Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 63

Thread: the flouride in drinking water is toxic

  1. #41
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    Fluoridation doublespeak from the American Dental Association
    Sunday, May 04, 2014 by: Doug Cragoe
    The American Dental Association (ADA) publishes a booklet titled Fluoridation Facts, the prior edition of which claimed, "Water fluoridation is practiced in approximately 60 countries." Phone calls to the ADA headquarters showed that, while the ADA insisted this was true, they could not provide a list of the 60 countries.

    Next, the ADA said the 60 countries number came from the British Fluoridation Society (BFS). The BFS data showed that roughly 30 countries were adding fluoride to water and about 30 more had natural water fluoride levels in "optimum" amounts. So the ADA added both together to get 60. However, just because a nation has an "optimum" level of natural fluoride in the water does not mean that nation is practicing water fluoridation. The definition of fluoridation is to add fluoride to water. There is no dictionary definition that says water with natural fluoride in it means there is fluoridation going on there.

    Public knowledge of the doublespeak led the ADA to change their words
    In the current edition of Fluoridation Facts, the wording was changed to this: "Over 405 million people in more than 60 countries worldwide enjoy the benefits of fluoridated water."

    The ADA is again combining natural and artificial together but now calling it "fluoridated water" instead of "practicing water fluoridation." They still have the wrong number, although it may not be their fault. In the current edition of the BFS One in a Million there are only 53 nations listed as having fluoridation or "optimal" natural water fluoride levels. The ADA document says they accessed the BFS publication in 2004, an earlier edition. The BFS in that earlier edition listed more nations as having fluoridation. No explanation was ever offered as to the nations that supposedly had fluoridation in the earlier BFS document but not in the more recent BFS document.

    Sneaky use of a new unspecified definition of fluoridated water
    The ADA statement does not define fluoridated water. Let's ignore the dictionary definition and look at ways the ADA may have defined fluoridated water in this case. If they say that fluoridated water is any water with some fluoride in it, then the statement is very misleading. Almost all nations have water sources with at least tiny amounts of fluoride. So with this definition of "fluoridated water," a more straightforward statement would be "almost all the world's 7 billion people in 195 nations enjoy the benefits of fluoridated water."

    Now, let's assume the ADA meant that only "optimal" levels of natural fluoride designate water as fluoridated. That means water with a 0.7 ppm fluoride level and above is fluoridated, and water with 0.6 ppm and below is not fluoridated. And the fluoride level used to determine whether water is fluoridated or not depends on what is considered "optimal" in that particular region and era in history. A water fluoride level considered not fluoridated one day could instantly become fluoridated with a new, lower government recommendation.

    If the ADA had merely inserted the word optimal before fluoridated water in the statement, it would not be objectionable. But with the correct definition of the word fluoridated, the statement is deceptive, as it falsely implies that 60 nations are adding fluoride to drinking water.

    A future article will look at more doublespeak from the ADA -- their unique statement that "No European country has imposed a 'ban' on water fluoridation."
    https://www.naturalnews.com/044977_w...sociation.html

  2. #42
    Senior Member jyng1's Avatar
    Type
    intp
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,682
    Quote Originally Posted by mara View Post
    naturally occurring hey?

    so not the flouride that is added as a toxic by product of the aluminium industry...and therefore not the same...

    Do tell. You mean naturally occurring "fluoride" is spelt differently or that the flour-ide added to drinking water is a byproduct of the wheat industry?

  3. #43
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    Quote Originally Posted by jyng1 View Post
    Do tell. You mean naturally occurring "fluoride" is spelt differently or that the flour-ide added to drinking water is a byproduct of the wheat industry?
    i'd rather mis-spell a word then be a spelling nazi who defends the mass poisoning of millions of people

  4. #44
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    catoptrics article said this:

    Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

    By Douglas Main On 6/29/15 at 2:57 PM

    If you’re like two-thirds of Americans, fluoride is added to your tap water for the purpose of reducing cavities. But the scientific rationale for putting it there may be outdated, and no longer as clear-cut as was once thought.

    Water fluoridation, which first began in 1945 in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and expanded nationwide over the years, has always been controversial. Those opposed to the process have argued—and a growing number of studies have suggested—that the chemical may present a number of health risks, for example interfering with the endocrine system and increasing the risk of impaired brain function; two studies in the last few months, for example, have linked fluoridation to ADHD and underactive thyroid. Others argue against water fluoridation on ethical grounds, saying the process forces people to consume a substance they may not know is there—or that they’d rather avoid.

    Despite concerns about safety and ethics, many are content to continue fluoridation because of its purported benefit: that it reduces tooth decay. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Division of Oral Health, the main government body responsible for the process, says it’s “safe and effective.”
    http://www.newsweek.com/fluoridation...y-shows-348251

  5. #45
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    ^ you gotta love that last bit in that article there where it says that they are overlooking all the damage fluoride does because according to them its good for your teeth!

    rofl....they're poisoning you and destroying your IQ because they really care about your teeth!

    lol

    yes while they destroy your economic health through austerity and while they lower your IQ through fluoridation they make sure that through all of it that they look after what is really important....your teeth!

    ah ha ha ha!

    do you know what's fucked up about that? it doesn't even benefit your teeth! that's just a fucking lie they tell you so that you keep drinking it!

  6. #46
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    Exposure to fluoridated water and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder prevalence among children and adolescents in the United States: an ecological association
    Ashley J MalinEmail author and Christine Till
    Environmental Health201514:17

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-015-0003-1

    Malin and Till; licensee BioMed Central. 2015

    Received: 7 July 2014

    Accepted: 4 February 2015

    Published: 27 February 2015

    Open Peer Review reports
    Abstract
    Background

    Epidemiological and animal-based studies have suggested that prenatal and postnatal fluoride exposure has adverse effects on neurodevelopment. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between exposure to fluoridated water and Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) prevalence among children and adolescents in the United States.
    Methods

    Data on ADHD prevalence among 4-17 year olds collected in 2003, 2007 and 2011 as part of the National Survey of Children’s Health, and state water fluoridation prevalence from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) collected between 1992 and 2008 were utilized.
    Results

    State prevalence of artificial water fluoridation in 1992 significantly positively predicted state prevalence of ADHD in 2003, 2007 and 2011, even after controlling for socioeconomic status. A multivariate regression analysis showed that after socioeconomic status was controlled each 1% increase in artificial fluoridation prevalence in 1992 was associated with approximately 67,000 to 131,000 additional ADHD diagnoses from 2003 to 2011. Overall state water fluoridation prevalence (not distinguishing between fluoridation types) was also significantly positively correlated with state prevalence of ADHD for all but one year examined.
    Conclusions

    Parents reported higher rates of medically-diagnosed ADHD in their children in states in which a greater proportion of people receive fluoridated water from public water supplies. The relationship between fluoride exposure and ADHD warrants future study.
    https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/...940-015-0003-1

  7. #47
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity
    Dr Philippe Grandjean, MD'Correspondence information about the author Dr Philippe GrandjeanEmail the author Dr Philippe Grandjean
    , Philip J Landrigan, MD
    Published: 14 February 2014

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70278-3 |

    Summary

    Neurodevelopmental disabilities, including autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and other cognitive impairments, affect millions of children worldwide, and some diagnoses seem to be increasing in frequency. Industrial chemicals that injure the developing brain are among the known causes for this rise in prevalence. In 2006, we did a systematic review and identified five industrial chemicals as developmental neurotoxicants: lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, arsenic, and toluene. Since 2006, epidemiological studies have documented six additional developmental neurotoxicants—manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers. We postulate that even more neurotoxicants remain undiscovered. To control the pandemic of developmental neurotoxicity, we propose a global prevention strategy. Untested chemicals should not be presumed to be safe to brain development, and chemicals in existing use and all new chemicals must therefore be tested for developmental neurotoxicity. To coordinate these efforts and to accelerate translation of science into prevention, we propose the urgent formation of a new international clearinghouse.
    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/la...278-3/abstract

  8. #48
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    Adding fluoride to water supply may have no benefit, say experts
    Critics call for end to scheme designed to prevent tooth decay in children, saying its effectiveness remains unproved
    Haroon Siddique
    Fri 25 Dec 2015 18.30 GMT Last modified on Wed 29 Nov 2017 05.15 GMT

    Water fluoridation has been in place in England for more than 40 years, and now covers about 6 million people. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calls adding fluoride to drinking water one of the 10 great public health achievements in the 20th century.

    Public Health England (PHE) describes it as “a safe and effective public health measure” to combat tooth decay in children and, alongside dentists’ groups, has called for it to be implemented more widely.
    Call for water fluoridation across England to cut childhood tooth decay
    Read more

    But health experts are calling for a moratorium on water fluoridation, claiming that the benefits of such schemes, as opposed to those of topical fluoride (directly applied to the teeth), are unproved.

    Furthermore, critics cite studies claiming to have identified a number of possible negative associations of fluoridation, including bone cancer in boys, bladder cancer, hypothyroidism, hip fractures and lower IQ in children.

    Stephen Peckham, director and professor of health policy at Kent University’s centre for health service studies, said: “Water fluoridation was implemented before statistics had been compiled on its safety or effectiveness. It was the only cannon shot they had in their armoury. It gets rolled out, becomes – in England – policy and then you look for evidence to support it.
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/...ed-tooth-decay

  9. #49
    Member
    Type
    INFJ
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    952
    http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/n...dical-journal/

    Medical Journal Designates Fluoride as Neurotoxin

    Fluoridation, the process of adding fluoride to public water supplies in an effort to prevent cavities, has courted controversy since its introduction in the US during the 1940s. Now, the prestigious medical journal The Lancet has published a report that supports what opponents of fluoride have long been arguing. In essence, the journal article pointed to the fact that fluoride is a developmental neurotoxin.
    Fluoride: A Dangerous Neurotoxin

    The peer-reviewed report, which builds off a 2006 study that looked at five potential neurotoxins, now adds fluoride to the list of harmful environmental pollutants. [1] In fact, fluoride is listed alongside such well-known hazards as lead, mercury, and arsenic. Developmental neurotoxins at high enough levels can cause developmental disorders and are particularly hazardous to fetuses and young children whose brains are still developing. Dr. Philippe Grandjean and Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, the authors of the study, are advocating for a global prevention strategy to control what they call a “pandemic of developmental neurotoxicity.” They also believe that there are still undiscovered industrial neurotoxins and state that chemicals that have not been tested for neurotoxicity should not automatically be presumed safe for brain development.
    Other Concerns

    In addition to the fluoride warnings published in the journal, a recent meta-analysis from Harvard found a correlation between fluoridated water and low IQ scores in children who grew up in the most fluoridated areas. Other studies have linked fluoridation to certain types of cancer. Again, these are mere correlations, but they are consistently strong and warrant further investigation. Mandatory fluoridation has been banned in many countries across the world, including most of Europe, where the addition of chemicals to the public water supply is generally viewed as unethical, especially when there is no significant health benefits. However, fluoride is still commonly added to the public water supplies of most of North America.
    What Can You Do?

    A high-quality water filter installed in your home can help eliminate, or at least reduce, the amount of fluoride you and your family are exposed to on a daily basis. Also, write a letter to your local government officials relaying your concerns over the fluoridation of the public water supply. Educate yourself first to see if your city’s water is fluoridated.
    -Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, ND, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM
    References:
    1. Dr. Philippe Grandjean, MD, Philip J. Landrigan, MD. Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity. The Lancet Neurology, Volume 13, Issue 3, Pages 330-338, March 2014. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70278-3.

  10. #50
    Senior Member jyng1's Avatar
    Type
    intp
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,682
    You realise no one reads your spam?

Similar Threads

  1. What Are You Drinking Right Now?
    By Osito Polar in forum The Pub
    Replies: 782
    Last Post: 08-29-2018, 02:21 AM
  2. Toxic Aluminium in the vaccines
    By mara in forum Health & Fitness
    Replies: 605
    Last Post: 06-03-2018, 12:19 PM
  3. Anyone not drink water?
    By BarIII in forum Health & Fitness
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 10-12-2017, 03:27 PM
  4. Water on Ceres:
    By msg_v2 in forum Math, Science & Tech
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-25-2014, 11:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •