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: 23
214
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by SyphonX
 


What do you suppose the Human Race should to do, to over come this flouride threat? How does the revolution begin?




posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by kokoro
 


You can ignore all the fluoride experts, but they explain in clear terms that fluoride in the body is a colligen disruptor, both in bones and in walls of arteries, or for hard and soft tissues.

Results from the longest fluoride areas report huge levels of aeorta fluoride content, which is very telling there is a huge problem.

It is clear the debunk gang can't read books and attempt to make themselves some self-aggrandized expert. imho

Nobody pays attention to your total lack of finding important data. You all could not find the Charles Perkins book, which was totally obvious to anyone. imho


Per HIV, the leader of the issues of HIV and AID is Peter Duesberg, and he makes some interesting points on HIV being a very weak virus:

www.duesberg.com...

It is real easy to make the argument that HIV stems from the result of immune impairment allowing it to take hold and propagate to the point of AIDs diagnosis. If one really studies HIV areas, the highest infection rates are Ethiopia, with its extreme endemic fluoride pollution that shuts down cellular immunity and mutates the enzymes that cause cell apoptosis. Duesburg makes some interesting points on HIV transmission in South Africa, which is low in rate and low in endemic fluoride toxic effects in the food and water chain.

I don't find it unusual that a fluoride expert would be thinking along the lines of Duesberg.



edit on 20-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: anyone leading off with the debunker term is not about science or finding the key information

edit on 20-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Duesberg's thesis



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by henryjonesjr
reply to post by SyphonX
 


What do you suppose the Human Race should to do, to over come this flouride threat? How does the revolution begin?


Very good question.

I think proper education and how to find the resource material is good start.

Then raise the public's awareness in all the ways possible to get Federal Level attention for a national ban of fluoridation.

It may even be good to see if it can be worked into the Ron Paul political platform by talking to his group. He is an MD and it be very good to know which way he is going to lean on this problem.

I invite everyone to contribute ideas.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 02:11 AM
link   
Ive read up on how fluoride can block up your pineal gland which in some beliefs is the third eye (eye of chakra). Professionals say its a spot for skitzofrenia but hey perceptions are valid lol.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 04:38 AM
link   
Just because everyone only refers to the Pineal Gland as "the third eye", it's function is to produce the hormone melatonin which regulates sleep patterns and can protect against neurodegeneration as well as regulating other hormones.

The studies are out there relating to the effects of fluoride, several of which are in this thread. If people want to believe that fluoride really does protect against tooth decay, why does the National Institute for Dental Research say it doesn't? Are they quacks too?

edit on 21-1-2012 by Kratos1220 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kratos1220
Just because everyone only refers to the Pineal Gland as "the third eye", it's function is to produce the hormone melatonin which regulates sleep patterns and can protect against neurodegeneration as well as regulating other hormones.

The studies are out there relating to the effects of fluoride, several of which are in this thread. If people want to believe that fluoride really does protect against tooth decay, why does the National Institute for Dental Research say it doesn't? Are they quacks too?

edit on 21-1-2012 by Kratos1220 because: (no reason given)


Another interesting tidbit on that matter is that originally not even the pro-flouridation people claimed that flouridated water has any positive effect on people over the ages of 8 years old. It was originally found that flouridated water could have a slight positive effect on teeth for these children below 8 years old(baby teeth) in certain areas, but at the rates of flouridation required also inflicted dental flourosis on these children. Read the full story on this in the book "The Truth about Water Flouridation" by Charles Eliot Perkins.
edit on 21-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by henryjonesjr
reply to post by SyphonX
 


What do you suppose the Human Race should to do, to over come this flouride threat? How does the revolution begin?


I agree with MagnumOpus here, first people need to be aware of the detrimental and hazardous long term effects on human health, so this message needs to go viral ASAP. Only then can people push for a removal of the forced water poison act currently in effect in countries such as the U.S. But the lobbyist have a vested interest here to have their toxic waste bought up by the taxpayers, so this need to be known and fought by ensuring only non-corruptible politicians get elected. The biggest challenge may be to get so many flouridated people to understand this... To some, being flouridated seems almost like a religion, judging by some comments in this thread.
edit on 21-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
Another interesting tidbit on that matter is that originally not even the pro-flouridation people claimed that flouridated water has any positive effect on people over the ages of 8 years old. It was originally found that flouridated water could have a positive effect on teeth for these children below 8 years old in certain areas, but at the rates of flouridation required also inflicted dental flourosis on these children. Read the full story on this in the book "The Truth about Water Flouridation" by Charles Eliot Perkins.
edit on 21-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)


You're preaching to the choir, my friend. I believe the statistic was 1 in 10 children will develop dental fluorosis which can consist of spotting, pitting and softening of tooth enamel. These changes in tooth enamel are permanent and cannot be fixed which leaves you with permanently damaged teeth. One can only imagine what it does to the bones of some people. Oh wait, there's studies on that, so I guess we don't have to imagine. It boggles my mind that not only are people A-OK with dumping this poisonous chemical in the water supply, but those people are also A-OK with giving children the same dosage as an adult.

It just boggles my mind how adamant some of the people in this thread are about it. I mean, why stop there? Red wine is heart healthy, so lets toss that in there too so everyone can have a healthy heart. Let's also add drugs that regulate cholesterol levels so we can all avoid cholesterol problems in the future. Yep, one size fits all for everyone and you have no choice in the matter. I just can't wrap my head around it all. If you want fluoride in your water, fine; put it there yourselves. Just because you want it doesn't mean it should be forced on everyone else. I'm sure they will be more than happy to sell you your own personal barrel of fluoride that you can dump in your water to your heart's content.

Why do we have to shower in fluoride so it absorbs through our skin too? Why do we have to cook food in fluoride which, by the way, fluoride becomes more concentrated when heat is applied. What benefit is there to showering in it? Bathing in it? Cooking food in it making it more concentrated? Where's the benefit? I'm not taking a shower because I want something to drink, after all. I'm not making spaghetti because I want to strengthen my teeth. I just don't understand it. Just the fact that fluoride absorbs easily through the skin while showering should be enough in and of itself to show that we are being overexposed to fluoride and far exceeding the "safe" dosages. Furthermore, it doesn't even have a chance to have any effect on the teeth at all. It's stupid and makes no sense.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
I alway's knew fluoride was bad, I switched to non-fluoride toothpaste and filtered water, seems to help keep the old noggin working. Good find. Keep up the good work.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   
This is good!! I think everyone is beginning to learn the issues of fluoride in the water and food. In the early 1900's, in the US, they set the limit on fluoride in water as 0.1 ppm contamination and this was considered safe practice because that was a factor of 10 below the level of detectable problems with fluoride seen at the 1 ppm levels.

We also see European Countries, like Finland, set their limit as 0.2 ppm, and they say water above that limit is unsafe for human consuption. Europe's rules on fluoride in water went to those used in the US before the corruption of the 1940s on pushing the fluoride level in water to the threshold level of detectable health effects. Europe even regulates the importation of produce and other items from the extremely high endemic fluorides areas of the East African Rift Zone.

The 1 ppm level for fluoride in water induces what is called "Pre-skeletal Fluorisis" effects on the body and heath and these are a bunch of chronic health effects, that worsen with age, on everything from bone burden of fluoride, to myelin nerve coating loading with fluoride, to blood vessel walls loading with fluoride, and the host of issues that the Boron article claims to fix in human health. The reports of Grand Rapids, Mich with fluoridation show the aeorta loading with fluoride being extremely high after decades of this being used on this city. There is a huge problem and this links to this thread's theme,

Things in the US changed in the 1940s with the corruption introduced by ALCOA and their IG Farben NAZI partners on the fluoride used to dull people's minds. This was done very intentionally to set up a dumbed down public that would set back and watch their Freedoms erode due to corporation fascism push on Americans. The American Public is now in the same boat as NAZI prison camp workers and the Russian Gulag system of labor camps in Siberia. We needed to be calling these crooks in the Govt. and Health services that endosed this bogus science of 1 ppm fluoride is good for you in the same like as Holocaust Denial. Like it or not, part of the German Holocaust issues was the use of fluoride in their prison labor camp that were used to support IG Farben's industrial network. The Prison Camp Forced Labor IG Farben group is one in the same as the Partners with ALCOA in the US that used scientific fraud to dupe Americans into believing fluoridation was good.

The further issues to become aware of also involve aluminum in the food chain and that the fluorides combine to cause problems there also. Morton's Salt uses aluminum as the anti-Cake agent, and their salt puts aluminum in your diet. It didn't stop there as Baking Powers are loaded with Aluminum and there are better choices like Baking Soda and yeast as rising agents. You have to read the food labels to protect your health these days and be aware of the problem areas. When fluoride combines with aluminum in the stomoch, this causes addition fluoride related health problems. The White Stuff in toothpaste is generally aluminum oxide mixed with sodium fluoride which is really a bad idea due to AlFx compound formation that cause problems in the thyroid process. There are much better choices for toothpaste without the aluminum or the fluoride.

These problem are not new with fluorides, because they are age old issues linked to the Essene group at Qumran. Qumran sat right in the middle of a lot of fluoride loaded Basalt issues from the Rift Zone effects there that took out a couple cities health in the days of old. It is highly unfortunate that the real truth behind these associations was kept from the public's view and understanding of the greater details that relate to the problems of fluoride and health today. Yet the renewal of this understanding of these messages from the old world can become the renewal of the rise of fluoride problems being acknowledged. This is help fluoride going viral in the public's greater understanding of the long term problems with fluoride and the effect of essential trace nutrients in helping fluoride health factors in these times that promoted the Mt. Carmel Boron minerals into a region of special attention. There has been much forgotten, and perhaps intentionally lost in the history, but this is going to change with the greater understanding of what was really going on back then.

If one watches the aging process, one does note that many times that older folks get to where they can't sleep much or well and this links back to the melatonin issues. Melatonin loss, due to Pineal Gland fluoride, is another very important problem connected to fluoridation. Keep up the good work and keep raising the public's awareness of how badly they have been used and abused by corruption at the highest levels in the US Govt.


edit on 21-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Going Viral with massive fluoride health problems



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Just so you know, I am agreeing with you too...I think the language of the study was misleading and the author of the article kind of took that and ran with it. Either that or he didn't understand the science. At any rate, a discussion was born lol, so here we are. It is very interesting to see how many other people have eschewed consumption of tap water...I did it because it was murdering my kidneys but before that, I never even thought about it. I don't know if that made me a sheep or not but I was definitely more aware of what I consumed after suffering like I did.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


Two things:

Be careful about suggesting borax as a detoxifying agent (you typed "borox"). It can be very harmful if inhaled/ingested. Wiki says it's banned in the US but I know that to be untrue, as I buy it all the time for pest control at Home Depot
If it is inhaled, it can cause severe respiratory irritation and if ingested, can cause diarrhea, nausea, vomiting. In large enough doses, it can cause renal failure.


Thought you might be interested in knowing that boron (in its pure form) does not come from "mother nature"; in fact it does not come from this planet
Not sure why in your post there were references to both substances, because borax is a compound of boron. At any rate, I thought you might find that to be interesting



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Hey guys, by the way, the original research work that supposedly claimed that sodium fluoride causes vascular calcification has been completely misconstrued. I have a concentration in behavioral neuroscience and I do research in this area, so i'm forced to be familiar with Positron Emission Tomography physics and Magnetic Resonance Imaging physics. I can tell you that if you clearly read the original full text research article without a foundation in PET physics or functionality, you will easily distort what the researchers actually endeavored to discover. It's a bit strange--yet discouraging to see 189 flags for a claim ultimately based on bad interpretation. This is not to say that I do not agree with completely abstaining from the consumption of sodium fluoride (whether from water supplies, or any products packaged our way).

What the researchers hoped to find out is whether using a radioactive fluoride dye could serve as a determinant or tag for vascular calcification or arteriosclerosis. Briefly, let me explain to you guys how PET functions... You drink a radioactive dye/tracer, let's say fluorodeoxyglucose (or fluoride in this case), and you have about thirty minutes to get into the PET machine. At this point, fluoride (which is a radioactive isotope), starts emitting positrons, which is the antiparticle of an electron. So depending on glucose, or sugar intake throughout the circulatory system or brain, the release of poistrons travel approximately 1mm from the site and annihilate with neighboring electrons. Millions and millions of miniannihilations take place, and this energy can be triangulated by coincidence detectors on the left and right of the person laying down. Only those annihilations that are approximately 180 degrees from the coincidence counter will be analyzed, and this energy can be gridded, or mapped through the use of sophisticated monitoring machinery.

Although they usually use fluorodeoxyglucose or maybe raclopride, this time they used solely fluoride for this experiment. The findings concluded that there was a direct correlation between the amount of fluoride uptake in the vasculatory system and inherent calcification or vascular disease. In other words, the more the fluoride tracer or dye was taken in, the more that researchers found (Through PET Images) the subject to have higher degrees of vascular calcification or arterial disease. The results are very fruitful for any further medical interests in this area, because it proves promising to use radioactive fluoride as a tracer to reveal the extent of vascular calcification in patients. Hence, the whole purpose of this study is diagnostics and imaging of vascular calcification and the dynamics of radioactive fluoride tracers for demonstrating (through the aforementioned annihilations and captured energy release) the extent of this disease.

So higher fluoride dye uptake was correlated with higher rates of vascular calcification... Never once, did they say that ingesting fluoride CAUSED or led to higher rates of arteriosclerosis. I understand scientific literacy is rare, but it is important to first read the full text article and not misapprehend scientific jargon; this is especially true for the sake of 'denying ignorance'.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by tigertatzen
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


Two things:

Be careful about suggesting borax as a detoxifying agent (you typed "borox"). It can be very harmful if inhaled/ingested. Wiki says it's banned in the US but I know that to be untrue, as I buy it all the time for pest control at Home Depot
If it is inhaled, it can cause severe respiratory irritation and if ingested, can cause diarrhea, nausea, vomiting. In large enough doses, it can cause renal failure.


Maybe he just spelled it wrong, who knows, boron certainly is not toxic.


Elemental boron, boron oxide, boric acid, borates, and many organoboron compounds are non-toxic to humans and animals (approximately similar to table salt). The LD50 (dose at which there is 50% mortality) for animals is about 6 g per kg of body weight. Substances with LD50 above 2 g are considered non-toxic. The minimum lethal dose for humans has not been established, but an intake of 4 g/day was reported without incidents, and medical dosages of 20 g of boric acid for neutron capture therapy caused no problems. Fish have survived for 30 min in a saturated boric acid solution and can survive longer in strong borax solutions.[119] Boric acid is more toxic to insects than to mammals, and is routinely used as an insecticide.


I have found out that raisins and apples both contain sufficient amounts of boron to clean the flouride from your system gradually if eaten regularly, so no need for pharmaceutials or potential overdoses

edit on 21-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Reptilian Ph.D
 


Hey and welcome to the thread, some interesting info you got there. However two things; at the start of your post you say this



Hey guys, by the way, the original research work that supposedly claimed that sodium fluoride causes vascular calcification has been completely misconstrued.

Then at the end you say this.


So higher fluoride dye uptake was correlated with higher rates of vascular calcification...


See what i see here?

Furthermore, as stated earlier in the thread, that no matter what the original intent of the study was here, the conclusion can also be drawn that intake of flouride will gradually calcify your vascular system, even if only at the points where plaques already exists. So to turn it around, if you do not intake flouride, these plaques would not grow. Correct?
edit on 21-1-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by tigertatzen
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


Two things:

Be careful about suggesting borax as a detoxifying agent (you typed "borox"). It can be very harmful if inhaled/ingested. Wiki says it's banned in the US but I know that to be untrue, as I buy it all the time for pest control at Home Depot
If it is inhaled, it can cause severe respiratory irritation and if ingested, can cause diarrhea, nausea, vomiting. In large enough doses, it can cause renal failure.


Thought you might be interested in knowing that boron (in its pure form) does not come from "mother nature"; in fact it does not come from this planet
Not sure why in your post there were references to both substances, because borax is a compound of boron. At any rate, I thought you might find that to be interesting



I might have mistyped something, happens all the time. But for clarification. I was talking about Borax, as was the article listed. They also tell to use small amounts.

You may need to read up on things. "Boric acid" is bad, so don't take that. That is the form used against bugs. However, "Borax" is what is used for the way to pull fluorine out of the body. Borax makes for an alkaline response in the body.

Anyone can buy Borax at Wall-Mart in huge boxes as it is the same stuff they use for laundry and the trade name twenty mule team borax. It is from nature. It has not been banned. People also take it internally in foreign countries to clean out fluoride. I've tried it in small amounts and I am still doing fine. It just tastes funny.

Most people choose the 10 mg supplements in little capsules, which works better.


edit on 21-1-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Borax



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 





Most people choose the 10 mg supplements in little capsules, which works better.


I have found that raisins, apples, pears, and certain nuts also contain boron. So i see no reason to buy those capsules, since i love nuts


Did you know this?



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by tigertatzen
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Just so you know, I am agreeing with you too...I think the language of the study was misleading and the author of the article kind of took that and ran with it. Either that or he didn't understand the science. At any rate, a discussion was born lol, so here we are. It is very interesting to see how many other people have eschewed consumption of tap water...I did it because it was murdering my kidneys but before that, I never even thought about it. I don't know if that made me a sheep or not but I was definitely more aware of what I consumed after suffering like I did.



And one of the big reasons to end water fluoridation is to help persons with kidney failure, as the fluoride rention for them goes way up. Kidney failure and higher fluoride retention drives up the problems with arterialsclerosis.

Ref: PMID:22245411



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 





Most people choose the 10 mg supplements in little capsules, which works better.


I have found that raisins, apples, pears, and certain nuts also contain boron. So i see no reason to buy those capsules, since i love nuts


Did you know this?


Yes, and how I started noticing the nut thing was peanut butter used to make me feel really good, and I'd get these huge cravings for roasted peanuts.

Then Boron came into view. Combined that thought with the issues of persons working in gas diffusion plants that drank beer, with Boron from grains, did better than others.

Raisins have some extra fluoride due to the pesticide issues, so I don't eat lots of those. Apples are very good.


But I also know that since the 1930s, the agricultural reports tell that most of these trace minerals are highly depleted in the US Soils, so I'd suggest that we don't benefit from these fruit and nut sources as much as we used to benefit.

I do the 10 mg Boron supplements to counter the huge load of fluoride in the water and food chain, and it makes a difference with me. Then again, I've been around some of the most dangerous fluoride operations in the world, so I need an extra boost.

Look at the adult vitamins these days and you'll typically find these have Boron now. Look at some of the bone formulats in health food stores and you'll find some have 50 mg boron.

Some might be able to manage with just diet, and I won't knock that idea, but some need a lot more powerful jolt to keep fluoride effects in order.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   
My friend also had that same misunderstanding. Actually, before I read the full text, I also hopped on the bandwagon and was pretty awestruck by the findings (if we judge only based on a cursory look at the abstract). The study just found that the more the fluoride intake was facilitated, the more that this fluoride tracer would provide radioactive markers for calcification. Hence, let's say I have arteriosclerosis and I participate in this study.. I would be more likely to allow greater intake of fluoride in the coronary arteries. In the abstract they conclude:

"sodium [¹⁸F]fluoride PET/CT might be useful in the evaluation of the atherosclerotic process in major arteries, including coronary arteries. An increased fluoride [the dye] uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk."

So if I don't have manifest calcification in my arteries, I would be less likely to be permeable to fluoride dye intake--therefore the PET scanning mechanisms would be unable to display possible signs of arterosclerosis (which I didn't have in the first place).

The fluoride (dye) doesn't make one more susceptible to any of these conditions in this study, it is just that the dye itself--when taken in more easily (according to findings) by those with calcification, serves as a marker for such a condition.

I mean perhaps fluoride does cause calcification of the vasculatory system... However, this study in and of itself does not attempt in any way to substantiate or disprove this assertion. They just want to see how effective radioactive fluoride tracers are for the diagnosis of arteriosclerosis.




top topics



 
214
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join