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!

1101113151620

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    JJayoo wrote: »
    There are zero dental benefits ZERO. We are the only nation in the whole of Europe that continues to add Fluoride to our water. The other countries stopped in the 70's/80's. If there was even the slightest benefit why wouldn't the other 934 million people of Europe partake> Please answer this jh79 because you keep stating the benefits.

    In Europe Spain and the UK fluoridate drinking water. Many other European countries such as Germany and Switzerland provide fluoride in the form of table salt as an alternative.

    Outside of Europe the US, Chile, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, and other countries provide fluoridated water to their citizens.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 80 ✭✭philiy


    Found this so though I would post it.

    http://www.indymedia.ie/article/101469

    The author is clearly against fluoride in the water but he gives a good breakdown of the cost.

    I realise €4 million is not much when you look at the cost of other public services but we all moan if ministers get an annual raise of a few grand a year so are we prepared to accept spending €4 million on a maybe?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Ziphius wrote: »
    In Europe Spain and the UK fluoridate drinking water. Many other European countries such as Germany and Switzerland provide fluoride in the form of table salt as an alternative.

    Outside of Europe the US, Chile, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, and other countries provide fluoridated water to their citizens.

    In the Uk and Spain only 10% of the water is fluoridated

    In other European countries manufactures can decide to put fluoride into salt and milk and then the consumer can chose to purchase the brands which contain the fluroide. The addition of Fluoride has nothing to do with the government.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18 Yawnz


    jh79 wrote: »
    Associating with that freeman nonsense is not going to help your cause.

    The "girl against fluoride" was on the radio recently, I can't decide whether she knows that the papers she mentioned as proof of fluoride toxicity in the Irish context say no such thing and is misleading people or she just doesn't understand the relationship between concentration and toxicity.

    She also mentioned a petition signed by "health professionals" but failed to mentioned it was mostly alternative types ie homeopaths and other con artists. Her credibility is suspect.

    This is an e-mail sent by the Professor of the petition you're referring to, to the Last Word. It makes for interesting reading.

    Dear Matt,

    I was able to hear your show on water fluoridation in which Aisling Fitzgibbon went head to head with Dr. Joe Mullen. Mullen claimed that my opposition to fluoridation was not scientifically based. That is a blatant falsehood and he knows it. He heard my invited testimony before the Irish Fluoridation Forum in Oct 2000. He knows I presented a scientific case. He knows I presented them with '50 Reasons for Opposing Fluoridation" and most of these were also science-based. He heard my science-based testimony before the SCHER committee in Brussels in 2010. He should also be aware of the book I wrote on this subject with Professors Beck and Micklem: "The Case Against Fluoride" (Chelsea Green, 2010) where every argument was backed up with references to the scientific literature - 80 pages of references in all. He also mischaracterized the 4000 Plus professionals who have called for an end to fluoridation. Yes some were environmentalists and a few were lawyers, but a very large number were PhDs, doctors, nurses, dentists and others working in the medical and dental professions.

    Mullen is entitled to his opinions but he cannot play fast and loose with the facts in this way. I am disturbed that a civil servant should be behaving in this way, i.e. as an unabashed spin artist on behalf of one side of this debate.

    It is probably too much to expect an apology from Dr. Mullen - I don't think it is in his nature - but i do request that I be allowed to correct this matter on air.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 99,663 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    jh79 wrote: »
    The other halogen ions ie Cl- and Br- would be chemically similar to F-. Has the effects of these on the pineal gland been tested, do these accumulate also? Should we stop using table salt in the mean time? NaCl like NaF is toxic.
    The flouride in the pineal gland is almost certainly an insoluble form in a calcium compound. That's the difference.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    JJayoo wrote: »
    In the Uk and Spain only 10% of the water is fluoridated

    In other European countries manufactures can decide to put fluoride into salt and milk and then the consumer can chose to purchase the brands which contain the fluroide. The addition of Fluoride has nothing to do with the government.

    You said we were the only nation in Europe to fluoridate water. That is not true.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18 Yawnz


    Ziphius wrote: »
    You said we were the only nation in Europe to fluoridate water. That is not true.

    I think s/he meant we are the only country in Europe that are mandated by law to fluoridate our water. The other 2% of Europe - parts of Spain and UK are not mandated by law to continue this.


  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JJayoo wrote: »
    There are zero dental benefits ZERO. We are the only nation in the whole of Europe that continues to add Fluoride to our water. The other countries stopped in the 70's/80's. If there was even the slightest benefit why wouldn't the other 934 million people of Europe partake> Please answer this jh79 because you keep stating the benefits.

    No I don't , I keep questioning your assertions that there are health risks involved / proven.

    The majority of dentists support water fluoridation by the way.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    jh79 wrote: »
    No I don't , I keep questioning your assertions that there are health risks involved / proven.

    The majority of dentists support water fluoridation by the way.

    Indeed. I'm always amused that these types of threads are started in After Hours rather than the Dental forums.


  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Ziphius wrote: »
    Indeed. I'm always amused that these types of threads are started in After Hours rather than the Dental forums.

    Or the science forum considering it is mainly a health science issue, it is as if they don't fully believe in what they are posting!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,000 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    Ziphius wrote: »
    Indeed. I'm always amused that these types of threads are started in After Hours rather than the Dental forums.

    The dental forums are heavily censored - you cannot discuss fluoride, mercury unless it is to say good things, or Eastern European dentistry unless it is to say bad things, without the thread getting shut down and possibly getting yourself a ban


  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Yawnz wrote: »
    This is an e-mail sent by the Professor of the petition you're referring to, to the Last Word. It makes for interesting reading.

    Dear Matt,

    I was able to hear your show on water fluoridation in which Aisling Fitzgibbon went head to head with Dr. Joe Mullen. Mullen claimed that my opposition to fluoridation was not scientifically based. That is a blatant falsehood and he knows it. He heard my invited testimony before the Irish Fluoridation Forum in Oct 2000. He knows I presented a scientific case. He knows I presented them with '50 Reasons for Opposing Fluoridation" and most of these were also science-based. He heard my science-based testimony before the SCHER committee in Brussels in 2010. He should also be aware of the book I wrote on this subject with Professors Beck and Micklem: "The Case Against Fluoride" (Chelsea Green, 2010) where every argument was backed up with references to the scientific literature - 80 pages of references in all. He also mischaracterized the 4000 Plus professionals who have called for an end to fluoridation. Yes some were environmentalists and a few were lawyers, but a very large number were PhDs, doctors, nurses, dentists and others working in the medical and dental professions.

    Mullen is entitled to his opinions but he cannot play fast and loose with the facts in this way. I am disturbed that a civil servant should be behaving in this way, i.e. as an unabashed spin artist on behalf of one side of this debate.

    It is probably too much to expect an apology from Dr. Mullen - I don't think it is in his nature - but i do request that I be allowed to correct this matter on air.

    While the above maybe true as Dr. Mullen pointed out the number on this petition was dwarfed by the number of health professionals that were ok with water fluoridation. Dentists alone in the US far outnumbered this petition.


  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The dental forums are heavily censored - you cannot discuss fluoride, mercury unless it is to say good things, or Eastern European dentistry unless it is to say bad things, without the thread getting shut down and possibly getting yourself a ban

    Unless you have proof you mean


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Ziphius wrote: »
    You said we were the only nation in Europe to fluoridate water. That is not true.

    Yes
    we are the only nation in Europe where it's people have no say in the matter and are forced to drink medicated water. The 10% of Spain and the Uk use Fluorideated water because the people in those areas voted to have it included.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    jh79 wrote: »

    The majority of dentists support water fluoridation by the way.

    So all the dentists in the rest of Europe are just uneducated? because they clearly don't support it's use.


  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JJayoo wrote: »
    So all the dentists in the rest of Europe are just uneducated? because they clearly don't support it's use.

    Have you any proof of that? Any links to statements of the various associations in Europe?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    jh79 wrote: »
    Have you any proof of that? Any links to statements of the various associations in Europe?

    Lol you must be trolling at this stage

    Like I have said numerous times the rest of Europe does not support adding Fluoride to water. If the dentists in these countries believed in it's benefits then these countries would add fluoride to the water.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,318 ✭✭✭✭Menas


    The organisers of the rebellion have added fluidisation to their agenda.

    https://www.facebook.com/events/446293835447518/
    Tell tell everyone u know this is massive one happening in Dublin in may, we need as many going as possible as its the wage cuts, jobs, the fluoride, the tax, the evictions, the debt, everything the government has done etc. pls read full description & RSVP.
    It'll end we the government being disbanded/resigning then being arrested like in Iceland etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    Well the NHS seems to be in favor of water fluoridation

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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,610 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    JJayoo wrote: »
    Lol you must be trolling at this stage

    Like I have said numerous times the rest of Europe does not support adding Fluoride to water. If the dentists in these countries believed in it's benefits then these countries would add fluoride to the water.

    Thats still not proof, find statements, im not trolling here im on the fence, but would be interested to see statements from european dentistry groups on the topic


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,318 ✭✭✭✭Menas


    The organisers of the rebellion have added fluidisation to their agenda.

    https://www.facebook.com/events/446293835447518/

    Just to be clear, I don't support these loons but do find it funny that they have flouridisation on their list of reasons for toppling the government.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 99,663 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Tomk1 wrote: »
    Untill Hexafluorosilicic acid is validfied as safe for human consumption, it should be suspended from use.
    Do I have to post the Oxygen is a carcinogen link again ?

    Do I have to remind you that you would probably die of water poisoning long before you ingested enough flouride to do you harm ?


    The only reason why most nutrient supplements aren't banned is because there is such a low concentration of the active ingredient.


    But let's use an anvil

    Nitroglycerine is a liquid that explodes if you hit it with a hammer. ( Don't drop the bottle )

    When diluted with an absorbent inert compound it 's called dynamite.

    When mixed with chocolate and placed under the tongue it's used to treat angina and prevent heart attacks.

    And this is the new use for it. [inset bang joke]
    http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/a-new-condom-with-something-extra-12152011.html
    . The drug, based on chest pain treatment nitroglycerin, widens the blood vessels by relaxing the muscles in the vessel walls, increasing blood flow. A company study found a significant portion of men and women reported firmer erections with a Zanifil condom, as well as larger penis size and longer-lasting sex.




    Also compare the LD50 for Hexafluorosilicic acid with Caffeine.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Thats still not proof, find statements, im not trolling here im on the fence, but would be interested to see statements from european dentistry groups on the topic

    Could you please explain how it's not proof. Lets take Germany for example who exactly advises the government not to add Fluoride to water, or where would the German government go for advice on dental issues? Would it not be to the people who spend their lives dealing with dental issues?

    If
    The majority of dentists support water fluoridation
    surely they would advise their governments to add it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,610 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    JJayoo wrote: »
    Could you please explain how it's not proof. Lets take Germany for example who exactly advises the government not to add Fluoride to water, or where would the German government go for advice on dental issues? Would it not be to the people who spend their lives dealing with dental issues?

    If surely they would advise their governments to add it.

    LOL are you serious? Because its just you saying it why should i believe anything some random on the internet types? Provide Links to statements, statistics, facts, what every other person understands as being proof.
    You cant make a staement without providing evidence that its true and expect everyone else to believe you.

    By consistently not providing proof when asked for it you look like your being intentionally evasive cus you know your wrong. Im not saying you are wrong just how it looks.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    Not European I know but, really, why should we restrict ourselves? Here is the policy statement on water fluoridation from the American Dental Association:

    "The American Dental Association unreservedly endorses the fluoridation of community water supplies as safe, effective and necessary in preventing tooth decay. This support has been the Association's position since policy was first adopted in 1950."

    http://www.ada.org/4045.aspx


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    VinLieger wrote: »
    LOL are you serious? Because its just you saying it why should i believe anything some random on the internet types? Provide Links to statements, statistics, facts, what every other person understands as being proof.
    You cant make a staement without providing evidence that its true and expect everyone else to believe you.

    By consistently not providing proof when asked for it you look like your being intentionally evasive cus you know your wrong. Im not saying you are wrong just how it looks.

    Statisitics/Facts A population of almost a billion people live in European countries which do not add fluoride to their water. The governments stopped adding Fluoride to the water supplies. These are facts.

    "Generally, in Germany fluoridation of drinking water is forbidden. The relevant German law allows exceptions to the fluoridation ban on application. The argumentation of the Federal Ministry of Health against a general permission of fluoridation of drinking water is the problematic nature of compuls[ory] medication." (Gerda Hankel-Khan, Embassy of Federal Republic of Germany, September 16, 1999).

    "Fluoride chemicals are not included in the list [of 'chemicals for[B](French[/B]) drinking water treatment']. This is due to ethical as well as medical considerations." (Louis Sanchez, Directeur de la Protection de l'Environment, August 25, 2000)

    "This water treatment has never been of use in Belgium and will never be (we hope so) into the future. The main reason for that is the fundamental position of the drinking water sector that it is not its task to deliver medicinal treatment to people. This is the sole responsibility of health services." (Chr. Legros, Directeur, Belgaqua, Brussels, Belgium, February 28, 2000).

    "Fluoride has never been added to the public water supplies in Luxembourg. In our views, the drinking water isn't the suitable way for medicinal treatment and that people needing an addition of fluoride can decide by their own to use the most appropriate way, like the intake of fluoride tablets, to cover their [daily] needs." (Jean-Marie RIES, Head, Water Department, Administration De L'Environment, May 3, 2000)

    "We do not favor or recommend fluoridation of drinking water. There are better ways of providing the fluoride our teeth need." (Paavo Poteri, Acting Managing Director, Helsinki Water, Finland, February 7, 2000)

    "We are pleased to inform you that according to the Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy, toxic fluorides have never been added to the public water supplies. Consequently, no Danish city has ever been fluoridated." (Klaus Werner, Royal Danish Embassy, Washington DC, December 22, 1999)"

    "In Norway we had a rather intense discussion on this subject some 20 years ago, and the conclusion was that drinking water should not be fluoridated." (Truls Krogh & Toril Hofshagen, Folkehelsa Statens institutt for folkeheise (National Institute of Public Health) Oslo, Norway, March 1, 2000)"

    "Drinking water fluoridation is not allowed in Sweden...New scientific documentation or changes in dental health situation that could alter the conclusions of the Commission have not been shown." (Gunnar Guzikowski, Chief Government Inspector, Livsmedels Verket -- National Food Administration Drinking Water Division, Sweden, February 28, 2000)"

    "From the end of the 1960s until the beginning of the 1970s drinking water in various places in the Netherlands was fluoridated to prevent caries. However, in its judgement of 22 June 1973 in case No. 10683 (Budding and co. versus the City of Amsterdam) the Supreme Court (Hoge Road) ruled there was no legal basis for fluoridation. After that judgement, amendment to the Water Supply Act was prepared to provide a legal basis for fluoridation. During the process it became clear that there was not enough support from Parlement [sic] for this amendment and the proposal was withdrawn." (Wilfred Reinhold, Legal Advisor, Directorate Drinking Water, Netherlands, January 15, 2000)"

    "The water supply in Northern Ireland has never been artificially fluoridated except in 2 small localities where fluoride was added to the water for about 30 years up to last year. Fluoridation ceased at these locations for operational reasons. At this time, there are no plans to commence fluoridation of water supplies in Northern Ireland." (C.J. Grimes, Department for Regional Development, Belfast, November 6, 2000).

    "Toxic fluorides have never been added to the public water supplies in Austria." (M. Eisenhut, Head of Water Department, Osterreichische Yereinigung fur das Gas-und Wasserfach Schubertring 14, A-1015 Wien, Austria, February 17, 2000)"

    Since 1993, drinking water has not been treated with fluoride in public water supplies throughout the Czech Republic. Although fluoridation of drinking water has not actually been proscribed it is not under consideration because this form of supplementation is considered:

    "uneconomical (only 0.54% of water suitable for drinking is used as such; the remainder is employed for hygiene etc. Furthermore, an increasing amount of consumers (particularly children) are using bottled water for drinking (underground water usually with fluor)
    unecological (environmental load by a foreign substance)
    unethical ("forced medication")
    toxicologically and phyiologically debateable (fluoridation represents an untargeted form of supplementation which disregards actual individual intake and requirements and may lead to excessive health-threatening intake in certain population groups; [and] complexation of fluor in water into non biological active forms of fluor." (Dr. B. Havlik, Ministerstvo Zdravotnictvi Ceske Republiky, October 14, 1999)"


  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JJayoo wrote: »
    Lol you must be trolling at this stage

    Like I have said numerous times the rest of Europe does not support adding Fluoride to water. If the dentists in these countries believed in it's benefits then these countries would add fluoride to the water.

    Ziphius already addressed water fluoridation in Europe, but you already knew that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Ziphius wrote: »
    Not European I know but, really, why should we restrict ourselves? Here is the policy statement on water fluoridation from the American Dental Association:

    "The American Dental Association unreservedly endorses the fluoridation of community water supplies as safe, effective and necessary in preventing tooth decay. This support has been the Association's position since policy was first adopted in 1950."

    http://www.ada.org/4045.aspx

    And yet the United States Environmental Protection Agency never carried out any research into Fluosilicic acid and Sodium silicofluoride the two substances used to add Fluoride to water in the states.

    http://www.fluoridealert.org/uploads/thurnau-2000.pdf


  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JJayoo wrote: »
    Statisitics/Facts A population of almost a billion people live in European countries which do not add fluoride to their water. The governments stopped adding Fluoride to the water supplies. These are facts.

    "Generally, in Germany fluoridation of drinking water is forbidden. The relevant German law allows exceptions to the fluoridation ban on application. The argumentation of the Federal Ministry of Health against a general permission of fluoridation of drinking water is the problematic nature of compuls[ory] medication." (Gerda Hankel-Khan, Embassy of Federal Republic of Germany, September 16, 1999).

    "Fluoride chemicals are not included in the list [of 'chemicals for[B](French[/B]) drinking water treatment']. This is due to ethical as well as medical considerations." (Louis Sanchez, Directeur de la Protection de l'Environment, August 25, 2000)

    "This water treatment has never been of use in Belgium and will never be (we hope so) into the future. The main reason for that is the fundamental position of the drinking water sector that it is not its task to deliver medicinal treatment to people. This is the sole responsibility of health services." (Chr. Legros, Directeur, Belgaqua, Brussels, Belgium, February 28, 2000).

    "Fluoride has never been added to the public water supplies in Luxembourg. In our views, the drinking water isn't the suitable way for medicinal treatment and that people needing an addition of fluoride can decide by their own to use the most appropriate way, like the intake of fluoride tablets, to cover their [daily] needs." (Jean-Marie RIES, Head, Water Department, Administration De L'Environment, May 3, 2000)

    "We do not favor or recommend fluoridation of drinking water. There are better ways of providing the fluoride our teeth need." (Paavo Poteri, Acting Managing Director, Helsinki Water, Finland, February 7, 2000)

    "We are pleased to inform you that according to the Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy, toxic fluorides have never been added to the public water supplies. Consequently, no Danish city has ever been fluoridated." (Klaus Werner, Royal Danish Embassy, Washington DC, December 22, 1999)"

    "In Norway we had a rather intense discussion on this subject some 20 years ago, and the conclusion was that drinking water should not be fluoridated." (Truls Krogh & Toril Hofshagen, Folkehelsa Statens institutt for folkeheise (National Institute of Public Health) Oslo, Norway, March 1, 2000)"

    "Drinking water fluoridation is not allowed in Sweden...New scientific documentation or changes in dental health situation that could alter the conclusions of the Commission have not been shown." (Gunnar Guzikowski, Chief Government Inspector, Livsmedels Verket -- National Food Administration Drinking Water Division, Sweden, February 28, 2000)"

    "From the end of the 1960s until the beginning of the 1970s drinking water in various places in the Netherlands was fluoridated to prevent caries. However, in its judgement of 22 June 1973 in case No. 10683 (Budding and co. versus the City of Amsterdam) the Supreme Court (Hoge Road) ruled there was no legal basis for fluoridation. After that judgement, amendment to the Water Supply Act was prepared to provide a legal basis for fluoridation. During the process it became clear that there was not enough support from Parlement [sic] for this amendment and the proposal was withdrawn." (Wilfred Reinhold, Legal Advisor, Directorate Drinking Water, Netherlands, January 15, 2000)"

    "The water supply in Northern Ireland has never been artificially fluoridated except in 2 small localities where fluoride was added to the water for about 30 years up to last year. Fluoridation ceased at these locations for operational reasons. At this time, there are no plans to commence fluoridation of water supplies in Northern Ireland." (C.J. Grimes, Department for Regional Development, Belfast, November 6, 2000).

    "Toxic fluorides have never been added to the public water supplies in Austria." (M. Eisenhut, Head of Water Department, Osterreichische Yereinigung fur das Gas-und Wasserfach Schubertring 14, A-1015 Wien, Austria, February 17, 2000)"

    Since 1993, drinking water has not been treated with fluoride in public water supplies throughout the Czech Republic. Although fluoridation of drinking water has not actually been proscribed it is not under consideration because this form of supplementation is considered:

    "uneconomical (only 0.54% of water suitable for drinking is used as such; the remainder is employed for hygiene etc. Furthermore, an increasing amount of consumers (particularly children) are using bottled water for drinking (underground water usually with fluor)
    unecological (environmental load by a foreign substance)
    unethical ("forced medication")
    toxicologically and phyiologically debateable (fluoridation represents an untargeted form of supplementation which disregards actual individual intake and requirements and may lead to excessive health-threatening intake in certain population groups; [and] complexation of fluor in water into non biological active forms of fluor." (Dr. B. Havlik, Ministerstvo Zdravotnictvi Ceske Republiky, October 14, 1999)"

    What website did you copy and paste that from?

    What exactly are we supposed to conclude form all that? As previously mentioned some countries introduce fluoride by other means. Pointless post.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JJayoo wrote: »
    And yet the United States Environmental Protection Agency never carried out any research into Fluosilicic acid and Sodium silicofluoride the two substances used to add Fluoride to water in the states.

    http://www.fluoridealert.org/uploads/thurnau-2000.pdf[/QUOTE]

    I thought it was the introduction of the fluoride ion that was the problem?

    Maybe the substance formed when the acids dissociate in water aren't toxic at low concentrations?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement