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.

 

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

page: 8
33
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

You are continuously forgetting and quite conveniently I might add that the water and toothpaste is not the only source of Fluoride; it is used via tap water in all processed or canned foods....Which means you could technically get at least 8 ppm even more at the usage of the 1ppm in 80% of what you consume daily..




posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Don't put neurotoxin between quotes when writing about fluoride.

It has been replicated countless times, familiarise yourself with the study that spawned all those papers.

Phyllis J Mullenix was at time of publication from Harvard-affiliated Forsyth.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7760776


Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1995 Mar-Apr;17(2):169-77.

Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats.

Mullenix PJ, Denbesten PK, Schunior A, Kernan WJ.

Toxicology Department, Forsyth Research Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Abstract

Fluoride (F) is known to affect mineralizing tissues, but effects upon the developing brain have not been previously considered. This study in Sprague-Dawley rats compares behavior, body weight, plasma and brain F levels after sodium fluoride (NaF) exposures during late gestation, at weaning or in adults. For prenatal exposures, dams received injections (SC) of 0.13 mg/kg NaF or saline on gestational days 14-18 or 17-19. Weanlings received drinking water containing 0, 75, 100, or 125 ppm F for 6 or 20 weeks, and 3 month-old adults received water containing 100 ppm F for 6 weeks. Behavior was tested in a computer pattern recognition system that classified acts in a novel environment and quantified act initiations, total times and time structures. Fluoride exposures caused sex- and dose-specific behavioral deficits with a common pattern. Males were most sensitive to prenatal day 17-19 exposure, whereas females were more sensitive to weanling and adult exposures. After fluoride ingestion, the severity of the effect on behavior increased directly with plasma F levels and F concentrations in specific brain regions. Such association is important considering that plasma levels in this rat model (0.059 to 0.640 ppm F) are similar to those reported in humans exposed to high levels of fluoride.

PMID: 7760776 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]




posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


Which means you could technically get at least 8 ppm even more at the usage of the 1ppm in 80% of what you consume daily..



8 ppm. Really? But I don't really understand what you mean when you say "usage of the 1ppm in 80% of what you consume". That doesn't represent a "dose", it's a concentration.
So what you are saying is that if I ate a 12oz can of spam (not that I would) I would be ingesting 2.72mg of fluoride? Can you tell me how you arrive at that 8 ppm figure?

Don't get me wrong. I think that eating a lot of processed food is not a good idea. Nor do I think drinking a lot of water with high concentrations of fluoride (or some other things) is a good idea.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


Which means you could technically get at least 8 ppm even more at the usage of the 1ppm in 80% of what you consume daily..



8 ppm. Really? But I don't really understand what you mean when you say "usage of the 1ppm in 80% of what you consume". That doesn't represent a "dose", it's a concentration.
So what you are saying is that if I ate a 12oz can of spam (not that I would) I would be ingesting 2.72mg of fluoride? Can you tell me how you arrive at that 8 ppm figure?

Don't get me wrong. I think that eating a lot of processed food is not a good idea. Nor do I think drinking a lot of water with high concentrations of fluoride (or some other things) is a good idea.


So then why are you defending it?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
 

Caffeine is a neurotoxin but you would have to consume quite a lot of coffee to see any toxic effects.

Interesting study based on rat behavior. As I said, the neurological effects of fluoride have not been shown to occur at the levels found in fluoridated water.
From the complete article you cite:

Similar plasma fluoride levels of 0.076-0.25 ppm have been found in humans ingesting 5-10ppm fluoride in drinking water.

The study does not say fluoride is a neurotoxin.

Thus, conclusions concerning the neurotoxic potential of fluoride require further rat and human studies, both focused on the relationship of plasma fluoride levels with the brain, behavior, and skeletal growth.

www.fluoridealert.org...

edit on 8/26/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


So then why are you defending it?

Drinking fluoride in high concentrations? I'm not.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I'm saying that if they allow 1ppm and this same dosage/concentration is in all of your processed foods etc; so for every can of veggies or chips, spam, etc you are getting 1 ppm per item. Consuming up to 8 processed foods would result in the ingestion of 8 ppm of fluoride; not to mention that quite a few people drink much more than 1L of water or that boiling the water increases the concentration of fluoride.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


It does say fluoride is a neurotoxin, quite blatantly at that, in its title. Only if the results turned out to be negative, then you'd be correct, but you aren't.

What does the EPA limit of 4 ppm say to you, when the lower range of 5 ppm is just 1 ppm away?

Quite liberal limit, which do nothing to safeguard public from harmful effects.

From

-Pharmacological
-Public Health

standpoints, fluoridation fails both.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Don't worry about the fluoride. It's important to know how to neutralize the effects. There are antidotes to consider. Here is one on this site. blog.imva.info... Note the other ions that this site addresses. I'll dig through my bookmarks and try to find others that I have. Not much fluoride is needed to suppress the thyroid, a cup of coffee has little effect on speeding most people up because the methyl is counteracted by the fluoride.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by Phage
 


I'm saying that if they allow 1ppm and this same dosage/concentration is in all of your processed foods etc; so for every can of veggies or chips, spam, etc you are getting 1 ppm per item. Consuming up to 8 processed foods would result in the ingestion of 8 ppm of fluoride; not to mention that quite a few people drink much more than 1L of water or that boiling the water increases the concentration of fluoride.


Precisely. I drink a lot of water. Most day's vary, but I would guess my average intake of tap water to be around 2-3L a day. To assume that 1ppm is harmless is completely short sighted, and not looking at other factors.

Phage, it would seem to me that you are a victim of your own brilliant mind here. Your rationality (which I respect completely), seems to be a cage in this instance, only allowing you to crunch certain numbers and not others, because you want to believe.

I used to balk at the idea of fluoridation being detrimental too, until I remembered a regiment at my elementary school in which we had to rinse our mouths every morning with concentrated fluoride. This was in addition to fluoridated water, tooth paste, etc. I witnessed many of my fellow students swallow it, and even did so myself on occasion.

The benefits simply do NOT outweigh the risks.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


Consuming up to 8 processed foods would result in the ingestion of 8 ppm of fluoride

No. It would result in eating 8 "servings" at 1 ppm (assuming that the "serving" was nothing but water and that water was tap water from a fluoridated water supply).


not to mention that quite a few people drink much more than 1L of water or that boiling the water increases the concentration of fluoride.

Yes they do drink more than 1 liter of water a day. Yes, boiling water does increase the concentration. If you increase the concentration from 1 to 8ppm you have boiled that 1 liter down to 1/8 liter, about 4 ounces. That's a lot of boiling.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


Consuming up to 8 processed foods would result in the ingestion of 8 ppm of fluoride

No. It would result in eating 8 "servings" at 1 ppm (assuming that the "serving" was nothing but water and that water was tap water from a fluoridated water supply).


not to mention that quite a few people drink much more than 1L of water or that boiling the water increases the concentration of fluoride.

Yes they do drink more than 1 liter of water a day. Yes, boiling water does increase the concentration. If you increase the concentration from 1 to 8ppm you have boiled that 1 liter down to 1/8 liter, about 4 ounces. That's a lot of boiling.


And what if I drink 3L a day, and boil water to cook my processed mac and cheese in?

Your arguments simply do not make sense. You are trying to present the numbers as harmless instead of taking a cold hard look at ALL the data and making an informed decision.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
 


It does say fluoride is a neurotoxin, quite blatantly at that, in its title. Only if the results turned out to be negative, then you'd be correct, but you aren't.

It was a study of neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats that is what the title means.
If the results had turned out negative the title would have been the same and the conclusion would have been that there is no indication of neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Instead the result is that at high plasma levels there were indicators of neurotoxicity in rats.



What does the EPA limit of 4 ppm say to you, when the lower range of 5 ppm is just 1 ppm away?

It says to me that maybe the EPA limit could be lower because it results in plasma levels of 0.076-0.25 ppm.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Another site which addresses neutralizing the effects. www.glutathionediseasecure.com...

Seems like eggs, garlic, plain old yellow mustard (turmeric) and a few other foods can help. Asparagus is another good food as is cabbage but unless boiled they have sedative properties of their own. I'd prefer the asparagines over the fluoride anyday though. certain forms of organic sulfur is the antidote. Remember that the sulfur group also may contain goiterinogens so they not only stop fluoride from attaching, they restrict iodine. seems to defeat the purpose a little but many cures have their own side effects. Boiling these things help though.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


While this may be highly inappropriate and maybe even a direct violation of T&C; I rather wish somebody would knock out all of your teeth, then perhaps you wouldn't feel the need to consume fluoride and just maybe you would begin to think clearly.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


And what if I drink 3L a day
Tap water? Then you would get 1/3 more fluoride.

and boil water to cook my processed mac and cheese in
It would depend on how much tap water you added.

While we're doing what ifs...what if you had a well with a concentration of 20ppm?


Your arguments simply do not make sense. You are trying to present the numbers as harmless instead of taking a cold hard look at ALL the data and making an informed decision.

My arguments do make sense. At fluoridation levels the concentrations have not been shown to be toxic. I have looked at an awful lot of data. Why don't you do the same? Both "sides" of it.

edit on 8/26/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


I rather wish somebody would knock out all of your teeth, then perhaps you wouldn't feel the need to consume fluoride and just maybe you would begin to think clearly.

How pleasant.
But I don't feel a need to consume fluoride. I try not to swallow toothpaste.

edit on 8/26/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 





It was a study of neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats that is what the title means. If the results had turned out negative the title would have been the same and the conclusion would have been that there is no indication of neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Instead the result is that at high plasma levels there were indicators of neurotoxicity in rats.


Above is simply a repeat of what I replied to you, worded differently.

The only thing you seem to be stubborn is the connotation of concentration.

In today's conditions, the concentration is constantly reached, for all practical purposes.

That was confirmed by the recent CDC release that Dental Fluorosis is on the RISE, with increasing percentage.

Are you trying to word your way out of admitting it's a neurotoxin?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Oh that's right, sublingual mucosal absorption doesn't occur so there is no way you could ever absorb toxins with your mouth.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   


Above is simply a repeat of what I replied to you, worded differently.
No. It is quite different from what you said. You said the title stated that fluoride is a neurotoxin. The title merely states the object of the experiment.




That was confirmed by the recent CDC release that Dental Fluorosis is on the RISE, with increasing percentage.

Are you trying to word your way out of admitting it's a neurotoxin?


CDC source please.

The study you showed me did not say fluoride is a neurotoxin

edit on 8/26/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join