
In Harm's Way: Toxic Threats to Child Development
A Report by
Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility
May 2000
        
 - A pdf file of this entire report 
        is available online at http://www.igc.org/psr/ihw.htm
        - See Endorsements of the report from Public Health Scientists at 
        http://www.igc.org/psr/scientists-endorse-ihw.htm 
        
Chapter 6: Known and Suspected Developmental Neurotoxicants
Fluoride
Since the 1950's, in many communities throughout 
        the US and other areas of the world, fluoride has been added to community 
        drinking water supplies with the intention of reducing tooth decay. Controversy 
        about the safety of that practice centers around concerns about increased 
        risks of tooth staining and brittleness (dental fluorosis), bone brittleness 
        (skeletal fluorosis), bone cancer, hormone disruption (melatonin), premature 
        puberty, and altered neurological development. In addition, some critics 
        argue that fluoridating the water supply has a minimal impact on tooth 
        decay. The practice has been staunchly defended by the American Dental 
        Association and heralded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
        as one of the major public health success stories of the 20th century. 
        We do not intend to review the entire controversy here. Recent reviews 
        are found elsewhere (149 150 151). Rather, here we comment briefly on 
        concerns about neurodevelopmental impacts of prenatal exposure to fluoride.
        
        The US EPA sets a Recommended Maximum Contaminant Level of 4.0 ppm fluoride 
        in drinking water. The National Institute for Dental Research considers 
        fluoride at 1 PPM optimal for preventing dental caries. This level may 
        be exceeded in some communities. Additional sources of fluoride, including 
        topical fluoride treatments, fluoride tablets, and fluoride toothpaste, 
        add to the total fluoride burden.
        
        In an animal study, pregnant rats were given 0.13 mg sodium fluoride/kg 
        by injection on 9 separate occasions from days 14-18 or 17-19 during pregnancy 
        (152). Offspring of treated animals and controls were monitored by videotape 
        that was then computer-analyzed in order to quantify various behavioral 
        characteristics. Offspring exposed to fluoride on days 17-19 of pregnancy 
        showed significant hyperactivity. They tended to move from one activity 
        to another more frequently than unexposed animals. This study has been 
        criticized for using excessive fluoride exposures. The authors respond 
        by noting that the blood levels of fluoride in the treated animals were 
        similar to the levels measured in people who are exposed through fluoridated 
        water. Another criticism centered on the lack of biological plausibility 
        that the results would differ in the two groups exposed at similar times 
        during pregnancy (153). The authors, however, point out that vulnerable 
        developmental stages change rapidly during this time window and argue 
        that the findings are entirely plausible (154).
        
        Another study found that the offspring of rats given 5, 15, 50 PPM fluoride 
        in drinking water during pregnancy and lactation had significantly elevated 
        acetylcholinesterase levels when tested at 80 days of age (155). Maternal 
        acetylcholinesterase levels were also increased. Though not measured in 
        this study, a likely result of elevated acetylcholinesterase activity 
        is decreased acetylcholine levels. As we have noted, the enzyme, acetylcholinesterase, 
        and the neurotransmitter, acetylcholine, play important roles in brain 
        development. Changes in the concentrations of any neurotransmitter during 
        development may have permanent neurological consequences. The largest 
        effect was seen at 5 PPM, decreasing at the higher levels.
        
        Two reports from China identify significantly lower childhood IQs in communities 
        where fluoride exposure is elevated. In one community, where drinking 
        water naturally contains 4.12 PPM fluoride, IQs were significantly lower 
        than in a nearby community with fluoride levels at 0.91 PPM (average IQ 
        98 vs. 105) (156). This difference persisted when the study population 
        was controlled for parental educational level. The authors describe similar 
        occupations, living standards, and social customs in the two communities. 
        The ecologic design of this study imposes some limits on the conclusions 
        that may be drawn since the exposure (fluoride) and outcome (IQ) were 
        compared on a population-wide basis without any attempt to associate individual 
        fluoride exposure levels with individual IQs. Nonetheless, an IQ shift 
        of 7 points in an entire population has large population-wide implications, 
        as well as impacting individual members, and these results deserve close 
        attention.
        
        In the other study, investigators used dental fluorosis and urinary fluoride 
        levels to stratify children into four quartiles (157). Elevated fluoride 
        exposures were associated with decreased IQs in this population. That 
        is, the distribution of IQ scores in children in each quartile of fluoride 
        exposure shifted progressively downward as the fluoride exposures increased.
        
        Conclusion
Studies in animals and human populations suggest 
        that fluoride exposure, at levels that are experienced by a significant 
        proportion of the population whose drinking water is fluoridated, may 
        have adverse impacts on the developing brain. Though no final conclusions 
        may be reached from available data, the findings are provocative and of 
        significant public health concern. Perhaps most surprising is the relative 
        sparseness of data addressing the central question of whether or not this 
        chemical, which is intentionally added to drinking water, may interfere 
        with normal brain development and function. Focused research should address 
        this important matter urgently.
        
        References:
        
        149 Hileman B. Fluoridation of water. Chem Eng News 66:26-42, 
        1988.
        
        150 Connett P. Fluoride: a statement of concern. Waste 
        Not #459. Canton NY.
        
        151 CDC. Fluoridation of drinking water to prevent dental 
        caries. MMWR 48:986-993, 1999.
        
        152 Mullenix PJ, Denbesten PK, Schunior A, Kernan W. 
        Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol17(2):169-177, 
        1995.
        
        153 Ross J, Daston G. Letter to the editor. Neurotoxicol 
        Teratol 17(6):685-686, 1995.
        
        154 Mullenix P, Denbesten P, Schunior A, Kernan W. Reply. 
        Neurotoxicol Teratol 17(6):687-688, 1995.
        
        155 Zhao XL, Wu JH. Actions of sodium fluoride on acetylcholinesterase 
        activities in rats. Biomed Environ Sci 11(1):1-6, 1998.
        
        156 Zhao LB Liang GH, Zhang DN, et al. Effect of a high 
        fluoride water supply on children's intelligence. Fluoride 29(4):190-192, 
        1996.
        
        157 Li XS, Zhi JL, Gao RO, Effect of fluoride exposure 
        on intelligence in children. Fluoride 28(4):189-192, 1995.
© 2000 Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility 
        (GBPSR)
        GBPSR grants permission to reprint properly credited excerpts from this 
        book.