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.

 

Fluoride is Natural in Water

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I just showed you that the composition of calcium and sodium flouride is very very different... and so are the sources.. Again if you still think sodium flouride is good for you then why do rats die when they are given it ?



Originally posted by TheComte
To everyone who says fluoride additives are not the same as natural fluoride.


Fluoride additives are not different that natural fluoride.

Some consumers have questioned whether fluoride from natural groundwater sources, such as calcium fluoride, is better than fluorides added “artificially,” such as from the fluoride water treatment additives presently used. This allegation is not supported by scientific findings. The ionic speciation study mentioned previously (Finney et.al. 2006) also reported that water treatment additives dissociate to the same ions as present in groundwater.


www.cdc.gov...

Or, is the CDC in on the conspiracy?

LOL...Post a correction...indeed....LOL...I demand you delete your post demanding my correction!


[edit on 17-6-2008 by TheComte]

[edit on 17-6-2008 by TheComte]




posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 



Well... if you can't think for yourself.. and you rely on the CDC for your judgment.. then well maybe the flouride has really gotten to your brain.. Ijust showed you the chemical composition of sodium flouride and calcium flouride.. and they are very very different... And again.. If you think sodium flouride is so good..then why is it used for rat poison?? Perhaps you can enlighten us and teach us that sodium flouride is in fact good.. put it to the test.. go purchase some.. put it in your water.. then drink it on youtube..Post it here for results.. Since you beleive in its safety so much.. then prove it!


[edit on 17-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


Just let me ask you a question. What do you think it means when they says "this allegation is not supported by scientific findings," or, "water treatment additives dissociate to the same ions as present in groundwater?"

Are they wrong?


And again.. If you think sodium flouride is so good..then why is it used for rat poison??


For the last time. In large doses it's a poison. That's why it's used for rat poison. OK? Damn, dude. What's so difficult?

[edit on 17-6-2008 by TheComte]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by greydawn
First let's clarify something here. The fluoride that is in most drinking water,

and should be of concern to those that care about their health is referred to

as inorganic fluoride. It is a by product of the glass and aluminum manufactur-

ing industries. Instead of throwing this toxic waste out as should be done, it is

pumped into our drinking water, and we are told of the myriad benefits of it.

But don't worry, if you're doctor says it's good for you then it must be good for

you. Now there is another form of fluoride which is naturally occurring, simply

referred to as organic fluoride. This is not a problem like the other version.

But if you still don't believe this is possible, go ahead keep drinking your

filthy tap water and you will soon be chemically lobotomized in the not so

distant future. Enjoy.


well buddy, to be honest, i am going to believe my doctor/dentist telling me that flouride in my water is good for me, before i believe someone on an internet forum dedicated to conspiracies and telepathic alien contacts, telling me that i am going to die if i keep drinking it

i am 21, have been drinking tap water since i was a small small child, my teeth are healthy, and i don't have any health problems. so I could honestly say that you tin foil hate wearing kooks are just trying SOOOO hard to come up with something that you totally ignore facts and examples.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   
It occurs to me that one could probably replace every reference to "flouride", "flourine", etc, found in this thread, with nearly any food or drink additive and have the same discussion.

That being said.....no one in this thread has the position that flouride, or any other related compound, is harmless. Like an immense list of other substances....it can be dangerous in the wrong quantities. Just like a thousand other substances....heck, pure oxygen is poisonous to our bodies.

This, I think, is the main point.....no one has been able to show any evidence that after 60 years of water flouridation by various municipalities, that there are obvious and measurable negative effects of the practice.

Those that oppose the practice have tremendous amounts of data showing that flouride, et al, can be dangerous to the human body. Well duh. I can show a lot of data that many things are dangerous. If you want to convince me.....show me the damage that has been wrought. Show me the sick children....better yet, show me the sick adults who have been ingesting flouridated water for their entire lifetimes.

Show me that evidence of that...just that. No hyperbole, no rhetoric....show me the damage that water flouridation, when properly administered and metered, has caused.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by MrPenny]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by SRTkid86

well buddy, to be honest, i am going to believe my doctor/dentist telling me that flouride in my water is good for me, before i believe someone on an internet forum dedicated to conspiracies and telepathic alien contacts, telling me that i am going to die if i keep drinking it

i am 21, have been drinking tap water since i was a small small child, my teeth are healthy, and i don't have any health problems. so I could honestly say that you tin foil hate wearing kooks are just trying SOOOO hard to come up with something that you totally ignore facts and examples.


SRTkid86, so true. I also have been drinking/using tap water for 40 years and same. Good oral health and good health overall, knock on wood. Certainly I'm not being "chemically lobotomized."



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


Well, it seem as if you beleive what you want to beleive.. I just showed you the chemical composition and sources are completly differant The EPA BTW carries allot more weight then the Centers for disease Control which by the way this falls out of there jurisdiction anways...why are the EPA scientists and workers demanding an end to water flouridation.. Are they wrong?If you want to continue poisoning yourself and your family then continue to.. Just don't try to post lies on ATS. CALCIUM FLOURIDE(NATURAL) is not that bad for you... and SODIUM FLOURIDE(NOT NATURAL is very toxic and comes from pollution scrubbers which by the way pick up allot more toxic chemcials ..... and it all gets dumped in the water..It's also a toxic byproduct of aluminum manufacturing...

www.nteu280.org...


[edit on 17-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte

No, I don't claim that there is no difference. The CDC claims it. Did you not see my post? Are you ignoring it. Here it is again:


Fluoride additives are not different that natural fluoride.

Some consumers have questioned whether fluoride from natural groundwater sources, such as calcium fluoride, is better than fluorides added “artificially,” such as from the fluoride water treatment additives presently used. This allegation is not supported by scientific findings. The ionic speciation study mentioned previously (Finney et.al. 2006) also reported that water treatment additives dissociate to the same ions as present in groundwater.


If you disagree with the CDC, then that's fine. But don't try to convince me you're right.


What the CDC says is a 100% total lie. If you believe something because a government agency says so, well, it's your life. The CDC is despicable for making such a claim. But then again, they're a big proponent of vaccines, so it's not surprising.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


Yes, you've shown me how the composition is different. I didn't disagree with you. What seems to be going over your head is that when you add them to water the "treatment additives dissociate to the same ions as present in groundwater." That means the compounds break down to the exact same ions as natural fluoride. So, essentially they are the same. Get it now?



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
[mor


You posted an outright lie ... and you know it.. Again I want you to go purchase some sodium flouride put a few crystals in a cup.. and drink the water... While you do this make sure you are on camera..and post it quickly... So we can see the results



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

What the CDC says is a 100% total lie. If you believe something because a government agency says so, well, it's your life. The CDC is despicable for making such a claim. But then again, they're a big proponent of vaccines, so it's not surprising.


Ok. You say this is a lie. Show me some data that disproves the CDC's statement and I will take a look at it.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan

Originally posted by TheComte
Because the evidence shows that the vast majority of people are unaffected in any way.


Its all about making the people docile and to lay down when your rights are trampled. Did you not read about the Nazi use of fluoride? The Soviets used it in the Gulag also.

If what the Government has been doing on top of letting us get raped at the gas pump 40 years ago we would have riots. Not anymore...we are the good flock.


what the hell are you talking about "getting raped at the gas pump" you really have NO idea what you are talking about there. we STILL (yes even at 4.13/gallon here in Austin, Texas) pay HALF, i repeat HALF what they par in england per gallon.

please do some reaseach and don't just think because it's expensive to you, we are getting raped. plain and simple we enjoy some of the lowest gas prices IN THE WORLD.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
You posted an outright lie ... and you know it.. Again I want you to go purchase some sodium flouride put a few crystals in a cup.. and drink the water... While you do this make sure you are on camera..and post it quickly... So we can see the results


"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!:

OMG. You just won't let it go, will you? You're never going to stop. What lie did I post?
And why would I do that. It will be poisonous. Now, if I dilute it down to 1mg/l then I'll drink it, no problem. Because it won't harm me.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


i dunno, but we aren't rats so... i fail to see how you making a connection there.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


i dunno, but we aren't rats so... i fail to see how you making a connection there.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


Ok how exactly does this additive somehow change sodium flouride to a safe substance? can you explain the process? When I spoke to the water manager he told me its just pumped in there.. there is no process that removes all the other toxic chemicals nor does it change the chemical composition of the flouride.. Whats in the tank is the same substance that goes in the water.. You say its in the amount..... how would you feel if arsenic was being pumped into your water in small amounts knowing it is slowly killing you? Sodium flouride isn't so different.. If it was calcium flouride I wouldnt mind at all... But its not!



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


I'll try to provide as many sources as I can, although that post came from gathered and studied knowledge over the years.

One thing I'd like to point out as well is that only 1% of the population of Japan has fluoridated water, and their teeth pretty nice without it. They are also the only country that has embraced the only non-toxic sweetener known as Stevia, instead of the neuro-toxic Aspartame, Sucralose, Neotame trio.

Another interesting find is that the studies on Fluoride initiated in 1945 and 1946, closely after the time period when we found the Germans were using it. By 1960, the plans to "Fluoridify" the drinking water of the nation were in full effect. The government "proved" it's effectiveness by claiming that tooth decay was down 46%.

Heres a recent study done on negative effects of Sodium Fluoride on the body:

health.gov...

Although harder to find, it is possible to find statistics on Fluoride distribution throughout different regions. Some may require you to "read between the lines", and some will prove it unintentionally, but it's definitely there. In order to find out truly, one would need to do some simple research regarding the part of the CDC that regulates "Community Fluoridation Commitee". They have a range of PPM that they can add and this committee apparently votes which areas will have which. I believe the typical range is from .5 PPM to over 2 PPM, but I know in many regions it has been recorded as MUCH higher and the CDC claims this is occurs naturally. That is where it gets "iffy" for me.

NRC on Fluoridation 2006

Calculating Fluoridated Populations (CDC & EPA)

Here is a direct quote from the EPA regarding Fluoride that will tell you that each community "adds it differently":



Many communities add fluoride to their drinking water to promote dental health. Each community makes its own decision about whether or not to add fluoride. EPA has set an enforceable drinking water standard for fluoride of 4 mg/L (some people who drink water containing fluoride in excess of this level over many years could get bone disease, including pain and tenderness of the bones). EPA has also set a secondary fluoride standard of 2 mg/L to protect against dental fluorosis. Dental fluorosis, in its moderate or severe forms, may result in a brown staining and/or pitting of the permanent teeth. This problem occurs only in developing teeth, before they erupt from the gums. Children under nine should not drink water that has more than 2 mg/L of fluoride.

I find it disturbing that their allowable limit is 4 mg/L , yet children under nine shouldn't drink more than 2mg/L.

EPA breakdown of public water contamination

An independent academic study / journal

A scientific review of the EPA's standards

An EPA toxicity and risk report on Sodium Fluoride

An independant study done by the University of Japan

Interesting study regarding findings of public water consumption and body weight

Best Regards...




[edit on 17-6-2008 by Azurus]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SRTkid86
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


i dunno, but we aren't rats so... i fail to see how you making a connection there.



FYI rats are very similar to humans in the way they absorb and process chemicals... They are mammals.. Just like us(thats why they are used in labs)... But in smaller amounts.. If you swallow one crystal of sodium flouride.. you will die.. just like a rat.. I hope this clarifies.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


well yes, you are right. but rats are an entirely different animal when it comes to size. it is poisonous in large amounts, just like milk isn't necasarily good for you in large amounts.

you see, it would be like me giving a double shot of whickey to a rat and watching him stumble around in his little hamster wheel before he falls over dead from alcohol poisoning. then saying that if a human ingests a double shot of whiskey they are going to suffer the same affects.

im really just playing devil's advocate more than anything i guess.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 

Look, do you even understand the difference between the official position of an agency (meaning the opinion of a politically-appointed administrator) and it's employees who do the actual scientific research and analysis?

Another poster already pointed you to a link where 7000 EPA employees explain in detail why they're opposed to fluoride. You won't find this information on the official EPA website, because the EPA administrator has, for political reasons, chosen to ignore the scientific research and recommendations of his own employees:

www.nteu280.org...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join