Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fluoride in tap water

Options
1…9799101102103

Comments

  • Options
    #2942
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    Lol don't mentioned bottled water, that is a whole other health topic!
    But health aside. It would mean for example next year, paying for drinking water as well as paying for bottled water, as well as trying to keep your recycling bin from overflowing, as well as lugging litres and litres of water from the shop to the house.
    How about we try to take examples from othe cuntries and tackle obesity in children all in one go?
    By addressing the root cause, it would be a major step towards an issue that has a serious effect on many peoples health, as well as negate the need to mass "medicate" with something that a majority of the world does not see the need to use.
    Despite it's cost effectiveness ^^ Why is that? They would save money if they cut out education and used a chemical instead.


  • Options
    #2943
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Torakx wrote: »
    Lol don't mentioned bottled water, that is a whole other health topic!
    But health aside. It would mean for example next year, paying for drinking water as well as paying for bottled water, as well as trying to keep your recycling bin from overflowing, as well as lugging litres and litres of water from the shop to the house.
    How about we try to take examples from othe cuntries and tackle obesity in children all in one go?
    By addressing the root cause, it would be a major step towards an issue that has a serious effect on many peoples health, as well as negate the need to mass "medicate" with something that a majority of the world does not see the need to use.
    Despite it's cost effectiveness ^^ Why is that? They would save money if they cut out education and used a chemical instead.

    And you`d be happy to continue with fluoridation until these alternative s started to have an effect?


  • Options
    #2944
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    jh79 wrote: »
    And you`d be happy to continue with fluoridation until these alternative s started to have an effect?
    Happy no, would i have much choice? no.
    So that doesn't really matter how I feel in the end.
    but say it did and I had the choice for the country, I would sacrifice a year or two if I knew 100% that flouride would be out and society would be educated more for better health.
    I have been drinking flouride since i was a kid, I have been sick most of my adult life. I can take another year or two as is.


  • Options
    #2945
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Torakx wrote: »
    Happy no, would i have much choice? no.
    So that doesn't really matter how I feel in the end.
    but say it did and I had the choice for the country, I would sacrifice a year or two if I knew 100% that flouride would be out and society would be educated more for better health.
    I have been drinking flouride since i was a kid, I have been sick most of my adult life. I can take another year or two as is.

    How do you know it is fluoride at fault rather than the thousands of other chemicals you are exposed to daily such as manganese or lead (also in water) ?


  • Options
    #2946
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    jh79 wrote: »
    How do you know it is fluoride at fault rather than the thousands of other chemicals you are exposed to daily such as manganese or lead (also in water) ?
    I don't. One battle at a time haha
    After flouride I may move on to that. Or if I happen to get some information put under my nose about the possible chances it.s manganese i may get curious and fall down another rabbit hole.
    It just happens that these days I am insanely busy, especially compared to a year or two ago when i had time to research all day long.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2947
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    http://fluoridealert.org/studies/thyroid01/

    Apparently a combination of iodine deficiency and flouride can cause all these issues and I hear more(hearsay till I find out).

    Maybe they should put Iodine in the water as well, to fix the flouride problem.

    But later may need to somehow add proteins or vitimins to the water to counter the iodine.
    Now if people are already taking enough or too many vitimins, they may want to put something in the water that could hopefully counteract the resulting issues.
    Whatever that is, they may want to put something else in to counter the issues that probably would cause.

    Possibly the best solution then to help fight tooth decay is to grind up all our dietary needs and hydration needs into a paste or liquid form and pump it through the pipes for everyone to drink.
    This way they can cut costs, without people having to buy food in shops to survive.
    We could have a blanket tax/charge for what I will lovingly name Mulchent Green.
    We should then have more space for car parks when the food markets close down. This could allow us to create more jobs for car park attendants and increase efficiency for parking and traveling into work.
    Overall my plan seems very efficient and economical, with an increase in jobs in the service industry. Everyone gets the correct amount of vits and nutrients and most importantly no more tooth decay!

    I reserve the rights to the name Mulchent Green and all it's subsidiary products or products obtained through Mulchent Green or residing therein.


  • Options
    #2948
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Torakx wrote: »
    http://fluoridealert.org/studies/thyroid01/

    Apparently a combination of iodine deficiency and flouride can cause all these issues and I hear more(hearsay till I find out).

    Maybe they should put Iodine in the water as well, to fix the flouride problem.

    But later may need to somehow add proteins or vitimins to the water to counter the iodine.
    Now if people are already taking enough or too many vitimins, they may want to put something in the water that could hopefully counteract the resulting issues.
    Whatever that is, they may want to put something else in to counter the issues that probably would cause.

    Possibly the best solution then to help fight tooth decay is to grind up all our dietary needs and hydration needs into a paste or liquid form and pump it through the pipes for everyone to drink.
    This way they can cut costs, without people having to buy food in shops to survive.
    We could have a blanket tax/charge for what I will lovingly name Mulchent Green.
    We should then have more space for car parks when the food markets close down. This could allow us to create more jobs for car park attendants and increase efficiency for parking and traveling into work.
    Overall my plan seems very efficient and economical, with an increase in jobs in the service industry. Everyone gets the correct amount of vits and nutrients and most importantly no more tooth decay!

    I reserve the rights to the name Mulchent Green and all it's subsidiary products or products obtained through Mulchent Green or residing therein.

    Do they not sell so called "natural" crap like that on mercola? You name it , it cures it.


  • Options
    #2949
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Torakx wrote: »
    http://fluoridealert.org/studies/thyroid01/

    Apparently a combination of iodine deficiency and flouride can cause all these issues and I hear more(hearsay till I find out).
    What a great case you are putting together there for adding iodine to our water supply to avoid deficiency.:D


  • Options
    #2950
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Any chance people could stop quoting utterly useless environmental data which has nothing at all to do with fluoridation? Fluoride might be higher in one part of China than another, but maybe arsenic and mercury is higher there too.
    Do the anti-fluoridation people even know what the words "correlation" and "causation" mean?


  • Options
    #2951
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Torakx wrote: »
    I have been drinking flouride since i was a kid, I have been sick most of my adult life.
    I have been drinking fluoride since I was born, I have been fit as a fiddle all my life.
    Anecdotal evidence, eh?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2952
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    I have been drinking fluoride since I was born, I have been fit as a fiddle all my life.
    Anecdotal evidence, eh?
    I accept either or.
    I know what else was involved with my illness, it certainly was not just flouride.
    The question for me is if flouride helped it along. and I don't know the answer to that for sure yet.

    But to just accept an authority even if I see a substantial amount of what is seen as evidence, to me is to limit my perspective.
    I accept flouride may still be a non issue, but i can't yet prove it to myself.
    So i question...
    When all of us here take a side or stance, we force each other to defend the opposite, due to our egos. So i am constantly trying to agree with the anti flouride and also see the side of the pro flouride groups.
    However a majority in society as pushing flouride on my without me having a choice, and so the ego will push back.. that is the basis for this forums and the apposing views.
    Its our bread and butter intellectually lol

    To expand, I believe half the people here are not really lookiing for answers as much as trying to prove they are correct and validate their perspectives.
    If i agreed with you on everything we would never have anything to talk about, and we would not be chatting now online.
    In fact when I look back at all the times on my past posts where I now thinnk i may have been wrong, it has always been due to defending my ideas and questions.


  • Options
    #2953
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Torakx wrote: »
    However a majority in society as pushing flouride on my without me having a choice, and so the ego will push back.. that is the basis for this forums and the apposing views.
    That's democracy I guess. If enough people care about fluoridation, thieving politicians and bankers, people dying on hospital trollies etc they'll vote for somebody else, won't they?
    What makes you think you have a choice in everything that happens to you in a democracy?


  • Options
    #2954
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Any chance people could stop quoting utterly useless environmental data which has nothing at all to do with fluoridation? Fluoride might be higher in one part of China than another, but maybe arsenic and mercury is higher there too.
    Do the anti-fluoridation people even know what the words "correlation" and "causation" mean?

    What enviromental data are you reffering to ?


  • Options
    #2955
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    weisses wrote: »
    What enviromental data are you reffering to ?
    Every paper in the meta-analysis of the Chinese studies. They are all environmental issues, NOT fluoridation issues.


  • Options
    #2956
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    That's democracy I guess. If enough people care about fluoridation, thieving politicians and bankers, people dying on hospital trollies etc they'll vote for somebody else, won't they?
    What makes you think you have a choice in everything that happens to you in a democracy?
    They can vote for somebody else but it makes no difference who they vote for.
    I have watched politicians in Ireland go on tv to state they are against flouride, then get promoted to health minister and support it.
    Democracy is not what we have. Oligarchy I hear bandied about a lot though and maybe that is more accurate?
    We had to vote twice on the Lisbon treaty for example. The first answer apparently was wrong.


  • Options
    #2957
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Every paper in the meta-analysis of the Chinese studies. They are all environmental issues, NOT fluoridation issues.


    Does that go for the US, Russia and Mexico as well ? ... Mentioned on the same page


  • Options
    #2958
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    weisses wrote: »
    Does that go for the US, Russia and Mexico as well ? ... Mentioned on the same page
    Anything that isn't from similar groups plus and minus fluoride ONLY is completely irrelevant. Would probably fool a lot of people who haven't a notion about science or basic logic though. Or would be lapped up by anybody with an agenda and promoted.


  • Options
    #2959
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Anything that isn't from similar groups plus and minus fluoride ONLY is completely irrelevant. Would probably fool a lot of people who haven't a notion about science or basic logic though. Or would be lapped up by anybody with an agenda and promoted.

    Nice way of dancing around the question

    I can perfectly decide for myself what is and isn't relevant in the discussion ... Thank you


  • Options
    #2960
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    weisses wrote: »
    Nice way of dancing around the question

    I can perfectly decide for myself what is and isn't relevant in the discussion ... Thank you

    You don't appear to like straight answers.
    If the study is correlating environmental levels of fluoride in different areas to IQ then it is a CORRELATION. Not a causation. Proof of causation requires an equivalent control group.
    You can "decide" what is proof or not. We know this pretty well at this stage.


  • Options
    #2961
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    I'm dissapointed nobody liked my mulchen Green product idea. :(

    Did anyone even get the Soylent Green reference? lol
    I thought it was funny anyway :D

    Or to point at it being on topic, a satirical attempt to point out the flaw in putting flouride in water, to address a problem unrelated.
    Sometimes it's good to exaggerate a mechanic or idea to get a good outside view of the overall picture.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2962
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Apologies Torakx, I got it, I just didn't comment. I thinking you're wandering afield when you talk about putting fluoride in water to solve problems unrelated though; it's put there to reduce dental caries, a problem which fluoride has been shown to directly affect.


  • Options
    #2963
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    You don't appear to like straight answers.

    I actually do like straight anwsers

    You asked could we stop posting environmental data which has nothing at all to do with fluoridation specially referring to China.

    This article deals with Iodine deficiency and fluoride at our levels mentioned on that page

    http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/lin-1991.pdf

    They do fluoridate the water in the US However and they were mentioned on the same page
    “The effects of fluoride on various aspects of endocrine function should be examined further, particularly with respect to a possible role in the development of several diseases or mental states in the United States. Major areas for investigation include the following: thyroid disease (especially in light of decreasing iodine intake by the U.S. population).”

    So are these examples relevant to the fluoridation discussion ?


  • Options
    #2964
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    weisses wrote: »
    I actually do like straight anwsers

    You asked could we stop posting environmental data which has nothing at all to do with fluoridation specially referring to China.

    This article deals with Iodine deficiency and fluoride at our levels mentioned on that page

    http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/lin-1991.pdf

    You are confused again.
    There is no mention of FLUORIDATION (that's what this thread is about, remember?) in that paper. There are environmental levels of fluoride and iodine quoted and correlated with health parameters. What's the fluoride level in "Control" group C anyway? Everything else in the water is similar except for iodine and fluoride? Oh, they don't say.
    Anyway, again you are making a case for adding iodine to the water supply in non-supplemented areas. Amazing how you can be pro-iodine and anti-fluoride at the same time...


  • Options
    #2965
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Torakx wrote: »
    I'm dissapointed nobody liked my mulchen Green product idea. :(

    Did anyone even get the Soylent Green reference? lol
    I thought it was funny anyway :D

    I got the reference alright, it's just I was under the impression that sarcasm and hyperbole were not permitted here so I didn't expect your post to last long.


  • Options
    #2966
    Torakx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    good point Dan. I guess I like to lighten to mood sometimes and it was 5am when I posted(my crazy time).
    Apologies if it was offensive.
    I wanted to make a point and felt maybe using comedy instead of being so serious all the time, may have some effect.
    Guess not lol
    Worth a try though, but I won't give up the day job :D


  • Options
    #2967
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    You are confused again.
    There is no mention of FLUORIDATION (that's what this thread is about, remember?) in that paper.

    How is the exposure to fluoride from natural sources different then exposure from fluoridation (other then possible different levels ?)

    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Anyway, again you are making a case for adding iodine to the water supply in non-supplemented areas. Amazing how you can be pro-iodine and anti-fluoride at the same time...

    I am just pointing out your imo flawed reasoning regarding what you think is on topic.

    I got pro iodine where and how ??

    Amazing how you stack one assumption onto another


  • Options
    #2968
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    weisses wrote: »
    How is the exposure to fluoride from natural sources different then exposure from fluoridation (other then possible different levels ?)
    Because you have NO idea whether all other factors are equal, so it is a pretty random correlation, not proof of causation of any sort.
    weisses wrote: »
    I am just pointing out your imo flawed reasoning regarding what you think is on topic.
    But you think environmental iodine and fluoride levels are on topic in a thread about fluoridation?
    weisses wrote: »
    I got pro iodine where and how ??
    My mistake, I just accidentally assumed that if there was a widespread health problem relating to a deficiency in drinking water and there was no evidence of health problems at the concentrations required to rectify it then you would approve.
    I am now fully informed that you do not care about the well being of the general public. Thanks for clarifying that.
    weisses wrote: »
    Amazing how you stack one assumption onto another
    Well, you're the guy assuming that one environmental variable correlating to one measurement is a proof, so I don't think you're in any position to be accusing me of assuming too much really.
    Anyway, that paper you cited to us. What was the fluoride level in the water at "Control" location C? Any time you like...


  • Options
    #2969
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    My mistake, I just accidentally assumed that if there was a widespread health problem relating to a deficiency in drinking water and there was no evidence of health problems at the concentrations required to rectify it then you would approve.
    I am now fully informed that you do not care about the well being of the general public. Thanks for clarifying that.Well, you're the guy assuming that one environmental variable correlating to one measurement is a proof, so I don't think you're in any position to be accusing me of assuming too much really.
    Anyway, that paper you cited to us. What was the fluoride level in the water at "Control" location C? Any time you like...

    Can you point out where I am making a case for adding iodine to the water supply ?


  • Options
    #2970
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    weisses wrote: »
    Can you point out where I am making a case for adding iodine to the water supply ?

    Where are all the sick people?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2971
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    garhjw wrote: »
    Where are all the sick people?


    In bed or if your are really sick in Hospital probably


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement