It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Fluoride vs Second hand smoke.

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 10:53 PM

On topic today is the distinction we make between the side effects of Fluoride and second hand smoke. You see, fluoride has been as proven to cause health defects and decay as much as cigarette smoke has yet.... On the tobacco side we see an unprecedented government involvement in laws, propaganda and heavy handedness.

This while they ADD fluoride to almost every public water source. Despite THIS and THIS and THIS.

There are many other links but I ask again...... Why protect people from one thing and ignore the risk you are contributing too? Take for instance my state of Illinois. Should you decide to not put on your seat belt you will be pulled over and pay a $75 dollar ticket. While that is an actual law in Illinois, you are completely free to operate a motorcycle without a helmet...........

The state, the government is woefully unable to protect you from yourself and the fact that they choose which facets of danger they want to protect you from under threat of fine speaks to just how illegitimate the end goal actually is. Victimless crime and the victims that are persecuted under such a system are slowy destroying this country but....... Also making a fortune for law enforcement, private prisons and fueling the homeland military industrial complex.

No victim, NO CRIME. Enough is enough.
edit on 17-9-2014 by Helious because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 11:10 PM
a reply to: Helious

I haven't drank tap water for many years, if i'm offered it i will politely decline and go thirsty lol. The problem of drinking it is one thing but everyone showers/baths in it too. i think the addition of it to public water supply is enough evidence alone to suggest that something isn't quite right in the world. It's all a vicious circle of profit and money. You're totally right that it's a pick and choose what is safe and what is not, and what should be enforced and what shouldn't, and again it comes down to money. At this point, i'm really at a loss for what to do about it and i don't need a suggestion to write my MP/congressman lol.

ps. two of your links go to the same article.

edit on k122014-09-17T23:12:36-05:00kAmerica/Chicago17 by kicked because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 11:33 PM
a reply to: Helious

These results do not allow us to make any judgment regarding possible levels of risk at levels of exposure typical for water fluoridation in the U.S. On the other hand, neither can it be concluded that no risk is present. We therefore recommend further research to clarify what role fluoride exposure levels may play in possible adverse effects on brain development, so that future risk assessments can properly take into regard this possible hazard.

from the authors of your Harvard study

critics of floride in water seem to ignore the fact that almost all American and European water supplies are already treated with cholorine or ozone - both poisonous

posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 05:47 AM
Funny though, y'all pay for the pleasure to consume that poisoned water too, same as us moron smokers.

posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 06:46 AM
Poisoned water? I dotn know how much Fluoride is in USA water but over here in Europe we have country that don't fluoride water.

But i never found a bottle water with 0 Fluoride, that is because Fluoride is in nature and some scientist say that natural Fluoride is not so harmful, but produced fluoride is very dangerous and that is what they out in toothpaste and water.

Same you can say for salt.
they say salt is bad, but i say manufactured salt is bad, natural sea salt or Himalayan salt is good (recently bought that pinks alt, it taste so good, but is expensive)

top topics

log in