is fluoride dangerous in tapwater and does boiling your water neutralize it

TomVanDerBrook

Hey guys,
I ve heard from several source that Irish Tap water contains loads of Fluoride, I ve also heard this is kinda dangerous not Physically but some peeps claim that Fluoride makes persons that use it daily very apathic.

Maybe this just absolute crap? i have been drinking the tapwater for years but i must say never noticed anything unusual so

But I ve visited some health shops in the Dublin area this weekend, they all told me that it is actually true about the tapwater except for one guy who told me that expect for the Dublin 1 and 2 Areas all over Dublin Tap water is perfectly drinkable. In the countryside the quality is even better , that s what one shopkeeper told me
...
One lady started a 25 minutes during speech about the tap water and it being the reason for the fact that so many irish people are so apathic...i haven t noticed this about Irish people actuaally but as i m a bit paranoid about drinking Fluoride...

So my plans was to only drink boiled tapwater... This is gonna kill the fluoride isn't it ?

I actually care as i drink around 3 liters of water a day ...Keeps me happy and active
and

Regards

locum-motion

Irish water does not contain "loads of" flouride. It contains precisely the correct amount!

Flouride in water is one of the favourite 'conspiracy theory' subjects out there, so you can expect this thread to be locked pretty quickly. Before it is, though, let me just give you this piece of advice: don't pay any attention to any of the crap on the net saying that flouride in the water is a bad thing.

zxce

locum-motion wrote: »

Irish water does not contain "loads of" flouride. It contains precisely the correct amount!

Flouride in water is one of the favourite 'conspiracy theory' subjects out there, so you can expect this thread to be locked pretty quickly. Before it is, though, let me just give you this piece of advice: don't pay any attention to any of the crap on the net saying that flouride in the water is a bad thing.

Theirs no need for it in Ireland. It's been a hot topic alot lately so will probably end soon.

Proposed bill would ban fluoride from Ireland’s water
http://www.fluoridefreewater.ie/

It's one of many chemicals added to make it drinkable. If you seen them added you wouldn't drink it.

SleepDoc

zxce wrote: »

Theirs no need for it in Ireland. It's been a hot topic alot lately so will probably end soon.

Proposed bill would ban fluoride from Ireland’s water
http://www.fluoridefreewater.ie/

It's one of many chemicals added to make it drinkable. If you seen them added you wouldn't drink it.

It's a safe and effective way of helping to prevent dental decay.

Evidence to the contrary or gtfo.

I'd rather lose my teeth, than lose my mind.

ozmo

TomVanDerBrook wrote: »

Hey guys,

So my plans was to only drink boiled tapwater... This is gonna kill the fluoride isn't it ?

Boiling or normal filtering (Brita etc) does not remove it.


Only option if you dont like it, is a very expensive specialised filter (Reverse Osmosis or Distillation filter) or to drink bottled water that if fl free.

Personally - I don't believe Ive read anything convincing to say its harmful - but if its past its usefulness nowadays then maybe its time to stop adding it. We have a choice of Iodine in our Salt or not - we should have a choice of medication in water also.

Lurching

I think I'd listen to a scientist before I'd listen to the advise of a lowly health food shop assistant.

gctest50

The only think better than dumping something you don't want is getting paid to dump it

Republic of Ireland

71% water fluoridation.

United Kingdom and Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland: No fluoridation.

Scotland: No fluoridation.

Wales: No fluoridation.

England: 10% water fluoridation.



Various Other European Countries


Austria: No fluoridation – "toxic fluorides have never been added to the public water supplies in Austria." (17th February 2000).

Belgium: No fluoridation.

Czech Republic: No fluoridation – "since 1993 drinking water has not been treated with fluoride in public water supplies throughout the Czech Republic. Reasons:

Uneconomical
Unecological
Unethical
Toxicologically and physiologically debatable"


Denmark: No fluoridation – "toxic fluorides have never been added to the public water supplies." (22nd December 1999)

Finland: No fluoridation. One city, Kuopio, stopped in 1992.

France: No fluoridation – "fluoride chemicals are not included in the list of chemicals for drinking water treatment. This is due to ethical as well as medical considerations." (25th August 2000)

Germany: No fluoridation – "Generally in Germany fluoridation of drinking water is forbidden." (16th September 1999)

Luxembourg: No fluoridation – "Fluoride has never been added to the public water supplies in Luxembourg."

Holland: No fluoridation. It was rejected in 1976.

Norway: No fluoridation. It was rejected in 1975.

Spain: 3% water fluoridation.

Sweden: No fluoridation – "Nobel Medical Institute recommended against fluoridation. It is banned since 1971."

Switzerland: No fluoridation.


http://www.fluoridefreewater.ie/

gctest50

Lurching wrote: »

I think I'd listen to a scientist before I'd listen to the advise of a lowly health food shop assistant.

Dr. J. William Hirzy, Senior US EPA Chemist

"If this stuff (hydrofluorosilicic acid) gets out into the air, it's a pollutant; if it gets into the river, it's a pollutant; if it gets into the lake, it's a pollutant; but if it goes right straight into your drinking water system, it's not a pollutant. That's amazing."

zxce

SleepDoc wrote: »

It's a safe and effective way of helping to prevent dental decay.

Evidence to the contrary or gtfo.

http://www.fluoridealert.org/issues/caries/who-data/

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_330_en.pdf
Other Dark Blue countries don't add it (page8). Higher percentage of Irish go to Dentist more often than them aswell(page near the end).

pg10 Blue Box (Danes don't add it)
Just good practice.


Everyone shouldn't be exposed to a toxic byproduct just because a few can't keep the coke/cigs/vodka out of their mouths.

Plus it only has an effect topically in your mouth, not when you swallow it.

zxce

Lurching wrote: »

I think I'd listen to a scientist before I'd listen to the advise of a lowly health food shop assistant.

yea, just google the scientist first.

endacl

zxce wrote: »

yea, just google the scientist first.

Ah yes. Google. The noted academic journal. Made a researcher out of everybody who could (nearly) spell...

Pop fluoride plus <anything> into the google machine. It'll find a match. It won't filter out the rubbish results though. You kinda have to know the subject to do that filtering yourself. A quick check for 'flouride bad breath' and google vomits out...

http://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Your-Toothpaste-the-Cause-of-Your-Bad-Breath?---Bad-Breath-Toothpaste-Information&id=3917475

I'm off over to CT's! They go batsh1t for this stuff!

Oh no. Wait. Checked out the author. He only writes about bad breath. Apparently everything causes it. Luckily it can be 'cured' by the shtuff he 'recommends'.... Ah, who cares! Ct'ers will love this one anyway...

Google rewards the user. That's why its successful. If it told people there was nothing of worth to find, people wouldn't use it. Try Google Scholar next time. It's ever-so-slightly less pointless for 'proper' research.

:rolleyes:

Corvo Attano

In the amounts it is present in it is harmless. You'll probably be sick if you eat a tube of toothpaste.

SleepDoc

zxce wrote: »

http://www.fluoridealert.org/issues/caries/who-data/

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_330_en.pdf
Other Dark Blue countries don't add it (page8). Higher percentage of Irish go to Dentist more often than them aswell(page near the end).

pg10 Blue Box (Danes don't add it)
Just good practice.


Everyone shouldn't be exposed to a toxic byproduct just because a few can't keep the coke/cigs/vodka out of their mouths.

Plus it only has an effect topically in your mouth, not when you swallow it.

Yawn. Nothing peer reviewed then?

SleepDoc

gctest50 wrote: »

Dr. J. William Hirzy, Senior US EPA Chemist

"If this stuff (hydrofluorosilicic acid) gets out into the air, it's a pollutant; if it gets into the river, it's a pollutant; if it gets into the lake, it's a pollutant; but if it goes right straight into your drinking water system, it's not a pollutant. That's amazing."

Ffs.

Anything can be a pollutant.

jma

TomVanDerBrook wrote: »

Hey guys,
I ve heard from several source that Irish Tap water contains loads of Fluoride, I ve also heard this is kinda dangerous not Physically but some peeps claim that Fluoride makes persons that use it daily very apathic.

...

So my plans was to only drink boiled tapwater... This is gonna kill the fluoride isn't it ?

I actually care as i drink around 3 liters of water a day ...Keeps me happy and active
and

Regards

This has been debated extensively, here on Boards and also on other places. Personally, I don't think there's much point in debating whether it's safe or potentially harmful. One person is going to argue that it's not safe, another is going to say that it's potentially harmful, and the third is going to ask the others to provide peer-reviewed evidence. In the end, I think, it's best to go out and do your own research, then make up your own mind. The only problem with that is that many people still don't know their water is being fluoridated.

But the fact is that Irish Statute Book has a provision in the Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act, 1960, that says that periodic health surveys need to be carried out in conjunction with water fluoridation, and reports to be submitted to the Oireachtas. This was clearly neglected.

And, besides the health concerns, there's the ethical issue, which cannot really be argued. Also, it has been proven that, today, there's a negligible health benefit, which means there's not much point in adding fluoride. Especially when the cost is 4.8m per year!

With all the other sources of fluoride (mouth wash, toothpaste, tablets), it really comes down to the question of whether or not people should be allowed to choose whether or not they want to ingest fluoride.

Boiling fluoridated water actually has the opposite effect - it increases the concentration of fluoride. This is because water has a lower boiling point (water evaporates at 100° C, fluoride does not).

endacl

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'd rather lose my teeth, than lose my mind.

Stay away from conspiracy theories. No reason you can't keep both.

endacl

endacl wrote: »

Stay away from conspiracy theories. No reason you can't keep both.

Once upon a time, the notion of the US government spying on everyone was laughed off as a conspiracy theory.

EoghanIRL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Once upon a time, the notion of the US government spying on everyone was laughed off as a conspiracy theory.

What are your concerns about fluorine ?
If you don't like it then dont drink or use tap water.

jma

Corvo Attano wrote: »

In the amounts it is present in it is harmless. You'll probably be sick if you eat a tube of toothpaste.

It is if you ingest it once, but most of us drink water every day, and the concerns that people have are based on long-term effects. I don't think it's right to say that it's harmless. Most of the studies that have been carried out are retrospective and haven't found conclusive evidence to say that fluoridation is harmful. That doesn't necessarily mean it's harmless. Due to the toxic nature of fluoride, I wouldn't think it's unreasonable for people to be cautious about it.

In any case, there should definitely be freedom of choice. Anyone arguing against that is just arguing for the sake of arguing, if you ask me.

jma

EoghanIRL wrote: »

What are your concerns about fluorine ?
If you don't like it then dont drink or use tap water.

Water and sanitation is a basic human right. This is recognised by international human rights law. It's not exactly a luxury. We need it to survive.

Amazingfun

http://www.thegirlagainstfluoride.com/

zenno

The European Commission of human rights will eventually fine the Irish government on abuses of mass medication to it's citizens. Fluoridation will be a thing of the past soon enough, there is no doubt that this will be the case.

endacl

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Once upon a time, the notion of the US government spying on everyone was laughed off as a conspiracy theory.

No it wasn't. The USA has never in modern history denied the fact that it has an intelligence service. Most countries do. Even Ireland does - G2. The conspiracy 'theories' that paranoically tied every last little bit of badness in the world to the CIA is what gets laughed at. And rightly so.

The CIA doesn't care about the state of your teeth, any more than I care about the state of your teeth.

This is one of those sciency fact and evidence based forums. Where tinfoil millinery is seen as nothing more than a waste of good tinfoil. Refreshing.

endacl

zenno wrote: »

The European Commission of human rights will eventually fine the Irish government on abuses of mass medication to it's citizens. Fluoridation will be a thing of the past soon enough, there is no doubt that this will be the case.

Well, they haven't yet defined it as a medication. Ireland can't be fined for breaking a rule that doesn't exist. Have you been at those freeman websites again? You do know they're a bit silly, don't you...?

bumper234

Ah well.


Here we go again...

TomVanDerBrook

Hi guys,
Thanks for all the replys and opinions

zenno

endacl wrote: »

Well, they haven't yet defined it as a medication. Ireland can't be fined for breaking a rule that doesn't exist. Have you been at those freeman websites again? You do know they're a bit silly, don't you...?

It's quite obvious (even to a layman) that it is a medication, and this will be acknowledged soon and then the fines will commence, it's very simple really.

bumper234

zenno wrote: »

It's quite obvious (even to a layman) that it is a medication, and this will be acknowledged soon and then the fines will commence, it's very simple really.

No.

I am a layman and until 2 weeks ago i had never even thought about fluoride in my tap water, I knew it was there but i always thought (and still do) that it is an additive/supplement. I have yet to see it described as a medication (outside of these threads or some random guys report/blog.

jma

bumper234 wrote: »

No.

I am a layman and until 2 weeks ago i had never even thought about fluoride in my tap water, I knew it was there but i always thought (and still do) that it is an additive/supplement. I have yet to see it described as a medication (outside of these threads or some random guys report/blog.

Have a look here:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a682727.html

On this page, it (Fluoride) is described as a medication, with warnings of side effects (which happens to include seizures), and also includes advisories to seek professional medical advice before taking Fluoride.

endacl

jma wrote: »

Have a look here:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a682727.html

On this page, it (Fluoride) is described as a medication, with warnings of side effects (which happens to include seizures), and also includes advisories to seek professional medical advice before taking Fluoride.

By the US. What's that got to do with the current status of fluoride in the EU.

You really should consider the details before you post...

jma

endacl wrote: »

By the US. What's that got to do with the current status of fluoride in the EU.

You really should consider the details before you post...

You really should read and understand the posts you're commenting about before giving your 2cents worth.

Bumper234 said "I have yet to see it described as a medication (outside of these threads or some random guys report/blog."

I responded to that.

It has little to do with the status in the EU, but it has a lot to do with Fluoride, in case you missed that.

bumper234

jma wrote: »

Have a look here:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a682727.html

On this page, it (Fluoride) is described as a medication, with warnings of side effects (which happens to include seizures), and also includes advisories to seek professional medical advice before taking Fluoride.

But on this page it's considered to be an additive

http://www.ada.org/sections/newsAndEvents/pdfs/fluoridation_facts.pdf

So who to trust?

A service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

or

The American dental association?

One of them must be lying right?

Gbear

Deleted User wrote: »

Once upon a time, the notion of the US government spying on everyone was laughed off as a conspiracy theory.

The veracity of any conspiracy theory is based on the evidence for it - not whether any other conspiracies have ever been proven correct.

There is no evidence that fluoride is damaging to health in the concentrations it's found at in Irish water. There's just no argument to be had about the dangers. There simply isn't any.

There is an argument that it shouldn't be the government's place to do that sort of thing but because there's no real downside it should be rather far down the list of priorities.
You're not necessarily wrong to oppose it in principle but there's just no real point in doing so, other than technical correctness.

jma

endacl wrote: »

By the US. What's that got to do with the current status of fluoride in the EU.

You really should consider the details before you post...

Here's one a bit closer to home:

“The European Court of Justice has defined fluoridation as a medication and has refused to sanction its implementation. Yet our government continues to impose fluoride on the population at a cost of €4.8 million per annum.”

Source: http://www.thejournal.ie/ban-fluoride-ireland-902100-May2013/

And also:

Fluoridated water must be treated as a medicine, and cannot be used to prepare foods. That is the decision of the European Court of Justice, in a landmark case dealing with the classification and regulation of 'functional drinks' in member states of the European Community. (HLH Warenvertriebs and Orthica (Joined Cases C-211/03, C-299/03, C-316/03 and C-318/03) 9 June 2005)

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?num=C-211/03&language=en

bumper234

jma wrote: »

Here's one a bit closer to home:

“The European Court of Justice has defined fluoridation as a medication and has refused to sanction its implementation. Yet our government continues to impose fluoride on the population at a cost of €4.8 million per annum.”

Source: http://www.thejournal.ie/ban-fluoride-ireland-902100-May2013/

And also:

Fluoridated water must be treated as a medicine, and cannot be used to prepare foods. That is the decision of the European Court of Justice, in a landmark case dealing with the classification and regulation of 'functional drinks' in member states of the European Community. (HLH Warenvertriebs and Orthica (Joined Cases C-211/03, C-299/03, C-316/03 and C-318/03) 9 June 2005)

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?num=C-211/03&language=en

But.

The National Health Service (NHS), UK, quoted a UK study which compared levels of tooth decay among very young children in areas where drinking water was not fluoridated to those living in areas where fluoridation occurred. The researchers found that there was 60% less tooth decay among the children living in the fluoridated water areas.

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Fluoride/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Canadian Dental Association President Dr. Ron G. Smith described water fluoridation as one of the greatest preventative measure we have in the fight against dental decay. "There is clear evidence that fluoride helps natural tooth enamel remineralize and jurisdictions around the world support water fluoridation, as do we. It is important that everyone understands the facts and the benefits of fluoride."

http://www.cda-adc.ca/en/cda/media_room/news_releases/2011/01_10_11.asp

The Australian Department of Health and Ageing confirmed that according to the most up-to-date evidence, fluoride in the water system is safe and effective for people of all ages.

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/currentissue-P12000014

So again i ask, Who is lying?

jma

bumper234 wrote: »

But.

The National Health Service (NHS), UK, quoted a UK study which compared levels of tooth decay among very young children in areas where drinking water was not fluoridated to those living in areas where fluoridation occurred. The researchers found that there was 60% less tooth decay among the children living in the fluoridated water areas.

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Fluoride/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Canadian Dental Association President Dr. Ron G. Smith described water fluoridation as one of the greatest preventative measure we have in the fight against dental decay. "There is clear evidence that fluoride helps natural tooth enamel remineralize and jurisdictions around the world support water fluoridation, as do we. It is important that everyone understands the facts and the benefits of fluoride."

http://www.cda-adc.ca/en/cda/media_room/news_releases/2011/01_10_11.asp

The Australian Department of Health and Ageing confirmed that according to the most up-to-date evidence, fluoride in the water system is safe and effective for people of all ages.

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/currentissue-P12000014

So again i ask, Who is lying?

It doesn't really matter who is lying. You're missing the point. We should be free to choose. You're not forced to take flu vaccines through your taps either, are you? Even though that might decrease the number of annual flu infections. (That's just an example; I don't want argue about whether or not that is physically or even theoretically possible).

So, there's a lot of conflicting views and evidence. So, why take the gamble. If you think your oral health will benefit from fluoride supplements, go the the pharmacy and buy some tablets. Simple as.

jh79

jma wrote: »

It doesn't really matter who is lying. You're missing the point. We should be free to choose. You're not forced to take flu vaccines through your taps either, are you? Even though that might decrease the number of annual flu infections. (That's just an example; I don't want argue about whether or not that is physically or even theoretically possible).

So, there's a lot of conflicting views and evidence. So, why take the gamble. If you think your oral health will benefit from fluoride supplements, go the the pharmacy and buy some tablets. Simple as.

Vaccines are medication, fluoride is a supplement. It is present in water anyways so it is added to supplement what is already present.

If fluoride is such a dangerous substance why aren't ye pressing for its complete removal from the water supply?

bumper234

jma wrote: »

It doesn't really matter who is lying. You're missing the point. We should be free to choose. You're not forced to take flu vaccines through your taps either, are you? Even though that might decrease the number of annual flu infections. (That's just an example; I don't want argue about whether or not that is physically or even theoretically possible).

So, there's a lot of conflicting views and evidence. So, why take the gamble. If you think your oral health will benefit from fluoride supplements, go the the pharmacy and buy some tablets. Simple as.

And if you feel that drinking tap water equates to forced medication then maybe you should just drink bottled water.

jma

jh79 wrote: »

Vaccines are medication, fluoride is a supplement. It is present in water anyways so it is added to supplement what is already present.

I know the difference, jh79. As said, I was just making an example. The reason for the comparison: vaccines are to prevent diseases, while fluoride is added to prevent dental caries, which is also considered a disease. They are different, yes.

Perhaps a better analogy: you aren't forced to take vitamin supplements through your tap water, even though certain vitamin or mineral supplements can be beneficial to your health - for example if you're a vegetarian, or if you don't eat much fruit or veg.

jh79 wrote: »

If fluoride is such a dangerous substance why aren't ye pressing for its complete removal from the water supply?

Naturally occurring fluoride is different from added fluoride.

Whatnuclearsub

Tap water is not doing the irish population any harm, if tap water could harm people you can be sure there would have been a court case by now! If they remove fluoride now, the only reason for it will be to save money.

jma

bumper234 wrote: »

And if you feel that drinking tap water equates to forced medication then maybe you should just drink bottled water.

First of all, I do drink bottled water.

Secondly, a lot of bottled water also contains added fluoride, and apparently, there's no regulation that forces companies to state the levels.

Thirdly, do you really think that's an acceptable alternative? If you do, you didn't consider that very well. Hint: it basically affects all Irish produce. We would also need to use bottled water for preparing food - at home and in restaurants, etc.

You might as well say that people should move to another country if they don't like it.

bumper234

jma wrote: »

First of all, I do drink bottled water.

Secondly, a lot of bottled water also contains added fluoride, and apparently, there's no regulation that forces companies to state the levels.

Thirdly, do you really think that's an acceptable alternative? If you do, you didn't consider that very well. Hint: it basically affects all Irish produce. We would also need to use bottled water for preparing food - at home and in restaurants, etc.

You might as well say that people should move to another country if they don't like it.

That would be my next suggestion. Adding fluoride to the water system is seen (by most) as a positive thing. Until it is proven to be harmful there is no need to remove 8t just because a small % of the population do not want it. What next? Ban all mobile phones because they MAY cause tumours to people who use them?

jh79

jma wrote: »

I know the difference, jh79. As said, I was just making an example. The reason for the comparison: vaccines are to prevent diseases, while fluoride is added to prevent dental caries, which is also considered a disease. They are different, yes.

Perhaps a better analogy: you aren't forced to take vitamin supplements through your tap water, even though certain vitamin or mineral supplements can be beneficial to your health - for example if you're a vegetarian, or if you don't eat much fruit or veg.



Naturally occurring fluoride is different from added fluoride.

It's not, F- is the same no matter where it comes from. That should be reason enough for you to question the crap you are reading on fluoride alert / girl against fluoride. A leaving cert chemistry student would not make that mistake yet it is stated as fact on those ridiculous websites. Surely if they are willing to mislead you on this point you would question the veracity of the other "facts" they spout.

jma

Whatnuclearsub wrote: »

Tap water is not doing the irish population any harm, if tap water could harm people you can be sure there would have been a court case by now! If they remove fluoride now, the only reason for it will be to save money.

What are you basing that on exactly? Have you considered fluorosis cases in Ireland?

Ireland has one of the world's highest cancer rates. In fact, it's the second highest worldwide. I'm not saying that that has anything to do with fluoride, but I am suspicious about it. They are even higher than N. Ireland. More than likely, there are actually a large number of factors, including lifestyle, but I personally wouldn't rule fluoride out completely. Again, this is my personal opinion - I have no facts linking the two, but as I said before, most studies on fluoridation are retrospective, so I'd be eager to see what effect removing fluoride will have down the road.

Also, have you read about Aisling FitzGibbon's story, and why she became an anti-fluoride activist?

jma

jh79 wrote: »

It's not, F- is the same no matter where it comes from. That should be reason enough for you to question the crap you are reading on fluoride alert / girl against fluoride. A leaving cert chemistry student would not make that mistake yet it is stated as fact on those ridiculous websites. Surely if they are willing to mislead you on this point you would question the veracity of the other "facts" they spout.

Get your facts straight. Naturally occurring fluoride is a lot less soluble than the added fluoride. Solubility is a key factor in toxicity. I suggest you do a bit more research on the subject.

jma

I'll try and give you a starting point, to help you out a bit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_fluorosilicate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexafluorosilicic_acid

jh79

jma wrote: »

Get your facts straight. Naturally occurring fluoride is a lot less soluble than the added fluoride. Solubility is a key factor in toxicity. I suggest you do a bit more research on the subject.

If the fluoride concentration is measurable then it has already dissolved. Calcium fluoride is naturally occurring, Sodium fluoride is not. They dissociate at different rates but it is the final concentration that we are talking about. 0.7ppm of fluoride from which Calcium fluoride is the source has the same effect as 0.7ppm in which sodium fluoride is the source. Care to hazard a guess why these website aren't clear on this fact?

jh79

jma wrote: »

I'll try and give you a starting point, to help you out a bit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_fluorosilicate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexafluorosilicic_acid[/QUOTE]

To break it down for you, the source of the fluoride is not important it is the final concentration of the fluoride ion.

runawaybishop

jma wrote: »

Ireland has one of the world's highest cancer rates. In fact, it's the second highest worldwide. I'm not saying that that has anything to do with fluoride, but I am suspicious about it. They are even higher than N. Ireland. More than likely, there are actually a large number of factors, including lifestyle, but I personally wouldn't rule fluoride out completely. Again, this is my personal opinion - I have no facts linking the two, but as I said before, most studies on fluoridation are retrospective, so I'd be eager to see what effect removing fluoride will have down the road.

We also have dogs. Now, I'm not saying that dogs cause cancer but i am suspicious of them. I wouldn't rule dogs out from causing cancer. I have no facts linking the two though, but I'm eager to see what removing dogs from the country does.

bumper234

runawaybishop wrote: »

We also have dogs. Now, I'm not saying that dogs cause cancer but i am suspicious of them. I wouldn't rule dogs out from causing cancer. I have no facts linking the two though, but I'm eager to see what removing dogs from the country does.

Cars....what about cars.

It's the emissions causing the cancers lets go back to horse and trap like them Amish lads. Or the cows maybe the methane causes it....lets get rid of the cows.