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.
Originally posted by Iwinder
I am anti Fluoride to the nines and with that said I agree with your post above.
It was almost for sure an action that broke some kind of law there in that city.
On the other hand as I mentioned in an earlier post our city refuses to hold a vote on the issue and be sure that a lot of people here in town want a vote...
How do we go about getting a vote on the removal of Fluroide from our water?????
I guess we can push for a vote on it with having a vote on the issue of should we have a vote on it......
And so on and so forth, they (council and Mayor) won't move on it so for now it is a dead issue...
Regards, Iwinder
Town voters approved fluoridation 12 years ago after a heated debate on the controversial issue, and the task of adding the cavity-fighting chemical fell to Public Works Director Lonnie Frost, whose wife, Shelley, had led the opposition against fluoride.
Town Manager Patrick Banger could not immediately say whether it was done intentionally or by mistake.[/ex
and this has been going on for a while:
Reports from 2009 and 2010 indicate the fluoride in Gilbert's water varied between 0.42 and 1.1 parts per million, well below the maximum allowable level of 4 ppm. The 2011 report, however, indicates fluoride levels had dropped, ranging from "not detected" to 0.92 ppm.
and on an interesting note:
Flouoride apparently had been withheld from the North Water plant beginning around the time three new Town Council members were elected and sworn in. At least two have direct ties to the conservative "tea party" movement.
Tea-party activists have been vocal opponents of municipal-water fluoridation, and other conservative organizations such as the John Birch Society have opposed it for decades.
hmmmm:
Meanwhile, Councilman Eddie Cook, elected to his first term last spring, has requested that the Town Council discuss eliminating water fluoridation during its annual retreat this weekend. That agenda item is unrelated to the investigation at the North Water Treatment Plant, Banger said.
The Town Council first approved fluoridation in 2000, but a resident referendum forced the issue onto a November ballot. About 54 percent of voters approved the measure, and fluoridation commenced in 2001.
Only 54%????!!!!!
And just to say, that water in the Valley is as precious as gold anyway;
The disclosure of the Gilbert officials' actions marks the second time in a matter of days that water supplies to southeast Valley communities are in the news. Earlier this week, in an unrelated case, some San Tan Valley area residents learned that there were high levels of the E. coli bacteria in tap water supplied by Johnson Utilities.
Convenient, no? The news said that there never really was any threat to the water supply after this!
edit on 26-8-2012 by Sulie because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Miraj
While Fluoridation seems completely un-neccesary, I can understand why these officials were put on leave.
They weren't doing what they were paid to do.. That's not a conspiracy.
Originally posted by Sulie
Originally posted by Iwinder
I am anti Fluoride to the nines and with that said I agree with your post above.
It was almost for sure an action that broke some kind of law there in that city.
On the other hand as I mentioned in an earlier post our city refuses to hold a vote on the issue and be sure that a lot of people here in town want a vote...
How do we go about getting a vote on the removal of Fluroide from our water?????
I guess we can push for a vote on it with having a vote on the issue of should we have a vote on it......
And so on and so forth, they (council and Mayor) won't move on it so for now it is a dead issue...
Regards, Iwinder
I am anti flouride, too. I now live in Arizona, back afer the oil spill in the Gulf, since 2010. I had lived in the valley previously, so I am following along with the news about this. Here is an article from the Arizona republic:
www.a... zcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/20120823gilbert-discovers-flouride-withheld-from-water-puts-officials-leave.html
Town voters approved fluoridation 12 years ago after a heated debate on the controversial issue, and the task of adding the cavity-fighting chemical fell to Public Works Director Lonnie Frost, whose wife, Shelley, had led the opposition against fluoride.
Town Manager Patrick Banger could not immediately say whether it was done intentionally or by mistake.[/ex
and this has been going on for a while:
Reports from 2009 and 2010 indicate the fluoride in Gilbert's water varied between 0.42 and 1.1 parts per million, well below the maximum allowable level of 4 ppm. The 2011 report, however, indicates fluoride levels had dropped, ranging from "not detected" to 0.92 ppm.
and on an interesting note:
Flouoride apparently had been withheld from the North Water plant beginning around the time three new Town Council members were elected and sworn in. At least two have direct ties to the conservative "tea party" movement.
Tea-party activists have been vocal opponents of municipal-water fluoridation, and other conservative organizations such as the John Birch Society have opposed it for decades.
hmmmm:
Meanwhile, Councilman Eddie Cook, elected to his first term last spring, has requested that the Town Council discuss eliminating water fluoridation during its annual retreat this weekend. That agenda item is unrelated to the investigation at the North Water Treatment Plant, Banger said.
The Town Council first approved fluoridation in 2000, but a resident referendum forced the issue onto a November ballot. About 54 percent of voters approved the measure, and fluoridation commenced in 2001.
Only 54%????!!!!!
And just to say, that water in the Valley is as precious as gold anyway;
The disclosure of the Gilbert officials' actions marks the second time in a matter of days that water supplies to southeast Valley communities are in the news. Earlier this week, in an unrelated case, some San Tan Valley area residents learned that there were high levels of the E. coli bacteria in tap water supplied by Johnson Utilities.
Convenient, no? The news said that there never really was any threat to the water supply after this!
edit on 26-8-2012 by Sulie because: (no reason given)
I agree, at least they had the chance to vote.
Here I am most confident that a vote would rid us of this crap, why? because of the internet and the young people being more aware of what Government is capable of.
Regards, Iwinder
Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by Sulie
Only fifty four percent of the citizens that voted voted for it. That doesn't mean that it is 54 percent of the population of the area. People who wanted fluoridation were probably pretty aggressive at voting while those who were neutral and trusted in our government probably didn't vote. Sure, that also means those who researched the problems with fluoridation also voted against it. Voting often does not represent the majority only the majority of those who vote. They should have another vote now that many people have been made aware of the problems with fluoridation of water and the reduced recommendations of our federal government on fluoride treatment. 4 PPM is way to high, that had been the threshold limit. 1.5 PPM was the governments recommended average. Now it's recommended PPM is .5 average. I hope I have these figures right, I do them from memory, these coming from a bill that was passed in 2011
I did not quote a corporation or a company. I quoted the EU Department of Health and Consumer Protection.
Why do you think quoting corrupted corporations and companies lends weight to your statement?
What people?
These people are in business to make money; not baby sit us and keep us healthy.
What does that have to do with fluoridation? I would like to see a source for that figure but it probably has to do with drug abuse. Oh wait. It seems you just pulled that number out of someplace dark.
Or else explain to me why at least a 100000 people in the US alone die from prescription pills.
articles.latimes.com...
Drug deaths now outnumber traffic fatalities in U.S., data show
Fueling the surge are prescription pain and anxiety drugs that are potent, highly addictive and especially dangerous when combined with one another or with other drugs or alcohol.
September 17, 2011|By Lisa Girion, Scott Glover and Doug Smith, Los Angeles Times
Propelled by an increase in prescription narcotic overdoses, drug deaths now outnumber traffic fatalities in the United States, a Times analysis of government data has found.
Drugs exceeded motor vehicle accidents as a cause of death in 2009, killing at least 37,485 people nationwide, according to preliminary data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
It can only be harmful? No, I don't realize that. But I do know that in high concentrations it can be harmful.
You do realize that ingesting fluoride can only be harmful right?
Because high levels of fluoride can cause fluorosis and other more serious problems. If your kid eats half a tube of toothpaste (72 mg of fluoride) it would be a good idea to call about it.
Not to mention if you read your fluoridated toothpaste it says to call the poison control center if swallowing more than the recommended allotment
kidemergencies.com...
Based on the amount possibly ingested and the development of any symptoms, the center will give you advice on whether you can safely stay home or go to the ER with your child.
If you can be watched at home, they will most likely recommend that you give your child some milk.
Yes, toothpaste is not meant to be swallowed.
It is to be used topically; not ingested.
Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by Iwinder
Wasn't there another thread on coincidence? I just added to or technically helped you finish your post
Do you know the fluoride level of that water?
The villages I visit use mountain spring water, no water treatment plant.
I guess it depends on what you call a "need" but it seems that our bodies work better with it than without it.
If it were good, fluoride would have been adapted by the human body as a need.
The most obvious sign that a person has a fluoride deficiency is the appearance of dental carries, better known as cavities and weakened tooth enamel. Brittle bones which generally are caused by bone demineralization are also a symptom of fluoride deficiency. This situation can lead to a higher likelihood of developing bone fractures and possibly even osteoporosis.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Philippines
Do you know the fluoride level of that water?
The villages I visit use mountain spring water, no water treatment plant.
I guess it depends on what you call a "need" but it seems that our bodies work better with it than without it.
If it were good, fluoride would have been adapted by the human body as a need.
The most obvious sign that a person has a fluoride deficiency is the appearance of dental carries, better known as cavities and weakened tooth enamel. Brittle bones which generally are caused by bone demineralization are also a symptom of fluoride deficiency. This situation can lead to a higher likelihood of developing bone fractures and possibly even osteoporosis.
www.healthylivinganswers.com...
edit on 8/26/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)edit on 8/26/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Although the fluoride mineral is not considered as essential, it certainly plays a significant role in keeping teeth and bones healthy and strong.
Fluoride sources are not at all common and the fluoride mineral is not found in many of the foods that we eat. That is why it has been added to toothpaste and some drinking water supplies.
To get to it, teeth are not needed for life, though they are helpful.
"Probably"? Why not do some research and find out?
One issue of many overlooked throughout history. However the lifespan and average health compared per 1:1 ratio (1000:1000) is probably much larger than any "civilized" area in the world, but I attribute that mainly to diet (organic mostly), exercise, and a mostly natural way of living (having recently got electricity in the last 6 years, but still no cell phone signal.)