Search Results for: grandjean

Special pleading by Philippe Grandjean on fluoride

Scientists are as human as anyone else. They aren’t immune to jumping on bandwagons, getting bees in their bonnets, special pleading or selectively interpreting their data to support a pet hypothesis or an obsession. The scientific peer review process restrains … 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

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. 6: Incestuous relationship of these studies

A Fluoride Action Network (FAN) propaganda video where Paul Connett urges listeners to consider only four studies when considering the possible harmful effects of fluoridation. Paul Connett, director of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), now claims “You only have to … Continue reading

Industry-funded translation can introduce bias in selection of studies for scientific review

Image credit: Assessing and addressing bias in systematic reviews The Fluoride Action Network (FAN), in the last decade, paid for translation of a lot of Chinese-language scientific papers linking high fluoride dietary intake to IQ deficits in children. They, of course, … Continue reading

Another embarrassment for anti-fluoride campaigners as neurotoxic claim found not to be justified

Anti-fluoride campaigners have just lost another of their propaganda claims with the release of a US National Academies of Science (NAS) peer review of the recent National Toxicity Program’s (NTP) draft monograph discussing fluoride exposure and neurotoxicity. Ever since the … Continue reading

Some fluoride-IQ researchers seem to be taking in each other’s laundry

Scientific peer-review is often touted as a guarantee of the quality of published research. But how good is peer-review? Does it guarantee poor science is weeded out? Or is it sometimes simply a bureaucratic manipulation aimed at endorsing a paper … Continue reading

Scientific integrity requires critical investigation – not blind acceptance

Some people seem to want to close down any critical discussion of the current research into the relationship between water fluoride and child IQ. They appear to argue that claims made by researchers should not be open to critical review … Continue reading

Politics of science – making a silk purse out of a sow’s ear

Anti-fluoride activists have some wealthy backers – they are erecting billboards misrepresenting the Canadian study on many New Zealand cities – and local authorities are ordering their removal because of their scaremongering. Many New Zealanders are concerned at the scaremongering by … Continue reading

Anti-fluoridationists rejection of IQ studies in fluoridated area.

This is another article in my critique of the presentation Paul Connett prepared to present to a meeting at Parliament in February. I deal with his coverage of the studies of IQ effects where community water fluoridation (CWF) is used. … Continue reading