Debate and Discussion

The DANGERS of fluoride
Skullbie at 6:09PM, Feb. 23, 2009
(online)
posts: 4,764
joined: 12-9-2007
http://site.despair.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/pov.jpg
Saw this and thought of this thread lol
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:47PM
imshard at 11:30AM, Feb. 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
Rofl, oh thats a good one. I saved a copy.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
TheMidge28 at 2:35PM, Feb. 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 6,847
joined: 7-5-2007
does bottle water contain fluoride?
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:25PM
Hawk at 3:28PM, Feb. 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
Skullbie, that's AWESOME!

does bottle water contain fluoride?

With bottled water's bragging points of purity and glaciers and whatnot, I'd guess no. But I could be wrong. I made a lifelong goal to never purchase drinking water, and I've only broken it when I went to Mexico.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:46PM
ozoneocean at 7:42PM, Feb. 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 24,996
joined: 1-2-2004
imshard
But over time it will lead to long-term health effects as the material accumulates in your tissues and modifies your body chemistry.
Billions of people consuming it for at least half a century would seem to prove that not to be an issue. ;)
Besides, there is NOT a problem with it accumulating in tissue. Gaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!

—————————–
Yes, a lot of bottled water contains fluoride because it is infact the same treated water you drink at home. Its just been sold on (at a cheaper price) to a botling company like CocaCola and bought by … thirsty yet gullable people for a lot more than the cost of it if it had come out of the pipes… ;)

Some isn't, it depends, but it usaly is.

——————————
Skulbie's pic was good, but really innapropriate here, so I made it a link instead. >:{
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
imshard at 10:45PM, Feb. 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
ozoneocean
imshard
But over time it will lead to long-term health effects as the material accumulates in your tissues and modifies your body chemistry.
Billions of people consuming it for at least half a century would seem to prove that not to be an issue. ;)
Besides, there is NOT a problem with it accumulating in tissue. Gaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!

There seems to be a fundamental difference in knowledge of fact here about accretion and application.

And no, not billions but rather a few million have consumed fluoridated water regularly. A mere 5% of the world population at most do, and that is the trouble. Many of them do not WANT it. We should have the option of not being force medicated for any reason without our wishing it every time we take a drink of tap. However altruistic the reason its a fundamental courtesy of society not to force feed something to a person. This is after all considered a medicating agent in its appliance. We do not want MEDICINE coming out of my tap when we want WATER.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
ozoneocean at 3:26AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 24,996
joined: 1-2-2004
imshard
There seems to be a fundamental difference in knowledge of fact here about accretion and application.
Yes, you lack the knowledge. You're doing what I mentioned earlier- Extrapolating incorrectly for situations quite DIFFERENT to the large scale water treatment we're discussing. ;)
Typical homiepath argument…
imshard
few million
WRONG. So it might not be a billion but it's certainly a over hundred million. lol!
And your concerns are silly when you apply it to the real world.

As for “force medication”, as long as people are plainly too crazy about things like this I fervently HOPE it continues. The crazies can make up their own scenarios and invent their own science (as they do), and avoid it as they like. The rest of us will live the fine happy, healthy lives that we're destined to. I'm happy the water I drink is nicely treated so that I have strong teeth and no stomach viruses.

Crazies and conspiracy theorists are quite tolerable until they start to lower our standard of living and make life bad for everyone else like they try to do with the fluoride issue and like many HAVE done with mass immunisation- by refusing it and therefore not only hindering the eradication of series childhood diseases, but actively contributing to the reintroduction of ones that were previously totally eradicated in most areas.

…So I really don't have too much patience for this sort of thing. Face it, mainstream science doe not support this anti-fluoride idea. No science does, except studies focussing on situations with VERY different conditions that people (such as yourself), are wrongly applying to everything else and at the same time completely ignoring the real world fact that a few HUNDRED million people have been consuming this stuff in their water for at least half a century and yet they live longer than any preceding generation.

The leading cause of death now is cancer, not because of naughty minerals in our food and water, but because heart disease rates are going down but we're not immortal yet and old people still have to die of something so cancer is the next cab our of the rank. lol!
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
imshard at 5:50AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
You really don't See it do you? Look if somebody told you that cigarettes and asbestos could give you lung cancer 20-30 years ago you could have told them the same thing: “You're crazy, stopping will lower my standard of living”.

There are a lot of things people will subject themselves to and everyday they decide more and more facets of our lives are in fact bad for you. Radon used to be considered a medical treatment, lead was in everything from paint to pipes, methanol additives in food, Cocaine in drinks, etc.

How long and how mainstream does fluoride poisoning have to be before you'll acknowledge the studies as something more than crazy talk. What would it take to stop dismissing it outright without consideration?

Also, whats a Homiepath?
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
TheMidge28 at 7:27AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 6,847
joined: 7-5-2007
imshard
Also, whats a Homiepath?

Someone with a psychological bent towards killing gang members. :)

Ozone meant homeopath as in someoone who practices homeopathy which is a system for treating disease based on the administration of minute doses of a drug that in massive amounts produces symptoms in healthy individuals similar to those of the disease itself .

I always thought a homeopath was someone who self diagnoses and medicates.
I guess I was wrong.
_____________________________________________________

But if bottled water is fluoridated and more people are drinking bottled water more now than ever before could that explain and increase in its toxicity?
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:25PM
imshard at 9:09AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
TheMidge28
imshard
Also, whats a Homiepath?

Someone with a psychological bent towards killing gang members. :)

Ozone meant homeopath as in someoone who practices homeopathy which is a system for treating disease based on the administration of minute doses of a drug that in massive amounts produces symptoms in healthy individuals similar to those of the disease itself .

I always thought a homeopath was someone who self diagnoses and medicates.
I guess I was wrong.
_____________________________________________________

But if bottled water is fluoridated and more people are drinking bottled water more now than ever before could that explain and increase in its toxicity?

Homeopathy sounds like a mix of herbology and radionics/scalar manipulation. It doesn't look like they can substantiate their findings though.

Also not all bottled water has fluoride. Its something a lot of bottlers go out of their way to remove and then advertise it. Bottle sickness usually comes from bacterial contamination.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
Product Placement at 2:03AM, Feb. 26, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
imshard
You really don't See it do you? Look if somebody told you that cigarettes and asbestos could give you lung cancer 20-30 years ago you could have told them the same thing: “You're crazy, stopping will lower my standard of living”.

That is actually a good point.

The global warming topic was similarly ignored for decades and only now are governments wising up to it.

I don't have fluoride in my water so I never paid that much attention to this topic. Every time it's been brought up in a conversation it's mostly been about the conspiracy theorist who believe it's part of a mind control scheme. Every time I hear about it, I'm reminded of Dr. Srangelove (or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb). In it, a General launched a nuclear strike on the Soviet Union because he believed that the commies had tainted the American tap water to give every man who drank it erectile dysfunction (which was something that plagued him). Guess what chemical was the subject of the taint. Oh yes, fluoride.

imshard
We should have the option of not being force medicated for any reason without our wishing it every time we take a drink of tap. However altruistic the reason its a fundamental courtesy of society not to force feed something to a person. This is after all considered a medicating agent in its appliance. We do not want MEDICINE coming out of my tap when we want WATER.

This also reminds me of something else. I learned few years ago that it's a standard procedure to circumcise male newborns in America. This is something that has been going on since the turn of the 20th century and as a result, majority of all men living in the states are circumcised. Reasons given to support it was to improve cleanliness, reduce risk of STD's (a claim yet to be proven) and to curb masturbation. One of the people spearheading the start of this practice was John Kellogg (yes, the guy who invented the breakfast cereal) a man who designed a penis cage and poured chemicals on woman's clitoris to “allay any abnormal excitement”. Now correct me if I'm wrong but I hardly think a newborn is in any position to argue whether or not he wants this procedure. It kinda makes me glad I was not born there.

Edit: Oh. And another part. I'm married to an American and her teeth have been affected by the tap water, growing up in the states. She doesn't like that her teeth are spotty like that and blames the fluorite.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
Aurora Moon at 7:12AM, Feb. 26, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006


Not every hospital in the USA actually performs circumcision, P.P.

More than often they're usually only performed by opinionated doctors or doctors asked by equally opinionated parents.

Doctors can't do that without parents' consent anymore…. especially since how they got sued by some parents a very long while back. apparently in two states, those separate set of parents were rather upset to learn that their doctors had done this to their sons without even asking them if they preferred that their son have everything that they were born with intact. So of course they sued for a lot of money and won.

It's true that it's an common practice, though… simply because of this cultural thing about circumstanced weenies being more “atheistically pleasing”, and such.

It's gotten to the point where there's now more women who say they'll only do it with circumstanced males… because they don't want men who has wangs that looks like armadillos, etc. never mind that there's actually circumstanced males who has penises who look just like the circumstanced ones… especially when erect.

it's true that excess foreskin can lead to difficulties cleaning it, and thus lead to infections. I haven't heard of excess foreskins taking in more STDs than any other penises though…but I guess it could happen if it wasn't cleaned at all.





I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
ozoneocean at 7:51PM, Feb. 28, 2009
(online)
posts: 24,996
joined: 1-2-2004
The circumcision analogy is flawed since it turns out that several studies have shown it reduced the risk of transmission of AIDS by 60% and is now being used by the World Health Organisation as another tool to fight that problem in Africa. :)

the cigarettes analogy is also flawed since you're talking about a recreational drug that even the cigarette companies themselves knew lead to problems, but they suppressed it because OBVIOUSLY it would have meant suicide. Fluoride in our water isn't done because of commercial pressure, this is a scientific and medial initiative. If we stopped putting it in our water, no water treatment authorities would suddenly go broke, in fact they'd probably have more money! lol!
Whereas all your points against it a redolent of the theory of homeopathy- belief that diluted chemicals retain their efficacy no matter how much they're diluted.

That fluoride isn't going to harm you, don't worry! Real sicience has proved that. ;)
You've got as much risk from the carbolic acid and nitric acids in your rainwater…
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
Product Placement at 11:40AM, March 1, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
ozoneocean
The circumcision analogy is flawed since it turns out that several studies have shown it reduced the risk of transmission of AIDS by 60% and is now being used by the World Health Organisation as another tool to fight that problem in Africa. :)

Oz, we're not having this debate over here. I mentioned circumcision because imshard talked about being forced to receive something he didn't want. It reminded me of the times when I argued that circumcision should be your choice and not forced on you while you're an infant. It has nothing to do with whether or not it helps protect yourself against AIDS.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
bravo1102 at 9:46AM, March 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,325
joined: 1-21-2008
Fluride in drinking water should be a choice, but it's so widely practiced in the developed world and has led to such a reduction in tooth decay that it's worth something. As a child I got fluride treatments from my dentist because the water wasn't flurodated yet.

Then came fluride in toothpaste. I haven't had any tooth problems since I was 12.

Don't get me started on the whole immunization thing. Every time people don't do it childhood disease increase by as much as several hunderd percent. And there is no evidence about it's connection to childhood ailments. Whereas asbestos and tobacco was nearly always known to cause lung ailments and they used it anyway as the percentages bore out that its benefits outweighed the problems. Medical science improved and the causation was more conclusively proven.

The evidence about asbestos and tobacco was far more conclusive even 30 years ago than fluride is now.

As for global warming, it was supposed to be global cooling 30 years ago :) and now global warming could cause global cooling. That's hard for most average people to wrap their minds around. Evidence points more and more that it's just the way the world works. (The new studies linking oxygen levels, temperature and evolution is pretty neat and fits all the available evidence. It does cycle for various reasons and man has never effected it before. What makes us think it wouldn't happen anyway or that we can really stop it? Which sucks because we're a long way from weather control.)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
Product Placement at 4:44PM, March 4, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Well, again I mention that I'm new on the subject and most of what I know is what I've read here. With that being said I must ask: Since fluoride was added to the watersupply in order to halt tooth decay and they sell fluoride toothpaste today when they didn't back then, is it still necessary?

bravo1102
We're a long way from weather control.
It's a common knowledge that Carbon Dioxide is a mayor greenhouse gas and we pump billions of tons of it into the atmosphere.

The debate had always been whether or not our contribution affected the grand design of things. Since most governments are now implementing more ego friendly approaches, wouldn't you think that maybe they're noticing something?
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
bravo1102 at 3:41AM, March 5, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,325
joined: 1-21-2008
Product Placement
bravo1102
We're a long way from weather control.
It's a common knowledge that Carbon Dioxide is a mayor greenhouse gas and we pump billions of tons of it into the atmosphere.

The debate had always been whether or not our contribution affected the grand design of things. Since most governments are now implementing more ego friendly approaches, wouldn't you think that maybe they're noticing something?

They're noticing a very vocal group interest group screaming about such things. You want CO2 in the atmosphere? Look at one of the recent and convincing theories regarding some mass extinctions. These things don't need us. We help with the CO2, but all our effort may not be worth a plug nickel in either direction. Our species has a tendency to see ourselves at the center of everything.

And all our attempts at weather control and prediction are pretty pathetic. If the model doesn't hold for next week, why should I trust one for the next decade considering that it's based on most of the same predictive models and data? lol!

We might as well start being more eco-friendly as it certainly a lot better than the alternative. :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
Product Placement at 9:20AM, March 5, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Yes… politicians always make decisions based on how that will affect their popularity in the hopes of being re-elected. But people are screaming off their lungs at them because most of scientific committees have been waving the flag for decades. Not long ago these ego green protesters were considered jupy treehuggers. Hmh. I remember a funny moment while playing one of the many incarnations of the game Civilization. When I reached a hypothetical future during the course of the game a unit became available to me which was a radical ego terrorist, driving around in a brightly colored hippy wan. You could place him in opponent city which had a high pollution rate and cause him to do all kinds of ego attacks to reduce pollution and at the same time, production. His most radical attack was nuking the entire city, causing it to disappear which he did if the pollution level was high enough.

Most of these mass extinctions occur when something caused a mayor influx of greenhouse gas or something else to enter our atmosphere. Whether that was a meteor or a supervolcano throwing dust into the air, blocking out sunlight or an unusually large emission of greenhouse gas from, among other places, the seabed. Some scientists are afraid that if the permafrost tundras in Siberia and Canada were to melt, there be a sudden release of large volumes of methane from those regions. Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

George Carlin made it pretty clear to me once. All of our pollution will never harm Earth. The planet is fine… it is us that are screwed.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
cartoonprofessor at 5:38AM, March 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 396
joined: 9-2-2007
I just had to weigh in here.
The Premier of Queensland, Anna Bligh has decided to start flouridating our water, to much public outcry.
The company she was going to buy this flouride from has since declared it cannot sell it to her, so guess what?
She is now buying many tonnes of it from Belgium because Belgians don't want it there anymore.

On another note, Flouride is just one of the up-to-50 different chemicals they put in the water, many of them to ‘eradicate’ one thing.

It is this chemical cocktail that is the real concern, it varies all the time.

(Which is why I never drink tap water. I grew up on a farm drinking rainwater)

Chlorine also kills off lots of the good bacteria in your gut too.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:36AM
Product Placement at 5:50AM, March 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
cartoonprofessor
Chlorine also kills off lots of the good bacteria in your gut too.

It's the Chlorine that I can't stand. Man it's like drinking pool water. I understand that it has to be there because it's treated sewage water but you won't catch me willingly drinking that crap.

It's the worst when I order a soda from a restaurant only to find out during my first sip that it's made from a post mix machine, hooked up to the tap system.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
Inkmonkey at 5:57PM, March 30, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,220
joined: 1-3-2006
Whenever I hear about these things, I can't help but think about how people are living substantially longer and healthier now than ever before. We're at this point in human history when some fo the most significant health risks are self-induced (I.E.: McDonald's, Riding Lawn Mowers, The Thigh Master). If flouride chips away at my calcium intake but also kills nasty, nasty parasites that will give me the runs for a week and a half, I'll stick with the flouride. I'm seeing a lot of talk about the potential health risks of flouride, but not a lot about what would happen if they just yanked it out of the system.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:00PM
Product Placement at 9:23AM, March 31, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Inkmonkey
…but also kills nasty, nasty parasites that will give me the runs for a week and a half, I'll stick with the flouride…
That's not what it does. It's the chlorine that's killing the nasty bacteria. The fluoride is added to the water because it helps protect your teeth. Adding it to the water supply made sense in order to maintain peoples gum health back then but the practice started before fluoride toothpaste became common so I'd argue that it's redundant today.

All I know about fluoride is that they cause those white spots on your teeth. You only get those spots if you drink fluoride added water as you're growing up since that is the time when your teeth are developing. That is a symptom of something called dental fluorosis. There's also a disease called skeletal fluorosis which is much more dangerous. In order to get it you have to consume much more fluoride then there is added to the water.
Professor Wikipedia
Skeletal fluorosis in the United States

In the United States, an average of 1 ppm of fluoride is intentionally added to water supplies for water fluoridation. The Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), as established by the US Environmental Protection Agency, is 4 ppm. In 2006, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences concluded that this MCL is not sufficiently protective against fluorosis, and should be lowered. Symptomatic skeletal fluorosis is almost unknown in the U.S., with about a dozen cases reported.
Skeletal fluorosis is a bad degenerative illness though. It causes arthritis, chronic joint pains, makes your bone brittle and in severe cases it can cause neurological damage as your bone mass becomes deformed and your spinal column or neck ligaments could start to fuse together. Around 2 million people suffer from it globally in countries where it's naturally part of the groundwater in higher concentration and also in places where coals are used to heat houses since fluoride is released from the coals into the atmosphere.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
Loud_G at 11:13AM, April 20, 2009
(online)
posts: 389
joined: 8-13-2007
Oh dear. Not the flouride debate….

If you think Flrouride is a dangerous substance, maybe you should check out:
http://www.dhmo.org/

Dihydrogen monoxide has killed FAR more people than flouride ;)
Find out what George is up to:

 
 
Go! Visit George or he may have to eat you!*
*Disclaimer: George may or may not eat violators depending on hunger level and scarcity of better tasting prey.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:46PM
Kilre at 3:39PM, May 5, 2009
(online)
posts: 221
joined: 9-25-2007
Loud_G
Oh dear. Not the flouride debate….

If you think Flrouride is a dangerous substance, maybe you should check out:
http://www.dhmo.org/

Dihydrogen monoxide has killed FAR more people than flouride ;)

Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa….whoa.

I'm afraid that's way too controversial for this topic.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:15PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved