There are too many unaccounted-for confounding variables to confirm anything, in my view. However it may be that non - flouride-in-the -womb factors are more critical. I made no assumptions, just posed an hypothesis.
It would be interesting if the communities with fluoridation had higher IQ scores but lower education and income levels than those with no fluoridation. The critical factor for usefully including these factors in another study would be when exactly was fluoride introduced for each city.
However if studies of the kind you reported could be done on enough communities where fluoride was introduced to drinking water only one to a few decades ago, and the IQs of the communities measured pre and post fluoridation, and the IQ’s of the mothers AND fathers of the child subjects measured, and expertly dealt with statistically, then there would be less potential problems with validity.
But based on this one study your heading is click bait, isn’t it, particularly considering the shortcomings discussed by the authors under the heading “Strenghths and Limitations”. But it’s an interesting study and well worth posting.
