Harvard Study Says Fluoridated Water is Causing Cognitive Disorders

reply to post by Witness2008

One-size-fits-all is stupid. Unless it's socks, or something similar

thus, a large contention for fluoridated water, GMO's, etc.

good doctors should be pharmacists (then they may be worth the LARGE visitation charges). What I'm saying is that each person is different... some may even have more of an adverse reaction to fluoride, it could be an underlying cause of other ailments.

I'm saying a lot of things here, without saying 'em... I'm not the brightest stick, but I can think

I dunno, if our taxes can't supply us free vitamin supplements, why should they be so concerned with putting fluoride in the water? That's a backwards sentence, I'll roll with it... on a similar train of thought, (dunno how the rest of the world works but in South Africa you can't get compensated for dentistry by your health care plans, without paying through your teeth, that is) teeth are extremely important; bad teeth can hinder social interactions, limit job application approvals, and most importantly, bad teeth can lead to a number of health concerns for an individual.

So from what I've come to understand reading this thread, fluoride doesn't seem to show any beneficial nor detrimental effects in the majority of studies and cases beyond extreme examples. So what is the point then? Our taxes are paying someone to put an otherwise unnecessary chemical additive into our water... but we can't get health care plans to compensate for beneficial dentistry? I'm not talking about getting lekker gold bling-bling on yo teeth, dawg. I'm talking about root-canal, fillings, bridges, etc. This should, in my mind, be at the forefront of keeping citizens healthy; free, or cheap, dentistry for all... I wrote a silly poem a while ago :

"Take care of hands and teeth,
your arse and your two feet."
wise words a man of old
relayed to me one day.

I asked of eyes and ears
and also asked of strength.
He answered, "Nay, just those
I mention defend these"

reply to post by Phage


Is it possible that personal oral hygiene has increased and subsequently lead to the /assumption/ that fluoride is the cause?

reply to post by Jimjolnir

That is exactly what those studies attempt to determine.

reply to post by Phage


No.

They attempt to determine the greatness of fluoride, and what happens without fluoride, all the while mentioning fluoride yay or nay as the ultimate thing everyone should be thinking about.

My god do I ever feel better since getting non-fluoridated toothpaste, interestingly in my family everyone has followed me in this venture, and have noticed an appreciable decrease of nasal congestions, cavities, trips to the dentist and general healthiness all round.

It appears our genetics are GREATLY affected by the garbage in toothpastes that have fluoride in them, I can feel my body react instantly I get a gag reflex from it, try as much as possible to avoid them.

Now you may say other ingredients in these toothpastes is causing the reaction, but I just do not get those reactions in ANY toothpaste that does not have it, therefore, anything with FLUORIDE in it would naturally be mixed with other insane chemicals, because poison goes with poison, RIGHT ?

ParasuvO

They attempt to determine the greatness of fluoride, and what happens without fluoride, all the while mentioning fluoride yay or nay as the ultimate thing everyone should be thinking about.

Can you point to the parts of the methodology in the papers that you disagree with?

Phage
reply to post by AntiNWO

 

No study has ever proven that ingesting fluoride by drinking it helps prevent cavities in any way,

Really? Are you sure? Have you looked?

While 6-year-old children who had not ingested fluoridated water showed higher dft in the WF-ceased area than in the non-WF area, 11-year-old children in the WF-ceased area who had ingested fluoridated water for approximately 4 years after birth showed significantly lower DMFT than those in the non-WF area. This suggests that the systemic effect of fluoride intake through water fluoridation could be important for the prevention of dental caries.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com... 12%3A00+GMT+%2806%3A00-08%3A00+EDT%29+for+essential+maintenance&userIsAuthenticated=false&deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=

Sorry, I should have said "No credible study..."

Here's the source that your article sites: Systemic effect of water fluoridation on dental caries prevalence

And the authors?

Hyun-Jae Cho1
Bo-Hyoung Jin1
Deok-Young Park
Se-Hwan Jung
Heung-Soo Lee
Dai-Il Paik1
Kwang-Hak Bae

And who's selling us tons and tons of fluoride?

China

What a surprise.

AntiNWO
Sorry, I should have said "No credible study..."

Here's the source that your article sites: Systemic effect of water fluoridation on dental caries prevalence

And the authors?

Hyun-Jae Cho1
Bo-Hyoung Jin1
Deok-Young Park
Se-Hwan Jung
Heung-Soo Lee
Dai-Il Paik1
Kwang-Hak Bae

And who's selling us tons and tons of fluoride?

China

What a surprise.

edit on 3/14/2014 by AntiNWO because: (no reason given)

actually, i believe those are korean names....

still, the kind of fluoride they use in the water is a neurotoxin, and i don't think it's safe to ingest, at any dose....i mean, that's just common sense...studies be damned...

We are not all built the same way, no matter how many Doctors, researchers, corporate sluts, or idiotic politicians try to make it so.

This is nothing but a reason to divide people. Personal choice ends the argument. You want fluoride in your body? Then be adult enough to go get it for yourself.

a reply to: AntiNWO

Fluoride probably does have preventative qualities regarding dental caries. That is to be expected, studies or not. Why? BECAUSE it is a poison. What causes dental caries? Bacteria. What kills bacteria? Well, fluoride does.

The whole nuance being explored here is what ELSE the fluoride is doing, before/after/during its sterilization of your mouth =)

a reply to: Son of Will

What kills bacteria? Well, fluoride does.

It does?
At what concentrations?

a reply to: Phage

Am I correct in understanding that you're not all that thrilled with the chemical either?

My health sure seemed to improve when I removed it from my life as much as practical. I still shower in the city water . . . but I try not to linger very often. LOL.

a reply to: Phage

Hey your back on this thread again eh Phage…So can I ever have the answer to my question posed many pages and months ago? You know the question of how a toxic substance is ever good for you to ingest. How can it be that the benefits (dunno what they'd be) of a toxic substance out weighs how bloody horrible it is for your body to ingest this toxic substance…that is if we can agree it is considered toxic. I am pretty sure the label on the bottle takes care of that though...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Son of Will

What kills bacteria? Well, fluoride does.

It does?

That's what poison does, it tends to cause harm to organic matter.

At what concentrations?

You cited the studies to which I'm referring. I'm just using the most plausible mechanism for why those studies show what they do. But it sounds like you're already in way over your head on this one. Continue by all means.

a reply to: RickyD
Alcohol is a poison
www.medicaldaily.com...

a reply to: Son of Will

That's what poison does, it tends to cause harm to organic matter.

You said fluoride kills bacteria. I asked at what concentrations it does so.
See, even in fluoridated water supplies chlorine is used to disinfect the water (kill bacteria). If fluoride already does that, why add chlorine?

a reply to: Phage

one that we can choose to ingest, or NOT ingest, at no cost....

with fluoride, we are not given that choice....politicians decide for us, that we are to be dosed with something that is considered medicine.

if we choose NOT to ingest fluoride-laced water, the only alternative is bottled, or some kind of filter, or some kind of rain catch, with purification....all of which cost money.

is this ok?

a reply to: Daedalus
You're changing the subject. This is what you said:

You know the question of how a toxic substance is ever good for you to ingest. How can it be that the benefits (dunno what they'd be) of a toxic substance out weighs how bloody horrible it is for your body to ingest this toxic substance

ooops.

As far as artificial fluoridation goes (because many places are naturally fluoridated), I think it should be a community decision since it is a matter of public health. I think it's beneficial myself. Minimal risk, large benefits.

a reply to: Phage

Alcohol is a choice. I chose not to partake in the supposed health benefits it may offer. Are you suggesting that we add it to the public water supply?

a reply to: Witness2008
No.
The effective dose about (about 1 oz/day) would require an enormous amount to be added to the water supply. Terribly expensive.

a reply to: Phage

So....the care and keeping of the public health depends on what the price tag is then.

Industrial waist is cheap to purchase and saves the industry that produces it a sizable chunk of change in disposal cost. Seems rational.