It's funny how the fluoride is killing us, the vaccinations are killing us, the additives are killing us, the pharmaceuticals are killing us, the chemtrails are killing us — and yet life expectancy just keeps on going up and up and up.
Those illuminati need to change their recipe, I think.
Fluoride isn't killing you-it's just making you docile and compliant.
Life expectancy is "increasing" because there are fewer deaths at birth.
r how most people think its actual fluoride in our drinking water it is not! The chemical names of the main substances used in wate fluoridation practices are hydrofluorocilicic acid, hexafluorisilisic acid and sodium silicofluroride if you were to put any of these substances into a stream river or pond you would be committing and act or terrorism...
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
The issue isn't whether you've NOTICED adverse health effects. The issue is whether adverse health effects have happened.
Harvard found that fluoride lowers IQ in developing children (and probably also in adults). The study can be found here.
Now the question is: would you notice a reduction in your IQ? How could you tell if it happened when you've zero basis for comparison? Because you've been drinking fluoride your entire life, you have zero idea how smart you would/should have been had you completely abstained.
So yeah, in short, the "I never noticed any health problems" argument is a complete wash.
Fluoride: Worse than We Thought PDF Print E-mail
Written by Andreas Schuld
Wednesday, 14 April 2004 02:50
In 1999 the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) released a glowing report on the fluoridation of public water supplies, citing the procedure as one of the century's great public health successes.1
Ironically, the same report hints that the alleged benefit from fluorides may not be due to ingestion: "Fluoride's caries-preventive properties initially were attributed to changes in enamel during tooth development because of the association between fluoride and cosmetic changes in enamel and a belief that fluoride incorporated into enamel during tooth development would result in a more acid-resistant mineral."
The CDC report then acknowledges new studies which indicate that the effects are "topical" rather than "systemic." "However, laboratory and epidemiologic research suggests that fluoride prevents dental caries predominately after eruption of the tooth into the mouth, and its actions primarily are topical for both adults and children."
The obvious question is this: How can the CDC consider the addition of fluoride to public water supplies to be a public health success while admitting at the same time that fluoride's benefits are not "systemic," in other words, are not obtained from drinking it?.........
The most comprehensive US review was carried out by the National Institute of Dental Research on 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years.18 It showed no significant differences in terms of DMF (decayed, missing and filled teeth).
Children from every age group had greater caries prevalence and more caries experience in areas with negligible fluoride concentrations in the water than in optimally fluoridated areas . Controlling for child age, residential location, and SES, deciduous and permanent caries experience was 28.7% and 31.6% higher, respectively, in low-fluoride areas compared with optimally fluoridated areas. The odds ratios for higher caries prevalence in areas with negligible fluoride compared with optimal fluoride were 1.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29, 1.39) and 1.24 (95% CI 1.21, 1.28) in the deciduous and permanent dentitions, respectively.
This study demonstrates the continued community effectiveness of water fluoridation and provides support for the extension of this important oral health intervention to populations currently without access to fluoridated water.
Um. Here is what that study actually says:
The world's largest study on dental caries, which looked at 400,000 students, revealed that decay increased 27 percent with a 1ppm fluoride increase in drinking water.
Even the marginally high intakes of fluoride (>2.5 mg/day) continuously for more than six months in calcium-deficient children may cause severe dental fluorosis and caries (25).
Apparently from a 1972 paper. Can't seem to find that study but here's what a more recent Japan study found:
In Japan, fluoridation caused decay increases of 7 percent in 22,000 students,20
Results: The prevalence of dental caries was inversely related and the prevalence of fluorosis was directly related to the concentration of fluoride in the drinking water. The mean DMFS in the communities with 0.8 to 1.4 ppm fluoride was 53.9 percent to 62.4 percent lower than that in communities with negligible amounts of fluoride. Multivariate analysis showed that water fluoride level was the strongest factor influencing DMFS scores. The prevalence of fluorosis ranged from 1.7 percent to 15.4 percent, and the increase in fluorosis with increasing fluoride exposure was limited entirely to the milder forms.
With the narrative punch of Jonathan Harr’s A Civil Action and the commitment to environmental truth-telling of Erin Brockovich, The Fluoride Deception documents a powerful connection between big corporations, the U.S. military, and the historic reassurances of fluoride safety provided by the nation’s public health establishment. The Fluoride Deception reads like a thriller, but one supported by two hundred pages of source notes, years of investigative reporting, scores of scientist interviews, and archival research in places such as the newly opened files of the Manhattan Project and the Atomic Energy Commission. The book is nothing less than an exhumation of one of the great secret narratives of the industrial era: how a grim workplace poison and the most damaging environmental pollutant of the cold war was added to our drinking water and toothpaste.
From Publishers Weekly
Concerns over fluoridated drinking water have long been derided as the obsession of McCarthyite cranks. But this muckraking j’accuse asserts that fluoride is indeed a dire threat to public health, one foisted upon the nation by a vast conspiracy—not of Communist agents, but of our very own military-industrial complex. Investigative reporter Bryson revisits the decades-long controversy, drawing on mountains of scientific studies, some unearthed from secret archives of government and corporate laboratories, to question the effects of fluoride and the motives of its leading advocates. The efficacy of fluoridated drinking water in preventing tooth decay, he contends, is dubious. Fluoride in its many forms may be one of the most toxic of industrial pollutants.......
reply to post by AlienView
A book with a really sensational sales blurb.
I prefer science over biased writing.
edit on 4/4/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)