600 Physicians, Dentists, Scientists and Environmentalists Call for an End to Fluoridation‏

For hundreds of thousands of years we have been drinking water with fluoride in it. Often times at harmful levels. For hundreds of thousands of years peoples' teeth rotted away in areas which didn't have natural fluoride.

reply to post by Phage

I hate to ask but I must, can you provide a link for your above statement?

Regards, Iwinder

the above post reminds me of this story about a town, 1 side had floridation and the other side didn't...there was a marked difference...floridated had better teeth much less cavities...unfloridated had terrible teeth and many cavities..

I was trying to find the link....didn't find it yet...I have to go out run errand, will look some more larter

Wow great thread, love to invite some of you fluoridation supporters around for aluminium by product tea party. Phage you have the first invite

Autism? Look into immunisation.

Alzheimer's, look into aluminium.

People are slowly starting to understand sickness is a business, get it?

Originally posted by Sankari
Uh, OP? You're about 6 years too late. This is old news. It even says so on the blog:

Sources:
Fluoride Action Network August 9, 2007
Medical News Today August 10, 2007

Didn't you read it?

What's your point, keep it quite, don't repeat incase someone hasn't heard, don't want the info out there?

You have 2nd invitation

Originally posted by fireyaguns

Originally posted by Sankari
Uh, OP? You're about 6 years too late. This is old news. It even says so on the blog:

Sources:
Fluoride Action Network August 9, 2007
Medical News Today August 10, 2007

Didn't you read it?

What's your point, keep it quite, don't repeat incase someone hasn't heard, don't want the info out there?

You have 2nd invitation

You think just like I do, but you put it to words before I......A typical thread de-rail attempt is to say its old news but the de-railer takes the time to let us know that point......I think it should be obvious to all but many thanks for pointing it out FYG'S

Regards, Iwinder

Plenty of lies in this thread lmao. Guys, don't trust anyone who says something is good for you.

2 Cities where I live, the one I live in doesn't fluoridate but the other one does yet we have overall better teeth and lesser problems. This is enough proof for me to say that fluoride does more damage than ANY good.

Like others have said, there's a business in getting people sick. This is why we pay for healthcare! People need to start learning that we are just experiments for other generations to come. No government, doctor or business gives a crap about what they do to us cause they know the people they pay to spread lies do a damn good job at it.

Originally posted by superman2012
...even though in some parts it is naturally occurring and they take it out of the water. I agree that people should be given a choice in the matter, and they do, they usually vote on it.

There isn't enough evidence that it does harm in such a small concentration. They need to do much more research on it.

That is the same thing "they" said about DDT/asbestos/Lead paint/agent orange/ etc etc and more times a thousand.

Will we ever learn that a chemical is just that and not natural?

Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by Iwinder

For hundreds of thousands of years we have been drinking water with fluoride in it. Often times at harmful levels. For hundreds of thousands of years peoples' teeth rotted away in areas which didn't have natural fluoride.

reply to post by Phage

 

I hate to ask but I must, can you provide a link for your above statement?

Regards, Iwinder

One only has to look at the natural fluoride levels in untreated water. A simple google search will provide that for you. Some places take naturally occurring fluoride out of the water.

Originally posted by Iwinder

Originally posted by superman2012
...even though in some parts it is naturally occurring and they take it out of the water. I agree that people should be given a choice in the matter, and they do, they usually vote on it.

There isn't enough evidence that it does harm in such a small concentration. They need to do much more research on it.

That is the same thing "they" said about DDT/asbestos/Lead paint/agent orange/ etc etc and more times a thousand.

Will we ever learn that a chemical is just that and not natural?

Regards, Iwinder

"They" said that DDT/asbestos/lead paint/agent orange/etc etc was fit for consumption at low levels? I think you are getting your arguments confused.

Originally posted by Meaningless
Plenty of lies in this thread lmao. Guys, don't trust anyone who says something is good for you.

2 Cities where I live, the one I live in doesn't fluoridate but the other one does yet we have overall better teeth and lesser problems. This is enough proof for me to say that fluoride does more damage than ANY good.

Like others have said, there's a business in getting people sick. This is why we pay for healthcare! People need to start learning that we are just experiments for other generations to come. No government, doctor or business gives a crap about what they do to us cause they know the people they pay to spread lies do a damn good job at it.

There was a study done on your city and the other city?!? Can I read it please? Or is this your opinion? If I don't hear back from you, I will assume that you just made this up to try to garner some more stars.

Edit: There is a lot of fear mongering in this thread from people that don't even understand the basic principles of what is being discussed...but that is to be expected. People fear what they don't know.

Originally posted by fireyaguns
Wow great thread, love to invite some of you fluoridation supporters around for aluminium by product tea party. Phage you have the first invite

Autism? Look into immunisation.

Alzheimer's, look into aluminium.

People are slowly starting to understand sickness is a business, get it?

Apparently you didn't read the whole thread, otherwise you would have been privy to the information that was given showing that fluoride is NOT an aluminum byproduct, but rather it is used for smelting.

Get your facts straight in your mind before putting them down on here as fact.

reply to post by sarahlm


That wont do anything until you get those 600 people out of the back pocket of pharma fda and ama.

If ya know something i dont care how strange it is....speak the fkup. We will pay ya handsomely later.

Here is a great video on the real source of fluoridation and why we have it today!

reply to post by superman2012


watch the video I posted a few posts below!

reply to post by fnpmitchreturns


I did, now will you read this?
Link

reply to post by sarahlm


I would like to see a list of the professionals that call for an end to fluoridation. Not their names so much as their job titles. A CEO of a clothing store, while impressive, means nothing in this capacity.

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by phishyblankwaters

 

Is this your picture?

You should concentrate on this picture:

I just wanted to point out that the graphic you want more concentration on says nothing to factually support benefits of fluoride.
1. It's said it's safe and effective against tooth decay by two entities who have more of an interest in money than the well being of everyone else.
2. The vast majority of the rest of that graphic simply states when and where fluoride is added and how much.
3. Reduces tooth decay 20-40%? Compared to who, what where and when?
It looks fancy and contains facts, I suppose, it's just cleverly worded to seem as if it is in support of fluoride for your well being in general.

I can understand that flouride applied topically to teeth that are in need of it can be helpful. My concern is what chronic exposure from an unnatural source has on the rest of the body, especially in the brain when aluminum is combined with it.

BRAIN Fluoride’s ability to damage the brain is one of the most active areas of fluoride research today. In the past three decades, over 100 studies have found that fluoride exposure can damage the brain.

This research includes: Over 40 animal studies showing that prolonged exposure to varying levels of fluoride can damage the brain, particularly when coupled with an iodine deficiency, or aluminum excess;

37 human studies linking moderately high fluoride exposures with reduced intelligence;
19 animal studies reporting that mice or rats ingesting fluoride have an impaired capacity to learn and remember; 12 studies (7 human, 5 animal) linking fluoride with neurobehavioral deficits (e.g., impaired visual-spatial organization);
3 human studies linking fluoride exposure with impaired fetal brain development.

Based on this accumulating body of research, several prestigious reviews — including a report authored by the U.S. National Research Council and a meta-analysis published by a team of Harvard scientists – have raised red flags about the potential for low levels of fluoride to harm brain development in some members of the population.

The NRC Review (2006) In 2006, the National Research Council (NRC) stated that “it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain.” In addition to calling for U.S.-based research on fluoride’s IQ effects, the NRC expressed concern about fluoride’s possible contribution to dementia. According to the NRC: “Studies of populations exposed to different concentrations of fluoride should be undertaken to evaluate neurochemical changes that may be associated with dementia. Consideration should be given to assessing effects from chronic exposure, effects that might be delayed or occur late-in-life, and individual susceptibility.”

EPA’s Neurotoxicology Division Review (2007) In 2007, scientists from the Neurotoxicology Division of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency identified fluoride as having “substantial evidence” of “developmental neurotoxicity.” A developmental neurotoxin is a chemical that can damage the young, developing brain. The EPA scientists based their conclusion on studies showing that fluoride exposure during pregnancy can damage the brain of the offspring. Consistent with EPA’s assessment, three studies from China have found that the brain of the human fetus can be significantly damaged by the mother’s high fluoride intake. While the safe dose for preventing this effect is not yet known, some adults in western countries have higher urinary fluoride levels of fluoride than the mothers in the Chinese studies (=4.3 ppm). (Mansfield 1999; Yu 1996; Dong 1993).

Harvard Review (2012) In July of 2012, a team of Harvard researchers published a “meta-analysis” of 27 studies that have investigated the relationship between fluoride and human intelligence. (Choi 2012) The overwhelming majority of these studies found that fluoride exposure was associated with reduced IQ in children. In fact, 26 of the 27 studies that met the Harvard team’s inclusion criteria found a relationship between elevated fluoride and reduced IQ. The Harvard team thus concluded that fluoride’s effect on the developing brain of children should be a “high research priority” in countries like the U.S. where, despite mass fluoridation programs, no studies have yet been conducted to investigate the issue.

As noted by Dr. Philippe Grandjean, an environmental health scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health: “Fluoride seems to fit in with lead, mercury, and other poisons that cause chemical brain drain. The effect of each toxicant may seem small, but the combined damage on a population scale can be serious, especially because the brain power of the next generation is crucial to all of us.”

reply to post by superman2012


Some place stake naturally occurring fluoride out of the water, and some put unnatural fluoride in the water.

They said DDT/asbestos/lead paint/agent orange etc was fir for consumption at low levels, you clearly have had too much.

Where does unnatural fluoride come from again

reply to post by Rychwebo


A quick search will give you the science behind the graphic (unless you aren't sure how to google yet, let me know, I can help)