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 dtrock78
In Malcher's defense, RO/distilled water is much more likely to absorb toxins from the natural environment through the process of equilibration. And it does become more acidic since it absorbs much more carbon from the atmosphere.
Now deionized water, that is a different story. Red blood cells burst when exposed to DI water.edit on 20-1-2012 by dtrock78 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Malcher
Actally seawater is much higher in Fluoride than NORMALLY found fresh water. Dang learned something today.
Originally posted by dtrock78
@ Magnus Opum
Your opinion that surface water, by and large, is better/safer than well water is pretty preposterous. As an environmental scientist with minors in toxicology/biology, I'm not really sure where to begin.
Rivers are the dumping grounds (and have been since we settled this country) for basically everything. Be it sewage, industrial waste, acid rain runoff, air pollutants, etc - everything ends up in a river. The reason early settlers (and modern civil engineers) use rivers for drinking sources are simple - it's already on the surface. It costs much more to drill, maintain, and service a production/irrigation well. And up until relatively recently in our history, we didnt have the means to drill one in the first place other than 30-40 feet bgs. And don't even get me started on PPCP contaminants (Pharmaceuticals & personal care products). The freshwater river systems in this country are loaded with them - everything from synthetic hormones (birth control pills), synthetic psychotics (anxiety medications), etc that are contained within the medication people take (the average person is on THREE presribed drugs) do not breakdown and are NOT removed via traditional treatment plant processes. The EPA is in the middle of a landmark study concerning these contaminants and the prelim evidence is pretty shocking so far. They've found that levels of even one part per trillion (1 ppt ) can cause birth defects and impaired cognitive development in aquatic life. Everytime someone urinates and flushes it down the toilet, everytime someone dumps their old meds down the drain, these synthetic compounds become part of surficial drinking water supply.
Now...well water - talk about a natural Brita filter - soil lithology and bedrock are the best filtration units you can have. It takes YEARS for water to slowly filter into an underground reservoir/water bearing fracture before it gets to the source. This removes many, many biological hazards and industrial chemicals. Yes, in some areas of the country, natural background concentrations of arsenic and other trace metals are high, but these areas are well known and the filtration/treatment systems are built accordingly. Sulfur content is harmless, other than the taste, which people gradually get used to.
I have well water, my neighbor has well water, everyone in my town has well water. We are not healthier or "less lethargic" than the township next to me that has public supplied water.
If you REALLY want to get up in arms over an actual health effect that is a ticking timebomb in the scientific community, start rallying around PPCPs. These will be the "asbestos" of the 21st century. And the scary thing is, there's very little that can be done about them.
Originally posted by MagnumOpus
I see the super fluoride person still can't spell----might be the aluminum in salt you forgot to tell everyone to avoid. And how aluminum and fluoride work so well on the brain together.
Also, it appears that Samon don't either, because they have to run into fresh water to lay the eggs and let the new fish develop in fluoride free or low fluoride water. Just like human's don't do well with any fluoride when they are infants, neither do samon.
Originally posted by SweetSomnia
So where does this lead us all down the road in twenty years or so? Is there any information out there that leads us to believe that anything plans to be done about this? This is a monumental find. I would hate for it to go by the wayside.
Originally posted by Malcher
Actally seawater is much higher in Fluoride than NORMALLY found fresh water. Dang learned something today.
Originally posted by tangonine
Originally posted by Malcher
Actally seawater is much higher in Fluoride than NORMALLY found fresh water. Dang learned something today.
You shouldn't be drinking seawater either lol
Reverse Osmosis (RO) was developed in the late 1950's under U.S. Government funding, as a method of desalinating sea water
Originally posted by tangonine
If you've ever seen Flouride in action in a chemistry lab you'd never ingest it. It's great for toothpaste, provided you rinse thoroughly after you brush, but drinking it? srsly?
Glad I'm on my own well. No Fl for me.
Originally posted by MagnumOpus
NeoVan's new item has gone viral, not only on the ATS Forum from the huge number of Flags and Stars, but on all the alternative media folks pages also:
www.greenmedinfo.com...
New research reveals a startling new finding: fluoride is likely contributing to the epidemic of cardiovascular disease by stimulating calcification of the vascular system, including the coronary arteries.
What is novel about this new study is that it indicates how cardiovascular calcification may be occurring. Beyond the excessive consumption of inorganic calcium, fluoride may be an essential factor in mediating calcium's contribution to enhanced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Fluoride exposure is now ubiquitous, thanks to the fluoridation of public drinking water, medications like Prozac (fluoxetine), non-stick cookware, to name but a few common routes of exposure.
Fluoride-induced calcification is not a new finding. Back in 2001, autopsies on cadavers revealed that fluoride accumulation in the pineal gland is associated with enhanced calcification of that endocrine organ.
======
Note: This is not an endorsement for this product. As I'd not recommend bone meal, which tends to be very high in fluoride content.
Originally posted by kokoro
Originally posted by MagnumOpus
NeoVan's new item has gone viral, not only on the ATS Forum from the huge number of Flags and Stars, but on all the alternative media folks pages also:
www.greenmedinfo.com...
New research reveals a startling new finding: fluoride is likely contributing to the epidemic of cardiovascular disease by stimulating calcification of the vascular system, including the coronary arteries.
What is novel about this new study is that it indicates how cardiovascular calcification may be occurring. Beyond the excessive consumption of inorganic calcium, fluoride may be an essential factor in mediating calcium's contribution to enhanced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Fluoride exposure is now ubiquitous, thanks to the fluoridation of public drinking water, medications like Prozac (fluoxetine), non-stick cookware, to name but a few common routes of exposure.
Fluoride-induced calcification is not a new finding. Back in 2001, autopsies on cadavers revealed that fluoride accumulation in the pineal gland is associated with enhanced calcification of that endocrine organ.
======
Note: This is not an endorsement for this product. As I'd not recommend bone meal, which tends to be very high in fluoride content.
I debunked this pages ago. You need to go here and read the entire article as it was published in the scientific journal instead of taking some bloggers interpretation of it.
It is a study on fluoride usage as a diagnostic tool with PET scans to DIAGNOSE cardiovascular disease. The fluoride is injected in order to light up the calcifications that are already present so that they can more easily be seen on the PET scan. That is what is meant by an association between the uptake of the fluoride and the cacifications, that is what you WANT it to do so that you can image them and see exactly where blockage problem may arise and need intervention through stenting/ bypass ect. Once you read the study in its entirety that will become clear.
edit on 20-1-2012 by kokoro because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by MagnumOpus
Anyone that leds off with the term debunk isn't a scientists and is always a political pundit, usually one up to no good with a political spin to toss out. No scientist of any respect using the word debunk, and it part of the methods and languages of those that seek to sell disinformation and derail the public's vision of the truth.
I well know the uses of F-18 tracer isotopes with PET scanners, and a real scientist finds it highly important that F-18 lands in these areas of his calcium concentrations that require stints to put a band-aide on the problem.
Real scientists and persons of science recognize that fluoride likes the calcium in arterial walls and this trips the additional accumulation of calcium deposits and then more fluoride and the deposit grows.
Your little diatribe on these F-18 tracer studies is plain garbage science opinion. imho