Fluoride Linked to #1 Cause of Death in New Research

Interested to know heart disease rates before flouridation in the USA, prob much lower

I honestly do not understand why people do not understand this. It doesn't matter if it causes disease or is "good for your teeth". No one should have the right to mass medicate us. No one should have the right to dispose of their waste in our drinking water. To those of you defending the subtle, mass poisoning GO DRINK YOUR BRAWNDO TO MUTILATE YOUR THIRST AND WHAT'S LEFT OF YOUR IQ. I'm filtering mine the best I can. Ahhhh (that's me after I drink get it?)

Scientists just now starting to understand all this? I swear they lost their common sense. Water is a life giving necessity so why on earth would you want to put a chemical in it and poison yourself? This is probably another form of population control and making sure everyone has a timely death.

Originally posted by TheComte

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
Well I can contest to the ill affects of fluoride as I have given up all fluoride for the last year
that is not naturally occurring,.
Since I have done so,.
I have more energy
I sleep better
I havnt been sick in a year, used to get colds often
sore throats dont happen anylonger.
My memory is better
My thinking is more precise
and my latest dental check up had my dentist asking me why my gums look
much healthier since the last visit, and my teeth are still hard.

Flouride IS useless unnecessary and a poision.

Care to explain how exactly you measured your thinking so as to determine it's more precise now, and what did you use as a baseline for comparison? For that matter how did you determine any of that is related to fluoridated water in any way?

Oh, nevermind. This proves everything. I've never seen such compelling evidence. Close thread.

Ya i figured i get a response like this
but thats fine,.
I cannot offer anything but personal accounts and the info that is on the web
and frankly,, my personal experience is good enough for me..
and
fire is hot.. dont touch it
electricity hurts to.. dont touch that either
It doesnt require a vast amount of data to know truth

Some background info on why flouride was put in the water supply.

Historically, this substance was quite expensive for the worlds’ premier chemical companies to dispose of - but in the 50’s and 60’s - Alcoa and the entire aluminum industry - with a vast overabundance of the toxic waste - SOMEHOW sold the FDA and our government on the insane (but highly profitable) idea of buying this poison at a 20,000% markup and then injecting it into our water supply as well as into the nation’s toothpastes and dental rinse. Yes that’s right folks, a 20,000% markup. Consider also that when sodium Fluoride is injected into our drinking water, its level is approximately 1 part-per-million (ppm), but since we only drink ½ of one percent of the total water supply, the hazardous chemical literally ‘goes down the drain’ and voila - the chemical industry has not only a free hazardous waste disposal system - but we have also PAID them handsomely in the process!!

www.zimbio.com...

reply to post by THEDUDE86


link?? nvm...that'll make me lazy to ask. i'll look 'em up on google. thanks for reminding me though.

oops double post.

This is precisely why I filter and recycle my own urine!

Although scientific research has supported the benefits of fluoride treatment in preventing tooth decay, many people question its safety and effectiveness. Several interest groups cite recent increases in dental fluorosis and fluoride levels in water that exceed optimal levels in calling for an end to fluoride drinking water. They deem fluoride treatments unnecessary and less useful and more dangerous than originally thought.


fluoride is not their to assassinate you. It is being investigated now the benefits and losses associated with taking fluoride out of Drinking water. It is mainly there to prevent tooth decay in the population. fluoride is also a natural substance in water.

reply to post by SyphonX


More toxic then lead? Frankly thats non-sense. Lead is an insidious neurological poison where you need quite a large acute dose to immediately show acute affects, which are severe leg pain, dementia, coma then death. But lead accumulates in the body and what ever your exposed to stays with you unless removed by chelation therapy (a form of dialysis). Chelation also removes needed metals like iron, copper etc, so you have to replace the stuff you need. In children small amounts of lead as was exposed to people who lived in high traffic areas when lead was still in gasoline, are known to reduce IQ, inhibit learning and create a host of behavioral problems.

I won't even mention the problem of eating paint chips containing lead. Lead is rather "filling" and kills hunger pains and in ancient, and not so ancient cultures it was used to "sweeten" things like wine, etc. Pregnant women exposed to lead can have severe damage to a fetus, even in small doses. High doses of fluoride HAVE long been known to be toxic (as are high doses of almost anything) and is also very dangerous in very high doses. Fluoride has some chemical similarities to calcium and is absorbed by bone in a somewhat similar manner. High doses of fluoride can cause floridosis (may have misspelled that). Symptoms are similar to whats called osteogenesis imperfecta (fragilious ossium in the UK) No doubt misspelled that as well.That results in brittle bones that can spontaneously break. A bit like when you'r elderly and people say "she fell and broke her hip" What often happens is your hip breaks and THEN you fall down as a result of osteo-arthritus and reduced bone density due to not absorbing calcium and/or getting and absorbing enough vitamin D.

But also its important to point out there has long been some evidence (and proven at least in the lab) that fluoride can break down intestinal flora. Not quite as bad as huge doses of antibiotics but detectable. You need intestinal bacteria to properly absorb nutrients from food. An extreme example of what happens when intestinal flora is "sterilized" happens with massive radiation poisoning, but thats a quantum level above anything here. And finally there is a known reduction in a population overall in tooth decay when fluoride is added to municipal water supplies. Does that justify it being added, in what is really pretty small amounts in the US? Here you run in to a war of the experts. Some say it makes sense overall, but I'm somewhat ambiguous.

In the ideal world you should have fluoride in your tooth paste and mouthwash (this assumes people including kids brush their teeth) . Personally I filter the city water I get which removes chlorine, but fluoride ions are tiny and don't honestly know if typical charcoal filters get rid of it (I doubt it) But reverse osmosis dose. And naturally if you have your own well then all you have to worry about are natural sources of fluoride. So bottom line? Know what you're drinking, and why but in this case I don't loose any sleep over it. I got things to worry about that really give me nightmares.

reply to post by NeoVain


WOW! That's disturbing news.

I'm glad my family and I are on tank water.

I read somewhere that several large corporations donate money to city and state governments to put the fluoride in the water? I dont know if this part is true but it certainly would not surprise me since they want a dumbed down work force with a short life span "wont have to take care of retirees when said employee drops dead before his golden years.

Never the less this is not a conspiracy theory this is a conspiracy FACT! And these serial killers behind the curtain are getting away with murder after all folks the people are dumbed down and docile pawns and the ones that are aware of this wont do anything anyway at best complain about it on the internet. It's almost impossible to get away from fluoride now heck im drinking bottled water and it does not list it but how do i know It's in the beer i drink i bet

It's tap water that is used to wash our food and cook our food, we bathe in this poison. I wonder what kind of affects it has on the skin? Could it cause skin cancer? I know it is banned in several European countries and for a reason, here in the West if something does not make sense and it is dangerous lets play god with it.

What we need to do is find out who is calling the shots at the top. I would bet the same people who run the world banks, corporations and just about everything else that is bad for us. It just burns me inside knowing how easily these SOB's can be stopped and eradicated yet they do whatever they feel like and answer to nobody.

Since they are putting Flouride in the water is it not likely they would poison us from the air? And people say chem trails aren't real lol

Skeptics still don't believe me?

Stop drinking tap water and look up at the sky and pay attention... they want you Dumb and Dying! Stop protecting and defending them this is happening!

I should also point out that cardiovascular disease is the #1 killer in the US and many western nations. Of course when you get right down to it EVERYONE when they die, "Dies" of cardiac arrest. For example, more women by far die of cardiovascular disease then die of breast and ovarian cancer combined. So the OP making a DIRECT link to fluoride and cardiovascular disease together is frankly misleading. If there is a causative relationship that says fluoride consumption in municipal doses causes cardiovascular disease (like eating bacon every day likely in some people will, statistically) I would welcome seeing some solid data.

Originally posted by arbiture
I should also point out that cardiovascular disease is the #1 killer in the US and many western nations. Of course when you get right down to it EVERYONE when they die, "Dies" of cardiac arrest. For example, more women by far die of cardiovascular disease then die of breast and ovarian cancer combined. So the OP making a DIRECT link to fluoride and cardiovascular disease together is frankly misleading. If there is a causative relationship that says fluoride consumption in municipal doses causes cardiovascular disease (like eating bacon every day likely in some people will, statistically) I would welcome seeing some solid data.

Let me say this again.. THE ARTICLE IN THE OP IS NOT TRUE, THE SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL ARTICLE THAT THE "AUTHOR" CLAIMS TO SOURCE MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO LINK BETWEEN FLUORIDE AND HEART DISEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NONE! NADA!!

Honestly, the ignorance in this thread is Appalling. Seriously , did you guys bother to read the paper?

The fact that the OP has over 90 stars for this piece of garbage thread makes me sad and frankly a little concerned about reading comprehension skills in America.

OP, you have ignored at least 3 people , myself included, telling you that the paper you reference makes no such connection yet you continue to use it as a scientific basis for your theory that fluoride is killing all of us. If that is what you think it says you need to read it again and and again until you understand what it is saying. It is not talking even remotely about the toxicity or disease causing properties of fluoride. Either: 1. you are ignorant of medical science and how to read a scientific paper or 2. You choose to ignore the truth and instead have decided to pawn this off to get flags and stars.


This thread is dead, its whole premise is false.....

Total junk science, but who cares about facts? This is ATS.

reply to post by kokoro


Such fervor makes me wonder what your agenda is. I am certain there is one, since you go to such lengths trying to defend the consumption of toxic waste in the face of all the evidence.

And fyi

1. I am not the one making the statement, it is an article on a website, mirrored by several others. Author is Anthony Gucciardi, if you have some problem with his conclusions or statements, maybe you should contact him with your complaints on the website here naturalsociety.com...

2. This thread is posted in breaking alternative news, the topic header must be the exact same as the article referenced, as well as the information quoted.

3. The objective of the research paper may not have been to to link flouride consumption to cardiovascular disease, but that does not mean that this link can not be made with the conclusions drawn from it. That is what this author has done, and i am sure he has a better idea of these things than certain armchair critics.

Originally posted by scoobyrob
sodium fluoride is toxic: fact
they put sodium fluoride in drinking water: fact

common sense will tell you its bad for you.

You forgot one major fact though.

Government says fluoride is good for your health: fact

That trumps the previous facts and any other facts.

Originally posted by BACONHAWK
I honestly do not understand why people do not understand this. It doesn't matter if it causes disease or is "good for your teeth". No one should have the right to mass medicate us. No one should have the right to dispose of their waste in our drinking water. To those of you defending the subtle, mass poisoning GO DRINK YOUR BRAWNDO TO MUTILATE YOUR THIRST AND WHAT'S LEFT OF YOUR IQ. I'm filtering mine the best I can. Ahhhh (that's me after I drink get it?)

edit on 17-1-2012 by BACONHAWK because: too much flouride as a kid

edit on 17-1-2012 by BACONHAWK because: same

Exactly! And John Holdren wrote in his book "Ecoscience" that he envisioned putting sterilants in the water to mass medicate.

Alex Jones has an article on his website dated Jan 20 in which his writer Watson says that some are now suggesting adding Statins to the water. As if the flouride wasn't bad enough.

For the naysayers here, it's time to wake up and stop being in denial.

www.infowars.com...

reply to post by NeoVain

i am sure he has a better idea of these things than certain armchair critics

Highly unlikely.

I know nothing about medical sciences but upon reading the full text it is patently clear, as the sun is in the sky, that it is about the use of fluoride based pharmaceuticals in PET/CT scans.

I am not the one making the statement, it is an article on a website

You brought it here and should have done the due diligence to ascertain if the information is correct or not.

Such fervor makes me wonder what your agenda is. I am certain there is one, since you go to such lengths trying to defend the consumption of toxic waste in the face of all the evidence

Wonderful use of a strawman argument and an ad hominem attack.

153 people have flagged this thread because they blindly believed what you brought to the table was accurate information, when it's not. The fervor is because not everyone is an idiot and are actually denying ignorance

What is your agenda in spreading false information?

That's what shills and disinfo agents do.

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by kokoro

 

Such fervor makes me wonder what your agenda is. I am certain there is one, since you go to such lengths trying to defend the consumption of toxic waste in the face of all the evidence.

And fyi

1. I am not the one making the statement, it is an article on a website, mirrored by several others. Author is Anthony Gucciardi, if you have some problem with his conclusions or statements, maybe you should contact him with your complaints on the website here naturalsociety.com...

2. This thread is posted in breaking alternative news, the topic header must be the exact same as the article referenced, as well as the information quoted.

3. The objective of the research paper may not have been to to link flouride consumption to cardiovascular disease, but that does not mean that this link can not be made with the conclusions drawn from it. That is what this author has done, and i am sure he has a better idea of these things than certain armchair critics.

Step 1 to refutation= question my motives huh, is that it? Always an agenda with you guys, Paranoid much?
Actually, it jut gets under my skin to see people misrepresent medical literature to suit their own predetermined conclusions.

I never condoned the use of fluoride in drinking water. In fact, in a previous post I stated that I don't think the effects of this practice has been determined. I certainly do not take issue with your questioning the practice of putting a chemical into our drinking water. What I do take issue with is the use of a scientific article that has no link to spread alarmist misinformation.

I know you are not the one making claims but you are certainly responsible for posting it here are you not? Surely you read his source before doing that right?

And no, no link can be made from that paper. That is my whole point here. The paper makes no link at all to a disease or to any harm at all. Apparently I cannot get you to understand that. If he made any connection from that paper then he is an idiot so no apparently he doesn't "have a better idea of things". Clearly, he doesn't know a damn thing about medicine, that is clear to anyone who does.