It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by adeclerk
Originally posted by Uncinus
Since some areas fluoridate and some don't, then surely the difference in health would be apparent between those areas.
Are there any examples that show this?
Not one recorded instance, interestingly enough. And all of the ill effects seem to only affect children.
/thread
A new report from the prestigious National Academy of Sciences (NAS) concludes that the current allowable level of fluoride in tap water is not protective of the public health and should be lowered, citing serious concerns about bone fractures and dental fluorosis, a discoloration and weakening of the enamel of the teeth that the committee noted is associated with other adverse health impacts.
In just one example of the potential health risks from water fluoridation, the committee cited concerns about the potential of fluoride to lower IQ, noting on page six of the report that the "consistency of study results appears significant enough to warrant additional research on the effects of fluoride on intelligence." IQ deficits, the committee noted, have been strongly associated with dental fluorosis, a condition caused by fluoride in tap water (NAS pg 175).
The committee’s findings support Environmental Working Group’s (EWG’s) recommendation that fluoride exposure should be limited to toothpaste, where it provides the greatest dental benefit and presents the lowest overall health risk.
90 percent of the fluoride added to your drinking water is hydrofluoric acid -- a compound of fluorine that is a chemical byproduct of aluminum, steel, cement, phosphate, and nuclear weapons manufacturing.
Read more: www.chicagonow.com...# ixzz1NIOQeyEI
According to the CDC itself, about 32 percent of American children have some level of dental fluorosis, characterized by mottling and pitting of the teeth. The real percentage is probably a lot higher than that. In 1993, the National Research Council reported 84 percent of the population had dental fluorosis in areas where fluoride in the water exceeded 3.7 parts per million (ppm).
Read more: www.chicagonow.com...# ixzz1NIOXhMc5
Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Swills
I've noticed a lot of people are prolly in need of vitamin more than they are in need of fluoride. I'm guessing most American diets lack proper vitamin, and I only have to look to Americas rising waist line to know they need more vitamins as well as exercise.
I don't know about you but I still remember memorizing the food pyramid in school. Knowing how much of what to eat, how many times a day, as well as portion sizes.
For a grand conspiracy, they are doing a bad job at trying to teach people to eat right.
Of course, if they force fed you the proper food you ate, then that would be a violation of your rights...
People enjoy being lazy, and other people make money off of it. Eventually, someone has to take responsibility for their own life.
yes the steam is clean the leftover water is more concentrated. how would you catch steam without a distill? i think RO fillters workout cheaper because of the fuel cost to heat the water
Originally posted by NuclearMitochondria
# Boiling Water
This will concentrate the fluoride rather than reduce it.
How
Which one do you collect? The remains or the steam? Wouldn't the steam be pure for the most part? It'd be like distillation sort of in reverse.edit on 5/23/11 by NuclearMitochondria because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by seaside sky
My dentist said that pure baking soda is the best and only toothpaste anybody needs- the best results and the safest all around. Kills the bad breath germs, cleans the plaque off... And of course, it's cheaper than toothpaste too. It's all he ever uses.
Originally posted by CaptChaos
I have a 1948 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Can't post a link to it, they are real books. Generally accepted as authoritative on pretty much everything.
If you look up flouride or flourine it has a whole page on it. Tells you that it is one of the most toxic poisons KNOWN. Describes it as potent rat poison, and general pesticide. Does not say ONE WORD about it being good for your teeth, or for that matter being good in any way, other than killing rats.
Originally posted by bastet11
I do not consider any of this a coincidence.
Originally posted by CaptChaos
I have a 1948 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Can't post a link to it, they are real books. Generally accepted as authoritative on pretty much everything.
If you look up flouride or flourine it has a whole page on it. Tells you that it is one of the most toxic poisons KNOWN. Describes it as potent rat poison, and general pesticide. Does not say ONE WORD about it being good for your teeth, or for that matter being good in any way, other than killing rats.