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.

 

Hundreds of brave dentists speak out against water fluoridation

page: 4
43
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by HexagonSun
 



Whoa! Down boy!

Ingestion of fluoride is mostly only helpful to your teeth as an infant/child since while are forming. The effects on teeth during adulthood are neglible. If I had to take a guess, living in Europe, your water probably wasn't fluorinated when you much younger.




posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by dtrock78
reply to post by HexagonSun
 



Whoa! Down boy!

Ingestion of fluoride is mostly only helpful to your teeth as an infant/child since while are forming. The effects on teeth during adulthood are neglible. If I had to take a guess, living in Europe, your water probably wasn't fluorinated when you much younger.


So why is toothpaste for infants fluoride-free? That's a bit of a contradiction isn't it?

But yeah you're right about the water not being fluoridated when I was younger. I used to love it. Now it tastes like chemical waste.


Why do they put it in water? I don't have teeth in my stomach.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
It's because babies don't exactly grasp the concept of "Do not swallow" just yet.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by dtrock78
 



What's wrong with swallowing fluoridated toothpaste?

edit on 13/10/2011 by HexagonSun because: typo



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
The concentration is several orders of magnitude higher in toothpaste since it is not meant for ingestion.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by HexagonSun
 



I've just educated myself, and guess what, both my toothpastes contain sodium fluoride. As do other popular brand's ingredients that can be found on the internet. Colgate being one of them.


There is a considerable difference between -water- fluoridation and -toothpaste- fluoridation. Water is not regularly fluoridated with sodium fluoride. Toothpastes are a little more common that use it - but it is beginning to waiver as well.


And what special products or equipment might you be referring to? I'm confused.


If you live in an area with fluoridated water - you must purchase a filtering system to remove it, or to purchase water marketed as not having fluoride.

When you fan the hype - you fan the panic and fuel the market.


So why is toothpaste for infants fluoride-free? That's a bit of a contradiction isn't it?


Usually because it is easy to over-fluoridate a child's teeth, resulting in white-spots, yellowing of teeth, and a few other cosmetic effects considered unsightly.

Plus - a kid's teeth are going to fall out of their head in a decade or so, anyway - so it's not really worth messing with at that age.


Why do they put it in water? I don't have teeth in my stomach.


How does fluoridated water affect your bones... you don't pour that water over your bones, do you?

You have a lot of water in your body. The fluoride in water is eventually excreted in your saliva and serves as a very mild fluoride treatment. It distributes through your system via osmosis and is filtered out via the kidneys with a half-life of a few hours (so most of it is out of your system within 4-5 hours; with almost nothing left after 10+).


What's wrong with swallowing fluoridated toothpaste?


Nothing, really. It will make you mildly sick because of reactions with your gastric acids (if you start swallowing it by the mouthful straight out of the tube) - but to be of any real health concern, it requires an absolutely impractical amount of consumption.

The warning was added to toothpaste recently because the FDA decided to classify the use of Fluoride in Toothpaste as medical in nature and enforces a policy where any incident of overdose involving medicine is best addressed by medical professionals.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 12:32 AM
link   
I found an Australian Political Party that want ban Fluoride australianpatriotsassociation.com...
Its written into their water policy -

APA will also ban Fluoridation of the water supply because we believe and know it is a poison used to dumb down our population, it does nothing for your teeth and causes cancer and other sicknesses, we have documentation to back this up in a court of Law


australianpatriotsassociation.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Can anyone produce a link that documents one person who has actually been harmed by flouride? My mind is open on the matter at the moment so I'm still fact finding but I can't find anything that shows damage to someone from the water supply. I'm not going to take the word of some conspiracy theorist just the same as I won't just take the word of the official dental association. I want to see independant studies and documented evidence of individual cases ( people who have been directy affected) before I decide. It's nice to see dentists speaking up but I want to see some medical documents specifically stating a person has suffered due these flouride side affects in the amounts put in the public water supply.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hawkwind.
Can anyone produce a link that documents one person who has actually been harmed by flouride?... I can't find anything that shows damage to someone from the water supply.



What your asking is a little ridiculous, and a no-win proposition (which is probably why you presented it, that way - shrewd
)

You will not find a case where "cause of death was flouride". That's preposterous, only if someone were to ingest it in it's pure commonly use state(s) - it is, after all, a health hazard, right?(!)

But, flouride slowly degrades and deteriorates other vital organs over time, and other (more common) illnesses are ultimately to blame in the end for C.O.D. You see?

Fluoridation of water is normally accomplished by adding one of three compounds to the water: sodium fluoride, fluorosilicic acid, or sodium fluorosilicate.

Sodium fluoride (NaF) - MSDS - "Health Rating: 3 - Severe (Poison)
DANGER! MAY BE FATAL IF SWALLOWED OR INHALED. AFFECTS RESPIRATORY SYSTEM, HEART, SKELETON, CIRCULATORY SYSTEM, CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM AND KIDNEYS. CAUSES IRRITATION TO SKIN, EYES AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. IRRITATION EFFECTS MAY BE DELAYED."


Fluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) - MSDS - "Toxicology - Corrosive - causes burns. Harmful by ingestion, inhalation and through skin contact. May be fatal if swallowed. May cause serious eye damage."

[obviously, diluted, but why add anything so dangerous when no proven benefit, afterall?! - note those studies are included below, as well]


I want to see independant studies and documented evidence of individual cases ( people who have been directy affected) before I decide. It's nice to see dentists speaking up but I want to see some medical documents specifically stating a person has suffered due these flouride side affects in the amounts put in the public water supply.



I've compiled a list to start everyone off with from some links (and secondary links) from posts spread out on the first page here and elsewhere - enjoy:


I was unable to find any recent news (per my buddy (last page)) that the fluoridation of water was praised as one of the greatest inventions of the last 50 years, but I was able to find a few others:

It's made it to the White House - info (details of complaint) within: Petition to President Obama to end all federal involvement in the promotion, endorsement, and funding for fluoridation of the public's drinking water.
[Deadline: October 26, 2011]


[Ongoing] - Flouride Action Network - Over 3,000 Professionals Call for an End to Water Fluoridation: Top Ten Arguments Against Water Fluoridation


[last update: July 2011] THE DAMAGING EFFECTS OF FLUORIDE FOR TEETH ON THYROID AND BRAIN, AND A CURE - By Charles Weber, MS in soil science - this appears, at first, to be a commentary by a single individual, but is actually probably the best sourced, linked, and referenced document I could find. [I would start with this one]: "Fluoride has been added to water in the form of hexafluorosilicic acid (an industrial waste product) in the hope that it would reduce tooth decay. However it is a poison that has some serious side effects, badly affecting almost every organ in the body and does not reduce tooth decay in permanent teeth (has graphs) nor even in first teeth and The decline in tooth cavities has been the same in fluoridated and non fluoridated countries. Europe is only 2% fluoridated but has tooth decay similar to or less than the USA, which is 64% fluoridated. A study showed higher number of cavities in a fluoridated village than in nearby non fluoridated villages in South Africa. [Grobler] Fluoride is more poisonous than lead and only marginally less so than arsenic."


This is a fantastic study [CLICK THIS LINK, BELOW] - all the chart & graphs, cause & effects you've been looking for:

Water Fluoridation: A Review of Recent Research and Actions - by Joel M. Kauffman, Ph.D. Joel is Professor of Chemistry Emeritus at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, 600 S. 43rd St., Philadelphia, PA, 19104-4495. E-mail: kauffman@hslc.org. His conclusion: "probably does not reduce tooth decay - [there is] no significant benefit. [And] Proponents of fluoridation have censored most media, ignored intelligent discussion of fluoridation, slandered most opponents of fluoridation, and overturned legal judgments against fluoridation ina manner that demonstrates their political power. Many published studies that had conclusions favoring fluoridation were later found unsupported by their raw data. There is evidence that fluoridation increases the incidence of cancer, hip fractures, joint problems, and that by causing fluorosis it damages both teeth and bones. Other medical problems may also occur, including neurologic damage. Fluoridation of municipal water should cease. Defluoridation of naturally fluoridated water down to 0.4 ppm of fluoride should be mandated. Individuals should remove fluoride from their tap water if fluoridation cannot be stopped."

edit on 10/14/2011 by SquirrelNutz because: added linked content



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by SquirrelNutz
 



But, flouride slowly degrades and deteriorates other vital organs over time, and other (more common) illnesses are ultimately to blame in the end for C.O.D. You see?


Care to link to any studies that show a correlation between fluoridated water consumption and ... .... since you gave such a broad range of things, we'll just say: "lack of life span?"


You will not find a case where "cause of death was flouride". That's preposterous, only if someone were to ingest it in it's pure state - it is, after all, a lvl 4 health hazard, right?(!)


Again... what is Fluoride?

The Fluoride in water is considerably different from the Fluoride used in toothpaste or used in pills to treat osteoporosis.

The answer is going to vary widely depending upon what compound you are specifying.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

What your asking is a little ridiculous, and a no-win proposition (which is probably why you presented it, that way - shrewd
)

You will not find a case where "cause of death was flouride". That's preposterous, only if someone were to ingest it in it's pure commonly use state(s) - it is, after all, a health hazard, right?(!)





I never said anything about anyone losing their life to flouride poisoning, I've never read anywhere people die from it so I don't know where you got that from. If, as it's claimed, it's damaging to the human body I want to see an example of the damage in a person, a documented example. That would prove to me the levels in water is dangerous. I hear all these claims about how bad it is for you yet I don't know a single case of someone actually suffering from the affects of flouride in the doses that are in our water. Now, how is it ridiculous to question such a hole in this claim?



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Hawkwind.
 


Okay - how about reading the rest of the post there, Bucko.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by Hawkwind.
 


Okay - how about reading the rest of the post there, Bucko.




I did. Do I have to spell it out slowly for you? If the levels of flouride on our water was as damaging as these articles suggest then why isn't flouride damage rife? Where are all the sufferers? Do you know any? Did you read my post before you made your smug comment? All the article is saying is that there seems to be, due to new studies, not much benefit at all to flouridisation. I'd rather not have it in the supply anyway but I'm not falling victim to alarmist claims without proper facts. The facts seem to be that the level of flouridisation in our water is not harmful. Prove me wrong or stop being a conspiracy sheep.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hawkwind.

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by Hawkwind.
 


Okay - how about reading the rest of the post there, Bucko.


I did.


No, you didn't. If you had, then you wouldn't still be asking the same questions, over and over. And, I'm not going to 'spell it out slowly' for you!



If the levels of flouride on our water was as damaging as these articles suggest then why isn't flouride damage rife? Where are all the sufferers? Do you know any?


It is. All around you - anyone who consumes it. Yes, me and you - all of us. [respectively]



All the article is saying is...


"The article"?! I linked about 7(!) - which single one are you referring to? (they ALL say "not much benefit at all to fluoridation.") - but, since you are so lazy, here is ONE exerpt..

"In a report authored by Perry D. Cohn, Ph.D., M.P.H., for the
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the New
Jersey Department of Health, the rates of bone cancer in fluoridated
and nonfluoridated areas were compared. Both by counties or by
municipalities, males under the age of 50 had 3 to 7 times as many
bone cancers in the fluoridated areas. Males 10-19 years old fared
the worst. An external review panel found no serious flaws with the study."


[That's just one! Do some damn research - and, quit saying you've read anything, when you clearly haven't]



I'd rather not have it in the supply anyway but I'm not falling victim to alarmist claims without proper facts. The facts seem to be that the level of flouridisation in our water is not harmful. Prove me wrong or stop being a conspiracy sheep.


What are you not getting?!

A couple of 'debunkers' jump on here with no supporting data and say 'oh, this is all conspiracy mumbo jumbo' and that's good enough for you?! Yet, I've (and others) linked a whole library of data created by dentists, doctors, chemists, and other scientists & professionals, all saying 1) not only is it not helpful, but also 2) there is mounting supporting evidence that it is actually pretty harmful, and you're 'not buying it'.

This whole exchange is laughable.

Take some time and do the research (that has already been spoon-fed to you), or move on.
(I know I am)

Good day.

edit on 10/15/2011 by SquirrelNutz because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Lol, I read right through your little rant and yet again there isn't a single individual case that is documented proving a relationship between flouride levels in water and bad health. Those areas where cancer was higher, how do you know that there aren't other factors affecting them like pollution? You don't. You just carry on believing your 'spoon fed' conspiracy theories.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join