Next Level BS #38: Water Fluoridation, The Facts, The Crazy, and the Reality

What is wrong with all(most) of you people!? It doesn't matter if fluoride is dangerous to our health. It doesn't matter if it's the miracle cure to all of our problems.

These are the facts that matter and they cannot be disputed:
It's added to the water supply without our consent.
It's not required to make the water safe to drink.
It's virtually impossible to remove once added.
There are easy and cheap alternatives available to increase our intake in our diet if we wish.

Nobody can dispute these facts. Nobody!

Why aren't you all up in arms about this!? Sure, I have the choice not to drink it, but what about cooking with it, showering with it, consuming products prepared with it...? Pffft....Idiots!

originally posted by: -mytym-
What is wrong with all(most) of you people!? It doesn't matter if fluoride is dangerous to our health. It doesn't matter if it's the miracle cure to all of our problems.

These are the facts that matter and they cannot be disputed:
It's added to the water supply without our consent.
It's not required to make the water safe to drink.
It's virtually impossible to remove once added.
There are easy and cheap alternatives available to increase our intake in our diet if we wish.

Nobody can dispute these facts. Nobody!

Why aren't you all up in arms about this!? Sure, I have the choice not to drink it, but what about cooking with it, showering with it, consuming products prepared with it...? Pffft....Idiots!

Vote.

Edit: Your claim "It's virtually impossible to remove once added. "
Is quite telling of someone who has done little to no research on the subject. Internet meme I'm guessing?

originally posted by: Tusks
a reply to: Grimpachi

I just tried to watch. Couldn't stand listening to the host. Sorry.

Is this thread now only about the video? Do we have to watch it to comment about fluoridation in this thread?? or can we continue to speak and reason with the written word about the topic?

Did anyone associated with the video read my post about Delta Dental?? follow the links?? If Delta Dental or Renaissance or Interleukin Genetics was mentioned in the video, I will go back and watch it.

Sure, I'll bite.
What exactly is Schedule Y supposed to show?
What is it about his college major that is so interesting that you felt the need to note it?
What does their parent company have to do with your Schedule Y claim?
What does a genetic company have to do with water fluoridation?

One final two part question.

What makes them "one of the biggest pushers for fluoridation" and why did you bring this company into a fluoride conversation?

Thanks

a reply to: superman2012

"Vote"
___________
Our town did, twice over the last 15 years, not to fluoridate.

Then the State Legislature voted to FORCE all municipal water suppliers to over 5,000 people to fluoridate. They were convinced by the lobbying of a very strong "Insurance" company---Delta Dental

At a cost of millions, our water supply is scheduled to begin fluoridation in March.

But!! Last election we voted in enough legislators that a new bill eliminating the forced fluoridation has passed the House. With a little luck, we will escape. Of course, we still have the Diebold machines (or the newer replacements) to vote with, and we should toss those, too.

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: Tusks
a reply to: Grimpachi

I just tried to watch. Couldn't stand listening to the host. Sorry.

Is this thread now only about the video? Do we have to watch it to comment about fluoridation in this thread?? or can we continue to speak and reason with the written word about the topic?

Did anyone associated with the video read my post about Delta Dental?? follow the links?? If Delta Dental or Renaissance or Interleukin Genetics was mentioned in the video, I will go back and watch it.

Sure, I'll bite.
What exactly is Schedule Y supposed to show?
What is it about his college major that is so interesting that you felt the need to note it?
What does their parent company have to do with your Schedule Y claim?
What does a genetic company have to do with water fluoridation?

One final two part question.

What makes them "one of the biggest pushers for fluoridation" and why did you bring this company into a fluoride conversation?

Thanks

Schedule Y shows the relationship of the MANY different companies under the banner of a "non-profit, charitable" Renaissance. Health Services ---some like Delta Dental with revenues over $6.2 billion with more than 4000 employees. Renaissance claimed earnings of less than $9,999--shown on the link to Renaissance-

Delta Dental was the primary lobbier to get forced fluoridation in my State passed last year.

The credentials of the CEO of a company that has been able to circumvent multiple voter refusals should be of interest--and in this case he has a master's degree in applied behavioral sciences. That really becomes interesting if we're talking about forcing us to take a chemical that we suspect has the potential to alter behavior.

Renaissance has signed a contract with a genetic/DNA testing company, allegedly to get some kind of quick test for periodontal disease---something the dentist can usually tell at a glance. The DNA testing offered by Interleukin is the usual inside the cheek swab---where they can sequence what-ever they want to about you---like who might be a good organ donor for someone else, or who might be susceptible to certain diseases or drugs, etc. Almost assuredly this insurance company will soon require the DNA test to obtain dental insurance. It could well become required on Obamacare, too, and all other health insurance--unless the population becomes too suspicious.

a reply to: Tusks

Bill 1312?
Seems like all they would have to do is withdraw from Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority if they feel that strongly about fluoridating the water. Then they wouldn't have to add it.

How is this about a company and not about the politicians ignoring what (at least from what I read) their constituents want?
Upon actually reading the proposed bill, it seems like it is redundant and therefore useless.

SECTION 1. Arkansas Code § 20 - 7 - 136(b), concerning a statewide 19 fluoridation program, is amended to read as follows:
20 (b) The company, corporation, municipality, county, government agency, 21 or other entity that owns or controls a water system shall contro l may 22 determine whether the company, corporation, municipality, county, government 23 agency, or other entity will adjust the quantity of fluoride in the water so 24 as to maintain a fluoride content established by the Department of Health.

Link
So it would be up to the LOCAL entity to adjust the quantity of fluoride to maintain the content established by the Dept of Health....so it would be the same anyways. Why was this bill even introduced?
An even better question would be, why are the anti-fluoride people claiming that they wouldn't have to fluoridate if this bill was passed???Link

originally posted by: Tusks
a reply to: superman2012

"Vote"
___________
Our town did, twice over the last 15 years, not to fluoridate.

Then the State Legislature voted to FORCE all municipal water suppliers to over 5,000 people to fluoridate. They were convinced by the lobbying of a very strong "Insurance" company---Delta Dental

At a cost of millions, our water supply is scheduled to begin fluoridation in March.

But!! Last election we voted in enough legislators that a new bill eliminating the forced fluoridation has passed the House. With a little luck, we will escape. Of course, we still have the Diebold machines (or the newer replacements) to vote with, and we should toss those, too.

Does the town own the water treatment plant? If so, can they not leave the Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority so that they don't have to comply with that law? If they can, then that seems like it should be up to town council.
Any insight?

a reply to: superman2012

Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority is a small outfit far away and has nothing to do with our water supply, which is a multi-million gallons/day facility, owned by the city and supplying 200,000 or so people. The law that was passed requiring fluoridation was for any supplier to more than 5,000 people. The new bill allows for the supplier to decide the lowest amount of fluoride they will use (0), but the high end is still regulated at the old concentration.

But this legal stuff is really dull and straight forward compared to the questions I answered above.

a reply to: Tusks

I must have found a different bill. Can you please link the one that says they can lower the fluoride limit to zero?

a reply to: superman2012

How about you Google "Arkansas fluoride water bill" and take your pick of the multiple links.

I hate this show with every ounce of my being, but I made myself power through this one. I think that this is worth a watch. Fluoride has long been a favorite worry of the modern day conspiracy theorist, myself included at times. I can honestly say, I've never heard anyone like David Icke or Alex Jones provide any real sort of background for their blanket acceptance that Fluoride is the devil.

It's good to see some solid research. I think it's also important to note, people weren't crazy... After all, it's still determined that fluoride does some level of damage. It's also important to acknowledge the folks who take the stance that it's none of the government's god damn business to be putting things into your water. They're right, as well. I couldn't agree with that camp more, myself.

It's an interesting story. It feels like all but the furthest fringe will find something here to hang their hat on here.

a reply to: superman2012

I feel like I should reply to this ridiculous post even though it wasn't directed at me.

If it infringes your rights so much, vote it out.

Lmao if it were that easy we wouldn't be in this situation to begin with. You have more chance of making recreational marijuana use legal through voting. The government needs to officially recognize the utterly obsolete nature of water fluoridation and end the program nation wide.

It does not infringe your rights anymore than any other chemical added to your treated water supply...you did know that there are other chemicals right?

Yes but none of those other chemicals are designed to treat the people, all the other chemicals are designed to treat the water and make it safer to drink. Fluoride has no purpose other than the purpose of reducing cavities. It's a one-size-fits-all mass medication scheme and anyone who supports such a scheme is either inhuman or mentally retarded.

Nothing is stopping you from filtering out any chemicals added to water treatment either.

Fluoride is harder to remove than other chemicals because most water filters available cannot remove the fluoride and the ones which can are very expensive. Whereas other chemicals like chlorine are very easy to remove with simple filters, in fact the chlorine naturally evaporates out of the water.

Please link to one law that states it is illegal to collect rainwater

It is not illegal in many places but is illegal in some states, especially if you want to collect the water for drinking purposes:

City of Roseville Environmental Utilities Department spokesperson Lisa Brown said as long as you are not rerouting your plumbing and using it to shower or for drinking water, it is legal to capture rainwater.

Brown said the water can be used for irrigation purposes such as watering plants. You can generally capture the water without needing a permit. There are some case when a permit is needed.

www.news10.net...

But while rainwater may seem like a global common, nowadays it depends on where you live: By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has put city and state governments in an awkward position--smack in the middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within their own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies.

www.popularmechanics.com...

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Lmao if it were that easy we wouldn't be in this situation to begin with. You have more chance of making recreational marijuana use legal through voting. The government needs to officially recognize the utterly obsolete nature of water fluoridation and end the program nation wide.

Lots of places aren't in "this situation" because they voted. I don't believe I ever said it was easy, but people don't usually like the hard route do they? Even if it were obsolete (which it isn't as there isn't any other way to get it to people as of right now) it would still take the government 20+ years to stop....you know that.

Yes but none of those other chemicals are designed to treat the people, all the other chemicals are designed to treat the water and make it safer to drink. Fluoride has no purpose other than the purpose of reducing cavities. It's a one-size-fits-all mass medication scheme and anyone who supports such a scheme is either inhuman or mentally retarded.

Except for sodium hydroxide. Used to raise the pH of the water after running through a reverse osmosis system. Low pH water does nothing to harm a person. Fluoride is a great MINERAL (not medication) that helps reduce cavities. Anyone that doesn't want people to have good health is either inhuman or mentally retarded.

Fluoride is harder to remove than other chemicals because most water filters available cannot remove the fluoride and the ones which can are very expensive. Whereas other chemicals like chlorine are very easy to remove with simple filters, in fact the chlorine naturally evaporates out of the water.

What about potassium permanganate, sodium hydroxide, sodium bisulphite, antiscalants, alum, polymers, etc. I'm sure I don't have to Google chemicals that go into water treatment for you, do I? Reverse osmosis effectively gets rid of fluoride as does distillation. For drinking water, that is about $4 per 20L...not too expensive at all.

It is not illegal in many places but is illegal in some states, especially if you want to collect the water for drinking purposes:

Don't think I didn't fail to notice your lack of links to laws showing it is illegal and those laws being enforced to collect rainwater.

Fear and sex sell. Keep on, keepin on.

originally posted by: Tusks
a reply to: superman2012

How about you Google "Arkansas fluoride water bill" and take your pick of the multiple links.

I already knew the answer. Zero. There is NO bill that would allow zero fluoride at the operators discretion. Don't be mad, I do that to my kids too.

a reply to: thektotheg

I absolutely agree that it should be a persons choice and if they can't convince the government to change for their beliefs then they better be prepared to adjust their life to make the changes they couldn't convince the government to make and continue to try.

This has never been about the issue of choice, it is about false science, and fear.

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: Tusks
a reply to: superman2012

How about you Google "Arkansas fluoride water bill" and take your pick of the multiple links.

I already knew the answer. Zero. There is NO bill that would allow zero fluoride at the operators discretion. Don't be mad, I do that to my kids too.

You poor boy. Your research skills need some improvement. let me help you.
www.thv11.com...

a reply to: superman2012

Even if it were obsolete (which it isn't as there isn't any other way to get it to people as of right now) it would still take the government 20+ years to stop....you know that.

No other ways? Have you ever heard of toothpaste or mouthwash or fluoride treatments available at the dentist?

Fluoride is a great MINERAL (not medication) that helps reduce cavities. Anyone that doesn't want people to have good health is either inhuman or mentally retarded.

Anything used to treat the health of a person, especially chemically active substances like fluoride, are technically a medication. You can go to your doctor and get a prescription for fluoride tablets.

Anyone that doesn't want people to have good health is either inhuman or mentally retarded.

Yes, but prescribing a one-size-fits-all solution is not a way to ensure that everyone has good health for christ sakes. People aren't able to give their consent. It's like trying to reduce heart attacks by putting blood thinner in the water. And it's supposed to be applied topically to the teeth, which can be done by using toothpaste or many other ways. Just chucking it in the water supply and hoping that people get enough on the surface of their teeth when they drink it IS ABSOLUTELY INSANE and you know it.

What about potassium permanganate, sodium hydroxide, sodium bisulphite, antiscalants, alum, polymers, etc.

All the chemicals they use is yet another reason I don't drink tap water, it's like drinking a chemical cocktail mixed with what ever else leaks into the water from the piping. But the fact still remains that fluoride is the only additive used to treat the people instead of the water.

Reverse osmosis effectively gets rid of fluoride as does distillation. For drinking water, that is about $4 per 20L...not too expensive at all.

Reverse osmosis systems are very expensive to buy in the first place. The link I just posted states "Reverse osmosis systems are generally unaffordable for personal use." On top of that, I should not have to pay just to clean my god damn water and remove something I didn't want in it to begin with.

Don't think I didn't fail to notice your lack of links to laws showing it is illegal and those laws being enforced to collect rainwater.

Well forgive me for not being a lawyer, I'm not about to spend hours looking through the millions of laws that exist to find one specific law to prove something to you. It's much easier to present information from trusted sources (a mainstream news website and popular mechanics are reliable sources). There are many other sources which explain the same thing, all it takes is a simple Google search and you will be able to find the truth for yourself. If you want to stay in denial that's not my problem.

a reply to: superman2012

Anyone that doesn't want people to have good health is either inhuman or mentally retarded.

Right so this same government that is looking after our health and safety not only profits from both cigarettes and alcohol but promotes the sale of them....that makes sense

Putting fluoride in the water for the benefit of public health by the government is just such a hypocritical argument...

Profit is the only reason the wheels are turning in todays world and profit does not always have people's health in mind...

Just wanted to report a discovery. The bottled water by publix that is almost always on sale that I bought says it is purified by reverse osmosis and micron filtration ozonation only cost me like $2 for a 24 pack of 16.9 oz bottles.

So if you can't afford a filter you can still get the water cheap. Please remember to recycle.

a reply to: Grimpachi

it is purified by reverse osmosis and micron filtration ozonation

Are there any minerals or at least anything beneficial left in the water after that process ?