Iodine deficiency is interesting from the ethical standpoint as one of the most cost-effective - yet obscure - public health measures ever devised which deserves a name like nootropics: a few pennies of iodine added to salt eliminates many cases of mental retardation & goiters.
Background
Supplementation during pregnancy or infancy can raise average IQs in the worst-off regions by as much as 13 IQ points1 (close to a full standard deviation). In an additional bonus for our post-feminist society, females benefit more from iodization than males2. Because salt production is generally so centralized as a bulk commodity extracted from a very few areas, iodization is almost trivial to implement. (Although humans being humans, there are obstacles even to successful iodization programs3.)
Cretinism is only the most extreme form of iodine deficiency, although a major & worthwhile humanitarian task; iodine correlates with IQ in non-deficient children, eg. Japan is simultaneously one of the longest-lived & highest IQ countries in the world and one of the greatest consumers of iodine4 (from seaweed, principally, levels so high they suggest that current recommendations are overly conservative), and even weak hypothyroidism impairs mental performance (in the old). School is directly impacted in randomized trials; from a review of Poor Economics (Banerjee & Duflo 2011):
Providing iodine capsules to pregnant mothers is an intervention that helps brain development in fetuses. It costs around 51 cents per dose - and leads to kids who stay in school about five months longer because they are cognitively better able to learn.
The original waves of iodization caused large-scale changes in: numbers of people going to school5, their occupation6, how they voted, or even how many recruits from a region are accepted to selective flight schools7.
Of course, iodine can be a double-edged sword. Feyrer et al 2008 mentioned a wave of disorders after iodization of salt, as long-deficient thyroids were shocked with adequate levels of iodine, and natural iodine levels can be so high as to begin to inversely correlate with IQ in China.8
More worrisome is recent trends in the developed world such as the War on Salt. Uniodized salt or low-iodide salt like sea salt is ever more popular. Existing iodized table salt often has far less iodide than recommended, or even what the manufacturer claims it has9. Iodized salt used in cooking - as opposed to a straight table-side condiment - loses large chunks of its iodine content10. Small samples of ordinary people turn in severe or mild iodine deficiency rates of 67%11 to as much as 73.7%12. This is plausible given a steady secular trend of iodine reduction in the US (although one that seems to have paused in the 2000s)13. I was unsurprised to read Morse 2012:
Numerous population studies from a variety of countries including China, Hong Kong, Iran, India, Kyrgyzstan and England have reported iodine deficiency in girls of child bearing age 76, in pregnant 154,155,156,157, and in pregnant and lactation women 158,159. Some of these studies included regions where salt iodization is practiced, yet a significant proportion of pregnant and lactating women were still deficient 155,156,157,158,159,160,161. A few examples of recent studies follow…
Meta-analysis
Given all this, one naturally wonders what the effect might be in older humans: elementary school age and above. If iodine before birth can be responsible for increasing IQ by a full standard deviation or more in combination with iron, what about iodine post-birth? Iron supplementation treats anemia and there is evidence it also treats the cognitive problems as well, so what about iodine?
Unfortunately, no study of the issue is so large and high-quality that it definitively resolves our question. So we resort to meta-analysis: pooling many studies together to derive a summary average of the overall results, weighted by how many subjects each study had (since more is better) versus how strong a result they yielded.
While iodine has been extensively studied, this is a narrow question which many studies do not consider (a common problem in nootropics); we are interested in cases only where someone is mentally tested before and after iodine supplementation, or where 1 cohort receives supplementation after birth when compared against a similar cohort who receive no supplementation. Most studies turn out to be either correlational (eg. stratifying by blood levels of thyroid hormone) or comparing fetal supplementation against a non-supplemented control group.
Possible studies
I currently know of these studies involving post-birth effects which I considered for use:
Neurological damage to the fetus resulting from severe iodine deficiency during pregnancy
, Pharoah et al 1971;The effect of iodine prophylaxis on the incidence of endemic cretinism
, Pharoah et al 1972;Fetal iodine deficiency and motor performance during childhood
, Connolly et al 1979;A controlled trial of iodinated oil for the prevention of endemic cretinism: a long-term follow-up
, Pharoah & Connolly 1987; a 1966 Papua New Guinea trial which in 1972 began supplementing the control group as well (who were now 0-6 years old); at the 1982 followup, the control group still suffered cretinism and deficits compared to the experimental - no effect. These studies turn out to not test the adults or children born before iodization and so are not useful for our purpose.Prophylaxis of endemic goiter with iodized oil in rural Peru
, Pretell et al 1972;Iodine deficiency and the maternal-fetal relationship
, Pretell et al 1974: a 1966 Peru trial; females (<45 years old) and males (<18 years old); experimental infants did not outperform control infants - no effect. These studies turn out to not test the adults or children born before iodization and so are not useful for our purpose.The effects of oral iodized oil on intelligence, thyroid status, and somatic growth in school-age children from an area of endemic goiter
, Bautista et al. A 1982 Bolivia trial; 200 schoolchildren measuring IQ - no effectSupplementary iodine fails to reverse hypothyroidism in adolescents and adults with endemic cretinism
, Boyages et al 1990; 28 Chinese aged 14-52, severely deficient, with no gains on theHiskey Nebraska Test of Learning Aptitude
or theGriffiths Mental Development Scales
- no effectControlled trial of vitamin-mineral supplementation: Effects of intelligence and performance
, Schoenthaler et al 1991; multivitamin with 0.075mg iodine, IQ gain in the 8th and 10th graders - beneficial effectTiming of Vulnerability of the Brain to Iodine Deficiency in Endemic Cretinism
, Cao et al 1994: 689 children 0-3 years of age, minimal effect in the childrenDietary intake and micronutrient status of adolescents: effect of vitamin and trace element supplementation on indices of status and performance in tests of verbal and non-verbal intelligence
, Southon et al 1994: 13-15 year olds with a multivitamin of things including iodine (0.15mg); no effect on IQ testEffect of iodine and iron supplementation on physical, psychomotor and mental development in primary school children in Malawi
(mirror), Shrestha 1994Effect of iodized oil supplementation on thyroid hormone levels and mental performance among Orang Asli schoolchildren and pregnant mothers in an endemic goitre area in Peninsular Malaysia
, Isa et al 2000Improved iodine status is associated with improved mental performance of schoolchildren in Benin
, van den Briel et al 2000; originally a double-blind RCT, but subjects were contaminated by importation of iodized salt (there was an apparent small-medium effect on the matrix subtest)Cognitive and motor functions of iodine-deficient but euthyroid children in Bangladesh do not benefit from iodized poppy seed oil (Lipiodol)
, Huda et al 2001: 1st and 2nd grade children, ~1mg? no effectInfluence of supplementary vitamins, minerals and essential fatty acids on the antisocial behaviour of young adult prisoners
, Gesch et al 2002: over 18 prisoners, 0.14mg; beneficial effect on measures of violence, but they did not do an intelligence retest and so are not useful for our purpose.Effects of iodine supplementation during pregnancy on child growth and development at school age
, O’Donnell 2002; included children who were supplemented at age 2 but only tested with Raven’s at age 7, which renders their data not useful. However, the general results confirm that timing of supplementation even within pregnancy follows theearlier is better
rule.Iodine supplementation improves cognition in iodine-deficient schoolchildren in Albania
, Zimmerman et al 2006Effect of multivitamin and multimineral supplementation on cognitive function in men and women aged 65 years and over: a randomised controlled trial
, McNeill et al 2007; old adults, 0.15mg; no effectA micronutrient-fortified seasoning powder reduces morbidity and improves short-term cognitive function, but has no effect on anthropometric measures in primary school children in northeast Thailand
, Manger et al 2008Delayed Neurobehavioral Development in Children Born to Pregnant Women with Mild Hypothyroxinemia During the First Month of Gestation: The Importance of Early Iodine Supplementation
, Berbel et al 2009; turns out that supplementation was administered to all women during their pregnancy, so the development scores are not useful here.Iodine supplementation improves cognition in mildly iodine-deficient children
, Gordon et al 2009The effect of iodine supplementation on cognition of mildly iodine deficient young New Zealand adults
, Fitzgerald 2012: Young adult (18-30 years
), 0.15mg; no effect. (The paper should be available inlate
2012, according to Fitzgerald.)Iodine and Cognition in Young Adults: A Randomised, Placebo-Controlled Trial
, Redman 2012; this may be a re-reporting of Fitzgerald 2012 or a replication.- Dewi et al 2012,
Iodine supplementation into drinking water improved intelligence of preschool children aged 25-59 months in Ngargoyoso sub-district, Central Java, Indonesia: A randomized control trial
; subjects selected for low urinary iodine excretion, region has >50% goiter rates - van Stuijvenberg et al 1999,
Effect of iron-, iodine-, and β-carotene -fortified biscuits on the micronutrient status of primary school children: a randomized controlled trial
(My above searches & review turned out to be partially redundant with a review that was published online a few months afterwards, in June 2012: Zimmerman’s The Effects of Iodine Deficiency in Pregnancy and Infancy
. Regardless, the above was still useful because Zimmerman’s focus was not on any childhood or adult effects but the pregnancy & infancy effects. I have also benefited from Iodine intake in human nutrition: a systematic literature review
)
Unfortunately, a few of the useful studies also tested a variety of substances, so any estimate of iodine’s effect size (such as it is) would be an overestimate: the iodine might be synergizing with one of the other ingredients (eg. iron or selenium) or the iodine might not be the responsible agent at all! We will code that covariate in. But what implications can we draw out via a meta-analysis?
Data
First, the data from the surviving studies:
| study | year | n.e | mean.e | sd.e | n.c | mean.c | sd.c | age | dose | multi |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bautista | 1982 | 100 | 69.43 | 10.96 | 100 | 70.31 | 10.96 | 8.75 | 475 | 0 |
| Boyages | 1990 | 28 | 34.4 | 15.4 | 24 | 29.5 | 8.5 | 29.5 | 720 | 0 |
| Schoenthaler.1 | 1991 | 100 | 10.1 | 8.9 | 33.3 | 8.9 | 7.3 | 14 | 12.68 | 1 |
| Schoenthaler.2 | 1991 | 105 | 12.6 | 7.9 | 33.3 | 8.9 | 7.3 | 14 | 25.35 | 1 |
| Schoenthaler.3 | 1991 | 105 | 10.4 | 7.6 | 33.3 | 8.9 | 7.3 | 14 | 25.35 | 1 |
| Cao.1 | 1994 | 90 | 79 | 10 | 18.5 | 75 | 18 | 0.13 | 50 | 0 |
| Cao.2 | 1994 | 93 | 80 | 8 | 18.5 | 75 | 18 | 0.63 | 50 | 0 |
| Southon | 1994 | 22 | 63.94 | 2.6 | 29 | 64.1 | 1.87 | 13.5 | 16.8 | 1 |
| Shrestha.1 | 1994 | 72 | 17.1 | 1.8 | 36 | 10.7 | 2.4 | 7.1 | 490 | 0 |
| Shrestha.2 | 1994 | 80 | 18.2 | 1.5 | 36 | 10.7 | 2.4 | 7.1 | 490 | 0 |
| Isa | 2000 | 60 | 85.25 | 14.6 | 100 | 83.6 | 16.2 | 11.39 | 480 | 0 |
| Huda | 2001 | 145 | 14.88 | 3.28 | 142 | 14.60 | 3.19 | 9.8 | 400 | 0 |
| Zimmerman | 2006 | 159 | 25 | 6.3 | 151 | 20.5 | 5.6 | 11 | 400 | 0 |
| McNeill | 2007 | 398 | 11.5 | 2.3 | 374 | 11.7 | 2.1 | 72 | 54.75 | 1 |
| Manger | 2008 | 254 | 3.2 | 1.56 | 253 | 3.3 | 1.53 | 9.45 | 7.75 | 1 |
| Gordon | 2009 | 84 | 10.2 | 3 | 82 | 9.6 | 2.4 | 11.5 | 29.4 | 0 |
| Dewi | 2012 | 33 | 110.27 | 9.04 | 34 | 103.06 | 9.99 | 3.1 | 8.4 | 0 |
| Stuijvenberg | 1999 | 62 | 3.65 | 1.26 | 66 | 3.79 | 1.25 | 8.5 | 25.8 | 1 |
Comments:
age
variable is based on a simple average age of subjects (unweighted) or the reported mean;dose
is total administered iodine in milligrams (note that studies typically report in micrograms/μg per day or week); multi is whether the study used solely iodine (0) or other chemicals such as iron (1)- Bautista notes: Stanford-Binet IQ, some data re-derived14
- Boyages: the two groups were not randomly chosen and may have pre-existing differences in IQ
- Schoenthaler: RAPM IQ
- Cao:
developmental quotient
used, not an IQ; I exclude the pregnant women’s offspring - Southon: Non-verbal IQ scores pooled15
- McNeill: Digit span used in place of IQ scores (WM correlates highly with IQ)
- Gordon: score from matrix subtest (1 of 4 subtest scores; 2 showed positive trend but not significance)
- Manger: score from backwards digit span, not forwards (backwards loads higher on g; WM test)
- Stuijvenberg: backwards digit span
- Isa: IQ scores reported in unhelpful format; means & deviations reverse-engineered from percentile distribution16; as usual, pregnancy-related scores are omitted
- Shrestha:
Fluid intelligence
scores reported, omittingCrystallized intelligence
&Perceptual skill
; the control group is split across the iodine intervention (Shrestha.1
) and the iodine+iron intervention (Shrestha.2
)
The result of the meta-analysis:
~{.R} Random-Effects Model (k = 18; tau^2 estimator: REML)
tau^2 (estimate of total amount of heterogeneity): 1.1656 (SE = 0.4150) tau (sqrt of the estimate of total heterogeneity): 1.0796 I^2 (% of total variability due to heterogeneity): 97.95% H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 48.84
Test for Heterogeneity: Q(df = 17) = 298.7404, p-val < .0001
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub 0.5781 0.2593 2.2295 0.0258 0.0699 1.0863 * ~ ~{.R} Fixed-Effects Model (k = 18)
Test for Heterogeneity: Q(df = 17) = 298.7404, p-val < .0001
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub 0.2039 0.0356 5.7315 <.0001 0.1342 0.2736 * ~
So the effect size is, as expected, small: d=0.2. A far cry from the d>1 which we estimated from the prenatal studies.
The large difference in d - 0.2 vs 0.6 - between the fixed-effects and random-effects models is concerning. Given the very high heterogeneity of the i2, which indicates that there are large differences between some of the studies, a random-effects is more appropriate in principle; but further analysis shows this is being driven by a far outlier, and so I believe the fixed-effects estimate of 0.2 is more accurate.
A pretty forest plot summary:

Moderators
Age & dose
We suspected, based on the equivocal results in post-birth studies and the large decline in effect over the duration of a pregnancy in the Chinese studies, that if there was any benefit, it would be in the young; on the same reasoning, we might expect large doses to do more good than smaller ones. The necessary data is encoded into the table already, so we run a meta-analytic regression on them as independent predictors:
Mixed-Effects Model (k = 18; tau^2 estimator: REML)
tau^2 (estimate of residual amount of heterogeneity): 1.0299 (SE = 0.3927)
tau (sqrt of the estimate of residual heterogeneity): 1.0149
Test for Residual Heterogeneity:
QE(df = 15) = 248.3602, p-val < .0001
Test of Moderators (coefficient(s) 2,3):
QM(df = 2) = 4.3141, p-val = 0.1157
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
intrcpt 0.3832 0.3905 0.9813 0.3264 -0.3822 1.1486
iodine$age -0.0149 0.0156 -0.9581 0.3380 -0.0455 0.0156
iodine$dose 0.0019 0.0010 1.8435 0.0653 -0.0001 0.0040 .
Some graphs to help us visualize. Graphing by age, we see what might be a slight negative relationship, as the regression suggests (driven by Shrestha 1994):

plot(iodine$age, effects$yi)Graphing by dose, we see - despite the calculated significance - no relationship at all to my eyes (outliers are Shrestha 1994, again):

plot(iodine$dose, effects$yi)The estimate is the important part: neither of the moderators seem to have a strong relationship with the cognitive benefits (nor are they at least statistically significant). It would seem that any effectiveness of iodine is unrelated to age and dose. Whether the effectiveness is being driven by a few studies is what we’ll look at next.
Multiple supplements
One methodological concern is that by including studies like Southon which supplemented many things besides iodine, our results are merely picking up the efficacy of other supplements (iron is a particular concern). However, the effect of multiple-supplement studies is hardly any larger than the others:
Mixed-Effects Model (k = 18; tau^2 estimator: REML)
tau^2 (estimate of residual amount of heterogeneity): 1.0545 (SE = 0.3886)
tau (sqrt of the estimate of residual heterogeneity): 1.0269
Test for Residual Heterogeneity:
QE(df = 16) = 248.2604, p-val < .0001
Test of Moderators (coefficient(s) 1,2):
QM(df = 2) = 8.1836, p-val = 0.0167
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
factor(iodine$multi)0 0.9053 0.3170 2.8557 0.0043 0.2840 1.5267 **
factor(iodine$multi)1 0.0670 0.3944 0.1698 0.8652 -0.7061 0.8400
Bias checks
We do not have enough to reliably check for biases like publication bias, but we can still try. The funnel plot looks pretty bizarre, with almost all studies tightly bunched around the null effect but 2 outliers - the 2 Shrestha 1994 groups we just saw - showing shockingly high effect sizes of d=3.1/4.1. Why did Shrestha 1994 observe such large IQ effects? I don’t know, although the Malawi region was chosen for its iodine deficiency.
A test & graph:
Regression Test for Funnel Plot Asymmetry
model: mixed-effects meta-regression model
predictor: standard error
z = 3.1383, p = 0.0017

So Shrestha 1994 is driving most of the effect! (Not a surprise at this point.) If we omit those points, the funnel plot snaps into place cleanly:

A trim-and-fill check agrees with us and not the test, by deciding not to add in any new studies between Shrestha and the rest; we also notice that the τ2 & i2 are extremely high, which is just telling us what we know - Shrestha 1994 is different from the other studies:
Estimated number of missing studies on the left side is zero.
Random-Effects Model (k = 18; tau^2 estimator: REML)
tau^2 (estimate of total amount of heterogeneity): 1.1656 (SE = 0.4150)
tau (sqrt of the estimate of total heterogeneity): 1.0796
I^2 (% of total variability due to heterogeneity): 97.95%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 48.84
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 17) = 298.7404, p-val < .0001
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.5781 0.2593 2.2295 0.0258 0.0699 1.0863 *
If we were to redo the analysis but omitting Shrestha 1994, we see a much smaller effect-size:
Random-Effects Model (k = 15; tau^2 estimator: REML)
tau^2 (estimate of total amount of heterogeneity): 0.0585 (SE = 0.0337)
tau (sqrt of the estimate of total heterogeneity): 0.2419
I^2 (% of total variability due to heterogeneity): 72.81%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.68
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 14) = 57.7189, p-val < .0001
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.2149 0.0781 2.7527 0.0059 0.0619 0.3679 **
So, it seems a lot of the effect size is being driven by a few studies turning in large or extremely large effect sizes: Shrestha, Zimmerman, and Diwi (in chronological order). One common factor to these studies seems to be that they worked in the most iodine-deprived areas possible: Shrestha chose his region as being the worst he could find, and Diwi cites reports of goiter in half the population while targeting the supplementation to the most deficient children.
Code
Run as R --slave --file=iodine.r:
set.seed(7777) # for reproducible numbers
# TODO: factor out common parts of `png` (& make less square), and `rma` calls
# install.packages("XML") # if not installed
library(XML)
iodine <- readHTMLTable(colClasses = c("character", "integer", rep("numeric", 8)),
"http://www.gwern.net/Iodine#data")[[1]]
# install.packages("metafor") # if not installed
library(metafor)
effects <- escalc("SMD", m1i = mean.e, m2i = mean.c, sd1i = sd.e, sd2i = sd.c, n1i = n.e, n2i = n.c,
data = iodine)
cat("Basic random-effects meta-analysis of all studies:\n")
res1 <- rma(yi, vi, data = effects); res1
cat("Fixed-effects version:\n")
res2 <- rma(yi, vi, data = effects, method="FE"); res2
png(file="~/wiki/images/iodine/forest.png", width = 480, height = 480)
forest(res1, slab = paste(iodine$study, iodine$year, sep = ", "))
invisible(dev.off())
cat("Random-effects with age & dose moderators:\n")
rma(yi, vi, mods = ~ iodine$age + iodine$dose, data = effects)
png(file="~/wiki/images/iodine/age.png", width = 480, height = 480)
plot(iodine$age, effects$yi)
invisible(dev.off())
png(file="~/wiki/images/iodine/dose.png", width = 480, height = 480)
plot(iodine$dose, effects$yi)
invisible(dev.off())
cat("Check random-effects meta-analysis for whether the multiple-supplement trials are inflating results:\n")
rma(yi, vi, mods = ~ factor(iodine$multi) - 1, data = effects)
png(file="~/wiki/images/iodine/funnel.png", width = 480, height = 480)
funnel(res1)
invisible(dev.off())
cat("The funnel plot looks weird, test it:\n")
regtest(res1, model = "rma", predictor = "sei", ni = NULL)
cat("For kicks, what does a (normal) trim-and-fill say?\n")
tf <- trimfill(res1); tf
cat("Re-run random-effects meta-analysis, omitting Shrestha:\n")
res3 <- rma(yi, vi, data = escalc("SMD", m1i = mean.e, m2i = mean.c, sd1i = sd.e, sd2i = sd.c,
n1i = n.e, n2i = n.c,
data = iodine[c(1:8,11:18),])); res3
# funnel plot with Shrestha omitted
png(file="~/wiki/images/iodine/funnel-moderated.png", width = 480, height = 480)
funnel(res3)
invisible(dev.off())
# optimize the generated graphs by cropping whitespace & losslessly compressing them
system(paste('cd ~/wiki/images/iodine/ &&',
'for f in *.png; do convert "$f" -crop',
'`nice convert "$f" -virtual-pixel edge -blur 0x5 -fuzz 10% -trim -format',
'\'%wx%h%O\' info:` +repage "$f"; done'))
system("optipng -o9 -fix ~/wiki/images/iodine/*.png", ignore.stdout = TRUE)
See also
- Iodine section of Nootropics essay -(motivation; some statistical power calculations for a self-experiment looking for cognitive improvement; a
value of information
calculation on the possible benefit versus the quality of information from self-experimenting; a silly eye-color experiment resulting in no change from supplementation)
See Scrimshaw 1998; Bleichrodt & Born 1994; and Qian et al 2005:
↩Thirty-seven reported studies, total 12,291 children, were analysed. The effect size was an increase of 0.83, 0.82, and 0.32 SIQP respectively, for the children living in IS communities compared with those living in ID areas with no iodine supplementation, with inadequate iodine supplementation, or children who had received iodine during their mothers’ pregnancy and after birth. These equal to 12.45, 12.3, 4.8 IQ points. Compared with that of children whose mothers were persistently exposed to ID, the total effect size of the 21 entries was an increase of 0.58 SIQP (8.7 IQ points) in the group receiving iodine supplementation during pregnancy. Furthermore, there was an increase on 1.15 SIQP of Binet or 0.8 SIQP on Raven Scale (17.25 or 12 IQ points) for children born more than 3.5 years after iodine supplementation program was introduced. The level of iodine nutrition plays a crucial role in the intellectual development of children. The intelligence damage of children exposed to severe ID was profound, demonstrated by 12.45 IQ points loss and they recovered 8.7 IQ points with iodine supplementation or IS before and during pregnancy
IQ in the Ramsey Model: A Naïve Calibration
, Jones 2006:In a recently published paper, Erica Field, Omar Robles, and Maximo Torero study the effects of iodine deficiency on educational attainment in Tanzania (Field, Robles and Torero 2009). Theirs is the first published paper to link economically significant outcomes to iodine deficiency, and it supports the idea of improved schooling outcomes after iodine supplementation. Interestingly, Field et al. also find bigger effects for females, which could be due either to biological differences or differences associated with intra-household resource allocation and social responses to increased cognition of males and females.
The original:
↩Our findings suggest that reducing fetal IDD has significant benefits for child cognition: Children who receive iodine in utero attain an average of 0.33 years of education above siblings and older and younger children in their district. Furthermore, the effects appear to be substantially larger for girls, consistent with new evidence from laboratory studies in animals indicating greater cognitive sensitivity of the female fetus to in utero iodine deprivation, including sex-specific responses to maternal thyroid hormone restriction on expression of neural thyroid hormone receptors. The results are consistent across household and district fixed effects models and patterns of variation in estimated effects are consistent with predictions regarding the vulnerability of specific subpopulations to fetal IDD. Cross-country regression estimates indicate a strong negative influence of total goiter rate and strong positive influence of salt iodization on female school participation.
An example of the commercial opposition or conspiracy theorists is the Kazakhstan campaign; from
In Raising the World’s I.Q., the Secret’s in the Salt
, NYT:
↩In fact, Kazakhstan has become an example of how even a vast and still-developing nation like this Central Asian country can achieve a remarkable public health success. In 1999, only 29% of its households were using iodized salt. Now, 94% are. Next year, the United Nations is expected to certify it officially free of iodine deficiency disorders…Largely out of the public eye, they made terrific progress: 25% of the world’s households consumed iodized salt in 1990. Now, about 66% do.
…In some nations, iodization becomes tarred as a government plot to poison an essential of life - salt experts compare it to the furious opposition by 1950s conservatives to fluoridation of American water. In others, civil libertarians demand a right to choose plain salt, with the result that the iodized kind rarely reaches the poor. Small salt makers who fear extra expense often lobby against it. So do makers of iodine pills who fear losing their market. Rumors inevitably swirl: iodine has been blamed for AIDS, diabetes, seizures, impotence and peevishness. Iodized salt, according to different national rumor mills, will make pickled vegetables explode, ruin caviar or soften hard cheese. Breaking down that resistance takes both money and leadership…The country’s biggest salt company was initially reluctant to cooperate, fearing higher costs, a Unicef report said. Cardiologists argued against iodization, fearing it would encourage people to use more salt, which can raise blood pressure. More insidious, Dr. Sharmanov said, were private companies that sold iodine pills.
They promoted their products in the mass media, saying iodized salt was dangerous,
he said, shaking his head…Asked about the Unicef report saying that Aral Tuz initially resisted iodization on the grounds that it would eat up 7% of profits, the company’s president, Ontalap Akhmetov, seemed puzzled.I’ve only been president three years,
he said.But that makes no sense.
The expense, he said, was minimal.Only a few cents a ton.
…In the 1990s, when the campaign for iodization began, the world’s greatest concentration of iodine-deficient countries was in the landlocked former Soviet republics of Central Asia. All of them - Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan - saw their economies break down with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Across the region, only 28% of all households used iodized salt.
With the collapse of the system, certain babies went out with the bathwater, and iodization was one of them,
said Alexandre Zouev, chief Unicef representative in Kazakhstan…That combination is missing in many nations where iodine deficiency remains a health crisis. In nearby Pakistan, for instance, where 70% of households have no iodized salt, there are more than 600 small salt producers. [seePakistan takes legal action
, Unicef; for further reading, the WHO’s Assessment of iodine deficiency disorders and monitoring their elimination]average daily Japanese consumption of iodine ranges from 5.28-13.8mg of iodine; Patrick L. Iodine: deficiency and therapeutic considerations↩
The Impact of Iodine Deficiency Eradication on Schooling: Evidence from the Introduction of Iodized Salt in Switzerland
Politi 2010 (see also Field, Robles & Torero 2009):
↩I identify the impact of iodization in three ways: first, in a differences-in-differences framework, I exploit geographic variation in iodine deficiency, as well as the fact that the nationwide campaign to decrease iodine deficiency began in 1922. Second, I use spatial and temporal variation in the introduction of iodized salt across Swiss cantons, and examine whether the level of iodized salt sales at the time of one’s birth affected one’s educational attainment. Third, I employ a fuzzy regression discontinuity design and use jumps in sales of iodized salt across Swiss cantons to identify the effect of iodization, by comparing outcomes for those born right before and right after these sudden changes in the treatment environment. These approaches indicate that the eradication of iodine deficiency in previously deficient areas increased the schooling of the population significantly. The effects are larger for females than for males, which is consistent with medical evidence showing that women are more likely to be affected by iodine deficiency disorders than men.
Politi 2011,
The effects of the generalized use of iodized salt on occupational patterns in Switzerland
↩The Economic Effects of Micronutrient Deficiency: Evidence from Salt Iodization in the United States
, Feyrer et al 2008:
↩For instance, Sachs (2003) shows that efforts to eliminate malaria have substantial effects on income, through their effect on health, reduced absenteeism, etc. Acemoglu and Johnson (2007) look at the effect of health interventions and find little effect. Weil (2007) charts a middle course…For example, Bleakley (2007) examines the effects of hookworm eradication in the American South in early 20th century and finds significant effects on education and future incomes of those cohorts that benefited from the intervention.
- Bleakley, Hoyt,
Disease and Development: Evidence from Hookworm Eradication in the American South,
Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 2007, 122 (1), 73-117
…Figure 1 illustrates the geographic distribution of goiter in the US as measured among World War I recruits (we discuss the data further below). In 1924 iodized salt was introduced in the United States explicitly to reduce the goiter rate. This intervention rapidly reduced the incidence of iodine deficiency. Iodization of salt in the US provides a particularly good natural experiment due to the geographic distribution of the disease combined with a rapid, complete treatment. Since there are large in utero effects of iodine deficiency, we should see a significant difference between those born before and after the introduction of iodized salt in locations with low levels of environmental iodine. Those living in high iodine regions provide a control group…The probability of assignment to the Air Corps rises significantly in low iodine (i.e. high goiter) counties in the years after the introduction of iodized salt. In the lowest iodine regions, our estimates suggest a 10-20% increase in the probability of a man being assigned to the Air Corps after iodization. Using information about average scores of Air and Ground Force recruits we can infer a one-quarter to one half standard deviation increase in average test scores in these regions. The average level of iodine deficiency in the US was significantly lower than in the highest regions, so the overall effect in the US was much more modest, though iodization was undoubtedly extremely cost effective. The increase in cognitive ability due to salt iodization may have contributed a small amount to trend rise in measured IQ that took place over the course of the twentieth century, the so-called Flynn Effect…Behrman and Rosenzweig (2004) find that differences in birth weight among identical twins are reflected in differences in school attainment and adult earnings…More cites to be added, including Case & Paxson.
Typically, non-deficient populations differ from iodine-deficient populations by approximately 10 IQ points, whereas the whole normal IQ distribution of a population shifts to the left as a result of iodine deficiency7. In endemic areas, cretinism can affect up to 15% of the population (de Benoist et al., eds 2004). Bleichrodt and Born (1994) estimate that the average IQ of iodine-deficient groups is 13.5 points lower than the non-deficient groups…Scrimshaw (1998) provides a list of studies and experiments that have been conducted, and which have shown the hindering effects on mental development of iodine deficiency in utero.
- 7: Scrimshaw (1998) provides a list of studies and experiments that have been conducted, and which have shown the hindering effects on mental development of iodine deficiency in utero.
- de Benoist, Bruno, Maria Andersson, Ines Egli, Bahi Takkouche, and Henrietta Allen, eds, Iodine status worldwide: WHO Global Database on Iodine Deficiency, Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2004
- Bleichrodt, N and M P Born,
A meta-analysis of research on iodine and its relationship to cognitive development,
in John B. Stanbury, ed., The damaged brain of iodine deficiency, New York: Cognizant Communication, 1994, pp. 195-200
…It had been documented that large amounts of iodine could cause hyperthyroidism to develop in some adults and thyrotoxicosis in others…thyrotoxicosis might occur as a result of iodization in those individuals that have suffered from long-term iodine deficiency and whose goiters have become nodular. In such cases, iodine supplementation causes the output of hormone to jump to toxic levels…The number of enlisted men started increasing in 1942, and it peaked in the second semester of that year, as well as the first semester of 1943. People born after iodization enlisted in large numbers starting the first semester of 1943. The proportion of recruits going to the Air Force was particularly low in 1943…How large are these effects? The highest goiter places have goiter rates of 30. The coefficients (from Table 4) suggest that about 15% more recruits from the highest goiter regions go into the AAF after salt iodization. From Appendix A we know that the Air Force recruits have, on average 9 point higher AGCT scores (almost a half a standard deviation). The average increase for the recruits from that section is therefore 0.15 time 9 points, or 1.35. So the average cognitive ability in the section goes up by greater than one twentieth of a standard deviation. Examining the high-low regressions yields similar figures. In the high goiter group, we have a 5-10% higher assignment rate to the AAF after salt iodization. 10% times 8 AGCT points results in 0.8 points higher on average, or about a twentieth of a standard deviation. This implies a twentieth of a standard deviation increase in cognitive ability for 25% of the US population.
- Bleakley, Hoyt,
Effects of drinking water with high iodine concentration on the intelligence of children in Tianjin, China
(slides), Liu et al 2009:
↩The results indicated that for children who resided in regions with a very high water iodine concentration, there was on average a reduction of IQ by nearly nine points (b = −8.7, 95% CI: −15.9 to −1.4) in comparison with those who resided in a non-high water iodine area. When comparing children living in areas with a high water iodine concentration with those in the non-high areas, a slight reduction of IQ by about two points was observed, however, it was not significant. There was also a significant association between year of birth and IQ, which seemed to exhibit a dose-response relationship. There was a progressive increase in IQ by about four (p=0.072) and eight (p=0.015) points for children born in 1996 and 1997 when compared with those who were born in 1995, the year China first implemented the national dietary iodine supplement programme.
Analyzed 88 samples; 47 fell below USFDA recommended level and their labeled level: Dasgupta PK, Liu Y, Dyke JV.
Iodine nutrition: iodine content of iodized salt in the United States
↩Salt in cooking meat loses ~60% of iodine; Wang GY, Zhou RH, Wang Z, Shi L, Sun M. Effects of storage and cooking on the iodine content in iodized salt and study on monitoring iodine content in iodized salt↩
Iodine status of UK schoolgirls: a cross-sectional survey
, Vanderpump et al 2011; see alsoThe prevalence of iodine deficiency in women of reproductive age in the United States of America
, Hollowell et al 2007↩Gunton JE, Hams G, Fiegert M, McElduff A. Iodine deficiency in ambulatory participants at a Sydney teaching hospital: is Australia truly iodine replete?.↩
Hoption Cann SA. Hypothesis: dietary iodine intake in the etiology of cardiovascular disease:
In the general United States (US) population, a declining trend in urinary iodine levels has been observed as estimated through the large National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES I, 1971-74; and NHANES III, 1988-94) [3]. The proportion of the US population with moderate to severe iodine deficiency (<50 μg iodine/L in urine) has more than quadrupled in the last 20 years, 2.6% in NHANES I vs 11.7% in NHANES III [3]. This decline may be due to a reduced intake of iodized salt. For example, Enstrom et al. [4] compared data from nationally representative samples of the American population from two time periods, 1980-1982 vs 1990-1992. Based on dietary intake studies from over 10,000 individuals, no change was observed in sodium intake from food, while there was a 65% decline in sodium intake from discretionary (iodized) salt. Adventitious sources of iodine have also declined with reductions in the use of iodine in the dairy industry and in commercial bread production [5]. Comparable trends have been observed in other countries that iodize salt. For example, public health recommendations to reduce salt intake have been implicated in the decreasing iodine status in Australia and New Zealand [6]. Similarly, a recent decline in median urinary iodine levels in Austria may be due to lower salt intake as well as the availability of noniodized salt in Austria after joining the European Union in 1995 [7]. In Greenland, as imported foods have replaced consumption of traditional foods such as fish and sea mammals, there has been a gradual decline in iodine status. Andersen et al. [8] found that median urinary iodine excretion declined with the degree of decrease in the traditional lifestyle. Evidence of iodine deficiency was seen in non-Inuit subjects, who had the lowest levels. Thus, in countries where there are changing dietary patterns, including those long established iodization programs, significant declines in iodine intake may occur.
See also Caldwell KL, Jones R, Hollowell JG. Urinary iodine concentration: United States National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey 2001-2002. Thyroid. 2005 Jul;15(7):692-9; Pearce et al 2004; Trumpff et al 2013; and Gahche et al 2013↩
Bautista did not report standard deviations, but did report _n_s, means, and p-values, which permits the standard deviation to be derived, following the Cochrane Handbook (
7.7.3.3 Obtaining standard deviations from standard errors, confidence intervals, t values and p values for differences in means
): the degrees of freedom = 198, so with a reported p=0.57, t=0.569; then the standard error is the means divided by the t value (); and finally the standard deviation: .↩Southon reported control & experimental scores split by gender, which need to be re-pooled:
control
- mean =
- standard deviation =
active
- mean =
- standard deviation =
See Table 7; 12 month followup scores are reported grouped in IQ deciles, and if one assumes scores in each decile average to around the median (since they should be following a bell curve, this will overstate standard deviations), one can calculate out the figures in R as follows:
↩# experimental sd(c(rep(65,12), rep(75,10), rep(85,17), rep(100,19), rep(115,1), rep(125,1), rep(135,0))) [1] 14.59699 mean(c(rep(65,12), rep(75,10), rep(85,17), rep(100,19), rep(115,1), rep(125,1), rep(135,0))) [1] 85.25 # control sd(c(rep(65,30), rep(75,13), rep(85,25), rep(100,26), rep(115,5), rep(125,0), rep(135,1))) [1] 16.19141 mean(c(rep(65,30), rep(75,13), rep(85,25), rep(100,26), rep(115,5), rep(125,0), rep(135,1))) [1] 83.6

