The long-standing practice of adding fluoride to community drinking water in the United States is now under sharp review as questions rise about whether its advantages continue to outweigh possible risks. A fresh set of findings pushes back against recent warnings about fluoride in water and suggests that it might offer added benefits.

This renewed national discussion began after a government report from the National Toxicology Program stated that high fluoride exposure was tied to lower IQ in children. That report, however, assessed fluoride amounts that were at least twice higher than federal recommendations and had limited information about what happens at lower, commonly used levels, as per CNN.

However, the latest study examined fluoride quantities that match the usual suggested range in drinking water. Researchers found strong evidence showing that children who grew up with water containing these lower levels of fluoride performed better on cognitive assessments than those who had no fluoride exposure.

Fluoride in US Public Water Faces Renewed Questions

Dr. Rob Warren, lead author of the study released in Science Advances, said he was surprised by the National Toxicology Program’s earlier conclusions and felt the need to produce evidence more suitable for public policy. He explained that he pursued the work because it was a major question without a clear answer.

The national debate has also intensified as US Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has labeled fluoride an industrial waste and pointed to possible IQ loss while calling for a rollback of federal guidance. Utah and Florida have already moved to prohibit fluoridation of public water.

As per CNN, Warren compared the situation to testing a heart medication. If the advised dose is 100 milligrams, but a study measures reactions to nearly a million milligrams, the results do not reflect what happens at the normal dose. He said that this is how much of the fluoride research has been structured and that only extremely high doses have shown harmful effects, which is not helpful for policy decisions.

Warren directs a long-running program that began in the US Department of Education and has followed tens of thousands of Americans from their high school years in the 1980s through several decades.

Fluoride and Cognition: What The Study Found

For the current analysis, the team linked math, reading and vocabulary test scores from nearly 27,000 participants to the level of fluoride in their childhood drinking water. These measurements were based on older records from the US Geological Survey and the Department of Health and Human Services, as per CNN.

Researchers worked under the assumption that participants spent their entire upbringing near their high schools. They sorted people into three groups. One group had steady exposure to recommended fluoride levels either through natural sources or public water treatment. Another group never had fluoride in their water. A third group had mixed exposure because their community changed its water policy at some point.

Students who had fluoride for only part of their childhood scored higher on tests than peers who never had it. Those who grew up with fluoride throughout all their childhood years scored even better. Follow-up testing that continued up to 2021, when many had reached about 60 years of age, also showed no sign that fluoride contributed to cognitive decline.

Warren clarified that cognitive tests are not exact IQ scores, although they relate strongly. Test results reflect both mental ability and the learning opportunities a person receives. He is currently working on a follow-up project that will look more closely at fluoride and IQ with improved childhood location data.

Other studies this year suggested that removing fluoride from public water in the United States could lead to more than 25 million extra cavities among children and teenagers in five years along with nearly 10 billion dollars in dental treatment costs. Although the new study did not measure dental health, experts noted that pain from untreated cavities can interfere with a child’s ability to attend school or stay focused, which may influence academic scores.

Why Experts Still Differ on Fluoride Policy

Fluoride occurs naturally in some groundwater and foods. It protects teeth by strengthening enamel, which can be damaged by acids formed from bacteria, plaque and sugar. Communities in the United States started adding fluoride to water systems in 1945 to improve oral health in a cost-effective way.

The American Dental Association and numerous specialists continue to support community water fluoridation. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has also kept its recommendations unchanged. The agency does not have authority to require fluoridation, but it considers 0.7 milligrams per liter the ideal amount.

Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration restricted the use of prescription fluoride supplements. The agency noted that unapproved fluoride products may alter the gut microbiome and that better options exist to protect teeth.

In a written response published with the new research, Dr. David Savitz from Brown University argued that before ending a decades-long public health practice, there must be clear proof of harm at commonly used fluoride levels. He wrote that there is still no convincing evidence that fluoridation lacks benefit or causes damage at recommended doses.

He quoted a well-known saying, noting that if something is not broken, there is no reason to fix it. He said the new study suggests that fluoridated water remains on the side of being effective and safe.

A new study has discovered that use of antibiotics during pregnancy may raise the risk of babies developing Group B Streptococcus (GBS) disease.

Researchers from Sweden's Karolinska Institutet in Sweden and University of Antwerp in Belgium found prenatal antibiotic exposure to be associated with an increased risk of neonatal GBS disease by about 30 percent within four weeks of delivery. Exposure during early third trimester made the newborns most susceptible.

They scientists noted, "Prenatal antibiotic exposure can raise GBS risk within four weeks postpartum, especially in neonates not covered by risk-based intrapartum prophylaxis, with the early third trimester being a critical window of susceptibility."

What Is Group B Streptococcus (GBS) disease?

Most babies born to women carrying group B strep in their body are health but the few who are infected during labor can become very ill. The illness caused by group B strep can start within six hours of birth (early-onset disease) or three weeks after birth (late-onset disease).

Common symptoms include:

• Fever.
• Low body temperature.
• Trouble feeding.
• Sluggishness, limpness or weak muscle tone.
• Trouble breathing.
• Irritable behavior.
• Jittery movements.
• Seizures.
• Rash.
• Jaundice.

Universal prenatal screening around 36-37 weeks of pregnancy can help prevent the development of GBS disease in babies. The illness is typically treated with antibiotics.

What Did The Study Find?

The researchers conducted a population-based cohort study on 1,095,644 singleton live births in Sweden from 2006 to 2016 using national registers.

Among those, prenatal antibiotic exposure was recorded in 24.5 percent, of which 4.9 percent were exposed in more than one trimester. During the study period, the overall incidence of GBS disease was 0.71 per 1,000 live births.

Compared with unexposed newborns, GBS incidence within four weeks postpartum was higher among exposed newborns (0.86 per 1,000 live births) for an increased risk of 29%.

Among pregnancies without any GBS risk factors, prenatal antibiotic exposure was associated with a 34% higher risk of GBS disease.

Despite clear results, the authors noted it’s too early to draw causal conclusions more research into the links between antibiotics and GBS disease development is needed.

The researchers said, "Given the widespread use of antibiotics during pregnancy (~25% of pregnancies globally), rising GBS resistance, and the lack of licensed maternal GBS vaccine, this potential association warrants further studies."

This study was published in January 2026 in Journal of Infection.

In a recent episode of Soha Ali Khan’s YouTube podcast 'All About Her', actor Bhumi Pednekkar clarified that she has not used any weigh-loss drugs or injectables to lose over 40kgs of weight and credited her transformation to a balanced lifestyle.

The Dum Laga Ke Haisha star told Khan, "People have even asked me if I’ve had a rib removed. What about the fact that I’ve put 10 years into working out and eating right? In Delhi, women straight up come to me and ask, ‘Aapne bhi Ozempic ya Mounjaro liya hai?’

"I know enough people who have taken Ozempic and genuinely needed that medical assistance, so I will never judge anyone for it. But the fact is, I lost 40 kg and more without injectables.”

Pednekkar, 36, went on to also express annoyance over the rumors of her weight loss and noted that her battle against dengue in 2023 forced her to lose 12kgs.

"So basically, for this other character, I lost a lot of weight. I was in hospital recovering from dengue. I lost 12 kg and half my hair. The pain you go through is unmatched. It was Diwali and people were bursting crackers, while I had a splitting headache until I reached the hospital," she said.

How did Pednekkar lose weight?

For her workouts, she likes to mix things up with different workouts such as Pilates, running, strength training and weight training and completes nearly 8,000 steps on average every day.

What Are Ozempic and Mounjaro?

Ozempic (semaglutide) is a prescription injectable GLP-1 medication primarily approved for adults with Type 2 diabetes to manage blood sugar levels. However, the drug has gained immense popularity among those trying to lose weight as it can reduce hunger and help people feel full for longer, which forces the body to burn fat deposits to stay functional.

In clinical trials, people with obesity using semaglutide have shown to lose an average of about 15% of their body weight over 68 weeks. Most people begin to see noticeable results within 8 to 12 weeks of taking the drug.

The official price in India for a once-weekly Ozempic injection pen ranges from approximately ₹8,800 for the 0.25 mg dose to around ₹11,175 for the 1 mg dose per month. Insurance coverage is generally inconsistent for weight loss indications.

Similarly to Ozempic, Mounjaro mimics two natural gut hormones, GLP-1 and GIP, to regulate blood sugar, reduce appetite, slow digestion and provide the body with a feeling of fullness, leading to reduced calorie intake.

Clinical trials have shown that participants using Mounjaro along with lifestyle changes can lose up to 15-22% of their body weight over the span of 72 weeks.

Eli Lilly launched Mounjaro in India in March 2025 in the form of vials and released KwikPen versions of the drug later in August 2025. Monthly costs for KwikPens range from approximately ₹14,000 to ₹27,500.

Common side effects of both weigh-loss drugs include gastrointestinal issues, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and constipation. More serious but rare side effects can include pancreatitis and gallbladder issues.

Typhoid fever, to many sound like it now belongs to history books, but a new strain that can resist strongest of antibiotics have emerged in South Asia. This has raised the concerns over the potential spread of drug-resistant infections.

A gene, which is capable of breaking down carbapenems, which is a powerful antibiotics was seen as a drug of last resort, is discovered among 32 samples collected from hospitals, across western and southern India. This gene is known as blaNDM-5, which can move between different types of bacteria, raising fears that resistance could in fact grow quickly.

Recent outbreaks of extensively drug-resistant (XDR) typhoid across South Asia have raised serious concerns, as these strains no longer respond to most commonly used antibiotics. Since 2016, Pakistan alone has reported over 15,000 XDR typhoid cases, while resistance to azithromycin has been detected in Bangladesh, India, Nepal and other neighboring regions.

Speaking to the Telegraph, Dr Malick Gibani, Clinical Lecturer in Infectious Diseases at Imperial College London, said, “We all hear that antimicrobial resistance is a problem, but typhoid really exemplifies it – how resistance seems to emerge relentlessly, moving from one class of antibiotics to the next."

“It’s not yet untreatable, but the treatments we do have are much more limited and significantly more challenging to deliver.”

What Is Typhoid?

Typhoid is caused by the bacteria Salmonella Typhi. It usually spreads through contaminated food or water and can lead to high fever, stomach pain and serious complications if not treated on time.

Antibiotics are the first line of treatment. These range from commonly used medicines such as amoxicillin and co-trimoxazole to stronger, hospital-only drugs for resistant infections, including carbapenems. Without timely treatment, typhoid can turn life-threatening and, in some cases, prove fatal. What has alarmed researchers is the emergence of typhoid strains that can resist even carbapenems.

“Although the number of cases described is still relatively small, this feels very much like a warning sign,” said Dr Gibani. “This was always expected and reflects the steady evolution of antimicrobial resistance in typhoid. These infections are not untreatable yet, but they are becoming increasingly difficult to manage.”

Experts point out that typhoid is often difficult to diagnose. This uncertainty can lead to the widespread and sometimes unnecessary use of antibiotics, which further fuels resistance. There are also concerns that extensively drug-resistant typhoid may be more widespread than current data suggests, especially in low-income countries where surveillance and reporting are limited.

“The risk is highest in places with poor water quality, uncontrolled antibiotic use and weak healthcare systems,” said Prof Calman A. MacLennan from the University of Oxford. He noted that while current typhoid mortality is under one percent, the disease was far deadlier before antibiotics were available. “In the pre-antibiotic era, death rates were as high as 10 to 20 percent, and during some wars, more people died of typhoid than from combat.”

Best Line Of Defense Against Typhoid

Vaccination, experts say, could be key to preventing a resurgence. The Typhoid Conjugate Vaccine, or TCV, has shown strong effectiveness by triggering the body’s immune response rather than targeting the bacteria directly with antibiotics. “That makes it much harder for the pathogen to escape,” Prof MacLennan explained.

The vaccine has already been introduced into national immunization programmes in 11 countries. However, reaching the poorest regions, where typhoid is most common, remains a challenge. Rolling out a new vaccine requires significant planning and resources, even with international support.

Dr Gibani warned that although South Asia has been hit hardest so far, drug-resistant typhoid can spread globally through travel. Imported cases have already been reported in Europe, North America and Australia. Experts stress that surveillance, vaccination and better sanitation are critical to stopping these dangerous strains from taking hold elsewhere.