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.

 

How to prove to anyone that Water Fluoridation is Bad for us

page: 3
96
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Sulfur Hexaflouride

Molecular formula F6S

< br />

Someone warn these people about the dangerous gas they are about to inhale!









-not everything with fluorine in it is toxic....




posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Version100

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by grizzle2

Originally posted by adeclerkNaF (sodium fluoride) is not the same as F- (fluoride).


Right, but the fluoride in the water is toxic waste from the nuclear, phosphate and aluminum industries. It is not a pure chemical.

Do you have a source that shows where the nuclear, phosphate and aluminum industries are supplying the water distribution system with it's fluoride?

Most fluoride additives used in the United States are produced from phosphorite rock. Phosphorite is used primarily in the manufacture of phosphate fertilizer. Phosphorite contains calcium phosphate mixed with limestone (calcium carbonates) minerals and apatite—a mineral with high phosphate and fluoride content. It is refluxed (heated) with sulfuric acid to produce a phosphoric acid-gypsum (calcium sulfate-CaSO4) slurry.

The heating process releases hydrogen fluoride (HF) and silicon tetrafluoride (SiF4) gases which are captured by vacuum evaporators. These gases are then condensed to a water-based solution of 23% FSA with the remainder as water.

Approximately 95% of FSA used for water fluoridation comes from this process. The remaining 5% of FSA is generated during the manufacture of hydrogen fluoride or from the use of hydrogen fluoride in the manufacturing of solar panels and electronics.


You've been shot down three times now.

Care to try again ?


Why claim the nuclear industry is at fault then if its from the phosphate industry? Sounds like you know your stuff but a source would be great, otherwise it's just another unsubstantiated claim.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Here you go:

www.fluoridation.com...

Refs in the lower part of the page.

This is not some subtle point. Fluoride in excess is commonly known to be extremely toxic.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


LOL.

I think this crackpot idea about "fluoridation" goes back well into the 1960s era, and the insane paranoia of the "Cold War".

Stanley Kubrick lampooned it brilliantly, among other things, in the form of the character "Gen. Jack Ripper", from his classic (dark comedy) film;

"Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"

Pertinent clip, with scene ( "...precious bodily fluids..." LOL!):



"I do not avoid women, Mandrake....but I do deny them my essence."




edit on Sun 22 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by Version100

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by grizzle2

Originally posted by adeclerkNaF (sodium fluoride) is not the same as F- (fluoride).


Right, but the fluoride in the water is toxic waste from the nuclear, phosphate and aluminum industries. It is not a pure chemical.

Do you have a source that shows where the nuclear, phosphate and aluminum industries are supplying the water distribution system with it's fluoride?

Most fluoride additives used in the United States are produced from phosphorite rock. Phosphorite is used primarily in the manufacture of phosphate fertilizer. Phosphorite contains calcium phosphate mixed with limestone (calcium carbonates) minerals and apatite—a mineral with high phosphate and fluoride content. It is refluxed (heated) with sulfuric acid to produce a phosphoric acid-gypsum (calcium sulfate-CaSO4) slurry.

The heating process releases hydrogen fluoride (HF) and silicon tetrafluoride (SiF4) gases which are captured by vacuum evaporators. These gases are then condensed to a water-based solution of 23% FSA with the remainder as water.

Approximately 95% of FSA used for water fluoridation comes from this process. The remaining 5% of FSA is generated during the manufacture of hydrogen fluoride or from the use of hydrogen fluoride in the manufacturing of solar panels and electronics.


You've been shot down three times now.

Care to try again ?


Why claim the nuclear industry is at fault then if its from the phosphate industry? Sounds like you know your stuff but a source would be great, otherwise it's just another unsubstantiated claim.



Source:

Center for Disease Control Fluoride fact sheet.

CDC on Fluoride



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by grizzle2
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Here you go:

www.fluoridation.com...

Refs in the lower part of the page.

This is not some subtle point. Fluoride in excess is commonly known to be extremely toxic.

Interesting, the amount of fluoride that is optimal for humans is harmful for rats and their much smaller kidney/organs. Notice anything that might be wrong with that study?



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Sulfur hexafluoride is inert. Not everything containing fluoride is toxic, but sulfur hexafluoride can not give up free fluorine in the body. Teflon, and the fluoride in water, and a blood substitute called Fluosol DA can and do. Learn something about chemistry before trying to lead people astray by writing about things you know nothing about.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Version100
 


Thank you for the source. You sure make the water based FSA sound scary by throwing around chemical names and industrial processes.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
Interesting, the amount of fluoride that is optimal for humans is harmful for rats and their much smaller kidney/organs. Notice anything that might be wrong with that study?


Small animals are not humans. We learn things like this when, for instance, Thalidomide was put on the market after being tested on guinea pigs. It was safe for them. Humans and rats actually have a number of differences. For one thing, rats can't talk or write, which makes any IQ testing a problem unless it makes them grossly mentally retarded. Rats have superior abilities of regeneration, so if you sever a rat's intestine and sew the abdominal incision back up, the ends of the intestine will "find" each other and spontaneously anastomose (grow back together). Not so with humans. Some parallels can be drawn, but only some.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Stanley Kubrick lampooned it brilliantly, among other things, in the form of the character "Gen. Jack Ripper", from his classic (dark comedy) film;


Styanley Kubrick learned of the facts of fluoride after the film was made. He was horrified.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by grizzle2

Originally posted by adeclerk
Interesting, the amount of fluoride that is optimal for humans is harmful for rats and their much smaller kidney/organs. Notice anything that might be wrong with that study?


Small animals are not humans. We learn things like this when, for instance, Thalidomide was put on the market after being tested on guinea pigs. It was safe for them. Humans and rats actually have a number of differences. For one thing, rats can't talk or write, which makes any IQ testing a problem unless it makes them grossly mentally retarded. Rats have superior abilities of regeneration, so if you sever a rat's intestine and sew the abdominal incision back up, the ends of the intestine will "find" each other and spontaneously anastomose (grow back together). Not so with humans. Some parallels can be drawn, but only some.


Holy sh! Rats can do that? For one time, and one time only, I'm jealous of a rat.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Fluoride & the nuclear industry. An article commissioned by, but never published by the Christian Science Monitor.

www.fluoridealert.org...



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seiko
reply to post by boncho
 





The disclaimer must also state that the dietary supplement product is not intended to "diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease," because only a drug can legally make such a claim.


www.fda.gov...

Sorry the fda disagrees.


Where does that disclaimer say that vitamins are bad?



Why would they tell you that vitamins are bad, and only a chemical can help your body?


You quoted something that says: legally, only drugs can be claimed as a cure. But it did not say that vitamins are bad or not used for treating conditions....



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by adeclerk
 


How about ALL of the FACTS I posted in my original post. Debunk them ALL if you're right and we're just crazies

Using about.com as a source, I can easily make as many daft claims as you have in the OP.

Here's a link from about.com showing that Aliens are visiting earth, using an obvious appeal to authority.


That's a sweet link ty

My about.com has has a book or two listed as an outside source
edit on 22-5-2011 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Yes, they can. They also can't vomit, so they're pretty careful about what they eat.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Can anyone give us a verified death of a human being from consuming fluoridated water?



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by grizzle2
reply to post by boncho
 


Sulfur hexafluoride is inert. Not everything containing fluoride is toxic, but sulfur hexafluoride can not give up free fluorine in the body. Teflon, and the fluoride in water, and a blood substitute called Fluosol DA can and do. Learn something about chemistry before trying to lead people astray by writing about things you know nothing about.


The OP of the thread is equating toothpaste to rat poison.

Read a thread before you post in it.




posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Flouride is an iodine antagonist...
...iodine must bind with flouride to remove it from the body...
...low iodine intake affects glandular tissue...
...because glands require highly levels to function correctly (especially thyroid, pineal).

Low iodine levels may be the reason for the increase in breast and testicular cancer...
...and flourides increase the deficiency.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerkan obvious appeal to authority.


You're playing both sides of that issue. You dismiss Dr. Russell Blaylock, because Alex Jones decided to use his material (the implication is that because Jones is not an authority, the info is unreliable). make up your mind.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


You defend the fluoride agents like you're being paid.

Why would anyone trust in fluoridation when $h!t like this goes down every day.

Harvard Professor investigated after trying to hide a link between Fluoride and Cancer


edit on 22-5-2011 by Mactire because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
96
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join