Boris Johnson Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 I would have thought someone who lives in a country (Germany) which began and then discontinued fluoridation of some of its public water supply would have something pertinent to contribute to the subject at hand. If I recall correctly, the Germans were concerned that there's no way to evenly disperse it in the water supply and prevent it from concentrating so it wasn't safe to do it. Please correct me if I'm wrong about that. I freely admit to knowing nothing about what they do with the water supply here, I turn on the tap and hot or cold wet stuff comes out. The main thing I have noticed about the German water is that it flows from really nice taps, they had single block mixer taps before we had water full stop. The quality of their water dispensing hardware is wicked, who cares what the water contains when it comes out of such lovely taps......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 I've always made clear that I think fluoridating a water supply is a community decision. And that's where we differ -- I believe what I eat and drink should be MY decision, not some imaginary "community" decision. Anyway, on another thread you've been slagging off socialism, but what you're advocating on this thread sounds like socialism to me. Why is socialised decision-making in what we eat and drink good, but socialised decision-making in the economy bad, in your opinion? Or have I misunderstood you? Personally, I believe in individual liberty and free choice and don't want government sticking IQ-lowering substances in my water for the "common good". Anyone who has done their homework knows governments don't have a very good track record where the common good is concerned. Besides, what is a "community" composed of if not individuals? So let individuals decide, individually, for themselves. Let's suppose, for a moment, that fluoridated water really is amazing and has no negative effects. Great! If you want fluoridated water, go to the supermarket and buy it in bottles; or I'm sure you can buy some dilutable juice that has it in. There's simply no reason to fluoridate everyone's water supply when there are already so many readily available sources of fluoride. I buy Iodine tablets (a lack of Iodine can cause lower IQ) and Vitamin B tablets but you don't see me calling for them to be added to everyone's drinking water. I believe in a thing called individual choice. Also, I already brush my teeth at least twice a day with fluoride toothpaste, so I fail to see why I need it in my drinking water as well? Why not just advise us to swallow the toothpaste instead of putting a warning on the toothpaste warning us not to swallow it? I don't get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 Normal people don't make a fuss about multivitamins been put in bread, chlorine in the water, iodine in salt etc etc.Normal people ? It is possible to buy unadulterated flour in Britain. And it has been recognised since the late 70s that the original reasons for adding additives to flour no longer apply. Bizarrely it remains law and the millers are not required to list the additives added. Many european countries do not mandate flour fortification (including France where the quality of bread is a national political issue). Quality culinary salts are typically unrefined and iodine free. These are food purity issues. I agree that the quality of tap water should be improved - especially as the price increases. Over time better treatments have reduced the need for chlorination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 There are multiple areas of life where we sacrifice personal freedoms because the end result is better for the community as a whole. Seatbelts, speed limits, taxes. My accepting of fluoride improves the dental health of others. It would be great if everyone was taught dental hygiene and raised in a family where it was encouraged, but I don't see why education should be seen as something that is mutually exclusive to fluoridation. Look I am not that fussed about this - I lived in Hong Kong and drank fluoridated water, lived in South Africa and didn't, lived in Seattle and did, and in the IOM don't. If I went to live in Birmingham I wouldn't see the fluoridation there as some sinister loss of my freedoms, and don't think what is hopefully happening for example in Southampton is something to get all exercised about. If we fluoridate not a lot will happen but it is more than likely people will have better teeth ie 65 decayed teeth per 100 children in Newcastle vrs 107 in Manchester. My personal view having that difference is a reasonable pragmatic result. Clearly I'm in a minority for thinking this. Shrugs. But if people post bullshit pseudoscience about the elites using fluoride to lower people's IQ I'll call it out for the bollocks it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 There are multiple areas of life where we sacrifice personal freedoms because the end result is better for the community as a whole. Seatbelts, speed limits, taxes. My accepting of fluoride improves the dental health of others. Chinahand, are you actually a paid shill? I'm not even joking. On every single topic, you defend the side of Authority and whatever the mainstream media says. On this thread, you basically sound like a fluoride salesman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 Yawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 And you keep saying it's pseudoscience to say fluoridated water is linked to decreased IQ. Who are we supposed to believe: some anonymous person on a local internet forum, or Harvard University? They obviously felt there was something to these studies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 http://fluoridealert.org/issues/health/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 If you don't believe Harvard University, will you listen to this cute PhD student named Ashley? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 From that link (although I don't know why I'm bothering because you'll only see what you want to see): The Harvard team thus concluded that fluoride’s effect on the developing brain of children should be a “high research priority” Which is not quite the same as your statement that Do you have difficulty reading? From the very first paragraph: In a meta-analysis, researchers from Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) and China Medical University in Shenyang for the first time combined 27 studies and found strong indications that fluoride may adversely affect cognitive development in children. Based on the findings, the authors say that this risk should not be ignored, and that more research on fluoride’s impact on the developing brain is warranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 TJ what you are quoting is a press release - it has no authority. What the authors say in their conclusion is: "The results support the possibility of an adverse effect of high fluoride exposure" If you grow up in an area of China with extreme levels of fluoride there are indications of developmental issues. I'm not denying that, but these studies are not definitive and have multiple issues. Read what I've already said and what the authors say. The thing is you are making an assumption which is not sustained that this is relevant to fluoridation for dental caries. Again - salt is really bad for you in large amounts, but a positive good at low amounts. If the amount of fluoride used in water fluoridation caused problems it would be very easy to spot because millions of people drink it. Again salt, or iodine, or alcohol isn't an issue at low doses, but at higher ones are dangerous. Fluoride is the same, but you want to make this some huge conspiracy. What you are going on about is basically the same as claiming adding vitamin A to food is an attempt to deliberately poison people. Guess what it isn't and neither is fluoridation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 I suggest you send an email to Harvard University and tell them to change the text I quoted then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tameelf Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 http://rense.com/general79/hd3.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truth Seeker Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 http://rense.com/general79/hd3.htm It's not just second world war dictators that want to control the masses, the new kid on the block is Lithium. Is lithium the next fluoride? Medication may be added to the water supply. http://www.naturalnews.com/032669_lithium_water_supply.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted March 30, 2014 Author Share Posted March 30, 2014 A good song by Evanescence, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.