Shady Journal, Shoddy Review
JAMA Pediatrics faces a conundrum. Will they make the right choice?
A recent systematic review and meta-analysis about fluoride and IQ published in JAMA Pediatrics has sparked a wave of legitimate criticism. It has also been embraced by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which alone should be cause for concern.
There is another big red flag over the study — it’s last author is John Bucher, who retired from the National Toxicology Program in 2021. You may recall he was the PI on the $25 million grant attempting to link cell phone radiation to brain cancer. This resulted in a preprint of a rat study in 2016, and became a major story for a while, until it was debunked by a physician reporter at the New York Times, the American Cancer Society, and others. The study has never been published in a peer-reviewed journal, and represents a signature waste of federal research funding.
But the Bucher is back — and this time, it’s another favorite topic of his — the OG conspiracy theory, fluoride.
To perform the meta-analysis, Bucher and his government co-authors hired a company called ICF, which looks like a combination of a technology shop and contract research organization (CRO). Five of the eight authors on the JAMA Pediatrics paper work for ICF.
This backdrop is enough to make anyone worry.
It turns out, for good reason.
An analysis of the review shows how flawed it is, and recommends it be retracted. I agree, but I’m here to highlight the weird background that got us here.