So fluoride makes people watch the news? Or if they watch the news it makes them believe the news . . ? How does fluoride pacify people . . . what is the mechanism and what dose is necessary?Originally Posted by cheeple
So fluoride makes people watch the news? Or if they watch the news it makes them believe the news . . ? How does fluoride pacify people . . . what is the mechanism and what dose is necessary?
The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Spaten is brewed in Munich, Germany.
It's an anti-depressant, it's also the #1 Ingredient in Prozac and other anti-depressants, it also lowers IQ, best if you give it to babies.
The dosage can be very small since we're talking cumulative.
Fluoride was used by nazis to sterilize inmates and make them docile. Fluoride is a key dumbing down ingredient of Prozac and Sarin nerve gas. It's also the key ingredient in rat poison.. That's why 98% of countries have banned fluoridated water.
"The 'substance' referred to as 'Fluoride' is a misnomer - there is no such substance listed in the periodic chart of the elements, instead, we find a GAS called Fluorine - and from the use of this gas in various industries such as aluminum manufacturing and the nuclear industry -certain toxic byproducts are created which have 'captured' fluorine molecules. One such toxic, poisonous 'byproduct' is called sodium Fluoride - which according to the Merck Index is primarily used as rat and cockroach poison and is also the active ingredient in most toothpastes and as an "additive to drinking water. Fluoride is also one of the basic ingredients in both PROZAC (FLUoxetene Hydrochloride) and Sarin Nerve Gas (Isopropyl-Methyl-Phosphoryl FLUORIDE). Let me repeat: the truth the American public needs to understand is the fact that Sodium Fluoride is nothing more (or less) than a hazardous waste by-product of the nuclear and aluminum industries. In addition to being the primary ingredient in rat and cockroach poisons, it is also a main ingredient in anesthetic, hypnotic, and psychiatric drugs (like Prozac) as well as military NERVE GAS!."
http://www.greaterthings.com/Lexicon/F/F…
Over 3000 health dentists and doctors are currently urging the US congress to stop water-fluoridation.
http://www.groundreport.com/Health_and_S…
It has also been proven to cause:
1. Brain Damage
(from Feb 11th 2011)- New Warning About the “Healthy” Fluoride That Can Damage Your Brain and is in Fact a Dangerous Toxin http://www.reenagagneja.com/toxin-danger…
2. Lowered IQ
"researchers found that the number of intelligent children in the village with low fluoride levels was 350 percent higher than those in the high fluoride village. Even more disturbing, 15% of the highly fluoridated children scored low enough to indicate mental retardation, verses 6% in the other village."
http://www.naturalnews.com/030948_fluori…
3. Hypothyroidism (Fluoride was once used medically to suppress thyroid function.)
4. Cancers (especially osteosarcoma, a rare form of bone cancer, in young males)
5. Genetic mutations
6. Birth defects, such as Down’s syndrome
7. Immune system impairment
8. Skeletal fluorosis
9. Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia
10. Infertility
11. Early onset of puberty (due to interference with pineal gland, which produces melatonin)
12. Kidney damage
13. ADHD
SeriouslyDebatable (September 17th, 2012)
Mick I havent really been following the thread, are you gonna make a conscious effort to avoid Fluorine as best as you can?
That is a lot of information . . . how did those pushing fluoridation convince all the dental community and public health people to go along with it . . . they and their families would be likewise affected . . .
The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Because they are also Pacified, Their school wouldnt hold critical information from them would they? of course not thats only conspiracy theorists who would say something like that.That is a lot of information . . . how did those pushing fluoridation convince all the dental community and public health people to go along with it . . . they and their families would be likewise affected
Also they would be shunned in their profession and labelled a quack, everyone knows Fluroride is good for you, right?
No. I'm not going to seek it out either, but it essentially just another environmental toxin - harmless in low doses, and maybe even good for my teeth! I'm sure I'm vastly more medicated via beer.
LOL!, well better beer than Diet Pepsi unless you like drinking aborted baby cells. kinda strange to hear you admit it's a Toxin but it is true, and may i also say life is much easier with Fluroride in your system, less stress.
Last edited by cheeple; September 4th, 2012 at 06:51 PM.
Everything is toxic in sufficient quantity. Even water. For fluorine (which basically means a compound of flouride) it's quite a low quantity, less than a gram. Fortunately the quantities in water are really really low. There's just some dispute over the exact toxic levels and the nature of the toxicity. EPA says its fine though.
While the concern may be somewhat hyped . . . the fact the "EPA says it is fine" gives me no warm and fuzzy feeling . . .
The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Well, that's just wrong, isn't it?
Depending on how you define it, there's about 200 countries in the world. If 98% of them had banned fluoridated water, that would leave only four countries where it was used. This is plainly not the case...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_f...ound_the_world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoridation_by_country
I got that quote from a link, I'm sure they are not talking about Kazakhstan and Zimbabwe, I'm sure their talking about developed Countries.
Something has worked. It's made me watch the news a lot more now, pacification successful!
After a bit of quick research, I found out that in my locale, people voted to introduce this stuff into the water in the late 80s and only stopped last year (about 0.7 mg/L). Honestly, I don't feel any effects of pacification and I don't have any medical problems that I know of. Mind you, I'm pretty new to the topic, since the time they would have introduced this into the water supply of my home was when I was but a baby myself. Looking at this again, I'd probably be against the whole thing, and I still question my government from time-to-time (well, maybe a lot more than that). While I for one don't really see much benefit for adding fluoride in water, I don't really find it all that crippling either.
Do the USA, Israel, Japan, Singapore, the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia count as developed countries?
LOL, I see your putting alot of effort into the least important part of the thread.
I just think that if you're going to throw that sort of 'fact' into the mix, it casts doubts on your other 'facts'.
In other words, if you haven't bothered to check the veracity of (what appeared to me, at least) an obviously incorrect statement, how much time have you spent checking the 13 'proven' statements in your list?
I'd suspect none at all?
eg. This one...
- Cancers (especially osteosarcoma, a rare form of bone cancer, in young males)
Now, I had a long argument with someone else on the benefits (or otherwise) of fluoride on another forum, and this particular claim came up, and I researched it, so I'm on reasonably solid ground when I make the bold claim that it's pretty much bunk. And yet here you are listing it as a 'proven' side-effect of fluoride usage.
But I could be wrong. Time has moved on. How about digging out a study that proves the osteosarcoma/fluoride link?
Last edited by hemi; September 4th, 2012 at 09:19 PM.
Fine to answer your question yes I would consider USA, Israel, Japan, Singapore, the UK, Canada, and Australia to count as Developed Countries.Do the USA, Israel, Japan, Singapore, the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia count as developed countries?
I'd suspect none at all?
Japan
Less than 1% of Japan practices water fluoridation, so 99% does not.
United Kingdom
Around 10% of the population of the United Kingdom receives fluoridated water so 90% of the population does not have added Fluoride in the water supply.
Canada
The decision whether to fluoridate lies with local governments, it is not Nationwide
USA, Singapore and Australia are the highest from your list.
United StatesMain article: Water fluoridation in the United States
As of May 2000, 42 of the 50 largest U.S. cities had water fluoridation.[79] In 2010, 66% of all U.S. residents and 74% of U.S. residents with access to community water systems receive fluoridated water
Singapore
In 1956, Singapore was the first asian country to institute a water fluoridation program that covered 100% of the population.[29][30] Water is fluoridated to a typical value of 0.4-0.6 mg per litre.[31]
Australia
Main article: Water fluoridation in Australia
Australia now provides fluoridated water for 70% or more of the population
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoridation_by_country
The statement was "98% of countries have banned fluoridated water."
The relative levels of coverage within those countries is irrelevant. If they've got any at all - even 1% - it obviously isn't banned.
Yeah that was a stretch, I think the writer was European this is what I was able to find:
98% of Europe is now fluoridation free. The two holdouts are represented by England, 10% fluoridated, and Ireland, 73% fluoridated. The second largest political party of the most fluoridated population in the world, Ireland's Fine Gael, reported the week of January 15, 2001, that they have established as a major platform the eradication of all artificial fluoridation in the country due to "serious health concerns," even directing that the amount of natural fluoride in the water be reevaluated."Most of the world has rejected fluoridation. Only America where it originated, and countries under strong American influence persist in the practice. Denmark banned fluoridation when its National Agency for Environmental Protection, after consulting the widest possible range of scientific sources, pointed out that the long-term effects of low fluoride intakes on certain groups in the population (for example, persons with reduced kidney function), were insufficiently known. Sweden also rejected fluoridation on the recommendation of a special Fluoride Commission, which included among its reasons that: 'The combined and long-term environmental effects of fluoride are insufficiently known.' Holland banned fluoridation after a group of medical practitioners presented evidence that it caused reversible neuromuscular and gastrointestinal harm to some individuals in the population."
"The two holdouts are represented by England, 10% fluoridated,".
If people did proper research, they would find that England is only ONE part of the UK. Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales are part as well. The figure,10%, applies to the UK as a whole, not England.
Scotland, Wales, and NI have no fluoride added to their water only in parts of England is it added.
http://www.bfsweb.org/facts/wf_uknwo...f_uknworld.htm
Many European countries have rejected water fluoridation in general. This includes: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland,[33] Scotland[34] Iceland, and Italy.[citation needed] A 2003 survey of over 500 Europeans from 16 countries concluded that "the vast majority of people opposed water fluoridation".[35]
Not sure about Wales I cant find anything.
Interesting . . . why do you think this is true . . . what is the major reason for the turnaround from previous positions . . . ???
The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
You can check out the link to see all the examples
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoridation_by_country
Austria
Austria has never implemented fluoridation.[23]
Belgium
Belgium does not fluoridate its water supply, although legislation permits it.[23]
Czech Republic
Czech Republic (Czechoslovakia respectively) started water fluoridation in 1958 in Tábor. After six years, 80% reduction of decay was asserted[citation needed]. This led to widespread introduction of fluoridation. In Prague, fluoridation started in 1975. It was stopped in 1988 there and subsequently in the whole country too. Currently (2008) no water is fluoridated.[36] Fluoridated salt is available.[37]
Croatia
Croatia does not fluoridate its water.[38]
Denmark
Denmark does not fluoridate its water, although the National Health Board is in favour.[23]
Finland
The Finnish government supports fluoridation, although only one community of 70 000 people was fluoridated, Kuopio.[23] Kuopio stopped fluoridation in 1992.[39]
France
France fluoridates salt; but none of its water.[23][33]
Germany
Drinking water is not fluoridated in any part of Germany. One experiment, started 1952 in Kassel-Wahlershausen, was discontinued in 1971.[40] The GDR used to fluoridate drinking water in a few cities, but it was discontinued after the German reunification.[1] Fluoridated salt is available since 1992 with steadily increasing market share.
Greece
There is no water fluoridation in Greece.[41]
"Interesting . . . why do you think this is true . . . what is the major reason for the turnaround from previous positions . . . ???"
Can't speak for any of the others, but Scotland has never had fluoride added to it's water, so no turnaround there.
Interesting. Thanks Cheeple!
I drink Shiner Bock from Shiner, Texas. 0.3% they say.
You are equivocating a proscribed medicine with an environmental exposure. Apples and Oranges.
The infant dosage question is both emotive and relevant.
I think it's the same thing. If we accept there's no benefit to babies of fluoride exposure, then their exposure is essentially just a side effect of the dosing the water for older humans. It's an environmental exposure because it's not intended for them.
We allow children to get minute doses of carbon monoxide from cars because it's useful for something else, and not harmful in those low does.
We DON'T allow children to get minute doses of lead from cars any more, because even though it was useful, the low doses were still causing harm. So we stopped.
We allow babies to get low doses of fluoride because it's (arguably) useful for something use (preventing tooth decay in older children and adults), and it's not harmful in those low doses.
So in both cases it's the same thing. Unintentional (but obviously foreseeable) exposure to a substance is allowed because of separate benefits to other people, and lack of evidence of harm.
The debate needs to be about the evidence of benefits and the evidence of harm, and how we weigh one against the other. It's the same thing with lead, the same thing with second-hand smoke, and the same thing with carbon monoxide.
The Pepsi/Senomyx posts have been moved to:
http://metabunk.org/threads/752-Debu...n-their-drinks
Actually, anyone good at math would ask about the other 83%....but I realize that's a little off topic.
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” - Daniel Patrick Moynihan
JFDee (September 7th, 2012)
Good argument. I stand corrected.
Mick (September 7th, 2012)
I'm not sure what conclusions can be reached with this graph but claiming that it shows fluoridation does not reduce tooth decay is certainly not one of them.
The argument this graph attempts to support is that tooth decay is declining in all countries regardless of water fluoridation, therefor fluoridation is ineffective. The conclusion is flawed because it's committing the fallacy of composition, taking only one aspect and attributing it to the whole. The graph's somewhat disingenuously over-simplified assumptions do not consider all the many preventive measures that go into a nation's oral health strategy and it doesn't address to what degree each one of those measures affects the overall reduction of tooth decay.
The single common factor amongst all countries is the widespread adoption of fluoride toothpaste during the 70's and 80's. That is not to say it is the single largest contributing factor to the decline. During that same period of time many nations, but not all, offered free dental care to children. Included in the service was fissure sealants, fluoride rinse programs and many kinds of preventive care and education. Some nations had widespread fluoridated salt programs and offered free dental care. Others fluoridated water and had free dental care. Others offered free dental care and didn't fluoridate water or salt. Yet others only fluoridated water. These many factors overlap and are intertwined with such complexity over varying time lines and demographics that countries can't simply be placed into fluoridated and non-fluoridated groups in any meaningful way.
A better graph would compare fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities within a single country. Confounding factors, such as education, free dental programs, could then be reduced giving us a better picture of what effects fluoridation alone has on tooth decay numbers. Here's a graph showing the DMTF of two Irish communities. Non-fluoridated in blue. Fluoridated in orange.
There is a clear decline regardless of fluoridation strategies, but the lifelong residents of fluoridated communities show consistently lower tooth decay. In 1988 the fluoridated group was averaging 2 cavities per child. It took the non-fluoridated group about 6 years longer to show the same results.
These are the types of details lost in the meaningless clutter of the first graph.
Fluoridation is the most cost effective wide reaching prevention program and when used in CONJUNCTION with other strategies, it delivers the best results.
So if everyone is dosed with fluoride, how do they prevent EVERY young child from being dumbed down and affected. Obviously the old men who are conniving to dumb down the entire population will have to be replaced eventually, but everyone will be less intelligent and pacified. Makes no sense. Just like the chemtrail conspiracy, makes no sense they poison their own families AND THEMSELVES for that matter. They're ingesting fluoride too. Even if they drink bottled water, obviously if the corn flakes, beer and everything else is dosed with fluoride because it's made using water, they're going to ingest it also. Again makes no sense at all.
There are no aborted baby cells in Pepsi.
Last edited by JRBids; September 8th, 2012 at 03:17 PM. Reason: typo
There is no credible evidence to support that claim - it is oft repeated, but unsupported.
The sole source of the story was Charles Perkins - so Who was Charles Perkins and where did he get his info?
There is a claim he was sent by the US Govt to take charge of I.G. Faben after WW2 - but Perkins himself makes no actual mention of any connection with I. G. Faben in his book - an odd omission since it would be quite an important association to establish his credentials, and neither he nor fluoride rate any mention in "The Crime and Punishment of IG Farben".
Also I.G. Farbin had it's own war trial - the records are available online & I see no mention of Perkins or Fluoride in them - but they are very long - it's entirely possible I missed it so please feel free to point them out if you find any.
his failure to provide any documented link is analysed here.
Others have looked for evidence to support the claim - eg this forum discussion from 2009, and this one - AFAIK no-one has actually found any.
Evidence of "dumbing down"??Fluoride is a key dumbing down ingredient of Prozac and Sarin nerve gas.
Since prozac is an anti-depressant I suggest that it actually smartens up - if you've ever been depressed and taken it (I have) then it makes you a lot smarter then you are not depressed than when you are!
And since Sarin kills what would be the reason for having anything in it to "dumb down"??
Both chemicals also contain oxygen - we all know that every "dumb" person has ingested massive amounts of oxygen - so why not blame it for "dumbing down"??
It is an ingredient of SOME rat poisons - please try to be a little more accurate.It's also the key ingredient in rat poison..
Oh - and so is Oxygen!!
No it isn't. AS has been pointed out already, 98% of countries have NOT banned Fluoride.That's why 98% of countries have banned fluoridated water.
In fact looking around the 'net I can't actually find 1 country that has BANNED fluoride from water.
I see many that in various shapes or forms have decided not to add any fluoride - but none that have insisted that all natural fluoride also be removed - can you identify any of those??
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -Pascal
"It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley; but not at all so to believe or not in God" - Diderot
This is old news but still relevant to the debate and the issue of fluoridation. In a Toronto Star expose on fluoride (April 25, 1999), Dr. Hardy Limeback, a consultant to the Canadian Dental Association and dentistry professor at the University of Toronto, admitted that fluoride may not be the safe dental miracle some would have the public believe. Once a staunch proponent of fluoridation, Limeback is now strongly opposed against public water fluoridation, and himself avoids drinking Toronto tap water. He explained that he sees the early signs of too much fluoride in his dental practice, with the majority of the children he treats in his practice having dental fluorosis.
Limeback stated, "The fact is that fluoride is a dangerous by-product of the manufacturing of phosphate fertilizers, the smelting industry and coal-burning utility plants, and it is the legal responsibility of these companies to properly dispose of it. Imagine selling an industrial pollutant to municipalities, and then dumping into public water systems. When the extent of this issue is known to the public, it'll make tobacco industries look like saints. Fluoride is a pollutant, so why would you want to swallow that stuff? I had joint problems which cleared up when I switched to non-fluoridated water. We absolutely know about the tragic consequences of higher levels of fluoride, and we know it builds up over time. These people haven't done any studies to find out what effect fluoride accumulation will have at current levels. How can they say it's safe when the studies haven't been done? Right now, we have people who have been ingesting fluoride for 35 years. What happens in another 50 years when these people have been adding this poison to their bones for 85 years?"
A growing body of documented literature on fluoride does suggest links to various cancers, increased incidences of bone fractures, nervous system disorders, mental dysfunction and behavioral problems. Not surprising, considering that fluoride is between lead and arsenic on the toxicity scale.
Dental Expert Rejects Fluoride
http://www.robertgammal.com/Fluoride/TopResRejFl.html
Fluoridation Quietly Reduced Again
http://www.fluoridealert.org/news/fl...reduced-again/
You can always find SOME professionals who share in a fringe opinion. Just look at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth.
So why is it that those professionals, the small minority, are right, but the majority are wrong?
More relevantly, so is Vitamin D.It is an ingredient of SOME rat poisons - please try to be a little more accurate.
Oh - and so is Oxygen!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodenticide
Calciferols (vitamins D), cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) and ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) are used as rodenticides. They are toxic to rodents for the same reason they are important to humans: they affect calcium and phosphate homeostasis in the body. Vitamins D are essential in minute quantities (few IUs per kilogram body weight daily, only a fraction of a milligram), and like most fat soluble vitamins, they are toxic in larger doses, causing hypervitaminosis. If the poisoning is severe enough (that is, if the dose of the toxin is high enough), it leads to death.
It's all about the dosage. Everything is toxic at some level.
So, Dr. Kennedy, are you proud to be associated with these people and the hoax of chemtrails?
"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ...Mark Twain
Well this is an interesting coincidence. Dr. Hardy Limeback was my family dentist from ages 12-18. He noted that I had minor dental flourosis (white spots on my teeth). He asked if I ever ingested toothpaste and I had to admit that as a smaller child I would occasionally eat it because it tasted like bubblegum. Yes I know this is gross, but can be a very common problem with children and probably is the most likely reason for dental flourosis.
I will also note that he still provided me with free samples of flouride containing toothpaste and rinsed my mouth out with flouride containing mouthwash.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks