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: 7
7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
If you swallow one crystal of sodium flouride.. you will die.. just like a rat..


NO KIDDING??????

Wanna' throw out a guess as to how many other chemicals one can overdose on? Heck, I damn near overdosed on ham and beans last night....




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


The lie that sodium flouride is natural when in fact is NOT.. calcium flouride is natural.. But sodium flouride is used for water flouridation.. Question why would you ignore what the EPA scientists are saying on the affects of water flouridation?



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Azurus
 


Thanks, I will read them all.


And I agree with you that 4mg/l is high and I would submit that 2mg/l is too much as well. Everything I've read so far has recommended no more than 1mg/l.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


Thats just the thing... water flouridation is not carefully being administered. So one could die of flouride poisoning drinking lots of water in an area where flouride is high.... This has happened in cases where the water utilities would accidently dump more then they should into the water supply and people who drink there full 8 glasses a day get poisoned... So yes you can overdose on anything.. But Ham and Beans are nowhere near as toxic as flouride..



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
7000 EPA employees explain in detail why they're opposed to fluoride.


That article doesn't say 7000 union members oppose the practice. It is a position paper published by the union. Specifically, one union representative has applied his name to the paper.

It does not indicate the full backing of 7000 union members.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
The difference is the naturally occuring fluoride is Calcium Fluoride and the Fluoride they use to treat water is Sodium Fluoride, which is created from the waste of fertilizers. That waste is hydrofluoric acid. Natural Spring Water has a very small percentage of Calcium Fluoride opposed to Treated Water (Sodium Fluoride). If you choose to defend Fluoridation of water that's your choice. Just don't force it on others



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   
To those of you who are wondering exactly how much Fluoride is put into your water, you can check here:

How much Fluoride is in my water?


It differs per even small areas of the city/county. Only 32 states report it, but it is also distributed on a "community" level as well and can differ.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Azurus]

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Azurus]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


Wow, this thread has been eye opening. It demonstrates that on ATS, people are not interested in finding out the truth, they are all about the need to perceive an enemy and something to fight with. Post after post shows fluoride isn't the problem its made out to be, and most responses amount to "WELL...ITS A LIE!"

Sad. It seems like many on ATS are more interested in simply blind faith on conspiracy theories rather than finding out the truth. Congrats to the OP for trying to bring out the truth, though.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightinDarkness
 


That statement really has no meaning whatsoever nor does it contribute to the discussion in any way. I'm not even sure where your opinion stands or do you even have one? Obviously the OP thought the topic was worthy of discussion or he wouldn't have posted it nor expected responses.




Post after post shows fluoride isn't the problem its made out to be


Not sure where you are getting this from. Maybe you should read all the posts. Many have links to researched facts and studies, some even done by our government.

I think the "point" of this post is to find out exactly whether Fluoride is a threat or whether it's not, and also to find out if the naturally occuring Fluoride is as significant as the intentially added Fluoride.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Azurus]

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Azurus]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azurus
reply to post by ALightinDarkness
 


That statement really has no meaning whatsoever nor does it contribute to the discussion in any way.


Oh, it has lots and lots of meaning. Its an observation at how the need to be engaged in conflict - to promulgate an "us versus them" - in this case "us versus the government" - is more important in the minds of some conspiracy theorists than the conspiracy theory itself.




Not sure where you are getting this from. Maybe you should read all the posts.


I did. I got that from reading the thread.

Theres no need to argue with me about it, I find the thread interesting and especially the glimpse into the mind of some more...zealous...conspiracy theorists that showed up.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   
One of Azurus links: (Again, thank you. Interesting reading. I suggest everyone read it.)

A study from 1991.
health.gov...

Some of the conclusions (I'll try to pick some relevant ones):


Optimal fluoridation of drinking water does not pose a detectable cancer risk to humans as evidenced by extensive human epidemiological data available to date, including the new studies prepared for this report. While the presence of fluoride in sources other than drinking water reduces the ability to discriminate between exposure in fluoridated as compared to non-fluoridated communizes, no trends in cancer risk, including the risk of osteosarcoma, were attributed to the introduction of fluoride into drinking water in these new studies. During two time periods, 1973-1980 and 1981-1987, there was an unexplained increase of osteosarcoma in males under age 20. The reason for this increase remains to be clarified, but an extensive analysis reveals that it is unrelated to the introduction and duration of fluoridation.

There are two methodologically acceptable studies of the carcinogenicity of fluoride in experimental animals. The Procter and Gamble study did not find any significant evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and mice of either sex. In the NTP study there was no evidence of carcinogenicity in mice and in female rats. Male rats showed "equivocal" evidence of carcinogenicity based on the finding of a small number of osteosarcomas. "Equivocal" evidence is defined by NTP as "...interpreted as showing a marginal increase in neoplasms that may be chemically related" (HHS, 1990). Taken together, the data available at this time from these two animal studies fail to establish an association between fluoride and cancer.

Chronic low level fluoride exposure is nor associated with birth defects. Studies also fail to establish an association between fluoride and Down Syndrome.

There is no indication that chronic low level fluoride exposure of normal individuals presents a problem in other organ systems, such as the gastrointestinal, the genitourinary, and the respiratory systems. The effects of fluoride on the reproductive system merit further investigation in animal and human studies.


Go read the study for major findings and more conclusions.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   


Some of the conclusions


You are very correct. They chose to only release studies on certain aspects of Fluoride.

Many are overlooked, especially the neurological effects. Why they are overlooked is unknown.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte

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.



It most certainly is a lie. As GoldenFleece pointed out, the vast majority of vaccine information found on .gov sites is bogus as well.

But then again, .gov sites are the be all end-all of non-manipulated information apparently.

In my opinion, the biggest lie told on the subject which allows defenders like the OP to spew .gov propaganda is the denial of fluoride's cumulative poison affect. Of course, adamantly denied by corporately funded institutions such as the American Dental Association, etc but never the less very true.

Unfortunately, 40 plus years of drinking fluorinated water means you're probably just about due for a ripe form of rare liver cancer or maybe one of the many other varieties of cancer that have inundated our society as of late. But don't worry, it's not your fault. It's designed that way.

Extremely expensive treatment anyone?



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azurus
You are very correct. They chose to only release studies on certain aspects of Fluoride.

Many are overlooked, especially the neurological effects. Why they are overlooked is unknown.


I can't say but you make a good point. Are you implying they did neurological studies and didn't release the findings, or they did not do the studies? Because the former could be considered sinister whereas the latter could be because no neurological effects were observed during the cancer studies.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by StrangeBrew
 


How do you know this? You wrote a big rant but there is no links. From whom did you first learn that it is all a lie?



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by StrangeBrew
 


While I agree with you to a certain extent (I am against Fluoridation), the body is an incredible machine. If your diet consists of the proper live foods, vitamins, and minerals it will naturally rid itself (and the liver, colon) of outside toxins, including accumilated fluoride. Chlorella, Spirullina, and other supplements are best at keeping the body clean.

I'm less worried about the "physical" health effects of Fluoride, than I am about the mental health effects.

I suggest you take a look at Sodium Nitrate and Aspartame. Those two chemicals are consumed on a much higher level and are much more dangerous than Fluoride when it comes to long term use.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


I'm unaware of any "official" published or unpublished studies done on the mental effects of Fluoride. Most are done independently and are un-credited or just plain not good enough.

The problem is that most people don't believe anything unless they hear it from the government or in the news media. So until either one acknowledges anything regarding it, everything else will be considered ridiculous conspiracy.

Here are some "un-official" studies:

www.fluoridealert.org...

www.fluoridation.com...

What should be apparent though, is that one set of people did seem to be aware of the mental effects of Fluoride intake, and that was their sole reason for using it (Nazi Germany).

That is the only thing that really concerns me.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Azurus]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   
lol this thread is funny... so something thats put in rat poisoning is good for us now? fluoride is natural in water? ok then... im pretty sure even if it is its not the medicated amount huh? so your saying your happy we have fluouride in our water and your happy to drink it... thats great i never seen someone fight for sucha stupid idea in my life. instead of fighting for vitamins and minerals you want all that lovely fluoride.. lmfao? you keep saying omg its only deadly in large amounts.. isnt that enough said? do you honestly want to drink it now? even after admiting that? wow i see that fluoride has hit you and hit you hard.

what i dont understand is people like you who see it right in your face but want to deny it.. as if its a patriot fight for your country and defending your holy land and god himself. laugh out loud? you know exactly what it is and what products its used in... also what it could do and possibly does... you also never mention the other 40-234234234089 chemicals we had in our water. if its not medication at its finest then please tell me what is it? we have tooth paste... everyone buys tooth paste. why do they leak this chemical in mass amounts into our water? if you say to make us healthy in anyway you should def just delete your account and leave.


vitamins and minerals or nice medication and chemicals. i would say you chose but we actually dont have a choice now do we?



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
One of Azurus links: (Again, thank you. Interesting reading. I suggest everyone read it.)

A study from 1991.
health.gov...

Some of the conclusions (I'll try to pick some relevant ones):


The Procter and Gamble study did not find any significant evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and mice of either sex.

OMG, now he's quoting Proctor and Gamble studies.

I give up. It's obvious he's already ingested a lot of fluoride.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reality..
lol this thread is funny... so something thats put in rat poisoning is good for us now? fluoride is natural in water? ok then... im pretty sure even if it is its not the medicated amount huh? so your saying your happy we have fluouride in our water and your happy to drink it... thats great i never seen someone fight for sucha stupid idea in my life. instead of fighting for vitamins and minerals you want all that lovely fluoride.. lmfao? you keep saying omg its only deadly in large amounts.. isnt that enough said? do you honestly want to drink it now? even after admiting that? wow i see that fluoride has hit you and hit you hard.

what i dont understand is people like you who see it right in your face but want to deny it.. as if its a patriot fight for your country and defending your holy land and god himself. laugh out loud? you know exactly what it is and what products its used in... also what it could do and possibly does... you also never mention the other 40-234234234089 chemicals we had in our water. if its not medication at its finest then please tell me what is it? we have tooth paste... everyone buys tooth paste. why do they leak this chemical in mass amounts into our water? if you say to make us healthy in anyway you should def just delete your account and leave.


vitamins and minerals or nice medication and chemicals. i would say you chose but we actually dont have a choice now do we?


Nice rant. Very long winded but unfortunately not much substance. You obviously haven't read anything of the thread. I mean, seriously, educate yourself.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join