child IQ

Readers may remember the scathing reaction of anti-fluoride campaigners to the paper of Broadbent et al (2015). This was the first paper to compare child and adult IQ levels for people living in fluoridated and unfluoridated areas. The anti-fluoride campaigners … Continue reading

When scientists get political: Lead fluoride-IQ researcher launches emotional attack on her scientific critics

It seems impossible to keep politics out of science. It’s a pity because politics can end up forcing science to produce the results desired by politicians. When this happens the ideal aim of science – the pursuit of objective knowledge … Continue reading

New study touted by anti-fluoridation campaigners actually indicates fluoridation is safe

Anti-fluoridation activists on social media seem to cite any scientific article about fluoride which they think will show it harmful. They usually rely only on information in the article title or abstract. This means they are often wrong as the … Continue reading

New review finds fluoride is not a developmental neurotoxicant at exposure levels relevant to fluoridation

A new extensive review of the scientific literature has concluded that fluoride is not a human developmental neurotoxicant at the current exposure levels in Europe. This is of course just as valid for New Zealand, the USA and other countries … Continue reading

Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 4: Till et al (2020)

For earlier articles in this series see: Part 1: Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 1: Bashash et al (2018). Part 2: Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 2: Green et al (2019). Part 3: Anti-fluoridation propaganda … Continue reading

Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 3: Riddell et al (2019)

For earlier articles in this series see: Part 1: Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 1: Bashash et al (2018). Part 2: Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 2: Green et al (2019). Paul Connett, director of … Continue reading

Anti-fluoridation propaganda now relies on only four studies. 1: Bashash et al (2018)

This is the advice from the very top of the anti-fluoride movement – Paul Connett, director of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN). Don’t worry about reading  up on all the scientific information “You only have to read four studies…” Of … Continue reading

What are the recent fluoride-IQ studies really saying about community water fluoridation?

This graphic is typical of current anti-fluoride propaganda. It is scare-mongering, in that it is aimed at undermining community water fluoridation (CWF) which is accepted by health and scientific authorities as safe and effective. It relies on citations of recent … Continue reading

Fluoridation science and political advocacy – who is fooling who?

It is a false balance to equate the advocacy of scientific and medical experts concerned with truth and child health to the advocacy of ideologically-motivated anti-fluoride and anti-vaccination activists known for their misrepresentation of science. Credit: World Congress for freedom … Continue reading