Moms2B Avoid Fluoride
During pregnancy Moms know to protect their babies by avoiding
- smoking
- alcohol
- medications
- raw meat and seafood
- high-mercury fish
AND NOW WE SHOULD ADD
- fluoride in water, food, and drinks
Why add fluoride to the list?
In 2017, a 12-year-long government-funded study was completed. It showed significant reductions in children’s IQ when their mothers were exposed to fluoride during pregnancy. In this carefully-controlled study of Mexican mother-offspring pairs by American and Canadian researchers, mothers were receiving the same fluoride doses as mothers in the US who live in communities that add fluoride dental treatment to their water.
What should pregnant women know about this study?
The results of the 2017 study by Bashash et al. included up to 299 pregnant women and their offspring. Fluoride exposure was determined by measuring fluoride in the urine of the pregnant women because that is a very reliable measure of total fluoride exposure. The researchers found a correlation between the urine fluoride of the pregnant mothers and a loss of up to 6 IQ points in their children when the children were tested at age 4 and again between 6-12 years of age. This study was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives in September 2017.
Is there another mother-offspring study?
Yes, a second study by Thomas et al. was presented at a conference in March 2018. The researchers reported lower IQ scores due to prenatal fluoride exposure when the children were tested between the ages of 1 and 3.
Is this new information?
Yes. While there are another 53 published studies reporting an association of fluoride exposure with a lowering of IQ in children, and over 200 animal-fluoride studies reporting damage to the brain and reduced learning and memory ability, the surprise came with the release of these mother-offspring fluoride studies. Why? Because they have clearly demonstrated, for the first time, that pregnancy is the most critical period for exposure to fluoride. The fetus now ranks as the most vulnerable of our species to fluoride’s toxicity.
Pregnant women should know about these studies in order to take the necessary steps to protect their child’s brain.
Who funded these studies?
The two mother-offspring studies were funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
For more info on these studies use the links
in the Select-a-Topic at the top
How is a pregnant woman exposed to fluoride?
Fluoride is added to approximately 70% of public drinking water systems across the U.S. as non-consensual dental treatment. Exposure to fluoride mainly occurs by ingestion or inhalation. The greatest exposure to fluoride for the majority of Americans comes from drinking fluoridated water and using it in food preparation to make soups, rice, coffee, tea, infant formula, etc. Fluoride also has many industrial uses, so living close to a fluoride/fluorine emitting industry is also a concern. For more information on industrial releases, see the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory for fluorides.
What water should I drink if I am pregnant? — Find out here
Questions & Concerns? Check out the Q & A
New Study on Neurotoxic Effects of Fluoridation – Pregnant Mothers Produce Children with Cognitive Defects
There are many studies showing the neurotoxic effects of flouridation. The latest study show mothers who drink flouridated water product children with lower IQ.
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/ehp655/
See also a summary article.
Pseudoscience: The Use of Flouride in the Water Supply
The evidence continues to accumulate that flouride increases diabetes and ADHD and decreases IQ significantly when used at levels seen in the water supply. We have known this for 20 years, but progress against the flouride lobby has been slow, similar to the multi-decade battle against the tobacco industry where physicians were appearing in smoking ads saying smoking was good for you and lobbyists were arguing that there was insufficient scientific data to prove smoking was harmful, despite the fact that the tobacco companies had suppressed their own scientific studies showing smoking caused lung cancer. Futhermore, most of the flouride in water is industrial waste imported from China and is not food grade flouride, nor it is an approved medication by the FDA. If laws were strictly enforced it would be illegal to put industrial toxic waste in water and flouride in water is illegal in most western countries, the U.S. and Ireland being glaring exceptions.
Dr. Wright provides a summary of recent research on flouride in the January 2017 edition of Green Medicine.
“Community water fluoridation predicts increase in age-adjusted incidence and prevalence of diabetes in 22 states from 2005 and 2010.” That’s a very large amount of data, and rather difficult to contradict; so far no one has tried. At present, the strategy of public health “authorities” is to ignore these three reports (and many others about the adverse effects of water fluoridation), and very likely do what they can to make sure there’s little to no publicity.
Parents reported higher rates of medically diagnosed ADHD in their children in states in which a greater proportion of people receive fluoridated water from public water supplies.
The IQ-point loss caused by fluoride in the water was reported by a group of researchers from—no kidding—the Harvard School of Public Health, the School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai (New York), and the University of Southern Denmark. They reported that high fluoride exposure was associated with a 0.45 reduction in the standardized mean difference (SMD) in intelligence. Some fluoridation proponents have mistakenly interpreted this to mean that a half-point reduction in SMD equates to a half-point reduction in IQ. This, however, is NOT the case. As the research team confirmed, a reduction of 0.45 SMD is “approximately equivalent to seven IQ points for commonly used IQ scores.”
The ADHD researchers summarized their findings in just one sentence: “Parents reported higher rates of medically diagnosed ADHD in their children in states in which a greater proportion of people receive fluoridated water from public water supplies.”
The National Academies Press published a comprehensive reviews of Flouride in Drinking Water in 2006 and recommended lowering flouride exposure to reduce flourosis, particularly in children, and more studies on the impact of flouride on IQ and other health problems. There is enough scientific data available now to make a decision to stop drinking flouride.
The best way to deal with this is to avoid all substances containing flouride and to install a whole house filtration system that eliminates flouride from your showers and drinking water. This will also eliminate many other toxic substances regularly found in public drinking water. Even then frequencies available to subscribers need to be run regularly to eliminate flouride due to exposure to flouride in our contaminated food and beverage supply.
Pseudoscience: Flouride is Good for You!
Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity Dr Philippe Grandjean, MDcorrespondenceemail, Philip J Landrigan, MD
Published Online: 14 February 2014
Summary
Neurodevelopmental disabilities, including autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and other cognitive impairments, affect millions of children worldwide, and some diagnoses seem to be increasing in frequency. Industrial chemicals that injure the developing brain are among the known causes for this rise in prevalence. In 2006, we did a systematic review and identified five industrial chemicals as developmental neurotoxicants: lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, arsenic, and toluene. Since 2006, epidemiological studies have documented six additional developmental neurotoxicants—manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers. We postulate that even more neurotoxicants remain undiscovered. To control the pandemic of developmental neurotoxicity, we propose a global prevention strategy. Untested chemicals should not be presumed to be safe to brain development, and chemicals in existing use and all new chemicals must therefore be tested for developmental neurotoxicity. To coordinate these efforts and to accelerate translation of science into prevention, we propose the urgent formation of a new international clearinghouse.
Roundup Glycophosphate, Autism and Senile Dementia
Pseudoscience: ADA Spokesperson Makes False Statements About NRC Study of Thyroid
Politics trumps science anytime money is involved. As new scientific journal articles continue to roll out on brain damage, tooth damage, thyroid damage, and other negative side effects of a toxic carcinogen like flouride, the so-called scientific proponents of flouride distort or ignore the findings. And our so-called health sites like WebMD promote the disinformation. Fortunately, some of the scientists doing the real studies are starting to complain about the nonsense inflicted on the American public.
See flouridealert.org for more complete documentation:
A spokesperson for the American Dental Association made an inaccurate statement in the media recently while criticizing the latest study showing hypothyroidism’s link to fluoridation.
Dr. Edmond Hewlett, ADA spokesman and a professor at the UCLA School of Dentistry has been quoted by numerous publications discounting the study, stating that other studies have not uncovered a link between fluoridated water and thyroid problems, saying:
“the 2006 report by the U.S. National Research Council (NRC) found no adverse effects on the thyroid even at levels more than four times greater than that used in fluoridation.”
The quote appeared in a number of articles including those by the Chicago Tribune,HealthDay, and WebMD. It’s an absolutely false statement, as FAN’s NRC Thyroid webpage makes very clear. What isn’t clear is whether Dr. Hewlett intentionally lied when making the statement, or if he just lacked the knowledge to make an accurate statement on the matter.
Kathleen Thiessen, Ph.D., who was one of the authors of the 2006 NRC report on fluoride, responded to the inaccurate statement with the following letter to the author of the HealthDay article that quoted Dr. Hewlett:
Regarding a recent HealthDay article by Alan Mozes, which has been used by the Chicago Tribune, WebMD, and probably others:
The article on fluoride and underactive thyroid, reporting on a recent publication by Stephen Peckham et al., quotes a representative of the American Dental Association as saying that “the 2006 report by the U.S. National Research Council found no adverse effects on the thyroid even at levels more than four times greater than that used in fluoridation.” This statement by the ADA spokesman is demonstrably inaccurate.
From the NRC report
pp. 262-263: Fluoride exposure in humans is associated with elevated TSH concentrations, increased goiter prevalence, and altered T4 and T3 concentrations. . . In humans, effects on thyroid function were associated with fluoride exposures of 0.05-0.13 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was adequate and 0.01-0.03 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was inadequate.
p. 260: The major endocrine effects of fluoride exposures reported in humans include elevated TSH with altered concentrations of T3 and T4. . . . These effects are summarized in Tables 8-1 and 8-2, together with the approximate intakes or physiological fluoride concentrations that have been typically associated with them thus far. Table 8-2 shows that several of the effects are associated with average or typical fluoride intakes of 0.05-0.1 mg/kg/day (0.03 with iodine deficiency). . . . A comparison with Chapter 2 (Tables 2-13, 2-14, and 2-15) will show that the 0.03-0.1 mg/kg/day range will be reached by persons with average exposures at fluoride concentrations of 1-4 mg/L in drinking water, especially the children. The highest intakes (>0.1 mg/kg/d) will be reached by some individuals with high water intakes at 1 mg/L. . . .
also
p. 266: Fluoride is therefore an endocrine disruptor.
p. 234: Thus, several lines of information indicate an effect of fluoride exposure on thyroid function.
(Note: I was one of the authors of the 2006 NRC report. The NRC report is available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/
Kathleen Thiessen, Ph.D.
Oak Ridge Center for Risk Analysis, Inc.
You might also be interested in:
Harvard IQ Researchers Respond to Pro-Fluoridation Criticism
The authors of the 2012 Harvard Meta-analysis that highlighted fluoride’s role as a developmental neurotoxin, Philippe Grandjean, MD, PhD, and Anna Choi, ScD, have written a letter responding to pro-fluoridation criticism of their work by Dr. Jonathan Broadbent. Broadbent’s counter-study and Grandjean’s letter in response were both published in the American Journal of Public Health. In his response Grandjean states,
“We are therefore concerned that the safety of elevated fluoride exposure is being exaggerated in ways similar to those employed by vested interests to misconstrue the scientific evidence of other neurotoxicants, such as lead, mercury, and certain pesticides. Firm dismissal of fluoride as a potential neurotoxic hazard would seem premature.”
This isn’t the first time Grandjean has responded to pro-fluoridation efforts to downplay the impact fluoride has on IQ. In December, he challenged the spin being used by fluoridation promoters. Grandjean’s commentary (Mottled fluoride debate) appears on his website (Chemical Brain Drain) and is printed in full below. Grandjean explained that for the children tested,
“Their lifetime exposures to fluoride from drinking water covered the full range allowed in the US. Among the findings, children with fluoride-induced mottling of their teeth – even the mildest forms that appears as whitish specks on the enamel – showed lower performance on some neuropsychological tests. This observation runs contrary to popular wisdom that the enamel effects represent a cosmetic problem only and not a sign of toxicity. At least one of five American children has some degree of mottling of their teeth.”
Flouride Associated with Hypothyrodism
Are fluoride levels in drinking water associated with hypothyroidism prevalence in England? A large observational study of GP practice data and fluoride levels in drinking water
S Peckham, D Lowery, S Spencer Centre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK doi:10.1136/ jech-2014-204971
ABSTRACT: Background While previous research has suggested that there is an association between fluoride ingestion and the incidence of hypothyroidism, few population level studies have been undertaken. In England, approximately 10% of the population live in areas with community fluoridation schemes and hypothyroidism prevalence can be assessed from general practice data. This observational study examines the association between levels of fluoride in water supplies with practice level hypothyroidism prevalence.
Methods: We used a cross-sectional study design using secondary data to develop binary logistic regression models of predictive factors for hypothyroidism prevalence at practice level using 2012 data on fluoride levels in drinking water, 2012/2013 Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) diagnosed hypothyroidism prevalence data, 2013 General Practitioner registered patient numbers and 2012 practice level Index of Multiple Deprivation scores.
Findings: We found that higher levels of fluoride in drinking water provide a useful contribution for predicting prevalence of hypothyroidism. We found that practices located in the West Midlands (a wholly fluoridated area) are nearly twice as likely to report high hypothyroidism prevalence in comparison to Greater Manchester (non-fluoridated area).
Interpretation: In many areas of the world, hypothyroidism is a major health concern and in addition to other factors—such as iodine deficiency— fluoride exposure should be considered as a contributing factor. The findings of the study raise particular concerns about the validity of community fluoridation as a safe public health measure.
You may also be interested in:
Exposure to fluoridated water and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder prevalence among children and adolescents in the United States: an ecological association
Roundup Toxicity – It’s Killing Your Cells!
Weed-Whacking Herbicide Proves Deadly to Human Cells
Used in gardens, farms, and parks around the world, the weed killer Roundup contains an ingredient that can suffocate human cells in a laboratory, researchers say
Used in yards, farms and parks throughout the world, Roundup has long been a top-selling weed killer. But now researchers have found that one of Roundup’s inert ingredients can kill human cells, particularly embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells. Read more …
We already know Roundup is a carcinogen because of glycophospate. Now we know it is a cell killer. What most Amercan’s don’t know is that your food is being genetically modified to produce Roundup in the plant cells to protect it from bugs. Then you eat the insecticide.
You thought you could wash it off your vegetables. But those days are over!
A subscriber asked for frequencies for Roundup so I’ve posted them on the subscribers site. Everyone is now infected with Roundup.
Roundup Connection to Autism
The Warning: A Prediction That Shocked an Audience
In December 2014, Dr. Stephanie Seneff — a Senior Research Scientist at MIT with over 170 peer-reviewed publications — made a declaration that stunned a room of approximately 70 people at a special panel discussion about GMOs.
“At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.”
The audience, by all accounts, was deeply unsettled. A fellow panelist reported that after Dr. Seneff’s presentation, everyone in attendance “was squirming, likely because they now had serious misgivings about serving their kids, or themselves, anything with corn or soy, which are nearly all genetically modified and thus tainted with Roundup and its glyphosate.”
At the time, this prediction was widely dismissed by mainstream commentators as alarmist. We published this article that same month because the underlying evidence Dr. Seneff presented was too important to ignore.
The Evidence Dr. Seneff Presented
Dr. Seneff’s research focused on the relationship between glyphosate — the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide — and the rising rates of autism spectrum disorder. Her work over more than three decades spanned biology, technology, nutrition, and health, with particular focus on Alzheimer’s disease, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.
Her key findings included several striking observations. She demonstrated that the side effects of autism closely mimic the symptoms of glyphosate toxicity. Her data showed a remarkably consistent statistical correlation between the increased use of Roundup on crops and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds with rising rates of autism diagnosis. She also identified that children with autism carry biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate exposure, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.
The mechanism she proposed was straightforward: glyphosate disrupts the gut microbiome, impairs sulfate metabolism, chelates essential minerals, and crosses the blood-brain barrier — creating the exact conditions associated with autism spectrum disorder and other neurodevelopmental conditions.
2025 Update: A Decade Later, the Science Caught Up
We are now past the 2025 date in Dr. Seneff’s prediction. While autism rates have not reached one in two, the trajectory she identified has proven directionally correct — and the scientific establishment has largely validated the concerns she raised about glyphosate neurotoxicity.
The Numbers Have Continued to Rise
When Dr. Seneff made her prediction in 2014, the CDC reported autism prevalence at approximately 1 in 68 children. By 2023, that number had risen to approximately 1 in 36 — nearly doubling in less than a decade. While the one-in-two prediction has not materialized within the specific timeframe, the rate of increase has been dramatic and continues to accelerate.
Glyphosate Neurotoxicity Is No Longer Disputed
In 2014, suggesting that glyphosate was neurotoxic was considered fringe. Today, the picture has changed substantially. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a division of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” in 2015 — just one year after this article was published. Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) has paid over $10 billion in legal settlements related to Roundup health claims. Multiple peer-reviewed studies have now documented glyphosate’s ability to cross the blood-brain barrier, disrupt the gut-brain axis, impair mitochondrial function, and trigger neuroinflammation.
Dr. Seneff herself published a comprehensive book, Toxic Legacy: How the Weedkiller Glyphosate Is Destroying Our Health and the Environment (2021), synthesizing decades of her research into a detailed examination of glyphosate’s mechanisms of harm.
What This Article Got Right in 2014
When the Frequency Research Foundation published this piece in December 2014, we were among the earliest voices highlighting the glyphosate-neurotoxicity connection. The mainstream scientific community took nearly a decade to reach the same conclusions. This pattern — early identification of environmental health threats that are later validated — reflects the foundation’s commitment to following the evidence rather than waiting for consensus.
The Connection to Alzheimer’s Disease
The neurotoxic mechanisms that link glyphosate to autism also implicate it in Alzheimer’s disease. This is not a coincidence. Both conditions involve chronic neuroinflammation, disrupted gut-brain communication, mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired sulfate metabolism, and accumulation of toxic substances in brain tissue.
Dr. Seneff’s own research encompassed Alzheimer’s alongside autism — she recognized that the same environmental toxin was driving neurological damage across the age spectrum. In children, the developing brain is most vulnerable, manifesting as autism. In older adults, the accumulated damage manifests as cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s.
We explore the specific connection between glyphosate and Alzheimer’s risk in our dedicated article Glyphosate Alzheimer’s Disease: Could This Common Herbicide Increase Your Risk?. For the complete picture of how environmental toxins, infections, inflammation, and disrupted brain frequencies all contribute to Alzheimer’s, read our complete guide to Alzheimer’s disease and frequency therapy.
The Aluminum Connection
Glyphosate does not act alone. One of the most concerning aspects of Dr. Seneff’s research is how glyphosate interacts with other environmental toxins — particularly aluminum. As Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt has documented, glyphosate dramatically increases the toxicity of inhaled aluminum nanoparticles. Without glyphosate present in the body, ingested aluminum causes relatively limited damage. But when glyphosate is present — and it is now detectable in the vast majority of the population — even small amounts of inhaled aluminum become highly toxic to brain tissue.
This synergistic toxicity between glyphosate and aluminum creates a compounding threat to neurological health. The aluminum triggers chronic neuroinflammation and parasite infections, while the glyphosate impairs the body’s ability to detoxify and defend itself. Together, they accelerate neurodegeneration.
Our article Geoengineering – Nano Aluminum Creates Chronic Parasite Infections in Populations covers the aluminum side of this equation in detail, including Dr. Klinghardt’s research and the landmark study finding some of the highest aluminum levels ever recorded in human brain tissue.
How Frequency Therapy Addresses Glyphosate Damage
At the Frequency Research Foundation, Dr. Jeff Sutherland has developed frequency protocols that address the multiple layers of damage caused by glyphosate and its interaction with other environmental toxins. This is not a single-target approach. Effective treatment needs to address the full cascade of effects.
Frequency therapy can target the parasite infections that thrive in a glyphosate-compromised system. It can support detoxification pathways for clearing glyphosate, aluminum, and other toxic metals. Targeted frequencies address the chronic neuroinflammation that drives both autism and Alzheimer’s progression. Brain-specific frequencies, including 40 Hz gamma stimulation, support neuronal health and cognitive function.
This multi-target approach is what makes frequency therapy uniquely suited to environmental toxicity cases. Pharmaceutical interventions typically address a single mechanism. Frequency protocols can address multiple contributing factors simultaneously.
Concerned about glyphosate exposure and its neurological effects? Dr. Jeff Sutherland offers personalized paid consultations to assess your situation and develop a targeted frequency protocol. Book Your Consultation
Frequently Asked Questions
Take the Next Step
The evidence connecting Roundup’s glyphosate to neurological damage in both children and adults is now too strong to ignore. If you are concerned about environmental toxin exposure — whether for yourself, your children, or an aging parent — a consultation with Dr. Jeff Sutherland can help you understand the full picture and develop a personalized frequency protocol.
Book Your Consultation with Dr. Jeff Sutherland
This article is part of our comprehensive Alzheimer’s resource library. Glyphosate is one of several environmental risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease. Read our complete guide to Alzheimer’s disease and frequency therapy for the full scope of research, nutritional strategies, and frequency-based treatment approaches.
© Frequency Research Foundation. This content is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Always consult with qualified healthcare professionals regarding medical conditions.
41 Research Studies Show Brain Damage and Lower IQ From Flouride
There are 41 studies now showing flouride in water makes you stupid and damages the brains of your children. See the recent presentation by Michael Connett and the recent Flouride conference. 17 of these studies show damage at or below levels allowed in your water supply.
This, combined with fact that the flouride put in U.S. water (and banned in most other countries) is industrial waste from China often contaminated with asbestos and heavy metals makes it a publicly authorized criminal activity. Flouride in water is not food grade and would be illegal if the FDA classified it as a drug (which it is).
You are medicated against your will (which is illegal) by a known neurological poison. The supreme court of Israel banned flouride because of this. Legal actions are beginning in the U.S..
Much of the research on flouride is being carried out by the Chinese CDC because of the severe problems they have in Chinese children. They can show a clear dose response curve for children’s lower IQ with increasing flouride exposure.
Professor Prof. Xiang Quanyong, Jiangsu Province CDC,China (quanyongxiang@sina.com.cn) showed up to a 30% reduction in children’s IQ from flouride exposure. Any sane person studying this data would take action, but apparently a lot of Americans already have damaged brains from flouride.
As a former Professor of Radiology, Biometrics and Preventive Medicine and appointed by the governor of Colorado and former Congressman and Senator Tim Wirth to Chair the Health Effects Committee for the Rocky Flats Nuclear plant years ago, I am an expert in the toxicology of hazardous chemicals and radiation and know something about the political forces that damage the health of American communities. How the scientists at CDC can tolerate their grandchildren being exposed to flouride is beyond me. I know some of them object to giving their grandchildren mercury in common vaccines, but political interests force them to keep their mouth shut. Who is it that politically gains from poisoning our children with flouride?