Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Water fluoridation should be scrapped!

Options
12357…20

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Genghiz Cohen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    No more DHMO in our water supplies. This madness has to stop.

    It's the primary constituent of weed killer!! And it's in our water supplies!!


  • Options
    #123
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Genghiz Cohen wrote: »
    It's the primary constituent of weed killer!! And it's in our water supplies!!
    It's also a waste byproduct of MDMA synthesis (And all sorts of drugs). If that's not evidence that the government's trying to make us docile and subservient through forced medication then I don't know what is.


  • Options
    #124
    dirtyden
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭dirtyden


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    It's also a waste byproduct of MDMA synthesis (And all sorts of drugs). If that's not evidence that the government's trying to make us docile and subservient through forced medication then I don't know what is.

    Can you describe this MDMA synthesis?


  • Options
    #125
    Lefticus Loonaticus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 201 ✭✭Lefticus Loonaticus


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1962/en/si/0075.html

    So by the 1962 law it must be measured daily
    2007 law says the same.

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2007/en/si/0042.html

    Your 1997 reference is kinda outdated by the use of 2001 EU standards.

    The EU std. is behind paywalls though but it's the same one as used by the Germans and others who'd be more picky than we are about such things.

    I care not about measurement or complicated debates about chemical componds. I was pointing out that the toxic fluoride was coming from a fertilizer company in wexford.

    As far as i know now, its currently coming from a company called Chemifloc.

    Any official irish report or guidelines, no matter what year written in, is suspect to me and most other people who are against fluoride since their only aim is alway to deny, stonewall and keep the practice in place no matter what the opposition.

    The 2001 EU standards are irrelevant because another EU directive from the same year cancels it out and makes the mass medication of fluoride through tap water illegal.

    European Directive on Medicinal Products for Human Use -
    http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/internal_market/single_market_for_goods/pharmaceutical_and_cosmetic_products/l21230_en.htm

    (maybe we are talking about the same EU standards/directives?)

    The germans dont put fluoride in their water. East Germany discontinued the practice after reunification.


  • Options
    #126
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    dirtyden wrote: »
    Can you describe this MDMA synthesis?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDMA#Chemistry
    Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »
    I care not about measurement or complicated debates about chemical componds.
    If you want to talk about chemical additions to water (And fluorine isn't the only chemical that's added incidentally...) it's pretty much central to the conversation.
    I was pointing out that the toxic fluoride was coming from a fertilizer company in wexford.
    "Toxic fluoride". Anything can be toxic. The dose is what determines what is toxic and what is not. As for where it came from, it doesn't matter so long as it's been processed correctly.
    Any official irish report or guidelines, no matter what year written in, is suspect to me and most other people who are against fluoride since their only aim is alway to deny, stonewall and keep the practice in place no matter what the opposition.
    Or perhaps it could be because fluoridated water is beneficial for teeth with the only opposition coming from people with dubious "evidence" and conspiracy theories.
    The germans dont put fluoride in their water. East Germany discontinued the practice after reunification.
    Obviously that's because the Soviet Union used to fluoridate their water for mind-control purposes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Hoffmans
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,069 ✭✭✭Hoffmans


    zee equilivant amount of flouride in a pea sized blob of toothpaste to water would be around 15 litres, so if there is no problem using toothpaste whats wrong with the water unless your drinking 3-4 gallons of it a day:confused:


  • Options
    #128
    Lefticus Loonaticus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 201 ✭✭Lefticus Loonaticus


    partyatmygaff wrote: »


    Or perhaps it could be because fluoridated water is beneficial for teeth with the only opposition coming from people with dubious "evidence" and conspiracy theories.

    Obviously that's because the Soviet Union used to fluoridate their water for mind-control purposes.

    The evidence shows that it dosent really help teeth at all and its more likely to cause dental fluorosis, which many people unknowing have.

    It also helps heavy industry get rid of the stuff for a pitence, instead of spending a massive amount on trying to dispose of it, given that its a hazardous waste product.

    Now thats what i call dubiously dubious!

    And what exactly is this conspiracy theory you were talking about? Are you suggesting that the irish state is using fluoride as some sort of mind control? I wouldnt go that far, its much more likely to be an economic scam.


  • Options
    #129
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »
    The evidence shows that it dosent really help teeth at all and its more likely to cause dental fluorosis, which many people unknowing have.
    "The evidence" being? A Youtube video? An article on someone's blog?

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

    From the material on that site, there's far more evidence to suggest that controlled amounts of fluoride in water is beneficial for teeth.
    It also helps heavy industry get rid of the stuff for a pitence, instead of spending a massive amount on trying to dispose of it, given that its a hazardous waste.
    If the cheapest way to obtain and purify the required compound is through obtaining it from heavy industry what's the problem? Unless you believe that molecules can "remember" being used in heavy industry (And all the other things they've probably been involved with over time) I don't see why having something originate from heavy industry is an issue.
    And what exactly is this conspiracy theory you were talking about? Are you suggesting that the irish state is using fluoride as some sort of mind control? I wouldnt go that far, its much more likely to be an economic scam.
    An economic scam where the government pays money to foreign private companies to try and lower their recycling costs. Nice scam.


  • Options
    #130
    Hoffmans
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,069 ✭✭✭Hoffmans


    whatever about the conspirists and other loons and their agendas the fact that it is costing round 3 - 4 million a year to just add the stuff unecessarily is a bad joke...........


  • Options
    #131
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Hoffmans wrote: »
    whatever about the conspirists and other loons and their agendas the fact that it is costing round 3 - 4 million a year to just add the stuff unecessarily is a bad joke...........
    3-4 million isn't a lot for a significant improvement in public dental health. Prevention is always better than the cure e.t.c.

    If they could do the same with food to try and reduce salt and fat content they'd probably do the same. Chronic disease puts a huge strain on the public healthcare system.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    dirtyden
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭dirtyden


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDMA#Chemistry


    Thanks would not have thought that would be on Wikipedia.

    Interesting article. I had no idea the readily available starting material for the synthesis was such a common essential oil. Pretty bog standard chemistry as well.

    On the OP whilst fluorination cannot be linked to harm and anyone who suggests otherwise is really not following scientific fact based evidence, it is also probably of limited effect in the modern times.


  • Options
    #133
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    dirtyden wrote: »
    Thanks would not have thought that would be on Wikipedia.

    Interesting article. I had no idea the readily available starting material for the synthesis was such a common essential oil. Pretty bog standard chemistry as well.
    You'd be surprised. You could more or less find the synthesis mechanism for any drug if you had the inclination. That said, actually successfully making anything pure enough for use or sale is well out of reach for most.


  • Options
    #134
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 99,706 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »
    I care not about measurement or complicated debates about chemical componds.
    ...
    The 2001 EU standards are irrelevant because another EU directive from the same year cancels it out and makes the mass medication of fluoride through tap water illegal.

    European Directive on Medicinal Products for Human Use -
    http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/internal_market/single_market_for_goods/pharmaceutical_and_cosmetic_products/l21230_en.htm
    That link clearly allows Fluoride as it's been in use in at least one EU country for at least 8 years as you'd have seen if you had bothered to read it and my post liking our 1962 legislation.
    Notwithstanding the previous paragraph and without prejudice to the law relating to intellectual and commercial property, applicants are not obliged to provide the results of pre-clinical or clinical tests or clinical trials if they can show that:

    the medicinal product is a generic of a reference medicinal product which has been authorised for not less than eight years in a Member State or in the Community;
    the active substances of the medicinal product have had a well established medicinal use in the Community for at least ten years, with an acceptable level of safety.


    I care not about measurement or complicated debates about chemical componds.
    says it all really


  • Options
    #135
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,000 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    An economic scam where the government pays money to foreign private companies to try and lower their recycling costs. Nice scam.

    You do recall our previous government agreeing to take on all the bank debts for like....no good reason at all don't you ???? .....and the current one giving them more money even thought they said the wouldn't ???

    :pac:


  • Options
    #136
    heyjude
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,030 ✭✭✭heyjude


    Hoffmans wrote: »
    zee equilivant amount of flouride in a pea sized blob of toothpaste to water would be around 15 litres, so if there is no problem using toothpaste whats wrong with the water unless your drinking 3-4 gallons of it a day:confused:

    What is wrong is that when you are finished washing your teeth with toothpaste you spit it out so any fluoride that you swallow is incidental and your exposure to fluoride is largely limited to where it produces a benefit to you(i.e. your mouth).

    Fluoride in your drinking water only improves dental health as it passes through your mouth and provides no dental benefits once swallowed, which is pretty much what you do with drinking water, so you'd get the same benefits if you just used fluoridated tap water as mouthwash and spat it out afterwards.

    In fact, if they wanted to retain the benefits of fluoridating drinking water supplies, why not bottle the fluoridated water and distribute it cheaply for use as mouthwash.

    Besides if the government is so concerned about our dental health, why don't they make some effort towards providing free dental checkups for everyone at least once a year, instead of poisoning our water ? I also wonder why it is that every time the government wants to do something unpopular, we are told as a justification that almost every other country does it already, yet they are perfectly content to be in a very small minority of countries worldwide when it comes to fluoridating our public water supplies. What about copying other countries when it comes to water fluoridation ?


  • Options
    #137
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 99,706 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    heyjude wrote: »
    Besides if the government is so concerned about our dental health, why don't they make some effort towards providing free dental checkups for everyone at least once a year,
    slippery slope

    next thing we'll be getting an annual medical checkup and more screening for preventable disease :eek:


  • Options
    #138
    upandcumming
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,718 ✭✭✭upandcumming


    Worztron wrote: »
    That is a straw man.
    Passive smoking is harmful, I am in full agreement with that ban. We can live perfectly healthy without water fluoridation - ask the Germans.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75864615&postcount=38


  • Options
    #139
    Farmers For No
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2 ✭Farmers For No


    Water fluoridation is a highly controversial topic, with many individuals voicing massive concern over the practice. In contrast, some stick to the concept that there isn’t any association between fluoride and any real negative effects. Fluoride, however, is indeed a toxic substance, and has been tied with numerous health complications in well-established research. Fluoride can be found in many water supplies, toothpaste, and even food at alarming levels. While it may sound shocking to many, some research is even drawing a close connection between fluoride and an increased cancer risk.
    One paper entitled Fluoride – A Modern Toxic Waste says the following:
    Yiamouyiannis documents research showing that fluoride increases the tumor growth rate by 25% at only 1 ppm, produces melanotic tumors, transforms normal cells into cancer cells and increases the carcinogenesis of other chemicals. For the original references to these studies, refer to Yiamouyiannis’ pamphlet, Lifesavers Guide to Fluoridation.
    In 1997, it was shown that fluoridation caused about 10,000 cancer deaths in epidemiological studies by Dr. Dean Burk, former head of the Cytochemistry Section at the National Cancer Institute and Yiamouyiannis. Despite the findings occurring in 1997, they were not reluctantly released until 1989. After analyzing the study results in rats, it was found that animals who drank fluoridated water:
    • Showed an increase in tumors and cancers in oral squamous cells.
    • Developed a rare form of bone cancer called osteosarcoma.
    • Showed an increased in thyroid follicular cell tumors.
    • Developed a rare form of liver cancer known as hepatocholangiocarcinoma.



    Other research resurfaced by Dr. Dean Burk, former chief of cytochemistry at the National Cancer Institute for 30 years, also shows that fluoride increases the cancer death rate. Dr Burk refers to a study conducted which compares the 10 largest U.S. cities with fluoridation and the 10 largest without. What researchers found was that following fluoridation, deaths from cancer went up immediately- in as little as a year.
    To reduce fluoride levels to a the greatest degree, activists must demand that the government stop fluoridating the water supplies. Water fluoridation has not only been linked to an increased cancer risk, but a decreased IQ in children. In fact, the findings forced the government to call for lower fluoridation levels nationwide. Until water fluoridation comes to a halt, the easiest way to reduce fluoride exposure is to invest in a reverse osmosis water filtration system. Drinking distilled water for 3-6 months may also reduce the soft tissue fluoride levels, but not bone levels. Soft tissue fluoride levels cause the greatest health problems.


    http://info-wars.org/2012/04/15/top-scientist-fluoride-already-shown-to-cause-10000-cancer-deaths/


  • Options
    #140
    _AVALANCHE_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭_AVALANCHE_


    I'd be amazed if all the people in this Thread "for" Fluoridation were still for it if they actually seen it being added....along with the other chemicals, to water.

    It's like a bath after you've thrown in a bottle of Radox, stinking foamy bubbiling toxic mess.


  • Options
    #141
    Razleavy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 182 ✭✭Razleavy


    _AVALANCHE_ wrote: »
    I'd be amazed if all the people in this Thread "for" Fluoridation were still for it if they actually seen it being added....along with the other chemicals, to water.

    It's like a bath after you've thrown in a bottle of Radox, stinking foamy bubbiling toxic mess.

    Civil Engineer here so have seen it all. I love drinking my clean, chlorinated and fluoridated water.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,856 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    _AVALANCHE_ wrote: »
    I'd be amazed if all the people in this Thread "for" Fluoridation were still for it if they actually seen it being added....along with the other chemicals, to water.

    It's like a bath after you've thrown in a bottle of Radox, stinking foamy bubbiling toxic mess.
    Pretty silly appeal to emotion there... Heart surgery doesn't look great either, doesn't mean it's a bad thing.


  • Options
    #143
    Genghiz Cohen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    Dave! wrote: »
    Pretty silly appeal to emotion there... Heart surgery doesn't look great either, doesn't mean it's a bad thing.

    Or the treatment for severe burns.


  • Options
    #144
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,000 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    Razleavy wrote: »
    Civil Engineer here so have seen it all. I love drinking my clean, chlorinated and fluoridated water.

    Why do people always forget the aluminium ?


  • Options
    #145
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 99,706 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    opinion guy wrote: »
    Why do people always forget the aluminium ?
    http://alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=99
    A number of environmental factors have been put forward as possible contributory causes of Alzheimer's disease in some people. Among these is aluminium


  • Options
    #146
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,000 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    http://alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=99

    Touche Capn....touche


  • Options
    #147
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    And there's the issue of water being contaminated with drug metabolites and hormones.

    Drinking water: A cocktail of minerals, drugs and hormones. DHMO too.


  • Options
    #148
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,000 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    And there's the issue of water being contaminated with drug metabolites and hormones.

    Drinking water: A cocktail of minerals, drugs and hormones. DHMO too.

    You may think you are being smart, but your continued attempts at condescension merely make you look arrogant, take away from your arguments, and further betray the fact the you don't actually understand the issues of relevance.

    As I've said before I'm in the middle of this particular discussion. You should listen to me. Because I'm the kind of person you need to persuade - yet you are singularly failing to do so.

    Argument by derision is no argument and in fact an admission of inability to argue.


  • Options
    #149
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    opinion guy wrote: »
    You may think you are being smart, but your continued attempts at condescension merely make you look arrogant, take away from your arguments, and further betray the fact the you don't actually understand the issues of relevance.
    I'm not being condescending. I'm just saying that fluoride is the least of your worries with tap water. As for not "understanding the issues of relevance" I don't know where you got that idea.
    As I've said before I'm in the middle of this particular discussion. You should listen to me. Because I'm the kind of person you need to persuade - yet you are singularly failing to do so.
    Why?
    Argument by derision is no argument and in fact an admission of inability to argue.
    I'm not arguing with anyone. I just find some of the reasons given like "It's a byproduct of heavy industry" and "It looks disgusting" to be a bit ridiculous. I don't really care if our water is fluoridated or not.


  • Options
    #150
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,000 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    I'm not being condescending. I'm just saying that fluoride is the least of your worries with tap water. As for not "understanding the issues of relevance" I don't know where you got that idea.

    If you are not condescending/taking the piss, why do you keep dropping in DHMO in the hope someone will not understand it is water ?
    Why?

    Not sure what your why is referring to exactly.
    I'm not arguing with anyone. I just find some of the reasons given like "It's a byproduct of heavy industry" and "It looks disgusting" to be a bit ridiculous. I don't really care if our water is fluoridated or not.

    If you don't care why are you here ridiculing peoples views ? Mere trolling ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    opinion guy wrote: »
    If you are not condescending/taking the piss, why do you keep dropping in DHMO in the hope someone will not understand it is water ?
    Taking the piss isn't the same as being condescending. I'm just saying that people's irrational fear of "chemicals" is ridiculous. Chemicals in trace quantities or at safe doses aren't overly dangerous.
    Not sure what your why is referring to exactly.
    Why should I want to convince you of anything? If water stopped being fluoridated tomorrow I wouldn't really care.
    If you don't care why are you here ridiculing peoples views ? Mere trolling ?
    I wouldn't call it trolling. I just find people's irrational fear of chemicals ridiculous and I want to demonstrate how minor of an issue fluoridation is in comparison to the other contaminants in water such as hormones.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement