It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Where is the demand for fluoride "ENHANCED" water coming from?

page: 7
33
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam
Fun fact: most bottled water has fluoride added anyway, and always has.

It's part of the "minerals added for flavor" or whatever the little disclaimer is. If it's not distilled or DI, and it's marketed as 'drinking water', in the US if it's sold across state lines it's going to have been fortified with fluoride.

Send off a sample from your favorite supposedly-non-fluoridated "drinking water" to an water analysis lab that can measure fluoride ions. You'll see.

If it really bothers you, get a RO filter.


On the west coast of the US, Sparklets has the lowest flouride concentration.




posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Fluoride is bad stuff. I don't believe studies funded by TPTB to defend a chemical first used in a concentration camp.

I mean seriously? Will people believe anything just because it looks official and is presented in a pleasing manner?

And it applies to sources against fluoride. We know it harms the body but the internet is loaded with misconceptions.

And fluoride being bad for our health isn't one of them.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I like the fact that you are on this topic bringing facts to the conversation. There is a lot of disinformation spread regarding this topic.

That being said, I still do not like the authorities fluoridating the water, whether it's good for us or not.

In my opinion, we should have the choice of what we put in to our bodies or what we choose not to. The government deciding that it is best to include fluoride in to our city water supplies violates such freedoms.

So while it may be better for the population if they did fluoridate our water, I believe it goes against the American ideal that we have the right to make choices....and that choice has been taken away.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

defend a chemical first used in a concentration camp.
Evidence?


I mean seriously? Will people believe anything just because it looks official and is presented in a pleasing manner?
Will people believe anything (see above) just because it confirms their biases?



We know it harms the body but the internet is loaded with misconceptions.
Lots of things harm are bodies in large amounts. Ever hear of oxygen poisoning? Salt can be pretty bad. You can die from too much water.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
a reply to: Bedlam

Actually not "all" bottled water contains flouride:

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...


Great Source!!!!! Thank you.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247




That being said, I still do not like the authorities fluoridating the water, whether it's good for us or not.

It's actually becoming more an issue of community decision. Many communities are voting it out. Some are voting to keep it. A few are voting to start.

The trouble is, the misinformation clouds the issue. People end up making their decisions based on who makes the most noise.



and that choice has been taken away.
Lot's of choices are "taken away." That's a cost of living in a society. You can't choose which side of the road to drive on. You can't choose to not pay taxes. But you can vote.

edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247

here are some more facts for you...


Studies by the U.S. government, Harvard University and many other prestigious organizations show that fluoride in water may reduce intelligence and cause other health problems.


and that is the tip of the iceberg...

Moreover, the type of fluoride used in 90% of U.S. fluoridated water supplies has never been tested for safety.

well what a shock....


In a recent article in the journal NeuroToxicology, a research team led by Roger D. Masters, Dartmouth College Research Professor and Nelson A. Rockefeller Professor of Government Emeritus, reports evidence that public drinking water treated with sodium silicofluoride or fluosilicic acid, known as silicofluorides (SiFs), is linked to higher uptake of lead in children. Sodium fluoride, first added to public drinking water in 1945, is now used in less than 10% of fluoridation systems nationwide, according to the Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) 1992 Fluoridation Census. Instead, SiF’s are now used to treat drinking water delivered to 140 million people. While sodium fluoride was tested on animals and approved for human consumption, the same cannot be said for SiFs.


its just keeps getting better


Masters and his collaborator Myron J. Coplan, a consulting chemical engineer, formerly Vice President of Albany International Corporation, led the team that has now studied the blood lead levels in over 400,000 children in three different samples. In each case, they found a significant link between SiF-treated water and elevated blood lead levels. “We should stop using silicofluorides in our public water supply until we know what they do,” said Masters. Officials at the Environmental Protection Agency have told Masters and Coplan that the EPA has no information on health effects of chronic ingestion of SiF-treated water.

www.globalresearch.ca...



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed




Moreover, the type of fluoride used in 90% of U.S. fluoridated water supplies has never been tested for safety.

Do you know even a little bit about chemistry? When fluoride salts are dissolved in water they turn into ions of flouride. There is only one type of fluoride ion. It is not true that the "type" of fluoride has never been tested for safety.


Theoretical and experimental data indicate that chemical dissociation of silico-fluorides is essentially complete at the low concentrations of the reagent in drinking water. Levels of the elements As, Ni, Sb, Pb, Cd and Hg in drinking water from all sources are within internationally acceptable levels and pose no risk to human health. Manufactures and retailers of silico-fluoride reagents are required to certify the heavy metal content of their product, which is also subjected to independent analyses. Regular monitoring of processed potable drinking waters ensures that heavy metal contamination is well below public health limits. There is no evidence to justify claims that these heavy metals are carcinogenic individually or synergistically.

www.health.govt.nz...



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage



The trouble is, the misinformation clouds the issue. People end up making their decisions based on who makes the most noise.


That is true. I hope more people engage in the process and decide whether or not they want it in their water supplies.



Lot's of choices are "taken away." That's a cost of living in a society. You can't choose which side of the road to drive on. You can't choose to not pay taxes. But you can vote.


Excellent point! If you do not want your water fluoridated.....get involved in the process'.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




There is only one type of fluoride ion. It is not true that the "type" of fluoride has never been tested for safety.


and yet we have this....

Fluoride is not a generic term for fluorine. Fluorine is an element and a highly reactive pale yellow gas, but fluoride is an negative ion [technically called ionic fluoride] and combines with a positive ion called a cation, by sharing a electron, that generally produces a very stable molecule. To compare the two as just generic for each other is chemically incorrect. There are two forms that the fluoride ion can take. One is as an inorganic chemicals [as described above] and others is an organic chemical that combines the fluoride ion with the carbon ion in some manner.

www.friendsoffreedominternational.org...



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FyreByrd
Here's that 1995 paper:

Weanlings received drinking water containing 0, 75, 100, or 125 ppm F for 6 or 20 weeks, and 3 month-old adults received water containing 100 ppm F for 6 weeks.

Holy crap. That's a lot of flouride! Especially when you're talking about a mousey.

Oh, her "rebuttal":

These criticisms are without merit because our doses in rats produce a level of fluoride in the plasma equivalent to that found in humans drinking 5- 10 ppm fluoride in water, or humans receiving some treatments for osteoporosis.
Holy crap. That's a lot of fluoride! You might find that level in a private well but not in a public water system.





Wow - Holy Big Brains Batman - great reply.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I don't believe these scientists. No amount of godly fact spewing and ego can change the beliefs of many who know for a fact it's harmful.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I don't believe these scientists. No amount of godly fact spewing and ego can change the beliefs of many who know for a fact it's harmful.




check this vid out



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

But but there's big money and mighty logic behind their shill tactics. It can't possibly be real and anything we say can't stand up against their textbook responses.



Fluoride dumbs people down, makes them gullible. I may not believe all the negative views on fluoride but I'm not falling for them saying it's safe.
edit on 16-11-2014 by Yeahkeepwatchingme because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed




and yet we have this....

Which is not talking about fluoride salts dissolved in water. When that happens you get ions, not compounds.
With sodium fluoride you get sodium ions and fluorine ions. With calcium fluoride you get calcium ions and fluorine ions.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd
Thank you. You agree that the levels of fluoride in those tests are far beyond those found in artificially fluoridated water.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme




Fluoride dumbs people down, makes them gullible. I may not believe all the negative views on fluoride but I'm not falling for them saying it's safe.


agreed i believe there needs to be more independent research done on the subject



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I mean honestly, the very reason that there's so much controversy over it speaks volumes.

And when has the US ever done something to better the health of its inhabitants? Junk food, poor lifestyles promoted, big pharma, private prison industry, the NSA, etc.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

after all we are just a big human farm.......our owners treat us like just like a farmer would treat his cattle...they are only interested in profit and what is best for the people is not always the most profitable



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed




our owners treat us like just like a farmer would treat his cattle

Huh. The ranchers I know are very concerned about the health of their livestock.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join