It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I now believe in the fluoride conspiracy.

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:38 PM
so maybe thats why the media insist so much on drinking water? and how "healthy" it is

idk im new to this whole fluoride thing

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:41 PM
reply to post by Misterlondon

check this out!

sources of flouride...

SOURCE: 'Potentially harmful fluoride levels found in some instant tea'', Washington University School of Medicine, January 25, 2005.

Table 2. Fluoride Concentrations of Foods & Beverages

Product # of samples Mean Concentration
Range of Concentrations Reference
Artificially Fluoridated Water -- 1.0 ppm 0.6-1.2 ppm
Juice 43 1.03 ppm 0.15-6.8 ppm Stannard 1991
Grape juice 9 2.4 ppm 1.16-6.8 ppm Stannard 1991
Juice 532 0.56 ppm 0.02-2.80 ppm Kiritsy 1996
White grape juice
10 1.45 ppm 0.15-2.80 ppm Kiritsy 1996
Juice 24 0.69 ppm 0.16-1.08 Turner 1998
Soda 12 0.78 ppm 0.68 - 0.91 ppm Turner 1998
Soda 105 0.74 ppm 0.07-1.37 ppm Pang 1992
Soda 332 0.72 ppm 0.02-1.28 ppm Heilman 1999
79 0.70 ppm 0.02-1.10 ppm Heilman 1999
Dr. Pepper
47 1.02 ppm 0.70-1.28 ppm Heilman 1999
Pepsi Cola
104 0.60 ppm 0.02-1.22 ppm Heilman 1999
Gatorade 13 0.85 ppm 0.02-1.04 ppm Pang 1992
Gatorade 1 1.08 ppm -- Turner 1998
Wine 19 1.02 ppm 0.23-2.8 ppm Burgstahler 1997
Wine -- -- 0.1 - >12 ppm California State University, 1990-1994
Tea (brewed w/ NF water) 26 2.56 ppm 0.61-6.68 ppm Pang 1992
Tea (brewed w/ NF water) -- 3 ppm 0.1-4.2 ppm Levy 1999
Fluoridated Salt* 200-250 ppm -- Marthaler 2000
Cereals (processed w/fluoridated water) -- -- 3.8 - 6.3 ppm Warren 2003
Fish -- 2.1 ppm -- Dabeka 1995 (cited in ATSDR 2001)
Canned Fish -- 4.57 ppm -- Dabeka 1995 (cited in ATSDR 2001)
Chicken infant foods 6 4.4 ppm 1.05-8.38 ppm Heilman 1997
Pureed Chicken baby food (w/ mechancially deboned chicken) -- 4.2 ppm 1.89-8.63 ppm Fein 2001
Chicken sticks (w/ mechancially deboned chicken) -- 3.61 ppm 1.61-6.0 ppm Fein 2001
Luncheon meat (w/ mechancially deboned chicken) -- 1.98 ppm 1.01-3.65 ppm Fein 2001
Dry cereals produced w/ fluoridated water -- -- 4-6 ppm Fomon 2000
Powdered Infant Formula (made w/ fluoridated water) -- 0.97 ppm -- Fomon 2000
Breast milk -- 0.005-0.01 ppm Fomon 2000

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:00 PM
Notice the Mother's milk levels of fluoride-----extremely low.

Mother Nature tells us that Fluoride wasn't designed into the equation for human life.

Kids raised in low fluoride areas grow up very healthy, don't have cavity problems, and have high IQ.

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:56 PM
And if I had wheels, I'd be a wagon. Correlation does not equal cause. I bet those kids in unflouridated areas have some nasty teeth, or are using... *GASP* flouridated tooth paste! The Government has done some pretty screwed up things, but politicians don't have a separate system of tap water that they use. They'd have no reason to do such a thing unless they also wanted to be subjected to flouride mind control, if such a lunatic notion were true.
The Government certainly has skeletons in it's closet. It's tacit cooperation with ex-Nazis in Operation Paperclip. The JFK assassination. The Military-Industrial complex. The Business Plot of 1933. Various coup de tats of democratically elected leaders who were too friendly to the concept of socialism. These are the things we should be concentrating on and exposing the public to. Not the stereotypical tin-foil hattery that gets all of us labeled as the lunatic fringe!

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:01 PM
reply to post by NeoVain

as in the supposed pineal gland?

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:17 PM
reply to post by Grifter42

The rabbit hole goes way, way deeper.. and the nature of some of it is quite fantastic, even if you doubt it.

The only problem is getting caught in illusions, there's so much information and disinformation there's literally no way to vet the information, there's a lot of people with personal experiences for whatever it's worth though.

Everybody knows about the things you're talking about, it's common knowledge, most people don't care so let us talk about fluoride if we want to..

Besides, what conspiracy movement are you referring to when talking about mocking the movement?
Fluoridated water is pretty much conspiracy theory 101 along with Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg meetings and global leaders talking about world government.

Stick to Assange and his "revealing" videos of soldiers killing people if you can't swallow anything a little bit harder to digest.
Fact is we're being poisoned in so many ways it's starting to get ridiculous..

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:59 PM
Fluoride isn't a healthy choice:

Tons of reading material against fluoridation

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:11 PM
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

Well i know this because i actually did speak to some of the people (online) who do suffer from fluoride related side-effects... not everyone has this, about 35% of the population reports strange defects in their memory or weight problem or skeletal problems.

Why give it to babies if it causes dental fluorisis?

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:14 PM
reply to post by minor007

I used to think like you... but after doctors and dentists and the medical reports i am convinced that SODIUM Fluoride is bad for the human body.
Plants absorb many chemicals very well that is why you don't see them die off when you pour bleach with water on plants...

This hoax started in 1945 (about sodium fluoride being good)
edit on 10-1-2012 by CrazyRaccoon because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:19 PM
I'd be more worried about heavy metals in your water from industrial run-off than from flouride to prevent tooth decay. But oh no, it's a plot by that most dastardly of organizations, the American Dental Association, the ever so sinister ADA (Oh no, 3 letter acronym, just like the CIA!). It's so your teeth don't fall out cause, like, that's where the transmitters are man.

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 04:50 AM
I always find it rather amazing that those with the least experence think they know the issue. Those that do read all the peer reviewed research find serious problems.

Most people that really have studied the fluoride topic and look at the bone and other organ retention and build up of fluoride concentrations with age find something rather logical, you don't live beyond a certain limit of fluoride concentration in the bone.


Fluoride reportedly does the following:

inactivates 62 enzymes (Judd)

increases the aging process (Yiamouyiannis)

increases the incidence of cancer and tumor growth (Waldbott/Yiamouyiannis)

disrupts the immune system (Waldbott)

causes genetic damage (Tsutsui, et al)

interrupts DNA repair-enzyme activity (Waldbott)


Fluoride is a very controversial topic because fluoride is a known toxin. In the National Medical Library, over 40 articles can be found on the toxicity of fluoride. Half of the articles said fluoride promotes cancer (mutagenic). It should be noted that Proctor and Gamble paid for some of the "negative-concluding" research. The toxicity of fluoride has caused many countries to rethink allowing fluoride to be added to water. Those banning fluoride are Sweden, Norway, Denmark, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Austria, France, and The Netherlands. Despite these retractions of fluoride, the US still presses on with the goal to fluoridate (poison) every community water supply in the United States. However, many cities in the United States (including Santa Barbara, Escondido, Santa Cruz) have stopped adding fluoride to the water supplies based on the concern about fluoride's toxicity.

All dentists are very familiar with the American Dental Association (ADA) and other "authoritative" positions on fluoride. These groups rarely mention its toxic potential or the few studies revealing increased tooth decay after fluoride use. You may wonder why the ADA and other public "health" agencies continue to recommend fluoride. This is the biggest error found in studies using large populations of people. What happens is that the study shows a benefit compared to plain water. What does that mean? It simply means that some people had fewer cavities than those who did not have fluoride. Did every person benefit? No. Will you benefit? Maybe. But is having 1 cavity less than you might have had worth the risk? This is the dilemma.

The research of Burk and Yiamouyiannis revealed that every major city with fluoride had increased rates of cancer. If you don't want to look at this data, that is your decision.


Fluoride impairs the production of free radical scavengers such as glutathione. Fluoride impairs the function of enzymes that prevent lipid peroxidation. These enzymes include glutathione peroxidase, superoxide dismutase and catalase.


Those who know a little about the workings of the enzyme systems recognize glutathione, GSH, as the principle mechanism for removing toxic metal build up from the body via the liver pathway. Fluoridation harms the ability of the body to clear out toxic metals like mercury. The rise of mercury retention causes rates of oxidative stress to rise.

It doesn't stop there as it also impairs the production of the enzyme super oxided dismutase, SOD, which is the prime oxidation stress repair mechanism in the cells.

Fluoride intake in the body does what is called potentiation of toxic metal problems in the human body, making them worse due to the enzyme damage factors from fluoride intake into the body.

So, what one notices is that the Dentists love to use mercury fillings that leach mercury into the body, and they also tell you that internalization of fluoride is good for the teeth without ever mentioning to anyone that fluoride builds up in the human body over time, causaing all manner of problems, and along with that comes impairment of the body to remove toxic metals like mercury used in dentistry. Studies that only study teeth, don't report the full spectrum issues.

Such things are nothing new, as the tobacco companies lied for decades on the dangers of smoking and the addictions of nicotine. Tobacco Companies like Reynolds had a number of persons acting to hide and downplay the dangers. For tobacco look up Gerhart Cohen, Fluoride has the some type of organizations as the tobacco companies to cover up the dangers for the profit margine of industry.

edit on 11-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: added content

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 07:01 AM
reply to post by MagnumOpus

Thanks for adding additional information, people who are informed make wise decision... I how ever believed the mainstream media, i think differently now.

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 07:17 AM
What do medical professionals say? Are they just as convinced as you? Do they filter the flouride out of their drinking water?

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 07:56 AM
reply to post by MagnumOpus

I always find it rather amazing that those with the least experence think they know the issue. Those that do read all the peer reviewed research find serious problems.

Most people that really have studied the fluoride topic and look at the bone and other organ retention and build up of fluoride concentrations with age find something rather logical, you don't live beyond a certain limit of fluoride concentration in the bone.

Practise what you preach. there are a lot of trace minerals/elements the body needs that can be toxic to the body when given in large amounts.

Oh and i love saying this, according to these anti fluoride crowd saying fluoride is bad for you and If you live by the sea or work on the seas/oceans you are breathing in hydrogen fluoride all the time.....
So much for fluoride being bad for you.....

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:07 AM
reply to post by Cassius666

I don't know what your point is...but yeah i assume so, Dr. Connet 15 years of fluoride research (top respected doctor)

Are you going to contradict his scientific and medical findings? he is way more educated than i am about this and if you ever seen his interviews you will just say "WOW i can't believe it"
edit on 11-1-2012 by CrazyRaccoon because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:12 AM
reply to post by minor007

Hydrogen fluoride is different from sodium fluoride.

Did you not understand that?

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:10 AM

Originally posted by CrazyRaccoon
reply to post by minor007

Hydrogen fluoride is different from sodium fluoride.

Did you not understand that?

Yes i understand it but as i understand it you are talking about fluoride not sodium fluoride. Sodium fluoride is not added to the water hexafluorosilliac acid is and when that is mixed with water makes the fluoride break up to form hydrogen ions and fluorine ions in the water pipes. So when you turn on the tap you get hydrogen fluoride gas evaporating from the water and if you leave it long enough the fluorine in the water will evaporate away.
same with sodium fluoride , when mixed with water it breaks down to form sodium and fluorine ions

Btw if you are considering sodium fluoride as a link to the nazis .FORGET IT. IT never happened. Find some historical evidence before the onset on the internet and i might believe you but since sodium fluoride wasnt used by the nazis...
edit on 11-1-2012 by minor007 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-1-2012 by minor007 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:42 AM
One of the things one must note on fluoride exposures is that, if it were all good and safe, they would not need the Kettering Group to massage the Fluoride documentation to make it look better. Kettering is the tobacco cover up version for fluoride's toxic effects. They leave out the damaging information in reporting. Industry has huge liabilty for making many sick from their releases of fluoride into the air and water of areas.

Fluoride in water also makes lead poisoning worse, as it pulls the lead out of the old lead-tin solders and causes another toxic metal problem. The problems with that was so bad they had to make these new lead-free solders for copper water pipes. So, it is very well known that fluoride makes many problems of toxic metals worse.

Speaking of lead in the old days, real students of history can look up the Frankenstein story in Europe and find it was spun out of a person who was looking or studiing the visible lead build up on the bones of dead persons. Once one connects that fluoride released from things like coal burning in homes seeks the bone and that the use of lead pots was popular in Europe for meat keeping, then one may find this lead build up on person's bones as an issue. The funny story on Frankenstein only serves to cover up what was really happening was linked to lead study and its visible evidence on bones.

Coal smoke in China causes huge fluoride problems.

Then there is the industrial releases issues and their liabilties---big ones---these similar to the problems in the Meuse Valley in Germany:


Sadtler blamed fluoride for the Donora disaster in an account published in the December 13, 1948 issue of Chemical and Engineering News. He reported fluorine blood levels of dead and hospitalized citizens to be 12 to 25 times above normal, with "primary symptoms of acute fluorine poisoning, dyspnea (distressed breathing similar to asthma) ... found in hundreds of cases." He recommended that, "Changes should be made in suspect processes to prevent emission of fluorine-containing fumes."

Industry moved quickly to silence Sadtler, who had been a contributor to Chemical and Engineering News for many years. (C&EN is published by the American Chemical Society.) "I had a call from the editor that I was not to send them any more [articles]," Sadtler said. The editor told Sadtler that the head of the Alcoa and the US Steel-funded Mellon Institute, Dr. [first name] Weidline (who also had served as a director of the American Chemical Society) "went to Washington and told [the magazine's editors] that they were not to publish any more of what I wrote," Sadtler said.


There is also this interesting story on fluoride and boron. Fluoride enters the environment and human's bodies in various fashions and sometimes this effect builds up to problems. Fluoride is a huge problem around volcanos and rift zones, like the East African Rift Zone. Here the fluoride and toxic metals in the environment are so bad that Europe bans in the import of these areas foods.

The East African Rift zone extends to the Dead Sea area of the Holy Lands and one of the most interesting stories is on how the Jordan River is loaded with Boron and John the Baptist liked this area and not the Dead Sea for Baptismals. One of the other things one notes is that low level chronic fluoride exposures are associated with problems like arthritis. The other interesting thing is that areas with high Boron content have nearly zero problems with arthritic diagnosis. In the areas where Mother Nature saw fit to make the trace minerals higher with Boron the effects of fluorine build up in the body are highly corrected---naturally. Even Mother Nature recognized the problems of fluoride in humans.

So, Mother Nature even shows us how fluoride is bad for the body chronically, and she shows us how to correct the problems using Boron in the diet.

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:45 AM
reply to post by minor007

I don't fully understand how it works...but i assume they add another chemical in to keep the fluoride ion in tact
but Sodium fluoride is a bio-accumulative chemical and it gets absorbed by your gums when you brush your teeth with fluoride toothpaste

And i've seen the pumping machine have the label "Sodium fluoride"... you can't hoax an entire treatment facility

And actually sodium fluoride is the by product of the aluminium and phosphate industries...IF fluoride is so good and actually breaks apart in the water...why is the FDA trying to raise the amount? and why is it forceably given to every single individual?
edit on 11-1-2012 by CrazyRaccoon because: (no reason given)

produced in 1919... it killed off most of the animal life in the farms near by so they had to contain it
edit on 11-1-2012 by CrazyRaccoon because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:50 AM
reply to post by CrazyRaccoon

as i said sodium fluoride breaks down to form sodium (an element needed by the body) and fluorine (another element) and unless you plan not to spit out the toothpaste and walk around with it all day in your mouth and do the same for everyday for the next several years then yes i suppose it would build up toxicity.

lol havent laughed so much for ages about that line regarding the aluminium industry. With that one line shows your true ignorance. Aluminium industry is the largest user of fluorides IT dosent have any flouride waste whatsoever as they use flouride in the smelting process.
Apertite is made from calcium fluoride and phosphates. Teh phosphate industry buys its phosphates from industry that seperates the apertite into 2 useable forms hydrogen fluoride and phosphates. You really need to do your homework
edit on 11-1-2012 by minor007 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-1-2012 by minor007 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in