A new study published in the Journal of Health Economics provides compelling evidence that fluoridated community water harmed Americans: Childhood exposure to it reduced high school graduation rates, economic sufficiency, physical ability and health in adulthood. Currently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends water fluoridation, and many states and local governments mandate it.
This study is the doctoral dissertation of Dr. Adam Roberts from Texas A&M University, who is now a financial economist at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency within the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Among many data sources, Dr. Roberts obtained natural fluoride levels for most U.S. communities via a Freedom of Information Act request to the CDC.
Using a sample of more than twenty million individuals, he compared those exposed to fluoridated water during childhood with those of the same age in the same county who were not exposed. He found robust evidence that, despite its dental benefits, childhood fluoride exposure led to a net negative effect in adulthood, including lower high school graduation rates, reduced economic sufficiency, poorer physical ability and health.
This study exemplifies how economists use rigorous analytical tools and comprehensive data to answer complex medical and health questions. Another example comes from Dr. Todd Elder, an economics professor at Michigan State University, who found that children whose birthdays are in the month prior to their state’s cutoff date for kindergarten eligibility (i.e., youngest in class) were substantially more likely to be diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) than those whose birthdays fall in the subsequent month (i.e., oldest in class).
Dr. Elder concluded that ADHD is often misdiagnosed due to teachers’ subjective comparative assessments of children within the same grade. The negative consequences are substantial, including adverse health impacts and financial burdens from ADHD treatments and medications.
Another study by six economists, published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, used supermarket entry and household moving data to find that personal demand explains 90% of the difference in the consumption of healthy vs. unhealthy food. Therefore, policy efforts aiming to equalize the supply of healthy groceries across neighborhoods are wasteful and ineffective.
It is no coincidence that economists have been providing compelling evidence on medical and health issues. As the late economist Edward Lazear wrote in his renowned article, Economic Imperialism:
“Economics is not only a social science; it is a genuine science. Like the physical sciences, economics uses a methodology that produces refutable implications and tests these implications using solid statistical techniques. The goal of economic theory is to unify thought and to provide a language that can be used to understand a variety of social phenomena. The fact that there have been so many successful efforts in so many different directions attests to the power of economics.”
Robert Kennedy, Jr., the nominee for President Trump’s Secretary for Health and Human Services, pledged to return U.S. health agencies to their “tradition of gold-standard, evidence-based science” and to provide “transparency and access to all the data.” If evidence-based decision making is enshrined in broad health-related policies and practices, we may look forward to impactful economic research helping to make America healthier.
