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.

 

Wellington Florida, and Pinella's County Say, "NO!" to Fluoride!

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 

You have the freedom. If you don't like fluoridated water, don't drink it.
It applies if you live someplace with artificial fluoridation or natural fluoridation.

If you live someplace with natural fluoridation are you going to demand that it be defluoridated at the expense of everyone just for you? Or are you going to not drink the water?




posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 





Then why is it dumped into public water supplies?

Because it strengthens teeth.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   

onequestion
reply to post by Phage
 


Its not my last resort are you crazy?

I very accurately described my position.

People will read our debate and come to their own conclusions.

Weather its good for you or not isnt the point. You cannot see the flaws in your logic. Its really sad.
edit on 20142America/ChicagoquAmerica/Chicago2828362014 by onequestion because: (no reason given)


How can you accuse someone of having flaws in their logic, all the while arguing against proven scientific fact?



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by aoxomoxoa
 


its because the argument isnt about the science.

your only making it about the science as a claim to validate your argument that we should do it while we or i are saying that if you want it in your water add it and if you dont then dont.

pretty simple.

of course youll never understand that its not about the science.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by aoxomoxoa
 

Actually, onequestion hasn't really been arguing about the science. He's been arguing about personal choice.

The trouble is, he wants the benefits of living in a community without the responsibilities and sacrifices of personal choice that it entails. He wants the right to go against a community which may want their water supply fluoridated. And resorted to logical fallacies in the process of arguing for it.
edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 


I'm happy for you.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by Witness2008
 

You have the freedom. If you don't like fluoridated water, don't drink it.
It applies if you live someplace with artificial fluoridation or natural fluoridation.

If you live someplace with natural fluoridation are you going to demand that it be defluoridated at the expense of everyone just for you? Or are you going to not drink the water?


I have no issue with the naturally occurring levels of calcium fluoride. I do take issue with an industrial by product such as sodium fluoride being put into my water.

If the fluoride levels in my well water are too high for me then yes, I would use additional filtration.

I suppose this whole social debate in the end will be decided by the individual, finally.

Here is a growing list of communities around the world that are removing sodium fluoride from their water. Opting instead to let folks that want it go buy the pills.

www.just-think-it.com...



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 


I have no issue with the naturally occurring levels of calcium fluoride. I do take issue with an industrial by product such as sodium fluoride being put into my water.

Please point out how they are different.
www.sciencelab.com...
www.sciencelab.com...


If the fluoride levels in my well water are too high for me then yes, I would use additional filtration.
The EPA requires that to be done with public water supplies.


I suppose this whole social debate in the end will be decided by the individual, finally.
No. But hopefully it will at least be decided by the communities it concerns rather than politicians. Ideally it would be based on the science rather than the hype.

edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 


Thank you for posting this. This is a fight for our lives which most people don't believe or refuse to believe that the ADA, the Government, EPA and all the others have been lying to us the whole time.

Here is a copy and paste of more info on the topic. Look it up!



Fluoride at very low levels destroys at least 66 out of 83 enzymes (p. 53, GTBD) by uncoupling the hydrogen bond linkage between the enzyme coils. Fluoride causes 113 known ailments (p. 54, GTBD). Ten of these were established through double blind studies, which although noteworthy, may be of no more significance than the individual diagnoses.

Fluoride in the gels used (inappropriately) to harden the enamel is extremely toxic at a concentration of 13,000 ppm (1.3%). Keith Kantor of McMinneville Oregon was killed in the dentist's chair 3 years ago by swallowing half a teaspoon of the gel. His brother nearly died from the same treatment, but was saved by having calcium gluconate administered to him.

Three kidney dialysis patients at the University of Chicago Medical School were killed 3 years ago when nurses used unpurified Chicago tap water for dialysis. Chicago water has 2 ppm fluoride in it during the winter. Fluoridated water is lethal to dialysis patients. Fluoride is also very harmful to the kidneys of ordinary people.

One can look up the lethal dose of a large number of chemicals all the way from botulinum and snake poison toxins to sugar, a non-toxin, on pages 57and 58 of my book GTBD. It is interesting that the lethal dosage of fluoride compound for a 50 kg man is 2.5 mg (fluoroacetic acid), and 400 mg for arsenic oxide. Numerous people, animals and fish on earth, especially in the U.S., have been killed by fluoride, but very few, if any, by arsenic.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Happy to see this poison being removed from the water supply. I'm pretty sure once its all out they will offer free bags to anyone still wanting to consume it as they cannot dispose of it because its so toxic to the environment.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


One is bound with calcium (natural antedote to fluoride poisoning). The other is not. Sodium fluoride AKA silicofluoride is not found naturally within water, and is in fact an industrial byproduct containing possibly many other elements.

Again the issue at hand is individual choice. The fair thing to do would be to remove it from the water supply, and let those folks that want it in their bodies to go purchase and administer it themselves.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 


One is bound with calcium (natural antedote to fluoride poisoning). The other is not.
Yet both compounds can be toxic as shown by the MSDS.

But neither calcium flouride or sodium flouride are in the water. When dissolved you get calcium (or sodium) ions and fluoride ions. Here: that source you quoted earlier:

Hexafluorosilicic acid is also commonly used for water fluoridation in several countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Republic of Ireland. In the U.S., about 40,000 tons of fluorosilicic acid is recovered from phosphoric acid plants, and then used primarily in water fluoridation, sometimes after being processed into sodium silicofluoride.[5] In this application, the hexafluorosilicic acid converts to the fluoride ion (F-), which is the active agent for the protection of teeth.

en.wikipedia.org...

It is a myth that calcium fluoride is less toxic than sodium fluoride. Look at the MSDS for each. It is a myth that there is any difference in fluorides when they are dissolved in water.


The fair thing to do would be to remove it from the water supply, and let those folks that want it in their bodies to go purchase and administer it themselves.
I disagree, since water is a community resource, it should be at least a community decision. He wants it, she doesn't. He could supplement, she could buy untreated water. What's the difference?


edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


The difference is this Phage.... that I am forced to pay for, shower in and ingest something I don't want to partake in. Water should be just water. Not a cure for dental problems or any other health issue. You want fluoride? Then go buy it yourself and stick it in your own body.

Pretty simple, don't ya think?



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 08:50 PM
link   

onequestion
reply to post by aoxomoxoa
 


its because the argument isnt about the science.

your only making it about the science as a claim to validate your argument that we should do it while we or i are saying that if you want it in your water add it and if you dont then dont.

pretty simple.

of course youll never understand that its not about the science.


The point I wad rrplying to actually was about science.

But to your point : as I have said numerous times, living in a civilized society means that the welfare of society as a whole is greatet than an individual's perceived "right" to be selfish



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Witness2008
reply to post by Phage
 


The difference is this Phage.... that I am forced to pay for, shower in and ingest something I don't want to partake in. Water should be just water. Not a cure for dental problems or any other health issue. You want fluoride? Then go buy it yourself and stick it in your own body.

Pretty simple, don't ya think?



Yes it is simple: the general welfare of society is more important than your selfish desires



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 

I guess you don't understand the concept of community.

You want what you want and be damned with what anyone else wants. Unless they want what you want, then it's ok. Unless they think like you do, then it's ok. Sounds like you should move outta town.

edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 


Their trolling you with circular logic its a waste of time to engage with.

Pearls before swine.

< - - - read whats under my name LOL @ HTML
edit on 20142America/Chicagoq000000America/Chicago2928002014 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 


Hur hur. Good one.
Read my sig.
edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by Witness2008
 

I guess you don't understand the concept of community.

You want what you want and be damned with what anyone else wants. Unless they want what you want, then it's ok. Unless they think like you do, then it's ok. Sounds like you should move outta town.

edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Oh my. That was not something I expected from you.

Individual health issues are just that, individual. I'd rather not have the whole community deciding what is best for me. I would never try to tell another person how to attend their own unique body and health requirements. I leave that call up to the individual.

Water really should just be water.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 09:09 PM
link   

onequestion
reply to post by Brotherman
 


Great news! And interesting comments
I am intrigued about the place, i am from a town in England where there is lots of horses and ferrari's. Also I am sure they put things in the water hear too! I boil it before I drink but I just could not help but LOL at this bit:

"your a really pretty girl I may have hit on you or something embarrassing hahaha."

"I am a dude btw."
I don't know why it came up like this iam new and still getting used to the site great site tho glad i found it!
edit on 2-2-2014 by BoovDawg because: Coz it came up funny :/



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join