• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Simple fluoride question

Seanrmr, more damage to the young and from what I have read it is some what permanent. Takes a while to build up so guess it would be a slow job to remove it from our bodies. As others are happy to point out my explanations are basic. Don't think anybody ingesting fluoride then stopping would be aware of the subtle changes in themselves, a old person doesn't know when dementia sets in or is aware they have it in most cases. The less you get the better.
 
Old Bob said:
Phatomwolf, I could say " A study shows that 87.5% of the people scratch their butts twice a day." Then print it in the news and bingo it's fact. I don't believe the % studies that constantly come out. In this commercial world money bends the rules. I feel nauseated knowing that the bulk of the people of Qld are now slowly being damaged. It will take years to turn Anzac stock into wimps but slowly they control us. As for sources of info you are all sitting in front of the greatest information tool we ever had. Just put in search things like "toxins added to water" or some thing similar. I have stumbled on many anti sodium fluoride sites without even trying.
Click to expand...

You could claim it, but could you actually back it up. Scientific papers need facts to back up their claims. Heck the whole reason they started using fluoride in water trearment was because people in areas of natural fluoridated water had better teeth. Studies also show that the amount of fluoride ingested via water is small compared to the amount ingested by simply cleaning your teeth. Do you suggest we all stop brushing our teeth with fluoride toothpaste cause it's a mind control substance. By the way, several people have asked to to provide scientific evidence of that, but currently you haven't shown anything other than a stubborn belief in your being correct.
 
PhantomWolf, regards tooth paste, yes stop using the rubbish. Hunt for a tooth cleaner at good health shops or use bicarb soda or "Ganoderma" as we do. Not only the fluoride but in most brands the abrasive compound is aluminium in it powdered white form plus a LSL and aspartame sweetener. As for finding out truths regards fluoride if you and others are fair dinkum in wanting to know you would find out. I said in a earlier post that "John Hopkins" group has come out against sodium fluoride and thats easy to find. As much as we all argue and bicker my reason for trying to point out the danger is tribal in that I wish to see the people of this planet informed and healthy. Unfortunately many on these lists misinterpret some of what I say, Guess I use to much slang as we tend to forget that people from other countries don't know what the hell I'm saying. Any way all you Sun God worshipers have a happy xmas time.
 
I think it's nice the government care about so much about our teeth, they're putting fluoride in the water.
 
I think it's interesting that the realities of the people responsible for putting fluoride in the water are so different from the paranoid fantasy.

In the paranoid fantasy, some shadowy higher ups in a national organization whom one cannot know or vote for are mandating chemicals being put in the water.

In the reality, officials of local municipalities or water districts decide whether or not to provide fluoride to their customers. And these guys aren't shadowy "higher-ups". They're local people who typically were elected using a dozen volunteers and some yard signs.

Now, it's true you may not know who they are if you don't take an interest. Whose fault is that?
 
(With heavy sarcasm) Yeah, forced medication is nice. Maybe they should put amphetamines in gravy and Lipitor in cheese burgers. That would be "nice" also.

Here's a better idea, if you want fluoride you buy it, if you don't, you don't.
 
TjW said:
I think it's interesting that the realities of the people responsible for putting fluoride in the water are so different from the paranoid fantasy.

In the paranoid fantasy, some shadowy higher ups in a national organization whom one cannot know or vote for are mandating chemicals being put in the water.

In the reality, officials of local municipalities or water districts decide whether or not to provide fluoride to their customers. And these guys aren't shadowy "higher-ups". They're local people who typically were elected using a dozen volunteers and some yard signs.

Now, it's true you may not know who they are if you don't take an interest. Whose fault is that?
Click to expand...

The locals succumb to the CDC version of how swallowing fluoride is beneficial even when there is no direct study showing that it has benefits when swallowed. It only helps topically according to science. Just because the local municipalities are a argumentss duped as you doesn't mean that ingestion is a good thing. Google fallacious arguments and read up, you are posing one.
 
parky76 said:
Does WR believe that water fluoridation is an evil NWO conspiracy? or just bad medical science?
Click to expand...

Not a NWO conspiracy, rather a conspiracy by phosphate and aluminum companies who had a big expense of disposing of a toxic substance. Now it is a profitable substance.

They simply twisted the science that fluoride helps teeth. Yes it does, but only topically. The opposite happens with shampoo, twisted science tells you rubbing vitamin E on your head helps make hair stronger but it only does so when swallowed.

By the way, it can't be bad medical science because there is no science behind ingestion. Just really bad correlations.
 
sleeplessdwarf said:
Force? Vaccines medicate you. Many Ctist believe that they are full of deadly chemicals, and even if they are, you are not forced to take them. Ctist claim that you are but anyone that has bothered to check knows that you can sign a waiver and still put your kids in public school. No one forces you to take public water. You can get it from other sources but if it is a ct and is meant to control the masses, they do not do a very good job. Way too many people in this country can get their water from non fluoride sources.
Click to expand...


Well the poor who can't afford non fluoridated water to cook with and drink are pretty much forced. Plus food processing companies use local water to process foods. So if I don't want fluoride I have to buy organics and buy gallons of water daily. Try living with your water shut off for a month then tell me it is not forced.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Strawman argument. The research into the benefit doesn't look at "swallowing" it merely looks at the fact the water is flouridated, and those studies show a 10-15% decrease in cavities amoung adults and a 25-30% decrease in young children. Other studies have shown that children brushing their teeth with flouride toothpaste swallow about the same amount whether they have flouridated water or not, that the amount they take in via the toothpaste far exceeds that they take in via their drinking water. Do you suggest we should stop flouridating toothpaste?
Click to expand...

Not a straw man. How am I misinterpreting your argument? There is research about swallowing fluoride and it is all bad. There is only evidence of fighting cavaties when applied topically. You and your cohorts lack evidence to support reason behind ingesting fluoride. The scientific evidence is greatly in my favor, that is no where near a straw man argument, rather a argument that points out your lack of evidence as opposed to my mountain of evidence.

As for your child swallowing toothpaste argument, that is why they sell non-fluoridated toothpaste for children. Also labels warn that you supervise your children while they brush with fluoride. Furthermore, if children swallow fluoride while brushing then it is only compounded by the fluoridated water they consume.

The science you reference shows only a correlation between the fall in cavities and the introduction of fluoridated water. This same correlation is found in countries that don't fluoridate. Therefore your correlation is not coefficient. The coefficient correlation can be made properly by looking at countries who started brushing with fluoride. That is what made the cavities drop. If it was swallowing it then the countries that don't fluoridate would not have seen the same drop that fluoridated countries see.
 
Without Rights said:
Don't eat at a restaurant. Don't drink Soda, fruit juice or tea. Don't eat any prepackaged foods.

If I can't afford all this I am being forced.
Click to expand...

Oh well, you'll just have to accept the mind control.

There are worse things in life.

:D
 
Last edited:
Praktik said:
Ok, well - I'm no neurologist. I'd be interested if anyone here had access to the expertise to further the discussion on the point above.

It's easier for me to cautiously accept your quote as a possibility, its just I've seen it stated as fact and have yet to come across anything concrete that demonstrates that fluoride fluoride increases docility.

Since the source on this involves Nazis and Soviets, what I'd like to see is if either country has some science telling them that it increases docility in their archives. Heck, would be cool to see what their rationale was period.
Click to expand...


My quote was "I don't think it is a stretch to theorize", that is hardly stating it as a fact. The fact I stated was that fluoride damages the hypothalamus. If you read on the functions of the hypothalamus then you can see why I come to my THEORY.
 
Without Rights said:
So you are conceding then, alright.
Click to expand...


No, I just cant believe this silly topic is still being discussed.

I like flouride. It tastes yummy. And it has prevented many cavities and the further wearing away of my enamel.

So, when it comes to Parky76 and fluoride, we are buddies.

....yet I still hate Bush and Fox News. How does that work again?
 
parky76 said:
No, I just cant believe this silly topic is still being discussed.

I like flouride. It tastes yummy. And it has prevented many cavities and the further wearing away of my enamel.

So, when it comes to Parky76 and fluoride, we are buddies.

....yet I still hate Bush and Fox News. How does that work again?
Click to expand...


First, fluoride is tasteless. It is the added ingredients in toothpaste that you love so much.

Are you saying that topical fluoride has prevented cavities or that ingesting has?

Yeah, me and fluoride are buddies also, when it comes in a tube labeled "do not swallow"
 
parky76 said:
Oh well, you'll just have to accept the mind control.

There are worse things in life.

:D
Click to expand...

You also have to except the brain damage, the lower IQ, the dental fluorosis, and the osteoporosis. Oh but these are the arguments you don't touch. My bad, didn't mean to bring them up again.
 
parky76 said:
No, I just cant believe this silly topic is still being discussed.

I like flouride. It tastes yummy. And it has prevented many cavities and the further wearing away of my enamel.

So, when it comes to Parky76 and fluoride, we are buddies.

....yet I still hate Bush and Fox News. How does that work again?
Click to expand...


List of fallacious arguments used by Parky.

1. Ad hominem quite regularly. I.e. crazy Cters, loons, nut jobs, woo woos, etc.
2. Straw man, by misstating arguments and over exaggerating positions. I.e pretending I disagree with brushing teeth.
3. false dichotomy
4. Burden of proof I.e not providing proof of claims
5. Reductive fallacy, I.e. oversimplifying the facts
6. Psychogenic Fallacy, I.e. claiming I hold my beliefs because I have an axe to grind with the Government
7. Not invented here. I.e. foreign governments positions don't matter.
8. Appeal to anonymous authority. I.e claiming evidence that doesn't exist
9. False cause. I.e. claiming it is ingestion of fluoride that has caused reduction of cavities and ignoring topical use.
10. Appeal to widespread belief. I.e. since most think it, it must be true.
11. Pigheadedness, I.e. refusing to acknowledge science that contradicts your beliefs.
12. Cherry picking. I.e. focusing on a few points that are arguable and ignoring points you can't contest.
13. Selective reading.
14. Changing the subject
15. Having your cake. I.e. by claiming I should stick to the science but then giving the science no merit in further arguments
16. Moving the goal posts.

There you go, long live the king
 
Last edited:
parky76 said:
Reported for personal attacks. Learn to attack the message and not the messenger WR.
Click to expand...

What is the message I am supposed to attack? You have no message. You have fallacious arguments and that is all. I used a simple debate tool called ad absurdum to show how react to arguments that you can't defend. Ad absurdum is not a fallacious argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom