Till's interpretation of an odds ratio is fundamentally incorrect. An odds ratio in this example would indicates the odds of a particular diagnosis in one group compared to the odds of that diagnosis in another. Odds ratios are known to ALWAYS be further from the null value than a relative risk based on mathematics alone. It is clear the authors do not understand basic principles of epidemiology. I urge caution interpreting any findings from the MIREC group as all of the papers thus far have been rejected by the scientific community and the National Academy of Science Engineering and Medicine. Most recently was a published expression of concern. Here is the link to "Letter to the editor regarding “Critical windows of fluoride neurotoxicity in Canadian children” by Farmus and colleagues. Environmental research, 111315. doi-org.proxy.consortiumlibrary.org/.../...111315. No fluoride neurotoxicity in Canadian children": www.sciencedirect.com/.../S0013935123000245