June 18, 2013 |
79° Light Rain
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
Like all drugs, fluoride has side effects that affect different people in different ways, and some not at all, that can range from skin rash and stomach pains to bone and tooth damage.
Studies also link fluoride to lowered IQ, thyroid dysfunction, and even cancer.
There is no dispute that too much fluoride weakens bones and that people should limit their daily fluoride intake. However, with fluoride in the water, it's impossible for people to know how much fluoride they've ingested daily especially since fluoridated water is used to make most foods purchased in supermarkets and restaurants and is inhaled in showers and absorbed in baths. Also fluoride containing pesticide residues remain on many foods. Tea, ocean fish and some grape juices and win are very high in fluoride.
Since fluoride is neither a nutrient nor required for healthy teeth and no American is, or ever was, fluoride deficient, it doesn't make any sense to put fluoride chemicals into public water supplies especially when current science proves that fluoride ingestion does not reduce tooth decay. Topical application is what gets fluoride into tooth enamel.
"The Case Against Fluoride," by Connett, Micklem and Beck
For your answer, check out this brief video:
Sodium Fluoride is a very toxic chemical, that is hazardous to our health. This chemical has a Health Hazard rating of 3 (High), and the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) lists this as a chemical that is NOT to be ingested...at all. Many cities across the country have investigated, and removed Sodium Fluoride from their drinking water. But dont take my word for it, here is the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) on NaF (Sodium Fluoride)
Fluoride makes your body absorb extra aluminum. And where does the aluminum go? Your brain. And what metal shows up alarmingly in the brains of Alzheimer's victims? You guessed it!!
The "studies" cited by nyscof are highly questionable, so much so that no reputable scientific organization in the world sites them as anything but pure gibberish. Used in controlled levels, there are no proven side effects to fluoridated water.
Gus is right...fluoridated water has been around for decades and, if there were any clear side effects, they would have shown up in a consistent basis among the tens of millions of people who have been drinking it for years. Of course, there are no such side effects.
That's "If more than used for brushing is accidentally swallowed,..."
Nobody said that fluoridation of the water alone is sufficient to ensure good teeth - people also have to use good home care, and I imagine that habits like smoking, etc. play into it, and perhaps some genetics as well.
The United States Library of Medicine says fluoride's side effects could include:
staining of teeth;
unusual increase in saliva;
salty or soapy taste;
The FDA asks that fluoride drug side effects, including dental fluorosis, be reported at http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch] or [1-800-332-1088].
Fluoride, as with most chemicals can effect different people in different ways. I don't believe fluoride is good for infants and small children and the value of fluoride in adults is questionable. The biggest problem with any additive is when the various water departments have mistakes made on how much additive is used. Not knowing, following guidelines, broken equipment, or not adjusting amounts injected into the water supply following quality tests are the biggest problem with fluoride.
I also believe that people make the mistake of blaming fluoride for problems when chlorine is actually the culprit. Chlorine has been over used and over injected into our water supply for decades. There is no doubt that chlorine is a poison and has been blamed for many medical issues including cancer and diabetes.
They say that if you filter your water (ie Brita for example) you can leave the lid off for an hour or so. This will be enough time for the chlorine to evaporate. I do this when I think of it.
That is only valid if your water treating system still treats with chlorine. If they are primarily using a chloramination process, you are looking at chloramine and not chlorine in your water. Still there as a disinfectant, but chloramine has a much longer effective "halflife" than traditional chlorine.
Just letting the water sit there and "age" won't work at removing chloramine or at least the amount of time you will need to "age" the water is much mch greater (depends on the concentration in the water, surface aggetation, yadda yadda.)
Potassium metabisulfite (sold as campden tablets) is used by homebrewers to remove chloramine from water used to make beer. Chloramine can put a metalic taste into your home brew. Activated carbon can also remove chloramine, but the volumes of carbon needed usually preclude its used in that manner for home use.
Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) will work as well.
If you are really concerned about this, I would recommed buying some Vitamin C tablets at the grocery, crushing half of one and disolve it in your water, then run that through your filter.
Thanks. Interesting information. For a while I was getting my drinking water filled at a reverse osmosis machine and or water distillation machine. But, I've heard that they strip valuable minerals out of the water. For this reason I drink tap water and use a brita filter.
To my knowledge, distillation strips valuable minerals, but reverse osmosis doesn't do that.
Unfortunately, it's rather expensive, and wastes a lot of water.
Fluoride is also known to weaken bones even if it is supposed to prevent cavities. It occurs naturally in small amounts: Why add more? More is not always better.
Me, me, I know I know!!!!!!!!!!
Supporters of flouride, whose benefits far outweigh the difficulties, are known to be supporters of women's rights, high gas prices, depressed national economy, high national debt, the muslim, Kenyan president and other liberal touchstones, and therefore the advocacy of this demon vile chemical must be erased from the city of Wichita.
the effects of flouride have always been one of those conspiracy theories.
I have spent upwards of $30,000.00 on my teeth to make them presentable. Not movie-star gorgeous. Just normal-looking.
People used to ask me point-blank if I ever brushed them because they looked so horrid. I actually wasn't able to get them very clean because of how pitted they were. And brown all the way through, not just superficially.
And yes, this was due to exposure to too-large amounts of fluoride as a child.
I wouldn't call this "evil," and I do believe that small amounts of fluoride are beneficial for adult teeth, but over-exposure during certain developmental stages can have really bad lasting effects.
These anti-science fluoride psycho's are no worse than the anti-science organic movement. They prop up bogus studies as unquestioned authority, and ignore scientific consensus.
This is just intellectually lazy and dishonest.
There is considerable evidence that exposure to fluoride is detrimental to a significant percentage of the population. That doesn't mean that fluoride doesn't have a positive effect on the reduction of caries, but it in no way settles the argument of whether putting fluoride in the water supply is the best way to get fluoride treatments to the desired target population (generally, people under 15 years old.)
W/regards to the report on organic foods, it was extremely sloppy in asserting conclusions that are not well supported by the data they compiled.
I didn't assert any conclusion... I posted a link citing scientists. If you think they're lazy that's fine. But for anyone who believes in the beauty of science, and isn't susceptible to germophobia, superstition, and conspiracy theories, embrace technologies like GM food, fluoride, and childhood immunizations, because they'll make you happier and healthier. The paranoia that drives these anti-science campaigns comes from the same human impulse that caused the Salem witch trials, bloodletting, and the avoidance of sidewalk cracks.
Umm...just because you want to drink fluoridated water (or eat untested GMO food) to your hearts content does not mean that everyone else does. However, please feel free to do so, its your personal choice. Just don't try to force your opinion/will on others. Did you know that article/link is flawed? Do you know that certain scrupulous companies will push biased 'news' articles and research to spin in their favor? Want to see another study? (there are many):
Its ironic that science has improved our lives to the point that we now feel so invulnerable we reject science as wrong or unnecessary. Fluoride, childhood immunizations, and obstetricians brought great advances in health, but now that we're healthy, we think we can do better without them.
With some things it depends on which side you are on. Immunizations for example are great for the majority of the population. Generally they have a failure rate that is considered acceptable. Say maybe 4 or 5 percent which takes in a variety of circumstances that make up the failure rate. If you are part of the 95 or 96 percent, great. If you or your kid is part of the 4 or 5 percent, it can suck to be you.
Today an ABC-TV Investigation finds US studies link fluoride to health dangers. How Safe is Fluoride in Your Water?
gus, did you have a cell phone during that time. There, that's what protected you.
Seriously, do you know how science is done?
You are arguing that if there is no apparent harm towards a specific aspect, then it should be used. However, if it is not a nutrient, it is harmful, found in poisons, and serves no purpose in making the water supply safe, then it is a contaminate. And if it is intentionally put in the water supply, then whoever does this is in violation of intentionally contaminating a water supply. Maybe a class action lawsuit would be in order.
Fluoride is a drug. Some say it is supposed to medicate teeth. Tell me, if someone is medicating someone without a license, with no control over the dosage, and there are established limits, what do you think should be done to them. Some people are getting no fluoridated water because they think soft drinks are what people should drink and others are getting way too much. If someone thinks the are deficient in fluoride, let them go to their doctor and ask for some fluoride tablets (or whatever) just like people do with any other poisonous drugs.
Fluoridators are practicing medicine without a license and should be fined or locked up.
There have been court cases, but the anti-fluoridation folks have generally lost them.
They used the same reasoning you're trying to use here.
I wonder what would be the results if terrorists dumped in arsenic, lead, etc., all within the allowed limits of course, and used the same arguments?
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·