How to prove to anyone that Water Fluoridation is Bad for us

Thanks for posting this, I always wondered what people meant when they mentioned flouride in the water.

One thing you didn't post though, what other countries do allow flouride in their water? I think the Czech Republic made a great point, it's uneconomical since only 0.54% of water is used for drinking, and it's also forced medication.

Are cavities such a rampant issue in this country that they decided to put chemicals in our water to help us out? Spend that money funding commercials that show mouths with rotting teeth and tell us why brushing our teeth is important, that will be a lot more effective. Is it really worth preventing a few holes in the teeth, (which is partly why we go to the dentist, to get those fixed, which is a pretty cheap and simple 'operation'), if we increase the rate of obesity, bone damage, thyroid disorders, cause our immune system to attack its own tissue, and lower the populations IQ?

Anybody that thinks it's worth those negative effects is mentally handicapped, probably due in part to the flouride in the water.

We need to fix it so they take flouride out of the water, but of course that will never happen. Nobody in America cares about things like this, I bet if I tried to get 10 people to read this thread, at least 8 of them would say "Dude, that's just some crazy crack-pot conspiracy theory, that's stupid man. Why would the government be hurting it's own people, you idiot? I don't believe this for a second."

Somebody who is good with computers should start an online petition or something, that would at least be a good start. Any volunteers?

reply to post by Buford2


Burt's Bees toothpaste still contains fluoride.... read the ingredient label before using it

reply to post by mnmcandiez


non flouride

Burts Bees makes both so does Toms. Read the label before you buy.

i read something like this before...The Gov clearly owes us a lot of answers

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?

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

ummmm does no one remember a few months ago EVEN the govt came out and said fluoride was bad?

i mean it was all over the news, even yahoo had it up on their home page at one point

it was the report about how fluoride is bad and that its teethe benefits werent as serious as once thought

no one remembers this?

it was all over and i said the minute i read it, nothing will change, it will just get buried like it never happened and we will keep fluoridation



well here we have it, another thread talking about how you have to PROVE fluoridation is bad


we dont need anymore proof, we need action

but clearly fluoride is doing its job of dulling the senses and pacifying the public because they themselves announced it was bad, and we still fluoridate, it was there for everyone to read, but no one cared

reply to post by Swills
I've been aware of the problems with floridation for quite some time and believe me, its not good for the body. Check out this link for more info on where our floride comes from.

www.celluliteinvestigation.com...

I hope more people pay attention to this. Good find! S & F.

On this list of things that concern me... this is very low indeed. All I know... water is treated with fluoride here, I had the full on put your teeth in cups and fill it with the pink fluoride junk a few times as a child, I have nearly perfect teeth... I've had one cavity in my life time and if ANYone deserved cavities it was me.

If anything, I think over brushing is a problem. I brush once a day. As far as the intelligence lowering goes... we have so many things that we encounter that have been "proven" to lower IQ. If you live in a city, the smog you breathe every day, the chemicals in the water you drink (my city only does fluoride, thank goodness. I worry about some of the cities up north... drinking that gunk) the chemicals we have poisoned our fresh water with... it really is a wonder we're not all shambling idiots by now, running around graveyards and looking for BRRRAAAIIIIINNNNNSSS.

Let's not forget the very REAL problem of Asthma on the rise, cancer and all other sorts of fun things. What a fun world we live in, hu?

lots of mixed opinions here. I am against fluoride in every way of course. Is there any reason to add it? Does it help ?

No.

period.

all you deniers, get a life.

Plenty of the ill effects attributed to long term exposure to Fluoride can be considered false positives of other ailments. I think the confusion people have with poisoning is that they believe you end up in the emergency room. Hypothyroidism, Sclerosis, Alzheimer, calcification of pineal gland, depression, iodine deficiency can all be explained through other means. No doctor trained in medical school to become a Practioner will successfully diagnose the source of the problems; that's not where they excel at, they excel at treatment of diagnosis.

In order for doctors to know and look for long term fluoride poisoning there has to be a general consensus that it is harmful, and due to the political nature of the problem a consensus is a bit hard to come by - - but not because of absence of evidence. Anyone that takes the time to read about fluoride will come to the conclusion that there is much uncertainty that needs to be addressed before water fluoridation continues. The studies done in the first half of last century were not complete or conclusive, yet it is somehow accepted as is. That's not the scientific way.

Originally posted by adeclerk
I feel like the whole 'flouride being really bad for you' conspiracy just another hoax/scaremongering tactic by Alex Jones, et al to sell books?

What, exactly, is the government's incentive to put fluoride in the water if it is really harmful? Wouldn't that be less people to pay the taxes that keep them afloat?

No scare-mongering. These are FACTS. Flouride is a harmful TOXIN that is so dangerous, that to dispose of it as industrial waste is extremely EXPENSIVE. This is just *another example* of a long laundry list of how the government caters to big industries instead of the average citizen. Don't get me wrong, I love this country. However, over the years it has come to be that I have learned that the "way things ARE" and the "way things are SUPPOSED TO BE" are two different things. I was told that "America" was a certain way, and taught how the "system" works. As you start looking into things that just don't seem to make sense, you realize that, oh yes indeed, they do make sense, but only if you look at them with an open mind and open eyes and really SEE what's going on.

Flouride was too expensive and toxic to easily dispose of. It's an industrial byproduct. So, someone got the idea of using it to prevent cavities. Thus, they took something too dangerous and expensive to dispose of and ended up making getting rid of it FREE ---and a health "benefit" as well. Whoever came up with that one either was "put down" quietly or given a hefty bonus. This is not someone "Alex Jonesing" you. This is real.

It's not just flouride. It's meat. Mad cow. Example: Stony Creek meat company wanted to test 100% of its beef so that it could say to its customers there was no chance of mad cow in its beef. 100% testing. The cattle industry went into alarm mode because they knew if Stony was allowed to do so, the rest of the industry would have to follow, and that would be expensive. They called in favors and threw a lot of special interest money into the situation. End result: Stony Creek ORDERED by law NOT to test 100% of its beef, and if they did so, then the government would sieze their operation, confiscate it, liquidate it, and possibly imprison the owners. What? Yes, all because they wanted to make a safer product for Americans concerned about mad cow. See, "they" (government) aren't looking out for "us." They're looking out for the people who fill their campaign chests: big business, industry, big pharma, etc.

So, if you think this is just a bunch of smoke to sell books, you are quite wrong. The books sell because a lot of people are awakening to what is really going on around them. In fact, if there is any fear monering going on by Alex Jones, then he is vastly out-shouted by the government and big industries that have been manipulating average citizens into taking actions that are not very beneficial (flouride in water, sunscreen lotion (proved to cause cancer), swine flu (and other) vaccinations, etc.). It goes on too long to list here or even to explore it in detail. I recommend a lot of personal research, and don't accept the "sanitized" Wikipedia explanations.

Flouride is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

BTW the information that I got was NOT from Alex Jones. This information has been available to the public way before Alex Jones ever chimed in. And good that he did because that means more people will take out the time to research it themselves and come to their own conclusions

I fell for the flouride is bad for you once. Luckily after a week of paranoia I went to the library (You know that place that has books in it?), and looked at the actual research that was done on Flouride.
Flouride's only bad for you in very large amounts. There's so little flouride in our water that it IS safe to drink. Plus if "they" really wanted to poison us, would they have warnings on toothpaste saying not to swallow it? no, they would have no such warnings.
If they really wanted to make us dumb, they wouldn't have required salt to contain 5% Iodide. There was a mass epidemic of people becoming dumb in Minnesota, there was a large study done and it was found that a lack of Iodide(or Iodine I forget which one), was causing these problems. It's actually where the term redneck comes from, because one of the symptoms of lack of Iodide is people's necks get red.
I don't think you people realize just how paranoid you're being. Flouride is just a red-herring.
If you fall for stuff you read online without reading up on it in a library, maybe you aren't just paranoid,
but extremely dumb as well.

reply to post by Ghost375

I fell for the flouride is bad for you once. Luckily after a week of paranoia I went to the library (You know that place that has books in it?), and looked at the actual research that was done on Flouride. Flouride's only bad for you in very large amounts. There's so little flouride in our water that it IS safe to drink. Plus if "they" really wanted to poison us, would they have warnings on toothpaste saying not to swallow it? no, they would have no such warnings. If they really wanted to make us dumb, they wouldn't have required salt to contain 5% Iodide. There was a mass epidemic of people becoming dumb in Minnesota, there was a large study done and it was found that a lack of Iodide(or Iodine I forget which one), was causing these problems. It's actually where the term redneck comes from, because one of the symptoms of lack of Iodide is people's necks get red. I don't think you people realize just how paranoid you're being. Flouride is just a red-herring. If you fall for stuff you read online without reading up on it in a library, maybe you aren't just paranoid, but extremely dumb as well.

Do you know that it is people like you that make me want to go berserk? Make me want to trash my house.
Do you hear yourself reasoning? Only harmful in small amounts. MATHEMATICS! YOU SHOWER IN IT EVERYDAY! YOU DRINK IT EVERYDAY. YOU BRUSH YOUR TEETH EVERYDAY. THINK !!

Omg i cannot believe what i am reading here on this forum. Its gets worse by the day.

Tell me you. Why are they adding it? What good does it do? Does it help you?

IT IS PROVEN TO BE HARMFUL ON A LONG TERM OK? A LONG TERM LOOOOOOOOONG TERM.

Peace

reply to post by Ghost375


Did you take the time out to read anything in this thread? There's lots of good info in discussions and links provided.

There was a mass epidemic of people becoming dumb in Minnesota, there was a large study done and it was found that a lack of Iodide(or Iodine I forget which one), was causing these problems. It's actually where the term redneck comes from, because one of the symptoms of lack of Iodide is people's necks get red.

Funny you would say that because a lot of people believe long term fluoride exposure causes a lessening of the IQ. And guess what one of the symptoms of LT fluoride poison is....you guess it iodine deficiency, Ain't that a darn coincidence? And let us refrain from using the word "they", because then it becomes a conspiracy (which it might be but there's no direct proof). Let's just give "them" the benefit of the doubt and say that the past studies on fluoridation is outdated.

Fluoride and iodine are both halogens. Fluoride, the negative ion of the element fluorine, easily displaces iodine in the body because it is much lighter and therefore more reactive. In fact, the activity of any one of the halogens (Iodine 126.70, Bromine 79.90, Chlorine 35.45, Fluorine 18.99 are the most common) is inversely proportional to its atomic weight. In other words, one halogen can displace another one of a higher atomic weight but cannot displace one of lower weight.

Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...

The problem has its roots in the American bastardization of the English language. Americanization if the English language has resulted in the American being unable to communicate effectively. The American are shortening their sentences. Dropping the verb "to be". Dropping the noun indicator "the" also dropping the verb indicator "to". In this example under inspection the problem is in that it is true to say "Flourine is for cavities". However does that mean that Flourine causes cavities or does that mean that Flourine is for curing the problem of cavities ? In other words instead of saying "Flourine is for cavities" one should speak more fully as follows "Flourine is for causing cavities". Thus spoken it becomes very apparent that the water authorities in the USA are knowingly wanting to cause harm to the civilian population. However since the language in the USA is such that people generally say "Flourine is for cavities" and thus spoken there is room for misunderstanding in that it is being thought in error that "Flourine is for curing cavities" thereby the system is putting Flourine into the public drinking water either because of a genuine misunderstanding or at worse because they knowingly in cold blood want to cause harm to the civilian population. I tend to believe the later hypothosis.

דער פּראָבלעם איז זייַן ראָאָץ אין די אמעריקאנער באַסטאַרדיזאַטיאָן פון די ענגליש שפּראַך. אַמעריקאַניזאַטיאָן אויב די ענגליש שפּראַך האט גורם אין די אמעריקאנער זייַענדיק געקענט צו יבערגעבן יפעקטיוולי. די אמעריקאנער זענען פעץ זייער סענטענסעס. דראָפּפּינג דער ווערב "צו זייַן". דראָפּפּינג די נאַון ינדאַקייטער "די" אויך דראַפּינג דער ווערב ינדאַקייטער "צו". אין דעם בייַשפּיל אונטער דורכקוק דער פּראָבלעם איז אין אַז עס איז אמת צו זאָגן "פלאָורינע איז פֿאַר קאַוויטיז". אבער טוט וואָס מיינען אַז פלאָורינע סיבות קאַוויטיז אָדער טוט וואָס מיינען אַז פלאָורינע איז פֿאַר קיורינג די פּראָבלעם פון קאַוויטיז? אין אנדערע ווערטער אַנשטאָט פון זאגן "פלאָורינע איז פֿאַר קאַוויטיז" מען זאָל רעדן מער גאָר ווי גייט "פלאָורינע איז פֿאַר קאָזינג קאַוויטיז". אזוי גערעדט עס ווערט זייער קלאָר אַז די וואַסער אויטאריטעטן אין די USA זענען וויסנדיק פעלן צו אָנמאַכן שאָדן צו די ציוויל באַפעלקערונג. אבער זינט די שפּראַך אין די USA איז אַזאַ אַז מענטשן בכלל זאָגן "פלאָורינע איז פֿאַר קאַוויטיז" און אזוי גערעדט דאָרט איז צימער פֿאַר מיסאַנדערסטאַנדינג אין אַז עס איז ווייל געדאַנק אין טעות אַז "פלאָורינע איז פֿאַר קיורינג קאַוויטיז" דערמיט די סיסטעם איז פּאַטינג פלאָורינע אין דער עולם טרינקט וואַסער אָדער ווייַל פון אַ עכט מיסאַנדערסטאַנדינג אָדער בייַ ערגער ווייַל זיי וויסנדיק אין קאַלט בלוט ווילן צו אָנמאַכן שאָדן צו די ציוויל באַפעלקערונג. איך טענד צו גלויבן די שפּעטער היפּאָטהאָסיס.

AVE RAEGINA CAELINA LA DEUS NOSTRA CAELI LA VERA DEUS

reply to post by Ghost375


seems you missed my post above reminding people how even YAHOO carried the story a few months back about the "NEW" "STUDY" done by the "GOVT" stating that fluoride is in fact BAD, and not nearly as beneficial as once thought

i could spend time tracking down that story im sure, but i wont as it doesnt REALLY matter, its not like people cared about the story when it was on the front page of yahoo, they sure as hell dont care about it now

but as far as the govt and i are concerned, this matter is dead, fluoride= bad

period according to all educated people

theres a reason swallowing toothpaste is bad, if swallowing a few drops of toothpaste means you have to call poison control, then just imagine the effects of drinking ONLY fluoridated water for your ENTIRE LIFE which those do who live in areas with fluoridated water as there is almost no cost effective way around it

if swallowing a few drops of toothpaste makes one have to call poison control, no one can say a lifetime of the stuff in water CANT be bad

Water Fluoridation has not killed anyone?

Why doesn't OP Proof any death related to this practice?

By your logic Water Fluoridation should be killing people, but it doesn't. People live long lives.

reply to post by TheDevilOfLies

theres a reason swallowing toothpaste is bad, if swallowing a few drops of toothpaste means you have to call poison control

More like whole tube. The probably toxic dose of fluoride is about 5 mg/kg.