Plant officials stop flouridating water... Get put on leave

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Reports over 100 cases of impairment of neuro-behavioral development..Don't give me any crap about an amazon book either; find yourself a free copy if you want to debunk it.

Why do you have to be such an ass?
What were the concentrations used in those "cases" (I think you mean studies).

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Iwinder

 

I appreciate your answer but I strongly disagree with you insinuating that 1ppm is an actual target level throughout the world, almost if not all canned goods are packed in water and what the water contains is not available to read or study.

I did not mean to insinuate that 1ppm is a target for artificial fluoridation used throughout the world but if you can produce evidence that it is not I would appreciate it. You understand that the higher levels I referred to were for naturally occurring concentrations?

edit on 8/27/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Fair enough, you should have made that clear in your post but I understand now.
A target level is just that, something to aim for not something that has been achieved as of yet.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Phage


I'm not intentionally being an 'ass'. I'm trying to nip any semantic arguments in the butt before they even get started here. It wouldn't be the first time someone tried to tell me off for posting an amazon link...

For anyone interested our city here was one of the two very first cities in Canada to implement the artificial injection of a known toxin to its residents....
Sarnia Ontario and hell yes I am not pleased with it.
The third link down is the one you want to read if you are interested in how and when this toxin first got started here in Canada.
Links below
www2.macleans.ca...
www.theobserver.ca...
www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com...

Kind of makes me wonder if our army base here had anything to do with this decision made way before I could possibly have a say in the matter.


Link for the base and each photo has a link and I do realize that it would be impossible for anyone here to check it all out, but I thought the connection might be interesting.
Link
www.google.ca... 24&bih=631


Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Phage


Funny that you mention formaldehyde, it and methanol is the same thing that Aspartame breaks down into..

reply to post by Phage

What were the concentrations used

It doesn't matter. If fluoride is indeed cumulative; any amount is a significant amount, because over time it will build up to cause the same problems as one massive concentration at once.

reply to post by Iwinder

A target level is just that, something to aim for not something that has been achieved as of yet.

Still some misunderstanding.

In localities where natural levels are less than 0.7ppm, the "target level" is the level which artificial fluoridation strives for. The "target levels" are reached by the use of artificial fluoridation. The target levels vary from location to location, determined by the local authorities but 1ppm is typical.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

It doesn't matter. If fluoride is indeed cumulative; any amount is a significant amount, because over time it will build up to cause the same problems as one massive concentration at once.

So. If you consume say, a tube of fluoride toothpaste, your teeth will immediately show fluorosis? Or do you mean that over time, since fluoride is pretty much unavoidable, we will all display the effects of flouride overdose?


Fluoride collects in hard tissues (bones and teeth) sort of like calcium does. And like calcium, it also leaves the bones.

Accumulation levels in soft tissues (the brain, nerves, muscles, etc) are very low under normal concentrations.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by VeritasAequitas

 

It doesn't matter. If fluoride is indeed cumulative; any amount is a significant amount, because over time it will build up to cause the same problems as one massive concentration at once.

So. If you consume say, a tube of fluoride toothpaste, your teeth will immediately show fluorosis?

Fluoride collects in hard tissues (bones and teeth) sort of like calcium does. And like calcium, it also leaves the bones.

Accumulation levels in soft tissues (the brain, nerves, muscles, etc) are very low under normal concentrations.

edit on 8/27/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

After reading this thread and hearing b0th sides, I am g0ing t0 have t0
g0 with Mr. Phage. The fluoride hype had me w0rried, I w0nder if any 0f
these pe0ple like alex jones have st0ck in b0ttled water

Originally posted by sirnukeem

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by VeritasAequitas

 

It doesn't matter. If fluoride is indeed cumulative; any amount is a significant amount, because over time it will build up to cause the same problems as one massive concentration at once.

So. If you consume say, a tube of fluoride toothpaste, your teeth will immediately show fluorosis?

Fluoride collects in hard tissues (bones and teeth) sort of like calcium does. And like calcium, it also leaves the bones.

Accumulation levels in soft tissues (the brain, nerves, muscles, etc) are very low under normal concentrations.

edit on 8/27/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

After reading this thread and hearing b0th sides, I am g0ing t0 have t0
g0 with Mr. Phage. The fluoride hype had me w0rried, I w0nder if any 0f
these pe0ple like alex jones have st0ck in b0ttled water

I really hope you aren't serious...

Have you looked at the evidence his critics have provided? Your going to tell me numerous dentists with 30+ years of experience are wrong and some guy on ATS is right?

I have a lot of respect for phage and he is a lot of fun to debate with, but he hasn't shown conclusively that concerns over the fluoridation of drinking water are unfounded. He hasn't done that AT ALL.

I don't understand the purpose of fluoridating water when we have toothpaste. Combining the high amounts of fluoride in toothpaste plus the amount ingested from drinking water seems completely unnecessary.

From the EU's public health program:

There is no obvious advantage in favour of water fluoridation compared with topical application, that is via toothpaste, mouthwash or gel. The effect of continued exposure to fluoride from whatever source is questionable once the permanent teeth have erupted.

And it's funny they even mention this:

The very youngest are at greatest risk of exceeding fluoride limits. The estimated tolerable limit for children under 1-6 years old is 1.5 mg/day, which should produce less than 5% of moderate dental fluorosis.

It's funny because on the CDC's website you can look up the fluoride concentration in every county's water supply and a lot of them have a concentration higher than 1.50 mg/L. I even saw this city which has a concentration of 2.10 mg/L. Now combine that with the use of TOOTHPASTE, and you get an exorbitant amount of flouride being ingested.

Someone tell me what's the point of that much flouride? I understand that maybe it's of some use for developing childrens' teeth in low, controlled amounts.. but why do I, as a grown person, need it? It's found naturally from many different sources, so why do I need so much extra from tap water? I doubt NOT brushing your teeth and just drinking flouridated water is going to help your teeth any. Here's another excerpt from the EU public health program:

There is no clear advantage of water fluoridation over direct application for prevention, and systemic exposure via drinking water is unlikely to benefit people whose teeth have already grown. Europe-wide trends show a reduction in tooth decay in 12 year-olds regardless of whether water is fluoridated or not.

That's great. So in Europe, it's proven that tooth decay is on the decline, no thanks to flouride.

To me the dangers and uselessness of flouridated water seem completely obvious, so I don't understand why the CDC touts it as a landmark achievement in public health.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Iwinder

 

A target level is just that, something to aim for not something that has been achieved as of yet.

Still some misunderstanding.

In localities where natural levels are less than 0.7ppm, the "target level" is the level which artificial fluoridation strives for. The "target levels" are reached by the use of artificial fluoridation. The target levels vary from location to location, determined by the local authorities but 1ppm is typical.

That is the problem in our area, "Local Authorities" are able and willing to dose the public when they themselves have no real idea of what they are approving to be dispensed into the water supply.

Second comment is that we do not need nor ever needed artificial Fluoridation in our drinking water.

A few posts up I posted some links to our cities debate on this issue and I tell you straight up some of the council members have less education than should be required for the job.

Yet they can dictate to almost 100 thousand people what they get out of their taps...
Not right and never will be when we are talking about a known toxin.
Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by VeritasAequitas

 

It doesn't matter. If fluoride is indeed cumulative; any amount is a significant amount, because over time it will build up to cause the same problems as one massive concentration at once.

So. If you consume say, a tube of fluoride toothpaste, your teeth will immediately show fluorosis? Or do you mean that over time, since fluoride is pretty much unavoidable, we will all display the effects of flouride overdose?


Fluoride collects in hard tissues (bones and teeth) sort of like calcium does. And like calcium, it also leaves the bones.

Accumulation levels in soft tissues (the brain, nerves, muscles, etc) are very low under normal concentrations.

edit on 8/27/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

TextSo. If you consume say, a tube of fluoride toothpaste, your teeth will immediately show fluorosis? Or do you mean that over time, since fluoride is pretty much unavoidable, we will all display the effects of flouride overdose?

Ridiculous comment to say the least, are you talking a tube of paste a day or over a month?
We don't do Fluoride paste, we pay extra not to have it in our tooth paste.
"since fluoride is pretty much unavoidable" is another good one.
So are you saying it is useless to try and cut back on your consumption of Fluroide because it cannot be avoided?
If so I guess I better hit the basement tonight and rip out my 5 stage RO system since it is letting in traces of Fluoride into our water supply.

If you cannot eliminate it 100 % then give it up?

Our tap water here reads at 105 ppm
Bottled water reads at 30-40 ppm
Our Reverse Osmosis water after a year and a half with the same filters reads at 4ppm

Those numbers are for suspended particles but you get the idea.

We had our water tested at a lab after installing the RO system and Fluoride came in at zero ppm
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by DeadSeraph


I concur in entirety; there are a great deal of points I made that he conveniently 'forgot' or did/could not rebut. Some of which are crucial to him proving himself.

reply to post by Phage


This is not true; Calcium, which fluoride binds to, stores itself into your soft tissues and arteries, like the Pineal gland, and your heart (remember the atherosclerosis findings?), due to an inadequate intake of Vitamin K2 which is severely lacking in the standard American western diet of Hamburgers, french fries, and toxins, the Calcium does NOT make it's way into your bones and teeth where it is supposed to go.

Incidentally, Vitamin K2, which has been shown to have no toxicity level or adverse effects, is effective in the treatment of dental decay and cavities, which again is one of my point's you neglected to rebut. Why not add an actual Vitamin to our water that would provide a range of benefits instead of neurotoxins?

reply to post by free_form

It's funny because on the CDC's website you can look up the fluoride concentration in every county's water supply and a lot of them have a concentration higher than 1.50 mg/L. I even saw this city which has a concentration of 2.10 mg/L. Now combine that with the use of TOOTHPASTE, and you get an exorbitant amount of flouride being ingested.

Localities with fluoride levels of greater than 1.2ppm are not artificially fluoridated. Did you read what it said for the location you linked?

Yes. The water system has a natural fluoride concentration at or above the level considered optimal for the prevention of dental caries (cavities). For fluoride levels above 2 ppm (2 mg/L), alternate drinking water sources should be used for children 8 years and younger. For more information, refer to CDC recommendations.

apps.nccd.cdc.gov... &StateName=South+Carolina

That's great. So in Europe, it's proven that tooth decay is on the decline, no thanks to flouride.

Actually it probably is due to fluoride, in toothpaste and supplements. Flouride in water provides additional protection.

Twenty studies were included in the final body of evidence. Among studies published after/during 1980, any fluoride (self- and professionally applied or water fluoridation) annually averted 0.29 (95%CI: 0.16–0.42) carious coronal and 0.22 (95%CI: 0.08–0.37) carious root surfaces. The prevented fraction for water fluoridation was 27% (95%CI: 19%–34%). These findings suggest that fluoride prevents caries among adults of all ages.

jdr.sagepub.com...

reply to post by Iwinder

Ridiculous comment to say the least, are you talking a tube of paste a day or over a month?

Please refer to the context of my reply:

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
It doesn't matter. If fluoride is indeed cumulative; any amount is a significant amount, because over time it will build up to cause the same problems as one massive concentration at once.

It was his statement which was ridiculous.

So are you saying it is useless to try and cut back on your consumption of Fluroide because it cannot be avoided?

According to him that would seem to be the case. He says concentrations are irrelevant.

reply to post by Phage


No, I'm saying that if you continue to ingest fluoride over time eventually it is going to take it's toll on your body and cause symptoms/problems like it would if you had taken it all at once. I'm not talking about fluorosis, I'm talking serious health problems..

If you ate a whole bottle of toothpaste in one go, you wouldn't have fluorosis, you'd be experiencing extreme shut-down of bodily organs, and possibly even death..

It wasn't a ridiculous statement; only the context and 'erroneous interpretation' you applied to it was.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

the Calcium does NOT make it's way into your bones and teeth where it is supposed to go.

None of it? Really? You really need to get away from making such ridiculously broad statements.

Please provide evidence for the accumulation of fluoride in soft tissue.

reply to post by Phage


How about Atherosclerosis for one? Which is caused by the calcium/plaque hardening the soft tissues of the arterial wall..What does fluoride bind to? Calcium...

Vitamin K2 is involved in the bone metabolism process of taking the calcium out of your soft tissues and placing it into your bones and teeth where it belongs; which would explain it's beneficial use for coronary heart disease and atherosclerosis patients.

/facepalm