Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Water Fluoridation

Options
1356

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    I'm confused by this post, it would make sense pointing it out if we didn't treat water and took it straight from the aquifer so whats your point?
    You also didn't reply to the main point of my post which is with the removal of medical card entitlements for dental care with little of no controversy indicates that dental issues are not a "health issue" and so do not fall under the duty of care.


  • Options
    #63
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    RDM_83 again wrote: »
    I'm confused by this post, it would make sense pointing it out if we didn't treat water and took it straight from the aquifer so whats your point?
    So how can removing excess fluoride be dangerous exactly?
    RDM_83 again wrote: »
    You also didn't reply to the main point of my post which is with the removal of medical card entitlements for dental care with little of no controversy indicates that dental issues are not a "health issue" and so do not fall under the duty of care.
    I fail to see you point.
    They probably removed (if they actually did remove) the cover because we're is a recession.
    But stuff like cavities are still covered by health cards, so using fluoridation ,which as some of the studies I posted earlier show is very cost effective, the government saves a lot of money.


  • Options
    #64
    N8
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭N8


    King Mob wrote: »
    But stuff like cavities are still covered by health cards, so using fluoridation ,which as some of the studies I posted earlier show is very cost effective, the government saves a lot of money.

    what a load of twaddle

    http://worldental.org/dental-news/health-ministry-finds-that-fluoridation-does-not-reduce-tooth-decay/1300/


  • Options
    #65
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    N8 wrote: »
    what a load of twaddle

    http://worldental.org/dental-news/health-ministry-finds-that-fluoridation-does-not-reduce-tooth-decay/1300/

    You realise I posted several studies showing that not only does reduce tooth decay, but is very cost effective at doing so.

    Did you actually read any of them before you responded with a lolcat?
    Did you read the study quoted in this article?

    Further more that article fails to mention that fluoridation also involves taking out excess fluoride in the water supply.
    But hey they must have been busy with all that advertising for "dental tourism" for fact checking.


  • Options
    #66
    Prime Mover
    Closed Accounts Posts: 85 ✭✭Prime Mover


    N8 wrote: »
    what a load of twaddle

    http://worldental.org/dental-news/health-ministry-finds-that-fluoridation-does-not-reduce-tooth-decay/1300/

    Where is the link to the original research? I would be very surprised if it exists.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    negrita
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1 ✭negrita


    Considering the Irish government are getting rather excited about the prospect of selling into private hands the one natural resource that we cannot live without, using science and technology to provide yourself with your own water supply is probably a sensible technology to investigate.

    Grabbing water from the atmosphere and using filtration systems and uv lighting to remove any impurities and kill and bacteria is a well established technology. A number of companies ( using mostly fear tactics as a sales tool ) sell equipment that allows you to take on the responsibility of providing your own clean water supply.

    On the Met website there are 30 year averages from 1962-1991 that list humidity levels of 70-90% all year round (http://www.met.ie/climate/corkairport.asp) for the Cork region. More recent data doesn't seem to be available or I dont have the brains to find it. If you live in other parts of the country then I would check the statistics in your region for the suitability of this technology.

    If you are really concerned about flouridation of water then I would suggest that you take on the responsibility of providing water for yourself.

    If you trust your government to establish good practices and supply clean water with nothing in it that will cause detrimental effects then I guess you have nothing to worry about.

    If you dont have the money to take on the responsibility of providing yourself with a private water supply then I guess lobbying the government is your best option.

    I would seriously suggest that all those that are really concerned about flouridation of water, request samples of the flouride that is being added to public water for independant laboratory tests that will show exactly what is being added. I have made a number of requests over the last year, all of which have been ignored or refused.

    I would like to think my drinking water is safe but considering the level of corruption visible in Irish politics, I am sorry i just dont trust the government anymore.

    If I was able to take samples of flouride to independant laboratories I would then at least know what is being put in the water and glady share the results of these tests with everyone. I can only assume that what is being put into our water is not safe else these requests would not have been repeatedly refused.

    The independant laboratories have thier own people who can collect these samples in a safe and scientific manner ensuring there can no tampering with samples so what is the big problem ?


  • Options
    #68
    Warrior Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 85 ✭✭Warrior Monk


    I've discovered a well near where I live so I am taking my drinking water from there now. Although I still make hot drink with regular tap water in the kettle so definitely some fluoride there.

    Negrita,

    Could you just provide the independent lab with a sample of your tap water? Perhaps they could ascertain how much fluoride is present?

    From the research I have done over the last few weeks (including info generously provided by fellow boards.ie users) I have come to the conclusion that reducing fluoride intake is what's important. Not removing it completely. So I am using low fluoride toothpaste and mouthwash. These products tend to detail the ppm (parts per million) of fluoride contained.

    I hope this is helpful.

    Kind regards,
    Warrior Monk


  • Options
    #69
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HboWZlznAis


    MEP Kathy Sinnott discussing the mass medication of Ireland without its citizens' permission.


  • Options
    #70
    bleg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,848 ✭✭✭bleg


    ex mep


  • Options
    #71
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    bleg wrote: »
    ex mep

    Six of one,half a dozen of the other.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    And politicians, as we all know, are immune to believing stupid unfounded nonsense.


  • Options
    #73
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    King Mob wrote: »
    And politicians, as we all know, are immune to believing stupid unfounded nonsense.

    The Irish Medicines Board declared that fluoride is "not a medicine" and has "never been proven safe or effective for use on humans." Is this the unfounded nonsense you are talking about?


  • Options
    #74
    bleg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,848 ✭✭✭bleg


    Source please.


  • Options
    #75
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    WildBoots wrote: »
    The Irish Medicines Board declared that fluoride is "not a medicine" and has "never been proven safe or effective for use on humans."
    Well a quick search of their site turns up nothing of the sort.

    If such a quote existed, which I doubt, you're probably taking it out of context.

    So as bleg said: source please.
    WildBoots wrote: »
    Is this the unfounded nonsense you are talking about?
    Well considering that you provided no source for the above source I would consider that unfounded nonsense.

    The unfounded nonsense I was referring to was the idea that fluoridation is anything but beneficial.

    I've posted a ton of studies showing exactly this.
    Have you any studies showing otherwise or just more youtube videos?


  • Options
    #76
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    WildBoots wrote: »
    The Irish Medicines Board declared that fluoride is "not a medicine" ...
    King Mob wrote: »
    ...
    If such a quote existed, which I doubt, you're probably taking it out of context.
    ...

    To attempt to provide some context; The IMB is responsible for the regulation of "medicinal products".
    So if they said anything about public water supply flouridation, it would be simply to point out that it's not a medicinal product, and therefore not part of their remit.


  • Options
    #77
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    locum-motion wrote: »
    To attempt to provide some context; The IMB is responsible for the regulation of "medicinal products".
    So if they said anything about public water supply flouridation, it would be simply to point out that it's not a medicinal product, and therefore not part of their remit.
    A similar situation with the FDA is a common bit of misinformation spread around.


  • Options
    #78
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    locum-motion wrote: »
    To attempt to provide some context; The IMB is responsible for the regulation of "medicinal products".
    So if they said anything about public water supply flouridation, it would be simply to point out that it's not a medicinal product, and therefore not part of their remit.

    Please remind me why fluoride is added to the water supply


  • Options
    #79
    bleg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,848 ✭✭✭bleg


    WildBoots wrote: »
    Please remind me why fluoride is added to the water supply


    Please provide a source.


  • Options
    #80
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    WildBoots wrote: »
    Please remind me why fluoride is added to the water supply

    And again it has to be pointed out to another ill-informed poster that fluoridation sometimes involves the removal of excess fluoride in areas where it is elevated.

    Why is chlorine added to water?


  • Options
    #81
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    WildBoots wrote: »
    Please remind me why fluoride is added to the water supply

    Your request makes no sense in the context in which you made it, which was in response to my post. It's a non sequitur.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    Some more interesting reading about fluoride:

    http://www.ukcaf.org/files/ecj_ruling_on_functional_foods.pdf


  • Options
    #83
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Your request makes no sense in the context in which you made it, which was in response to my post. It's a non sequitur.

    So you don't know why it's added to the water?


  • Options
    #84
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    WildBoots wrote: »
    Some more interesting reading about fluoride:

    http://www.ukcaf.org/files/ecj_ruling_on_functional_foods.pdf
    Wow that's unbiased site alright.

    Also that "interesting" reading is opinion from a biased writer who continually asks for research that has already been done and shown Fluoridation to be safe, effective and money saving.

    Any chance you're going to back up your claim about the IMB, or are you just going to pretend we're not calling you on this?


  • Options
    #85
    bleg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,848 ✭✭✭bleg


    WildBoots wrote: »
    The Irish Medicines Board declared that fluoride is "not a medicine" and has "never been proven safe or effective for use on humans." Is this the unfounded nonsense you are talking about?


    Could I get a source for this please?


  • Options
    #86
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    King Mob wrote: »
    Wow that's unbiased site alright.

    Also that "interesting" reading is opinion from a biased writer who continually asks for research that has already been done and shown Fluoridation to be safe, effective and money saving.

    Any chance you're going to back up your claim about the IMB, or are you just going to pretend we're not calling you on this?

    Are you suggesting that Kathy Sinnott is making up lies about the IMB?


  • Options
    #87
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    WildBoots wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that Kathy Sinnott is making up lies about the IMB?
    Who's Kathy Sinnott?

    Where are you getting this information from?
    It's a very simple question.


  • Options
    #88
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    Isn't water fluoridation illegal anyway, as it contravenes both EU directives and the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine?

    The use of unregistered substances for medicinal purposes is illegal under the Codified Pharmaceuticals Directive 2001/83/EEC

    The intent to medicate renders any substance presented as having any beneficial effect on a medical condition a medicinal substance under Article 1 of this Directive, irrespective of its efficacy. All medicinal substances must be registered as such, and subjected to full clinical testing for safety. Fluorosilicates have not been so registered nor tested for safety. Manufacturing these chemicals under BS EN 12174/5 does not authorise their use as medicinal substances.


    The use of fluoridation chemicals to medicate the public indiscriminately violates the code of medical ethics set out in the Council of Europe's Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine

    This Convention establishes a valid Code of Medical Ethics and is widely accepted throughout Europe - the failure of the British Government to endorse it does not render its provisions invalid, as all such national codes should comply with the principles set out therein. States may not medicate any individual except under exceptional conditions of recognised public health emergencies. All medical interventions must be carried out under proper medical supervision, and in accordance with the patient's needs and fully informed wishes.


  • Options
    #89
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    WildBoots wrote: »
    Isn't water fluoridation illegal anyway, as it contravenes both EU directives and the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine?

    Opinion doesn't equal law.

    Sources for these claims?


  • Options
    #90
    WildBoots
    Closed Accounts Posts: 337 ✭✭WildBoots


    Fluoridation is crude and ineffective treatment, declare top European scientists

    "By describing fluoridation as ‘crude and ineffective systemic fluoride treatment without a detectable threshold for dental and bone damage’ to prevent dental caries, Europe’s scientific committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) has confirmed the claim of European doctors in June 2009. They stated that fluoridation is medical treatment and therefore should be subject to medicinal risk assessment, as has been demanded of the European Commission by MEPs and European Parliament committees for years".


    http://voiceireland.org/water/fluoridation/fluoridation-is-crude-and-ineffective-treatment-declare-top-european-scientists/#more-576


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    WildBoots wrote: »
    Fluoridation is crude and ineffective treatment, declare top European scientists

    "By describing fluoridation as ‘crude and ineffective systemic fluoride treatment without a detectable threshold for dental and bone damage’ to prevent dental caries, Europe’s scientific committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) has confirmed the claim of European doctors in June 2009. They stated that fluoridation is medical treatment and therefore should be subject to medicinal risk assessment, as has been demanded of the European Commission by MEPs and European Parliament committees for years".


    http://voiceireland.org/water/fluoridation/fluoridation-is-crude-and-ineffective-treatment-declare-top-european-scientists/#more-576

    So wildboots are you just going to continue to post trash from biased websites.

    Are we ever going to see any evidence for your original claim?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement