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.

 

Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   


If you’re like two-thirds of Americans, fluoride is added to your tap water for the purpose of reducing cavities. But the scientific rationale for putting it there may be outdated, and no longer as clear-cut as was once thought.

Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

Included is questioning the outdated research on fluoride and lack of research that is being questioned: Such as about adverse effects of fluoride. Included is that there's a lack of evidence for it for help stop dental caries in adults. Also, there's a lack of research about effects from fluoride other than in the mouth.

Being shared in the MSM while not breaking news.

Moving from conspiracy to a valid concern? More about making money off of fluoridation in water systems than caring for safety and stopping cavities?
Thoughts?



“The sad story is that very little has been done in recent years to ensure that fluoridation is still needed [or] to ensure that adverse effects do not happen,” says Dr. Philippe Grandjean, an environmental health researcher and physician at Harvard University.
-OP Source
edit on 30-6-2015 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   

edit on 30-6-2015 by dreamingawake because: accidental post



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake

Well, yeah.

It is only good as a topical agent only. Ingesting it is not exactly good for you.

But, they had nothing to do with the toxic waste of aluminum production so, a few "tobacco'ish" studies saying how good it is and Bingo, instead of paying to dispose of toxic waste, they now get paid for the toxic waste to dump in the water supply.


Want to know what is funny, we are now IMPORTING China's toxic waste to dump in the water because we don't produce enough toxic waste to keep up the supply needed.

edit on 30-6-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake
It's never prevented cavities. I try to buy Tom's of Maine flouride free when I can from Amazon. Walgreens is supposed to be carrying several flouride free brands soon.

edit on 30-6-2015 by reldra because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Whether fluoride is bad for you or not is irrelevant in the end. In a free society, we should have the freedom to decide what we put in to our bodies. If we wish to ingest fluoride for any benefits it may have, that is our choice.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake

I have noticed for myself with a thin layer of protection on my teeth that fluoridation hurts my teeth in ways I can't fix..
It makes my teeth harder, and pitted.. I had well water for a long time at one point. That water gave me more plaque.. But it didn't break through my enamal.. It was just I had more bacteria in my mouth.. Bacteria in my mouth that went away with BRUSHING my teeth....

The hardening and breaking of my thin enamal (thanks dad haha) has led to all of my cavities..

Even regular brushing after the enamal is gone, I can feel it weakening, what I had originally..



None of that was scientific, but I wanted to say it.
If I had money to go to a dentist, I would make them get all of every rotting whatever off, and just seal it all up...
And then I would avoid Fluoride like the Plague.

That's my anecdotal 2 cents.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 07:29 PM
link   
As I sais before.. The government does not give a crap about your teeth.. Why not put something everyone needs.. Maybe a little chemo to stop cancer before it gets you..



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 07:48 PM
link   
some brief googling indicates:

Fluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) is the most commonly used additive for water fluoridation in the United States.[34] It is an inexpensive liquid by-product of phosphate fertilizer manufacture.[31] It comes in varying strengths, typically 23–25%; because it contains so much water, shipping can be expensive.[32] It is also known as hexafluorosilicic, hexafluosilicic, hydrofluosilicic, and silicofluoric acid.[31] (wiki)

Obviously fertilizer manufacturers want to keep profiting off selling their waste-products to water treatment facilities rather than having to be responsible for disposing of it. If someone is making money from selling poison, there is likely foul play.

Can't wait til I can drink tap water without cringing. For now I'll stick to stream water. Good find



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Fluoride was first developed in military labs for mind control purposes.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake
Hardly groundbreaking. Hardly proof of anything.

From their study:



Data suggest that the introduction of water fluoridation resulted in a 35% reduction in decayed, missing or filled baby teeth and a 26% reduction in decayed, missing or filled permanent teeth. It also increased the percentage of children with no decay by 15%. Although these results indicate that water fluoridation is effective at reducing levels of tooth decay in children's baby and permanent teeth, the applicability of the results to current lifestyles is unclear because the majority of the studies were conducted before fluoride toothpastes and the other preventative meaures were widely used in many communities around the world.


There was insufficient information available to find out whether the introduction of a water fluoridation programme changed existing differences in tooth decay across socioeconomic groups.


There was insufficient information available to understand the effect of stopping water fluoridation programmes on tooth decay.


No studies met the review’s inclusion criteria that investigated the effectiveness of water fluoridation for preventing tooth decay in adults, rather than children.


While NewsWeek may have promoted it a bit differently (spin causes fear, causing sales), any of what they have presented ( and yes I mean presented, there was no research done, only research taken from different papers and put together) is not new to anyone...or it shouldn't be if you are concerned about water fluoridation...



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
Fluoride was first developed in military labs for mind control purposes.

Another lie. Another drop in the fear bucket. If I'm wrong, prove it.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
Whether fluoride is bad for you or not is irrelevant in the end. In a free society, we should have the freedom to decide what we put in to our bodies. If we wish to ingest fluoride for any benefits it may have, that is our choice.

This is one of the few posts on water fluoridation that I agree with. The question is, instead of complaining on ATS about it, what are you doing to make the change that you want?



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: dreamingawake

Well, yeah.

It is only good as a topical agent only. Ingesting it is not exactly good for you.

But, they had nothing to do with the toxic waste of aluminum production so, a few "tobacco'ish" studies saying how good it is and Bingo, instead of paying to dispose of toxic waste, they now get paid for the toxic waste to dump in the water supply.


Want to know what is funny, we are now IMPORTING China's toxic waste to dump in the water because we don't produce enough toxic waste to keep up the supply needed.

Can I ask you for a source, or are you going to admit you read it somewhere and decided it was truth enough for you?



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
Fluoride was first developed in military labs for mind control purposes.


Evidence?

'cos AFAIK fluoride was originally developed in the big bang, being as it is a natural result of the physics and chemistry that resulted from that........



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra



I believe Toms toothpaste is owned by Colgate or at least like 85% of the company. Colgate has a patent on "tricolsan", and when mixed with chlorinated water (which most city water is treated!) makes chloroform! Watch out for most named branded products. I buy my toothpaste from a local nutrition store.
edit on 30-6-2015 by S3QU3NC3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Actually what it says is there isn't much recent research showing anything....and therefore no recent research showing any benefit.

But I'm not surprised the MSM and various others read into it what they will and create a headline like that.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: Gothmog
Fluoride was first developed in military labs for mind control purposes.

Another lie. Another drop in the fear bucket. If I'm wrong, prove it.

Is everything that does not fit your beliefs a lie or attempt at fear ? I meant neither. There was lots of research back in the day that the outcome was very negative on sodium fluoride . First , it calcifies the pineal gland which can affect a person both physically and mentally. I could go on with the list for a long post. Read up on a subject before you type.
edit on 30-6-2015 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: S3QU3NC3
a reply to: reldra



I believe Toms toothpaste is owned by Colgate or at least like 85% of the company. Colgate has a patent on "tricolsan", and when mixed with chlorinated water (which most city water is treated!) makes chloroform! Watch out for most named branded products. I buy my toothpaste from a local nutrition store.


It is triclosan, and it is not patented, and it does not make chloroform with chlorinated water - it makes dioxins:


The term “dioxins” is used to represent polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs). There are 210 different congeners of dioxins (75 PCDDs and 135 PCDFs); however, only 17 congeners are considered to be of toxicological concern (listed in Table 34). For these 17 congeners, evidence is sufficient to conclude that a common mechanism of action, involving binding of the chemicals to the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) as the initial step, underlies 2,3,7,8-TCDD-like toxicity elicited by these PCDDs, PCDFs, and Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (Van den Berg et al., 1998, 2006; Hahn, 2002).

Another possible source of toxicity from the use of triclosan is the presence of dioxins from interaction with chlorinated water. Dioxin congeners that form from triclosanare 2,7-dibenzodichloro-p-dioxin, 2,8-dichloro-p-dioxin, 1,2,8- and 2,3,7- trichlorodioxins and 1,2,3,8-tetrachlorodioxin in natural waters. These congeners are not among the 17 (listed below) that are of toxicological concern for mammals, birds, and fish.

edit on 30-6-2015 by Aloysius the Gaul because: spelling

edit on 30-6-2015 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: Gothmog
Fluoride was first developed in military labs for mind control purposes.

Another lie. Another drop in the fear bucket. If I'm wrong, prove it.

Is everything that does not fit your beliefs a lie or attempt at fear ?


Just stuff that isn't true - you've ben asked for evidence to support your contention that fluoride was developed by he military for mind control - so why not just post it?

to save you some time here's a link showing that the rumors that it was used by the Nazi's are nonsense - www.abovetopsecret.com...




top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join