Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Have you read the study?
Have you read the context within its reporting.
Did you even read my post, or skim and answer the question?
Have you any cavities? Have you any fillings?
Should water companies be banned form adding fluoride to our water?
- Thread starter ennogs
- Start date
Have you read the study?
Have you read the context within its reporting.
Did you even read my post, or skim and answer the question?
Have you any cavities? Have you any fillings?
I agree. I should have the right to decide if I want to take fluoride or not. Who gave North West water the right to decide I should be taking fluoride?
That is a separate issue from fluoride being bad for you. You have yet to show it is.
I was giving a good argument as to why other countries have done that unrelated to any harmful effects.
Yes. I have a few fillings. All happened during the years I used fluoride toothpaste and was (I think) drinking fluoridated water. I say think as I don't know they year North West water started fluoridating our water.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Are you still drinking the water provided to you by North West?
-edit
Are they silver fillings?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Yes thats 4ppm, the water you recieve is less than 1 ppm.
Know your concentrations.
The professionals do, no one will claim flurosis can't be caused.
-edit to make up for my slapping
Have you read about the silver fillings?
I would be more concerned regarding those than the water you are drinking.
Quite. Seriously.
Know your concentrations.
The professionals do, no one will claim flurosis can't be caused.
-edit to make up for my slapping
Have you read about the silver fillings?
I would be more concerned regarding those than the water you are drinking.
Quite. Seriously.
Last edited:
I have no choice. People who think bottled water is super healthy are wrong.
50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation
In Europe, only Ireland (73%), Poland (1%), Serbia (3%), Spain (11%), and the U.K. (11%) fluoridate any of their water. Most developed countries, including Japan and 97% of the western European population, do not consume fluoridated water.
In the U.S., about 70% of public water supplies are fluoridated. This equates to approximately 185 million people, which is over half the number of people drinking artificially fluoridated water worldwide. Some countries have areas with high natural fluoride levels in the water. These include India, China and parts of Africa. In these countries measures are being taken to remove the fluoride because of the health problems that fluoride can cause.
http://www.fluoridealert.org/articles/50-reasons/
In Europe, only Ireland (73%), Poland (1%), Serbia (3%), Spain (11%), and the U.K. (11%) fluoridate any of their water. Most developed countries, including Japan and 97% of the western European population, do not consume fluoridated water.
In the U.S., about 70% of public water supplies are fluoridated. This equates to approximately 185 million people, which is over half the number of people drinking artificially fluoridated water worldwide. Some countries have areas with high natural fluoride levels in the water. These include India, China and parts of Africa. In these countries measures are being taken to remove the fluoride because of the health problems that fluoride can cause.
http://www.fluoridealert.org/articles/50-reasons/
There's a growing amount of evidence linking fluoride to cancer, osteoporosis and genetic damage. Most governments in Europe have banned it, yet Ireland continues to add tooth-preserving acid to the public water supply.
http://www.nofluoride.com/irish_independent.cfm
http://www.nofluoride.com/irish_independent.cfm
This is the way most people respond to anything that questions the "norm".
They don't seem able to distinguish between the ramblings of dribbling fools who believe the queen is a lizard, and people questioning things.
This isn't an observation on whether fluoride is poisonous or not, but rather an observation of the way people are so quick to try and ridicule others who don't subscribe to their belief systems.
They do the same to people if they are anti-theist Atheists too. They are typically pseudo-intellectuals.
Fluoride is a base in water...the opposite of acid.
People have asked me for proof fluoride is dangerous? There are loads of credible organisations warning about the dangers of fluoride. I will not make one more comment on this thread. I think i have now provided enough evidence we should be looking very closely at water fluoridation.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Which is all concentration based. You have yet to acknowledge any reference to concentration. Are you willing to? Or will you persist with referencing articles which do not support your arguement?
I like fluroide conspiracy theorists, in general once their position is set, there is next to Ero point in engaging, as they have no actual arguement, just a series of google searches and cut pastes, most of which do not support any actual arguement.
Rat poison, warfarin, will thin the blood, in too high a dose it will kill you. In the right dose it will allow you to live for many years following heart attack or stroke. Its all about concentration. This won't matter to you, your brain will ignore it. You will seek another article to cut and paste. You will bold some text within the article to give it extra emphasis. This will form your arguement.
I like fluroide conspiracy theorists, in general once their position is set, there is next to Ero point in engaging, as they have no actual arguement, just a series of google searches and cut pastes, most of which do not support any actual arguement.
Rat poison, warfarin, will thin the blood, in too high a dose it will kill you. In the right dose it will allow you to live for many years following heart attack or stroke. Its all about concentration. This won't matter to you, your brain will ignore it. You will seek another article to cut and paste. You will bold some text within the article to give it extra emphasis. This will form your arguement.
Why not attack the posts he's making instead of brandishing the ban-hammer in an attempt to get him to stop posting stuff that you don't like?
Sure, he might be talking smack about stuff he doesn't understand, but he isn't breaking any rules.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
In reference to the OP, I would be delighted if as a society we didn't need to fluroidate the water. Unfortunately in the UK one of the worst regions for tooth decay is Northern Ireland. We have an apauling diet, very high in fermentable carbohydrates, sugars, processed sugars. The frequency of intake is high, and therefore as a population we get high rates of decay.
We don't have fluoridated water, and this is a shame. Personally I would like to see our water fluoridated, until such times as the public health system addresses peoples need to gorge on sugars many times daily. If peoples diets were good, the frequency of sugars low, then there wouldn't be any discussion on fluoride in the water. There would be no need.
Anyway due to the political structure here, we won't ever have water fluoridation, so the point is moot.
OP, I would suggest you review your talk on concentrations. Toothpaste is used topically around the teeth, the idea is to spit out afterwards, not rinse out the mouth, just spit out, so the material can have its helpful effect at strengthening teeth. If you cut sugar frequencies to three times daily, even in the absence of a fluoride toothpaste, you will hopefully be okay regarding future decay. For each brushing with proper toothpaste you can add a frequency daily. Each meal you eat will count as a sugar frequency, it doesn't relate to three chocltae bars per days, its consumption of anything.
We don't have fluoridated water, and this is a shame. Personally I would like to see our water fluoridated, until such times as the public health system addresses peoples need to gorge on sugars many times daily. If peoples diets were good, the frequency of sugars low, then there wouldn't be any discussion on fluoride in the water. There would be no need.
Anyway due to the political structure here, we won't ever have water fluoridation, so the point is moot.
OP, I would suggest you review your talk on concentrations. Toothpaste is used topically around the teeth, the idea is to spit out afterwards, not rinse out the mouth, just spit out, so the material can have its helpful effect at strengthening teeth. If you cut sugar frequencies to three times daily, even in the absence of a fluoride toothpaste, you will hopefully be okay regarding future decay. For each brushing with proper toothpaste you can add a frequency daily. Each meal you eat will count as a sugar frequency, it doesn't relate to three chocltae bars per days, its consumption of anything.
Sorry I have to reply. People like you will ignore the scientists, doctors, and dentists who are saying fluoride is dangerous. You will stick your argument about concentration and doses. Like you say you I have made my mind up and will not budge so have you. You have made your mind up fluoride is safe and I am not going to change your opinion. Some of the people who say fluoride is dangerous are saying it is the accumulative effect of fluoride. So they tell us the fluoride is in small doses with nothing to worry about. Others are saying the accumulative effect is what you need to worry about.