There are so many foolish people in denial here. Flouride is an industrial solvent sold to water companies which helps KIDS ONLY with tooth decay...how about brushing and flossing and not eating sugary crap instead. Combine it wih Chlorine and your kidneys and liver are filtering this "cocktail" ...why in this modern "clean" age of 2013 now evey 2nd person WILL get cancer while 50 years ago it was not so. The taste of tap water now makes me sick...like drinking bleach. Plastic bottle companies tell people "do not reuse our water bottles due to toxins leaching into the bottle....but I guess thats crap too....go ahead drink up cheers!!
Water Fluoridation
by still thinking 136 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
MinisterAmos
Jesus Christ not this crap again. I'm not surprised to find a concentration amongst folks associated with the Watchtower, however.
-
bohm
True witness 007. Did you know the goverments use of traffic lights kill people? Just 200 years ago, nobody was killed by cars, now the number of fatalities has skyrocketed, clearly showing it must be the traffic lights.
i heard putting tinfoil on your windshield will help though..
-
bohm
Witness 007: On a further note, can anyone tell me why i am not allowed to opt my kids out of basic education? How come in this supposedly educated age, more people are getting dementia and other similar neurological disorders, whereas it didnt use to be so. Just take the middle ages, very few cases of dementia!
-
LisaRose
I looked at the Harvard study, it was about some area in China that had high levels of fluoride naturally. Dean Burk was a scientist and did some great things like discovering Biotin. But he died in 1988, so I don't know how relevant his studies are. He also believed in Laetrile, a cancer cure that has been thoroughly debunked. I am just not buying this. I guess if you don't want it, you can drink bottled water, a lot of people do anyway. I filter my water, so I may look into whether it can or does filter fluoride, but even if it doesn't , I doubt if I am going to change just because of this.
This topic reminded me of Dr. Strangelove, one of the characters in it thought that flouride was a communist plot to destroy our "precious bodily fluids". I guess that Character was inspired by Dr. Burke.
Here is some onfo I found on debunking the fluoride myths. I didn't verify anything, so take it with a grain of salt as you should with anything found on the internet.
Conspiracy theories involving fluoridation are common, they often include claims that: Fluoridation is part of a Communist, Fascist or Illuminati plot to take over the world and mankind. By the way this notion is mentioned with comical effect in Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, that’s where you kooks get your conspiracy ideas from then eh, lol.
Other crazy conspiracies about Water Fluoridation include classics such as, Water Fluoridation was designed by the military industrial complex to protect the atomic weapons program from litigation in the United States, or how about this one. Fluoridation was pioneered by a German chemical company to make people submissive to those in power. Enough of this nonsense, let’s get the fact’s:
The Great Water Fluoridation Conspiracy Theory: Debunked
When have you ever heard one of them crazy fluoride conspiracy creeps state the facts about the benefits of fluoridation, scientifically proven data such as:
Water fluoridation is effective at reducing cavities in children
Studies have shown that water fluoridation can lead to a reduction of upto 64% in childhood cavities. A 2000 systematic review found that water fluoridation was statistically associated with a decreased proportion of children with cavities, the median of mean decreases was 14.6%, the range −5 to 64%, and with a decrease in decayed, missing, and filled primary teeth, the median of mean decreases was 2.25 teeth, the range 0.5–4.4 teeth, this is roughly equivalent to preventing 40% of cavities.
Fluoride also prevents cavities in adults of all ages.
There are fewer studies in adults however, and the design of water fluoridation studies in adults is inferior to that of studies of self- or clinically applied fluoride. A 2007 meta-analysis found that water fluoridation prevented an estimated 27% of cavities in adults.
A 2002 systematic review found strong evidence that water fluoridation is effective at reducing overall tooth decay in schools and communities.
Fluoridation is required in the United States, because unlike most of Europe the U.S. doesn’t have school dental care, most children do not see a dentist regularly, many American diets are very high in fats and sugars, and for a high number of U.S. children water fluoridation is the prime source of exposure to fluoride, Water fluoridation in this instance is most recommended and can reduce cavities amongst the first four years of all of America’s school children by up-to 60 percent.
Important United States Fluoridation Data from between 1974–1992 indicate that when water fluoridation is introduced into a community, there are massive decreases in the number of employees per dental firm and the number of dental firms. The data suggest that some dentists respond to this loss of income by moving to non-fluoridated areas and by retraining as specialists.
Children in the United States born between 1957–1964 who grew up in fluoridated areas have earned significantly more as adults than children who didn’t, this effect is heavily concentrated among girls from poorer families, consistent with the hypothesis that the effect is due to consumer and employer discrimination in favor of women with prettier teeth. And these are just some of the many benefit’s of Water Fluoridation. -
sammielee24
All this derision. All this 'conspiracy' finger pointing.
I should remind you that there have been many 'conspiracies'..and many people who questioned many things that have turned out to be fact and some people in some communities actually go so far as to say that those who condemn 'conspiracy theorists'..are themselves the problem because they lack the wherewithall to look at 'what ifs' and instead often choose to conform to norms presented to them as fact. I'm not saying it's the case - but I'm saying that others are saying it.
As for taking a bunch of bags of powered stuff that is clearly labelled as toxic - it says so on the pictures of the bags - and dumping all that powder into all your waters just because you want to stop kids from getting cavities - and then believing that its perfectly okay to dump that junk in all your water because somebody told you so is well - really rather insane.
The biggest problem is that you have no idea how much fluoride you are ingesting or absorbing at any given time and you wouldn't know if that additional fluoride you just got exposed to puts you in the toxic range or not. Addressing the stomach problems in the USA is somewhere around a 13 billion dollar industry - you think you would want to try something different - like maybe addressing the junk in the water that you ingest that just might be partially to blame for all those costs - sammieswife
-------------------
Excess fluoride consumption has been studied as a factor in the following:
- A weakening of bones, leading to an increase in hip and wrist fracture. At the level used in fluoridated water, decreased fractures are expected, [14] but the U.S. National Research Council found the overall evidence "suggestive but inadequate for drawing firm conclusions about the risk or safety of exposures at [2 mg/L]", but states that fractures do seem to increase as fluoride is increased from 1 mg/L to 4 mg/L, suggesting a "continuous exposure-effect" dose-response relationship at these levels. [17] :170
- Adverse effects on the kidney. Within the recommended dose, no effects are expected, but chronic ingestion in excess of 12 mg/day are expected to cause adverse effects, and an intake that high is possible when fluoride levels are around 4 mg/L. [17] :281 Those with impaired kidney function are more susceptible to adverse effects. [17] :292
- Four epidemiological studies have noted a correlation between increased fluoride and low IQ. [17] :205–223 The most rigorous of these compared an area with mean water concentration of 0.36 ± 0.15 mg/L (range 0.18–0.76 mg/L) to an area with 2.47 ± 0.79 mg/L (range 0.57–4.50 mg/L). Most of these studies did not publish important details, making them difficult to evaluate. If these correlations are caused by fluoride, the mechanism is not known, but the National Research Council speculates that effects on the thyroid could lead to poor test results. [17] :208 Two Chinese meta-analyses which included the previously mentioned studies have also noted this correlation. [20] [21] The high-fluoride areas studied had fluoride levels above those used in water fluoridation.
- The NRC report stated that "many of the untoward effects of fluoride are due to the formation of AlFx [aluminum fluoride] complexes". [17] :219 This topic has been identified previously as cause for concern. [22] The NRC noted that rats administered fluoride had twice as much aluminum in their brains. [17] :212 When water (1 ppm fluoride) is boiled in aluminum cookware more aluminum is leached and more aluminum fluoride complexes are formed. However, an epidemiological study found that a high-fluoride area had one-fifth the Alzheimer's that a low-fluoride area had, [23] and a 2002 study found that fluoride increased the urinary excretion of aluminum. [24]
- Fluoride's suppressive effect on the thyroid is more severe when iodine is deficient, and fluoride is associated with lower levels of iodine. [22] Thyroid effects in humans were associated with fluoride levels 0.05–0.13 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was adequate and 0.01–0.03 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was inadequate. [17] :263 Its mechanisms and effects on the endocrine system remain unclear. [17] :266
-
still thinking
When have you ever heard one of them crazy fluoride conspiracy creeps
Well...this sort of comment and tin foil hats certainly makes for open conversation doesn't it? I just LOVE the way people think they can call people nuts AND believe THEY can have a proper open conversation. When YOU believe YOU are right, and have made up YOUR mind that someone else is nuts because THEY don't agree with YOU.
END OF CONVERSATION.
I guess all the Drs and dentists and scientist that DON"T agree with fluoridation, and speak out, are ALL nuts too. Only Scientists that agree with the government are saine.
-
still thinking
The biggest problem is that you have no idea how much fluoride you are ingesting or absorbing at any given time and you wouldn't know if that additional fluoride you just got exposed to puts you in the toxic range or not.
That is correct. There is NO WAY to control how much fluoride you are ingesting. If you drink a lot of water you are getting more than someone who doesn't. If you are a baby and drink baby formula...you may be getting more fluoride than a child that may drink more juice than water.
If you eat vegetables watered with fluoridated water...you are getting more fluoride in your diet.
Pesticides
Due to its high toxicity, fluoride has long been used as a pesticide. In the United States, there are currently two fluoride-based pesticides that are allowed to be sprayed on food. These are: cryolite and sulfuryl fluoride.
5 Facts About Fluoride Exposure from Cryolite
1) The main way people are exposed to fluoride from the pesticide cryolite is through consumption of grape products, particularly white grapes, grown in the U.S. This is because cryolite use is widespread among U.S. vinyards.2) According to data from the USDA (2005), the average fluoride levels in grape products are as follows:
- White grape juice = 2.13 ppm
- White wine = 2.02 ppm
- Red wine = 1.05 ppm
- Raisins = 2.34 ppm
3) Many juice drinks that are not labeled as “grape juice” use grape juice as a filler ingredient. The use of cryolite thus contaminates many juices with fluoride.
4) Cryolite is also allowed to be added to the following products (although it is unclear how many producers actually do so, and what the resulting fluoride levels are):
- Apricot, Broccoli, Brussels Sprout, Cabbage, Cauliflower, Citrus fruit, Collards, Eggplant, Kale, Kiwifruit, Kohlrabi, Lettuce, Melon, Nectarine, Peach, Pepper, Plum, Pumpkin, Squash (summer & winter), Tomato, and a number of Berries (Blackberry, Blueberry (huckleberry) Boysenberry, Cranberry, Dewberry, Loganberry, Raspberry, Strawberry, Youngberry).
5) The key way to avoid exposure to fluoride from cryolite is to avoid buying non-organic grape products, particularly beverages made out of white grapes.
10 Facts About Fluoride Exposure from Sulfuryl Fluoride
In 2005, the U.S. EPA granted a request from Dow AgroSciences to use sulfuryl fluoride as a fumigant in food-processing facilities as a means of killing bugs, rodents, and reptiles. Although EPA granted FAN’s request in January 2011 to rescind its approval of Dow’s request, this is currently being challenged by the agribusiness industry. Thus, as it currently stands, sulfuryl fluoride is still being sprayed on food products made in the U.S.
Th e EPA allows sulfuryl fluoride as both a fumigant of food-processing facilities (while food is still on the premises) and as a direct fumigant of food. Both forms of fumigation result in the contamination of food with fluoride. Here’s what you need to know about both:
Fumigation of Food Processing Facilities
1) Structural fumigation is done for the purpose of killing pests in the facility where the food is stored. It usually is performed twice a year in a given facility.
2) Unlike virtually every other western country, the EPA does not require that food processors remove food prior to the fumigation. As a result, any food that is being stored in the facility during a structural fumigation will be contaminated with fluoride.
3) The level of fluoride contamination that EPA allows for wheat flour (125 ppm) and dried eggs (900 ppm) is sufficient to cause symptoms of acute fluoride toxicity (e.g., nausea, vomiting, etc) in children.
4) Although less than 0.1% of wheat flour and dried eggs will be contaminated with sulfuryl fluoride (due to the infrequency of structural fumigations), several hundred, if not thousands, of children will be exposed each years to doses of fluoride from these products that can induce temporary food poisoning-type symptoms. No other country allows this.
5) There are hundreds of other food products that EPA allows to be contaminated with sulfuryl fluoride.
Direct Fumigation of Food
6) The EPA also allows food processors to use sulfuryl fluoride as a direct fumigant of certain foods. This means that food processors can purposely spray sulfuryl fluoride directly onto certain foods.
7) Unlike structural fumigation (which takes place once or twice a year), direct fumigation is a routinely performed procedure. Thus, foods that can be directly fumigated with sulfuryl fluoride will consistently have elevated fluoride levels.
8) According to EPA’s estimates, some of the foods that will be most commonly fumigated are cocoa powder, dried beans, walnuts and dried fruits.
9) EPA estimates that, if the current regulations are not rescinded, 100% of cocoa powder, 100% of dried beans, 99% of walnuts, 69% of dried fruits, 10% of walnuts, 10% of tree nuts, and 3% of rice will be fumigated.
10) When fumigated the average fluoride levels in fumigated food is:
- Brown rice = 12.5 ppm
- Cocoa powder = 8.4 ppm
- Almonds = 5.3 ppm
- Tree nuts = 5.3 ppm
- Dried beans = 4.5 ppm
- White rice = 4.5 ppm
- Walnuts = 2.4 ppm
- Dried fruits = 1 ppm
So....why do we need to add fluoride to our water...when it would appear that we get too much already from our diets because of chemical sprays used as pesticides.
-
still thinking
And I agree with you WTWizard....the DO and WILL lie.
-
LisaRose
I am sorry if I offended you, I did not say those particular words, just pasted something that I thought was a counterpoint to the other postings, I actually had not intended to include that bit, so I am sorry. I was just trying to show that cut and pasts from the internet don't prove anything.
I think you certainly have a right to be concerned, and its not crazy to question things like this, I just don't share this particular concern. Many, many scientists have looked at flouride and concluded there isn't a problem. Fluoride has now been used for decades, it seems to me that if it caused cancer it would have been easy to spot it, all the areas where their is fluoridation would have higher cancer rates. If you had something like that, (other than Dean Burke studies) I would be interested in looking at it, and sorry if you already have and I missed it.
As some have pointed out, many things are toxic at high levels, but harmless when diluted.
And no, all the Doctors and dentists who don't like fluoridation are not nuts, but they are not necessarily right either. Dentists and doctors are not necessarily experts in fluoridation, so unless they were involved in studies of the effects of fluoridation, they are just giving their opinion. If you have a scientist, doctor or dentist who have published in an academic journal on the subject, I would be interested in that.
