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 Linked to #1 Cause of Death in New Research

page: 17
214
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


I hope this is not your Magnum Opus.

The truth IS out and has been known since the early 40s. Fluoridate is present naturally in water. Now my own research is that if people want to be in a stupor water is the last thing they drink. Seriously, the wheel has already been invented, didnt anyone tell you?




posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcher
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


I hope this is not your Magnum Opus.

The truth IS out and has been known since the early 40s. Fluoridate is present naturally in water. Now my own research is that if people want to be in a stupor water is the last thing they drink. Seriously, the wheel has already been invented, didnt anyone tell you?


I do think you might have crossed over to the side of functional illiteracy, since you can't spell fluoride and call it "Fluoridate." If you can't spell the term correctly, I'd be the last one to consider you a researcher of any merit.

People know there are lots of low fluoride water sources and this is why many water sources were chosen to be surface waters in many areas. With well waters one encounters issues with Arsenic, Fluoride, and sometimes biological and chemical issues.

Most folks that like to invest in long term health and have quick mind that learns quickly and retains and organizes the knowledge pick low fluoride water and low fluoride in their food choices.

You might want to check your brain aluminum levels as you don't make much sense or construct sentences clearly. imho



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
People know there are lots of low fluoride water sources and this is why many water sources were chosen to be surface waters in many areas. With well waters one encounters issues with Arsenic, Fluoride, and sometimes biological and chemical issues.

Care to delve into more explanation on this paragraph you typed? Specifically, choosing surface waters as the main drinking water supply based on their fluoride levels.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Reverse osmosis kits but they are expensive.....



I know what you are saying, but in the long-run not having one is actually considerably more expensive ... lost income due to illnesses, co-pays, out-of-pocket expenses, not too mention bone loss and other horrid symptoms.

I had to get a reverse-osmosis filter, not only because of the Fluoride in the water supply (that we pay for but don't want or need) but also because of a problem with Chloramine. Our water supply is also treated with Chloramine because it comes from American Water Supply -- AWS is THE WORST water supply system in the U.S. ... at least IMO.

Chloramine is a combination of chlorine + ammonia. It's a cheaper way to disinfect the water, as it costs less than Chlorine. Fluoride is waste/by-product and is bad all the way around, especially for young, growing children.

Over a period of time it causes a variety of illnesses and untreatable medical conditions. Once we had the water filter installed, my asthma (and other symptoms) completely disappeared and my immune system was functioning properly.

For those who are renting or cannot afford to drop over $800 on a whole-house filter, you can just buy one for the kitchen tap and also for the bathroom shower-head. Showering in Flouridated (or chlorinated) water isn't healthy either.

In the meantime, for drinking water, many grocery store chains carry gallon jugs of distilled water for around $1 per gallon. If it doesn't say "Distilled" on the label, it's not distilled. The minerals may have possibly been removed in the distilling process, but the amount of Fluoride (and Chlorine) is significantly reduced or eliminated.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
In my personal experience with fluoride, my teeth are much healthier now after abstaining from fluoride as best I can for years as well as a tooth sensitivity problem I had for a long time simply vanished in two weeks after I stopped using fluoride toothpaste and mouthwash. I use a toothpaste called "Epic" that uses Xylitol instead of fluoride and I attribute my dental health to that as well. Great toothpaste, but not sold in stores.

Regardless of what your stance is on fluoride, I can't understand why some in this thread are fine with medicating everyone with it. Just because you've had no ill effects doesn't mean they aren't there for other people. There is no reason this stuff should be put into our drinking water, none. If you want fluoridated water, then they should sell it in stores so people can buy fluoride additives they can put in their water. What if this was done with alcohol? Would you want everyone's kids to be drinking watered down alcohol or your family perhaps? It shouldn't be dumped into the water supply period. Here are some studies I found in haste:

Scientific Studies on Fluoride
IQ Study from Iran shows lower IQ in children
National Institute of Dental Research says no link to Fluoridation and Tooth Decay
Fluoride link to Thyroid Disease



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by dtrock78
People know there are lots of low fluoride water sources and this is why many water sources were chosen to be surface waters in many areas. With well waters one encounters issues with Arsenic, Fluoride, and sometimes biological and chemical issues.

Care to delve into more explanation on this paragraph you typed? Specifically, choosing surface waters as the main drinking water supply based on their fluoride levels.


====

Sure, why not. I think everyone knows that rainwater is usually thought to be purified by essentially distallation. This worked pretty well before the massive amounts of coal emissions, and as long as your didn't live near a volcano with HF emissions.

Surface water was easy to get in most areas, and was generally pretty clean. It became the lifeblood for livestock and irrigation of plants. In most areas these surface waters were cleaner than the underground sources and they just ran the water past some simple clean up and pumped it into peoples houses.

Underground water has numerous issues, like radon stems from areas usually with lots of granite formations that have uranium and the radon gets into the well water, and when the well water gets into the home the radon leaves the water and pollutes the home.

Other well water problems stem from areas with high arsenic, which causes some health problems, and you don't usually see this in the surface waters except around coal ash release areas. Another problem is the fluoride levels in well water are high in some areas and in the old days people could not use well water either in cattle farming or plant growing because around 1 ppm made the farm animals not thrive well. So, again the idea that surface waters were better for humans stemmed from their general trend in farming, cattle raising, and so on.

Around India and some other areas a bunch of do-gooders that knew little about the issues of well water contaminates got together and decided to drill wells all around India and a few other countries and they hit high arsenic levels. So, in the end they ended up screwing up huge areas of India and lots of people because they didn't do their homework on arsenic poisoning of well water. That mess ended up being a bigger human health disaster than Bo-Pol and the Union Carbide disaster. This is what happens when you turn loose technological idiots on water issues.

As, someone from Finland mentioned their public waters, be they surface derived or well water derived, are consider unusable with more and 0.2 ppm fluoride.

Fluoride in water at 1 ppm only became an faked up nutrient issue when they got this idea to use it to quell the intelligence and resistance of the masses and be able to spoon feed them the corporate methods that were taken without questions. Areas in Texas and some other areas were poor on surface waters and had to use high fluoride water, as they were too cheap to clean up the water source. So, areas in Texas got "Texas Teeth", which were bright white and frosty white from the fluorosis of the enamel. High Fluoride areas of Ethiopia have this same look of the teeth. Those trying to fool the public into acceptance of 1 ppm fluoride used that as poster children to go nationwide with the ALCOA and IG Farben idea.

The Fluoride in areas around Ethiopia associated with the East African Rift zone cause the produce and other products grown or caught in these area to be banned for import into the EU countries mainly because of the fluoride contamination and their much stricter standards in Europe.

But all the science up to this time of the 40s in the US said the less fluoride the better.

These days, surface waters are generally being forced to be cleaned up by the clean air and water act to return to what used to be, but problems still exist in domains like pig farming and the uses of phosphates in the pig feeds which turns into massive run-offs into streams and surface waters that set up these toxic algae issues downstream from these areas. Volcanic eruptions are known to be dangerous to farm animals hundreds of miles from the eruptions due mainly to the HF toxic effects on the surface water that free roaming and farm animals may drink.


So, the long standing trends was surface water to avoid arsenic, radon, fluoride, and other toxic minerals in the underground well derived water, and they went for surface waters and these became a precious commodity. Even the issues of sulfur and iron in well water were pesky problems that most didn't like. Obviously these issues were central to the need of the Colorado River diversions in the US, and when it gets down to the lower California area there is only a trickle left. In the days of the Lockheed-Martin's solid fuel rocket work in Colorado, this river was contaminated with Chlorine derived rocket fuel (perchlorate contamination) and this toxic effects started to appear even in the produce grown in California using the Colorado River's water. There are some problems in surface waters these days, but these existed in well water long before and this made surface waters the better pick for better water for humans, farm animals, and plants.

The choice preference for most water plant operators were surface water because of the distillation effects and the huge source term, and the lower mineralization effects in most areas.


edit on 19-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Rocket Fuel

edit on 19-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Percholrate

edit on 19-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Bo-Pol



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by metalshredmetal


do you still disbelieve the use of fluoride by the Nazis?



Yes. I can state categorically 100% that did not happen. The Nazis did not use fluoride and neither did the Bolsheviks.

That is a myth 100%.

onespeedbikerpolitico.blogspot.com...

This website sums up the info that I have personally researched myself, including reading the book in question and came to the same conclusion. NeoVain, you go ahead and read that book and then post the parts that say the Nazis used fluoride. I am eagerly awaiting this. It should be good.

edit on 19-1-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Read much?

From your study:


After entering your body, about half of the fluoride leaves the body quickly in urine, usually within 24 hours unless large amounts (20 mg or more, which is the amount in 20 or more liters of optimally fluoridated water) are ingested. Most of the fluoride ion that stays in your body is stored in your bones and teeth.


reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


No, maybe it's you guys who need to do more research. Did you ever think of that?




edit on 19-1-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Read much?

From your study:


After entering your body, about half of the fluoride leaves the body quickly in urine, usually within 24 hours unless large amounts (20 mg or more, which is the amount in 20 or more liters of optimally fluoridated water) are ingested. Most of the fluoride ion that stays in your body is stored in your bones and teeth.


reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


No, maybe it's you guys who need to do more research. Did you ever think of that?




edit on 19-1-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



NeoVain is not above misrepresentation of scientific literature to try to win an argument. He has demonstrated that over and over in this thread.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Read much?

From your study:


After entering your body, about half of the fluoride leaves the body quickly in urine, usually within 24 hours unless large amounts (20 mg or more, which is the amount in 20 or more liters of optimally fluoridated water) are ingested. Most of the fluoride ion that stays in your body is stored in your bones and teeth.


reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


No, maybe it's you guys who need to do more research. Did you ever think of that?




edit on 19-1-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



What is your point? that snippet only further goes to provy MY point, that flouride remains in your body, which was the whole issue you questioned. Are you really that dense that you cannot even understand what you are reading?



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by kokoro
 


Wow obviously you don´t understand either. Go back a few pages in this thread please to understand the original question. But since you are a girl i will explain to you: he questioned me whan i said parts of flouride is not expelled from your body, but indefinitely retained. I post proof of this fact after he questions it. Obviously he do not understand this and believes he found something that says otherwise, but it in fact says the exact same thing. "about half of the fluoride leaves the body quickly in urine" means "roughly half is retained!" as well! Which is the whole point.

edit on 19-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


NeoVain, what a clown you are.

Of course some remains in your body, in your bones and teeth, which is what it is supposed to do! Are you that dense that you don't know the whole point of fluoridating the water in the first place? And what doesn't stay in your bones and teeth is excreted within 24 hours.

You're questioning my reading comprehension? That's a laugh.

How are you coming along with that book?


edit on 19-1-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 

Nice deflection/misdirection attempt

That is not even what it says! It says MOST, not ALL!

And have you already forgot your own stance? You did not believe anything was retained which was obvious

I guess i won this one as well, although you are too proud to admit it
edit on 19-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


I apologize. I thought you were way more advanced into the subject than you are. I thought that we both understood that some fluoride is retained in the large calcium deposits in the body. After all, that is why we fluoridate the water, isn't it? I will try to be more clear:

Nothing is retained in the body, EXCEPT for that which accumulates in the bones and teeth, which is what we want it to do.

Is that better?


edit on 19-1-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MagnumOpus

Originally posted by Malcher
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


I hope this is not your Magnum Opus.

The truth IS out and has been known since the early 40s. Fluoridate is present naturally in water. Now my own research is that if people want to be in a stupor water is the last thing they drink. Seriously, the wheel has already been invented, didnt anyone tell you?


I do think you might have crossed over to the side of functional illiteracy, since you can't spell fluoride and call it "Fluoridate." If you can't spell the term correctly, I'd be the last one to consider you a researcher of any merit.

People know there are lots of low fluoride water sources and this is why many water sources were chosen to be surface waters in many areas. With well waters one encounters issues with Arsenic, Fluoride, and sometimes biological and chemical issues.

Most folks that like to invest in long term health and have quick mind that learns quickly and retains and organizes the knowledge pick low fluoride water and low fluoride in their food choices.

You might want to check your brain aluminum levels as you don't make much sense or construct sentences clearly. imho


You dont have the capacity to focus beyond a single word and that is why the word alone gets you so excited. I could have easily went back and fixed the word but as i noticed it after i hit reply, but left if in there since it is a word that is spelled correctly.

Fluoride occurs naturally in water. You can walk up to a stream, bend over and take a drink from water that is way over the fluoride limit. In fact there are parts of the world where people DO drink from water that is NATURALLY high in FLUORIDE. The effects of too high are well known. The question is how much fluoride is beneficial and how much is harmful. Now chances are if you drink untreated you are drinking fluoride and a whole bunch of other stuff. Could be bear urine, could be many things in there but the fact is most likely there will be residual fluoride.

SOURCE



In the early 1940s, scientists discovered that people who lived where drinking water supplies had naturally occurring fluoride levels of approximately 1.0 ppm had fewer dental caries (cavities). Many more recent studies have supported this finding (1). Fluoride can prevent and even reverse tooth decay by enhancing remineralization, the process by which fluoride “rebuilds” tooth enamel that is beginning to decay (1, 2).


Now when something is studied and watched over it is called what?

Regulation.

According to you zero amount of fluoride is what you want. The same way most people take an aspirin for a cure for a headache, thins out their blood etc. would not take a whole bottle of aspirin because why?

Well i really cant say what the effects of eating one bottle of aspirin would be but it would not be good. See where this is going? Now if you take one aspirin a day or one a week, by your own logic this would be deadly. Except for the simple fact that luckily we dont use your opinions as fact.

Seriously, just use google and put some key words in there not loaded up with what you WANT to hear but be subjective. This is how people learn things.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Nothing is retained in the body, EXCEPT for that which accumulates in the bones and teeth, which is what we want it to do.

Does that clear it up for you?


From your own excerpt

Most of the fluoride ion that stays in your body is stored in your bones and teeth.

MOST! NOT ALL!
That means it is also retained in other places, like your pineal gland, for example.
And besides, that is not even the point! You questioned me whan i said parts of it was indefinitey retained in your body, and you yourself admit it is kept in bones and teeth at least by now.
If you still do not understand, i guess it´s the flouride in your brain that may be the culprit .



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


Not everyone on ATS knows a lot about science, I chose to use Fl because it's more obvious what it stands for than F and is easier to read. This is also not a science forum. There is also nothing that Fl could be confused with, for instance you could not say Ca for Carbon because Ca is calcium. Trying to say I don't know anything about research based upon that, when in fact I have done independent research and have been published in articles you will find on PubMed shows a narrow-minded lack of thought on your part.

You do realize there are trace amounts of uranium, lead, arsenic, tin, lithium and a plethora of other chemicals in your body right? If you overdose on any of those you are in trouble. The fact is that Fl provides such a great benefit to your oral health that it out-weighs the potential side-effects from overdosing.

The argument could be made that Fl actually helps PREVENT heart disease. Fl helps prevent periodontal disease, which has been linked in scientific peer-reviewed journals to heart disease (likely due to systemic inflammation/bacteria etc). So there you have it, Fl prevents perio disease and therefore helps prevent heart disease.

Just some additional FYI knowledge: It's true that cavities were seen as a disease of the wealthy in centuries past. They were the only ones that had frequent enough access to refined sugars/carbs to cause tooth decay. The way it works is after you eat something, say a sugary snack, or even a piece of bread, the bacteria in your mouth produce acid for about around 20-30 minutes. This acid demineralizes your teeth. As soon as the bacteria stop, your teeth are remineralized by the minerals in your saliva (such as Fl). What this means to all you ATSers out there, if you're going to east junk food, eat it quickly in one sitting, don't snack on it through out the day, don't sip on a soda while you're at work, because every sip is 30 more minutes of demineralization, and you won't be able to remineralize and you'll get a cavity.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


NeoVain! Slow down!

First of all, the pineal gland calcifies with age. Since we know that fluoride binds to calcium then it is only natural that some will accumulate in the pineal gland.

Secondly, and most important, we want the fluoride to bind to the bones and teeth. That is the goal of fluoridation.

Do you not get that?

DocAdama, thank you for a great post.




edit on 19-1-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by kokoro
 


Wow obviously you don´t understand either. Go back a few pages in this thread please to understand the original question. But since you are a girl i will explain to you: he questioned me whan i said parts of flouride is not expelled from your body, but indefinitely retained. I post proof of this fact after he questions it. Obviously he do not understand this and believes he found something that says otherwise, but it in fact says the exact same thing. "about half of the fluoride leaves the body quickly in urine" means "roughly half is retained!" as well! Which is the whole point.

edit on 19-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



Becasue Im a girl?
Ah, Now I see the problem. Dont worry little boy, you arent the first to feel threatened by an intelligent, strong woman.

And if YOU go back several pages I quoted the reasearch as you asked for an completely obliterated all doubt that your reasearch article interpretation is bogus. Of course, you didnt respond to that. Guess what? its ok to admit you were wrong, in fact, Id have more respect for you if you did and added a least a little honesty to this thread.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   
I must say that research is something that is foreign to most ATS folks information, or lack there of.


I do think a magazine publisher can find the deeper details on the issues of Charles Perkins and, in fact, cooberate the information via two other sources. And to think you two disinformation specialists can't find this really good NEXUS mag article that does a fine job speaks to intentional blinders, and more than likely some ADA helpers to keep them from looking like Typhoid Mary due to the fluroide cover up issues. imho

Most folks respect NEXUS publishing and writers and they do a fine job, but you two science illiterates don't even slightly measure up.

They also go as far as to look at UK's Thatcher pulling the fluoride trick on Northern Ireland:

======

www.scribd.com...


FLUORIDATION:Mind Control of the MassesBy Ian E. Stephens
From an article in Nexus Magazine August/September 95

----

In a letter abstracted from Fluoridation and Lawlessness (published by the Committee for Mental Healthand National Security) to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on 2ndOctober 1954, a Charles Eliot Perkins, scientist and author of Washington, DC, and, one must assume,the same Charles Eliot Perkins of the "Dickenson Statement" to the Victorian Parliament, said this (and the words of the last two lines of the second paragraph cannot be overemphasised): "We are told by the fanatical ideologists who are advocating the fluoridation of the water supplies in this country that their purpose is to reduce the incidence of tooth decay in children, and it is the plausibility of thisexcuse, plus the gullibility of the public and the cupidity of public officials that is responsible for the present spread of artificial water fluoridation in this country."However - and I want to make this very definite and positive - the real reason behind water fluoridation not to benefit children's teeth. If this were the real reason, there are many ways in which it could be done which are much easier, cheaper and far more effective. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty ..."When the Nazis, under Hitler, decided to go into Poland ... the German General Staff and the Russian General Staff exchanged scientific and military ideas, plans and personnel and the scheme of mass control through water medication was seized upon by the Russian Communists because it fitted ideally into their plan to communise the world ..."I say this in all earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years research into the chemistry, Bo-chemistry, physiology and pathology and pathology of fluorine: any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically." Mr Perkins does not involve America, American institutions or individuals in his assertions, but when Major George Racy Jordan was in charge of the massive 'lend-lease airlift' operations from Great Falls,Montana, to Russia via Alaska, he queried the transhipment of considerable amounts of sodium fluoridevia Fairbanks, Alaska, to Russia. He was told "frankly" that it was to put into the drinking water in the prisoner-of-war camps to take away their will to resist.The published knowledge that sodium fluoride was known for this mind - and behaviour - changing potential was available at the start of this century, as witness such entries as "Fluoricum Acidum" (Encyclopaedia of Pure 'Materia Medica', vol. ix, p. 333).

----

Mrs Thatcher's astronomical expenditure of United Kingdom revenue on a fluoridation campaignin Northern Ireland a matronly concern for the youngsters' teeth, or perhaps an attempt to sedate thepeople and render them subservient to her autocratic dictates? Remember this. Mrs Thatcher has abackground of academic chemistry and would be far from ignorant of the tranquillising effects of thehalogens and their halides.

====


edit on 19-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: The scientific illiterate opinion is of low relevance



new topics

top topics



 
214
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join