Flawed MIREC fluoride and intelligence quotient publications: A failed attempt to undermine community water fluoridation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence presented in a set of articles that use the Canadian Maternal-Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) study database to claim that community water fluoridation (CWF) is associated with harm to foetal and infant cognitive development. METHODS: Critical appraisal of measurements and processes in the MIREC database, and articles derived therefrom. MIREC's cohort is approximately 2000 pregnant women recruited in 10 centres across Canada, 2008-2011, leading to measuring 512 children aged 3-6 years in six cities. Fluoride exposure was measured by city fluoridation status, self-reports and maternal spot urine samples. Intelligence Quotient (IQ) was measured using the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-III) by different assessors in each city. RESULTS: MIREC's fluoride and IQ measurements are invalid and therefore cannot support the claim that CWF is associated with IQ decline in children. CONCLUSIONS: The MIREC fluoride-IQ articles' results should be considered unacceptable for legal and policy purposes; other water fluoridation studies and systematic reviews show no effect of fluoridation on cognition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.386 | 0.726 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.050 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".