Fluoride in tap water

19-06-2013 12:55AM

zenno wrote: »

The whole point is...Give the people the choice on whether they want it or not.

You cannot force it on the population, do you not agree in freedom to choose ?.

Freedom of choice is great and a vote on fluordiation would be fine.
However there is a million more important issues I would prefer the government to address first.

And if there was a vote, do you think that you would be ok with people making very silly claims about fluoridation, like it lowers IQ or causes cancer or was used by the nazis, to scare people into voting against it?

StickyIcky · 19-06-2013 12:57AM

Exactly

Loving these rational minds in this forum

zenno · 19-06-2013 01:01AM

jh79 wrote: »

I do agree with freedom to choose as long as the correct information is supplied. The research out there doesn't support the theory that fluoridation is a health risk. The few animal experiments done could only show toxicity at high levels.

I really don't see the big deal if fluoride was removed from the water supply because it is so easy to purchase fluoride if a person or any one needs it, just brush your teeth and you have all the fluoride you want, or use fluoridated salt or whatever, people can have it if they so like.

My gripe with this is more of a moral thinking and i believe strongly that fluoride should not be mandatorily forced on our citizens especially when they are the one's that will be actually paying to be force-medicated, it's just wrong.

Right now i am thirsty and i have no bottled non-fluoridated water so i have no choice now but to drink this fluoride in my tap water, I want the choice to drink un-fluoridated water, but right now i can't. This is what i mean. Why there is such an uproar about the removal of fluoride is beyond me because as i said anyone can purchase it in most supermarkets or stores and the rest of us can enjoy drinking un-fluoridated water, i honestly cannot see why there is a huge problem with this method, and it works for both sides of people, it would be nice just to have the choice wouldn't it ?.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:02AM

King Mob wrote: »

Freedom of choice is great and a vote on fluordiation would be fine.
However there is a million more important issues I would prefer the government to address first.

And if there was a vote, do you think that you would be ok with people making very silly claims about fluoridation, like it lowers IQ or causes cancer or was used by the nazis, to scare people into voting against it?

Did you not watch the video of John Gormley and listen to what the experts told him?

The Government will keep making empty promises, tell lies and do the opposite of what they agreed to do and what would benefit the public the most.

How many of you were taken in and voted for Fine Gael and Labour?
They should all be arrested for treason, along with the previous Government.

zenno · 19-06-2013 01:04AM

endacl wrote: »

Like vaccination? Look how well that works out when parents make bad decisions based on misinformation and paranoia.

What has vaccinations got to do with the topic at hand

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:04AM

zenno wrote: »

I really don't see the big deal if fluoride was removed from the water supply because it is so easy to purchase fluoride if a person or any one needs it, just brush your teeth and you have all the fluoride you want, or use fluoridated salt or whatever, people can have it if they so like.

My gripe with this is more of a moral thinking and i believe strongly that fluoride should not be mandatorily forced on our citizens especially when they are the one's that will be actually paying to be force-medicated, it's just wrong.

Right now i am thirsty and i have no bottled non-fluoridated water so i have no choice now but to drink this fluoride in my tap water, I want the choice to drink un-fluoridated water, but right now i can't. This is what i mean. Why there is such an uproar about the removal of fluoride is beyond me because as i said anyone can purchase it in most supermarkets or stores and the rest of us can enjoy drinking un-fluoridated water, i honestly cannot see why there is a huge problem with this method, and it works for both sides of people, it would be nice just to have the choice wouldn't it ?.

Yes it would, wouldn't it but we don't live in a democracy it is a forced so called democracy state.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:08AM

If we stay united anything will be possible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdZlVlshnO4

lan · 19-06-2013 01:10AM

FREETV wrote: »

Jeez even the ex Health Minister admitted that it caused cancer.

I just watched the clip you posted, he said that a study showed a five times higher rate of bone cancer in children in fluoridated areas, that's not the same thing. While that, of course, sounds terrible, without reading the original study and knowing the detail, we can't draw any conclusions. As ever, correlation does not imply causation. We don't even know the sample size, statistical significance, fluoride concentration levels, etc.

You still haven't answered my other questions.

zenno · 19-06-2013 01:14AM

It's not a good thing to see some people of which have lost all ethics.

endacl · 19-06-2013 01:14AM

zenno wrote: »

What has vaccinations got to do with the topic at hand

Give the people the choice....

While I agree with the principle, when people rely on bullsh*t information, they make bullsh*t decisions. That doesn't work out well in large populations. Vaccination was presented as a case in point. Could just as easily been any Irish general election...

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:14AM

I have shown you evidence of the toxicity for humans at even low levels, it is even used to make atomic/nuclear bombs.

endacl · 19-06-2013 01:18AM

FREETV wrote: »

I have shown you evidence of the toxicity for humans at even low levels, it is even used to make atomic/nuclear bombs.

So is water. Lots of stuff is used for lots of things.

19-06-2013 01:19AM

zenno wrote: »

Why there is such an uproar about the removal of fluoride is beyond me because as i said anyone can purchase it in most supermarkets or stores and the rest of us can enjoy drinking un-fluoridated water, i honestly cannot see why there is a huge problem with this method, and it works for both sides of people, it would be nice just to have the choice wouldn't it ?.

It's not so much the removal people are reacting to, but the anti-science conspiracy theories that are being used to argue that it should be removed. Most of them are laughable and no one believes that they are valid reasons for even bringing up the issue seriously.

If you presented the issue as just the moral and ethical one instead of entertaining nonsense and bad science, people might be more receptive.

But then, since the science shows there is no danger or concern noone would care enough to change the policy.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:19AM

I had fluorosis in my right top/front tooth and neck and shoulder pain which has improved since I stopped drinking tap water and it was the water that caused it which means that the Fluoride levels in Meath and Dublin fluctuate as when the people used to go on holidays in water treatment plants we were told that they increased the amount of fluoride in the water before they left, that happened in Meath.

endacl · 19-06-2013 01:21AM

FREETV wrote: »

I had fluoridosis in my right top tooth and neck and shoulder pain which has improved since I stopped drinking tap water and it was the water that caused it which means that the Fluoride levels in Meath and Dublin fluctuate as when the people used to go on holidays in water treatment plants we were told that they increased the amount of fluoride in the water before they left.

The whole plant went on holidays at the same time? Come off it.

lan · 19-06-2013 01:22AM

FREETV wrote: »

I have shown you evidence of the toxicity for humans at even low levels

No you haven't, you have linked to other people claiming that, but shown no evidence.

Can you please answer my question, is there any amount of evidence, articles, peer reviewed studies etc that we can show you that would possibly cause you to change your opinion?

endacl · 19-06-2013 01:24AM

lan wrote: »

No you haven't, you have linked to other people claiming that, but shown no evidence.

Can you please answer my question, is there any amount of evidence, articles, peer reviewed studies etc that we can show you that would possibly cause you to change your opinion?

Howya Ian. I presume you're the night shift? Best of luck. I'll check back in in the morning.

Take regular breaks.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:25AM

lan wrote: »

No you haven't, you have linked to other people claiming that, but shown no evidence.

Can you please answer my question, is there any amount of evidence, articles, peer reviewed studies etc that we can show you that would possibly cause you to change your opinion?

I doubt it but I am open to proof if there are any sources who aren't paid or follow the orders of tyrants to tell lies in order to stop lawsuits/stop mass panic/outrage.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:28AM

endacl wrote: »

The whole plant went on holidays at the same time? Come off it.

This was like twenty years or more ago in a small town, there was only one person in charge of the fluoridation at the time.
My Mum rang the people in charge to make a complaint about the smell and taste of the water and was told that by a person working there, outrageous I know but true. She also knew one of the workers there who also went on to work at the sewage treatment plant some years later.

lan · 19-06-2013 01:30AM

FREETV wrote: »

I doubt it but I am open to proof if there are any sources who aren't paid or follow the orders of tyrants to tell lies in order to stop lawsuits/stop mass panic/outrage.

Ok, good, then maybe we can at least have a reasonable discussion.

Firstly, how do you verify whether a source is trust worthy or not?

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:35AM

lan wrote: »

Ok, good, then maybe we can at least have a reasonable discussion.

Firstly, how do you verify whether a source is trust worthy or not?

Well, if they have the same interests, compassion for other people in their heart they will tell the truth and seek it out without money being their primary goal.
They would have to be vetted and researched and have the proper qualifications in medicine or science to back up their claims.

lan · 19-06-2013 01:40AM

Ok, but if you don't know them personally?

This topic has been studied by scientists all over the world, whose works have been published in various different journals. You can't possibly hope to know each author, how do you decide whether you can trust the study or not?

* edit *

Ok, you've edited you're post to say they need to be vetted and have relavent qualifications. Good. That's what peer reviewed journals are for, the papers they publish are vetted by the best in their fields. The vast majority of material you've linked to is not peer reviewed and is not written by experts with academic qualifications, which is why we are so skeptical.

StickyIcky · 19-06-2013 01:43AM

FREETV wrote: »

Well, if they have the same interests, compassion for other people in their heart they will tell the truth and seek it out without money being their primary goal.
They would have to be vetted and researched and have the proper qualifications in medicine or science to back up their claims.

I have compassion and am truthful etc but I think you're a bit extreme in your beliefs and see what you want to see. You're polarised and can't be reasoned with.

I do believe agree with some of what you're saying but most of what you've said is dubious to say the least. That comment about it being in nuclear weapons. Come on man.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:45AM

http://www.drlwilson.com/articles/fluoridation.htm
I believe this guy. He studied 100 cases and was open minded about both sides of the argument.

zenno · 19-06-2013 01:47AM

King Mob wrote: »

It's not so much the removal people are reacting to, but the anti-science conspiracy theories that are being used to argue that it should be removed. Most of them are laughable and no one believes that they are valid reasons for even bringing up the issue seriously.

If you presented the issue as just the moral and ethical one instead of entertaining nonsense and bad science, people might be more receptive.

But then, since the science shows there is no danger or concern noone would care enough to change the policy.

With you're attitude i don't see much point in anyone taking you seriously at all, you seem to attack every poster here without providing solid scientific data as to the contrary.

Now you say I am entertaining nonsense, am I. I already left my moral comments on this issue, Have you, or do you even have any morals left with all of the attacks you have forwarded to a few posters.

Don't be assuming or making things up as you go along, instead of constantly attacking others, post relevant data to back yourself up for a change.

SeantheMan · 19-06-2013 01:49AM

The green party (when it was around) tried to have it banned

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/568?author_name=mike&userlanguage=ga&save_prefs=true

Also check out this site for information

http://www.fluoridealert.org/fan-tv/10-facts/

Green Party Press Office
7 February 2002

GREENS LAUNCH FLUORIDATION BILL TO HALT MASS MEDICATION OF IRISH POPULATION WITH FLUORIDE

The Greens Fluoridation Bill, which is published today, will repeal the current legislation of mass-medicating the Irish population without their consent with the chemical fluoride.

Green Party Dáil Health spokesperson, John Gormley T.D., launching the Bill said, “Today the Green Party is publishing the first ever Bill to repeal the Water Fluoridation Act of 1960. We are appealing to the Minister of Health to stop his prevarication on this issue and to accept the Green Party's Private Members Bill.”

“Water fluoridation is a very serious issue and will become a core issue for the Greens during the election campaign. In post election negotiations the question of water fluoridation is, in our view, a 'non-negotiable'. We would expect this simple piece of legislation to be enacted within the first month of a new government forming. As far we are concerned there is no room for further debate on this issue.”

“The Forum set up by the Minister to examine the issue is a disgraceful waste of tax payers money and is guaranteed to produce a 'white-wash'. It has undermined and delayed the work of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children, which is engaged in compiling its own report on this most important issue. “

“Our objections to water fluoridation are based on a number of factors:

a) We disagree with mass medication on ethical grounds. In our view freedom of choice ought to be an integral part of health care;

b) All studies show that we are not fluoride deficient. In fact, studies carried out in this country show that we have an excess of fluoride which is a toxic substance, in our bodies;

c) There is now a scientific consensus that fluoride does not work systemically, but rather topically and therefore does not need to be ingested;

d) The increase in fluorosis, which is a manifestation of fluoride toxicity, is a real cause of concern;

e) The many reports from all over the world which link fluoride with other health effects.”

Mr. Gormley said that “we believe that the Minister of Health should at all times rely on the precautionary principle, i.e., if there is any doubt, leave it out. And there is a real doubt about fluoride at this stage”.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:49AM

StickyIcky wrote: »

I have compassion and am truthful etc but I think you're a bit extreme in your beliefs and see what you want to see. You're polarised and can't be reasoned with.

I do believe agree with some of what you're saying but most of what you've said is dubious to say the least. That comment about it being in nuclear weapons. Come on man.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/salud/esp_salud34.htm

http://www.ahealedplanet.net/fluoride.htm

Nuclear weapons proof.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:51AM

SeantheMan wrote: »

The green party (when it was around) tried to have it banned

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/568?author_name=mike&userlanguage=ga&save_prefs=true

Yes he was my contacts Boss at the time.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:53AM

Dr Wilson link posted a few posts above should be trustworthy and believable.

FREETV · 19-06-2013 01:55AM

An overwhelming proof and stance of the harmful toxicity of fluoride is the majority of scientific studies from just Googling the area.

Fluoride in tap water

Comments