Water purity testing in Waterford?

Not The Real Scarecrow

spankmemunkey wrote: »

Ha ha very funny, I was waiting for the conspiracy theory slaggin to come along, Im putting a debate forward and where your lacking in arguement you just resort to slagging.

See the problem is it doesn't seem like you're putting forward a debate.It comes across that you're preaching to people and can be very patronising. If its one thing you should have learned aboutIrish people ,is that we don't respond well to foreigners telling us what we should be doing and talking down to us like morons. You've expressed your contempt for Waterford and its people plenty of times so don't expect the same people to start praising you for telling us where we went wrong in the past. If you're going to throw stones make sure your own country has a clean record to begin with. It wasn't only Ireland that stood back and remained silent when the government was performing atrocities.
I don't think you'd take it too kindly if people were to overly simplify your countries history.You know nothing about Ireland or how the country operates. You have an overly simplified view of events that you back up with unverified information off sites like Facebook. There's plenty of verified scientific test that prove fluoride is harmless to the majority of the population. It may be one of the many causes of cancer in people but there are few instances(if any) of this been proven.
If you're going to start a thread with

There are also many other toxins in our water that is one of the reasons Ireland is the sickest country in europe and has the highest cancer rates in europe cos we are the only ones adding fluoride to our water, its banned in the rest of Europe.

have the facts to back it up. I've travelled around Europe and at least in the majority of Ireland you can drink the tap water with out fear of getting badly sick, you can't state that for some of our EU counter parts.

jh79

spankmemunkey wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/letters/fluoride-use-should-be-suspended-222571.html

I havent got all those details im afraid if you look at the links i posted youll find out alot of info, theres a few links there and there is a comprehensive scientific analysis in the latest issue of HotPress from Scientist Declan Waugh he published some of his findings there!

This has been picked up by alot of leading papers and you will hear more news about it when there is a court case on the topic!

There is absolutely no detail in that article. Toxicity depends on concentration. All compounds have adverse effects at certain concentrations, Vitamins for example are carcinogens so why not ban supplement too?

The anti-fluoride side are always very vague on actual scientific facts and just say it is toxic, it comes from toxic waste etc. It is a simple question at what concentration is it toxic?

Ask yourself, why won't the anti-fluoride side answer this question? Why are their arguments so vague? Could it be that the concentration in our water supply is actually relatively safe?

Cabaal

spankmemunkey wrote: »

I think youll find that this link youve posted talks about NATURALLY OCCURING fluoride! IRELAND ADDS it to their supply!

Okay i found that its 10 percent is added in England, None is added in the north and none in Wales and none in Scotland

Heres a link for the countries who have said no to Fluoridisation

http://www.fluoridefreewater.ie/levels.php

nope,
I know what I posted

http://www.anglianwater.co.uk/household/water-quality/facts/fluoride/

In England, fluoridation schemes target the final level of fluoride at one milligramme per litre of water (equivalent to one part per million). Fluoridation is undertaken at the request of certain Strategic Health Authorities and is carried out in accordance with strict legal guidelines.

http://severntrentwater.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/261/session/L3RpbWUvMTM2MTI3NDkwMy9zaWQvVWpVNkZlamw=

Fluoride is added to water in some areas at the request of the Strategic Health Authority to protect teeth from decay. The decision to add fluoride to drinking water is solely the responsibility of the Strategic Health Authority and not Severn Trent Water. Fluoride is normally added as a diluted solution or as a powder.

So while they both state there is a level of naturally occurring fluoride its also added by Strategic Health Authority, did you even read what I posted?

wellboytoo

As someone who never a had a "town supply" I am not getting into the whole Flouride thing, but would suggest there is a bigger problem with farm effluent and fecal matter in our water than flouride will ever be.
Note the N2 levels in the WCC examples shown by a previous poster and how they peak at certain times of the year.

spankmemunkey

Cabaal wrote: »

nope,
I know what I posted

http://www.anglianwater.co.uk/household/water-quality/facts/fluoride/



http://severntrentwater.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/261/session/L3RpbWUvMTM2MTI3NDkwMy9zaWQvVWpVNkZlamw=



So while they both state there is a level of naturally occurring fluoride its also added by Strategic Health Authority, did you even read what I posted?

Yes i did thats why i went back and edited my post to say its at 10% in england

spankmemunkey

Meatwad wrote: »

See the problem is it doesn't seem like you're putting forward a debate.It comes across that you're preaching to people and can be very patronising. If its one thing you should have learned aboutIrish people ,is that we don't respond well to foreigners telling us what we should be doing and talking down to us like morons. You've expressed your contempt for Waterford and its people plenty of times so don't expect the same people to start praising you for telling us where we went wrong in the past. If you're going to throw stones make sure your own country has a clean record to begin with. It wasn't only Ireland that stood back and remained silent when the government was performing atrocities.
I don't think you'd take it too kindly if people were to overly simplify your countries history.You know nothing about Ireland or how the country operates. You have an overly simplified view of events that you back up with unverified information off sites like Facebook. There's plenty of verified scientific test that prove fluoride is harmless to the majority of the population. It may be one of the many causes of cancer in people but there are few instances(if any) of this been proven.
If you're going to start a thread with



have the facts to back it up. I've travelled around Europe and at least in the majority of Ireland you can drink the tap water with out fear of getting badly sick, you can't state that for some of our EU counter parts.

Ive lived many places in europe too and i have got my facts right Where abouts in europe have you been that youve been badly sick from the water supply? your making alot of presumptions about me and where im from, and your angle is just that you dont like me, If i had of said that it was perfectly fine youd say the opposite! If you dont care what i say or dont agree you dont have to answer me! your just coming here to ridicule me or whateve i say becuase of your dislike for me!

spankmemunkey

wellboytoo wrote: »

As someone who never a had a "town supply" I am not getting into the whole Flouride thing, but would suggest there is a bigger problem with farm effluent and fecal matter in our water than flouride will ever be.
Note the N2 levels in the WCC examples shown by a previous poster and how they peak at certain times of the year.

Be careful about pointing things out to people youll be run out of town! You must be mad theres nothing wrong with brown water!!!!:eek:

Waterfords water supply is fine no need to have it tested trust the powers that be they'll never lie to us.:D

At the end of the day adding Fluoride to water to protect our teeth is bull! Its not practised in any other european country bar 10 percent in england, but good old Ireland keep throwing it in their ah feck them!
Just like they left Tartazine in food for humans and it was banned animal feed in 1979 30 odd years till they reacted, still its only taken them 50 odd years to take the fluoride out when they do!

spankmemunkey

jh79 wrote: »

There is absolutely no detail in that article. Toxicity depends on concentration. All compounds have adverse effects at certain concentrations, Vitamins for example are carcinogens so why not ban supplement too?

The anti-fluoride side are always very vague on actual scientific facts and just say it is toxic, it comes from toxic waste etc. It is a simple question at what concentration is it toxic?

Ask yourself, why won't the anti-fluoride side answer this question? Why are their arguments so vague? Could it be that the concentration in our water supply is actually relatively safe?

Thats one of several articles, I didnt say that this had all the answeres i was merely highlightin this campaign! Theres other links i have posted but theres many many more that i havent posted cos this thread isnt just about Fluoride its about water quality in waterford and having it tested.

kayaksurfbum

If i were you OP. Id go get my water tested, then when you know what levels of "nasties" are in it, and you know what levels of said "nasties" are proven to be dangerous to us, come back on here and ask us if we care.

spankmemunkey

kayaksurfbum wrote: »

If i were you OP. Id go get my water tested, then when you know what levels of "nasties" are in it, and you know what levels of said "nasties" are proven to be dangerous to us, come back on here and ask us if we care.

Why should i tell yous? youve obviously made it clear you dont care about what your drinking, My initial query was to where i could get my water tested because there are nasties in the water, even the the other local poster will tell you that theres all sorts of farm waste in the water a few posts back!

spankmemunkey

wellboytoo wrote: »

As someone who never a had a "town supply" I am not getting into the whole Flouride thing, but would suggest there is a bigger problem with farm effluent and fecal matter in our water than flouride will ever be.
Note the N2 levels in the WCC examples shown by a previous poster and how they peak at certain times of the year.

Just read this above!

wellboytoo

spankmemunkey wrote: »

Just read this above!

Whoa right there, read what I said again, I said you should be more concerned not worried.
As I said I do not want to get involved in the flouride debate.
Mainly because all the anti flouride activists I have ever encountered were out of their gourd lunatics that I wouldnt share a county with never mind an opinion.







I really will have to learn to stop holding back.

spankmemunkey

wellboytoo wrote: »

Whoa right there, read what I said again, I said you should be more concerned not worried.
As I said I do not want to get involved in the flouride debate.
Mainly because all the anti flouride activists I have ever encountered were out of their gourd lunatics that I wouldnt share a county with never mind an opinion.







I really will have to learn to stop holding back.

You really must!

ronaneire

spankmemunkey wrote: »

I know your wont listen to me here but Fluoride is also bad for the Environment. one of the reasons it was banned was because its bad for the environement.

Sorry but I don't get into the whole debating thing regarding Fluoride. There are people in favour and others who are not.

As for you saying that Fluoride is bad for the environment, can you provide a link to the same? Or can you please explain?

stefan idiot jones

Meatwad wrote: »

See the problem is it doesn't seem like you're putting forward a debate.It comes across that you're preaching to people and can be very patronising. If its one thing you should have learned aboutIrish people ,is that we don't respond well to foreigners telling us what we should be doing and talking down to us like morons. You've expressed your contempt for Waterford and its people plenty of times so don't expect the same people to start praising you for telling us where we went wrong in the past. If you're going to throw stones make sure your own country has a clean record to begin with. It wasn't only Ireland that stood back and remained silent when the government was performing atrocities.
I don't think you'd take it too kindly if people were to overly simplify your countries history.You know nothing about Ireland or how the country operates. You have an overly simplified view of events that you back up with unverified information off sites like Facebook. There's plenty of verified scientific test that prove fluoride is harmless to the majority of the population. It may be one of the many causes of cancer in people but there are few instances(if any) of this been proven.
If you're going to start a thread with



have the facts to back it up. I've travelled around Europe and at least in the majority of Ireland you can drink the tap water with out fear of getting badly sick, you can't state that for some of our EU counter parts.

That'll learn you to call the womenfolk "orange" !!!!!!!!!!:)

spankmemunkey

ronaneire wrote: »

Sorry but I don't get into the whole debating thing regarding Fluoride. There are people in favour and others who are not.

As for you saying that Fluoride is bad for the environment, can you provide a link to the same? Or can you please explain?

Just read some of the links i previously posted, there are a few of many sources of info.

Why are Ireland the only country doing it? bar 10% in the UK why have the others banned it.

If you are introducing a product to a market you have to scientificly disprove it has any health worries, The Irish government havent disproved this and its upto them to do so, If they are adding it in such small amounts why ad it at all? Why has it been banned everywhere else?
Like cutting child benefit is on a list of priorities and they still add this crap that actually costs money to do and out of all the cuts that have been made to all the people they still do this? The vast majority of people disagree with me on this so theres not much point in me posting further on this.

By the way its advised not to bottle feed babies using tap water due to the levels of Fluoride are dangerous to the child, even if you look at toothpaste for example they dont recommend you use tooth paste on kids under 6 due to the fluoride in it, so please take head of that at least!

Oh and on the orange women, elephants never forget eh!:D comin over here takin our jobs and slaggin our women:D some people read things with an angry face on!

ronaneire

spankmemunkey wrote: »

Just read some of the links i previously posted, there are a few of many sources of info.

Why are Ireland the only country doing it? bar 10% in the UK why have the others banned it.

If you are introducing a product to a market you have to scientificly disprove it has any health worries, The Irish government havent disproved this and its upto them to do so, If they are adding it in such small amounts why ad it at all? Why has it been banned everywhere else?
Like cutting child benefit is on a list of priorities and they still add this crap that actually costs money to do and out of all the cuts that have been made to all the people they still do this? The vast majority of people disagree with me on this so theres not much point in me posting further on this.

By the way its advised not to bottle feed babies using tap water due to the levels of Fluoride are dangerous to the child, even if you look at toothpaste for example they dont recommend you use tooth paste on kids under 6 due to the fluoride in it, so please take head of that at least!

Oh and on the orange women, elephants never forget eh!:D comin over here takin our jobs and slaggin our women:D some people read things with an angry face on!

Sorry I am not going to trawl back through the thread to find a link, have you a link that officially states that Fluoride is bad for the "environment"?

Also who has advised that babies shouldn't be fed bottles made from tap water?

As for the toothpaste, they advise "Children of 6 years and under: use a pea sized amount for supervised brushing to minimise swallowing"

Where ever you maybe getting you're information from, may not be correct.

spankmemunkey

ronaneire wrote: »

Sorry I am not going to trawl back through the thread to find a link, have you a link that officially states that Fluoride is bad for the "environment"?

Also who has advised that babies shouldn't be fed bottles made from tap water?

As for the toothpaste, they advise "Children of 6 years and under: use a pea sized amount for supervised brushing to minimise swallowing"

Where ever you maybe getting you're information from, may not be correct.

The latest issue of Hotpress covers it pretty much but theres also a facebook page and more links, If your perfectly happy to continue drinking fluoride and bottle feeding with tap water then go ahead im not going to come on here to take abuse by every poster who feels like having a pop ive posted up all im going to post up on this topic, after i debate it out with you there'll be another poster who demands to see the links the posts the pages. ill throw these few out.

I also forgot to say that EPA has also reported that Fluoride has a damaging effect on the environment

Actually the first link is good it shows there was an Eu ruling that says any company making food product using Fluoridated water cannot export or sell that product anywhere else in europe,


http://www.oneworldchronicle.com/?p=5402



http://www.mayonews.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15648:council-warned-of-fluoridation-risks-in-water&catid=23:news&Itemid=46

http://www.fluoridealert.org/news/letter-by-declan-waugh-fluoride-in-water-supply-is-exposing-our-citizens-to-unnecessary-hazards/

http://www.fluoridesandhealth.ie/documents/Appraisal_of_Waugh_report_May_2012.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhA2abeOm7o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahPAgeQc1tk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhA2abeOm7o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rUxenL3fs4

http://ffwireland.blogspot.ie/2013/01/evidence-based-medical-science-used-to.html

The Studies and findings by Declan Waugh speak for themselve, when we compare NORTHERN IRELAND no Fluoride added to their water compared to SOUTHERN IRELAND
Higher instance of Cancer than the NORTH
40% Higher bone Cancer rate in the South
2x the Osteoporossis rate and on and on and on

jackfrostwins

Hmmm, who to believe? The rest of Europe or our daws. Tough one.

spankmemunkey

jackfrostwins wrote: »

Hmmm, who to believe? The rest of Europe or our daws. Tough one.

No trust the Irish Government they do whats best for us all the time and always have! Its all there in the scientific papers,

Untested untried unproven to be safe! the onus is on the people putting it in a paper to prove its safe and they havent done the relevant health and safety tests to prove so, and somebody said i was preaching, that all depends on how you perceive what im writing.

wellboytoo

spankmemunkey wrote: »

No trust the Irish Government they do whats best for us all the time and always have! Its all there in the scientific papers,

Untested untried unproven to be safe! the onus is on the people putting it in a paper to prove its safe and they havent done the relevant health and safety tests to prove so, and somebody said i was preaching, that all depends on how you perceive what im writing.

I think your floggin a dead burger at this stage...

Not The Real Scarecrow

spankmemunkey wrote: »

No trust the Irish Government they do whats best for us all the time and always have! Its all there in the scientific papers,

Untested untried unproven to be safe! the onus is on the people putting it in a paper to prove its safe and they havent done the relevant health and safety tests to prove so, and somebody said i was preaching, that all depends on how you perceive what im writing.

I partially agree with the message its the way its delivered I have a problem with. And don't get me wrong ,I actually do (sometimes) enjoy your posts and think ,at least you encourage a discussion or arguement, I only have a problem when you come across as being preachy or start making assumptions about people or the country based on your very limited knowledge of the place. You come across as an unknowing troll and alot of the decent points you could make are lost in how yo make the point.Your well entitled to your opinions but you have a habit of putting your opinions across as facts and getting overly defensive when you're questioned or challenged by them. All I was trying to say to you(badly) before hand, was use a bit of tact and if you want to talk about fluoridation in the water, try to do so with out insulting or talking down to people you want to have a discussion with.Pulling the Catholic Church scandal into a thread about water is only going to get peoples backs up and has nothing to do with what you're trying to get across. You get more flies with honey than vinegar.
And don't think I don't like you just cause I attacked a post you made.I'm not that petty....most of the time.

spankmemunkey

Meatwad wrote: »

I partially agree with the message its the way its delivered I have a problem with. And don't get me wrong ,I actually do (sometimes) enjoy your posts and think ,at least you encourage a discussion or arguement, I only have a problem when you come across as being preachy or start making assumptions about people or the country based on your very limited knowledge of the place. You come across as an unknowing troll and alot of the decent points you could make are lost in how yo make the point.Your well entitled to your opinions but you have a habit of putting your opinions across as facts and getting overly defensive when you're questioned or challenged by them. All I was trying to say to you(badly) before hand, was use a bit of tact and if you want to talk about fluoridation in the water, try to do so with out insulting or talking down to people you want to have a discussion with.Pulling the Catholic Church scandal into a thread about water is only going to get peoples backs up and has nothing to do with what you're trying to get across. You get more flies with honey than vinegar.
And don't think I don't like you just cause I attacked a post you made.I'm not that petty....most of the time.

Yes it is something i feel strongly about, something being done against our will and i have kids which makes me all the more angry about the situation, Im sorry if ive come accross all preachy but my main aim was to warn people of the dangers so if i was angry it was because i felt like im trying to warn people of it and my hand is being bitten, it has been proven scientificly that its bad so there you go. I do also think that sometimes people can put their own voice over someones writing and read it either as aggressive or passively as they feel, This is bad for us truly it is and i hope people realise that the government dont always tell the truth and there is a history of pass the buck in Ireland, it cant be denied, thank you for your arguement!

If we sometimes back down in an arguement it can bee seen as back tracking so i was trying to avoid that, Alot of the arguement coming back at me was me being ridiculed anyway,

I hope people read the reports and get behind it and dont allow my pig headedness to cloud your judgement on this topic thanks

jh79

spankmemunkey wrote: »

Yes it is something i feel strongly about, something being done against our will and i have kids which makes me all the more angry about the situation, Im sorry if ive come accross all preachy but my main aim was to warn people of the dangers so if i was angry it was because i felt like im trying to warn people of it and my hand is being bitten, it has been proven scientificly that its bad so there you go. I do also think that sometimes people can put their own voice over someones writing and read it either as aggressive or passively as they feel, This is bad for us truly it is and i hope people realise that the government dont always tell the truth and there is a history of pass the buck in Ireland, it cant be denied, thank you for your arguement!

If we sometimes back down in an arguement it can bee seen as back tracking so i was trying to avoid that, Alot of the arguement coming back at me was me being ridiculed anyway,

I hope people read the reports and get behind it and dont allow my pig headedness to cloud your judgement on this topic thanks

But it has not and that is why the anti-fluoridation movement are not taken seriously, they do not have the science to back up there claims. The majority of the scientific community have no issue with water fluoridation. The science isn't there to back them up, that's why we get only get vague statements and obvious questions on what constitutes a toxic concentration are ignored. Since when has Hot Press being a leading scientific publication and when did Paddy Casey change careers?

spankmemunkey

jh79 wrote: »

But it has not and that is why the anti-fluoridation movement are not taken seriously, they do not have the science to back up there claims. The majority of the scientific community have no issue with water fluoridation. The science isn't there to back them up, that's why we get only get vague statements and obvious questions on what constitutes a toxic concentration are ignored. Since when has Hot Press being a leading scientific publication and when did Paddy Casey change careers?

Hot Press isnt writing it, its independant scientist Declan Waughs findings that have been taken and used in HotPress.

Its been banned europe there is also a EPA report on the damaging effects of the water supply on the evironment and eco system.

Do you think that the governments priority in a recession is to add fluoride to peoples water? its not neccisary any more we have tooth paste these days its not needed the same way it was 50 years ago!

Theres lots of scientific evidence and papers to back this up.


And anyway where is your scientific evidence to say that it doesnt harm people or the eco system??

Your asking me to prove it and show the scientific sources of my concerns and i have ive named the lead scientist in it and posted up some links, wheres your evidence to clearly show me its not harmful?
There has never been a health and safety report on this to prove that its safe for human consumption or the environment

jh79

Hot Press isnt writing it, its independant scientist Declan Waughs findings that have been taken and used in HotPress.

What makes him independent he must work for somebody?

Its been banned europe there is also a EPA report on the damaging effects of the water supply on the evironment and eco system.

Not entirely true, some countries supply extra fluoride through table salt, others have removed it because they deemed it unnecessary.

Do you think that the governments priority in a recession is to add fluoride to peoples water? its not neccisary any more we have tooth paste these days its not needed the same way it was 50 years ago!

Doesn't mean you can't be critical of the so called evidence claiming it is an health risk

Theres lots of scientific evidence and papers to back this up.

Again most are show toxic effects at high concentrations irrelevant to the Irish situation.


And anyway where is your scientific evidence to say that it doesnt harm people or the eco system??

Again it is all about concentration, fluoride is toxic just not at the level it is in Irish water.

Your asking me to prove it and show the scientific sources of my concerns and i have ive named the lead scientist in it and posted up some links, wheres your evidence to clearly show me its not harmful?
There has never been a health and safety report on this to prove that its safe for human consumption or the environment

The US EPA recommend a concentration below 2mg/L, which they say in itself is not toxic. Waterford has a conc 8 times less than that.

spankmemunkey

jh79 wrote: »

Hot Press isnt writing it, its independant scientist Declan Waughs findings that have been taken and used in HotPress.

What makes him independent he must work for somebody?

Its been banned europe there is also a EPA report on the damaging effects of the water supply on the evironment and eco system.

Not entirely true, some countries supply extra fluoride through table salt, others have removed it because they deemed it unnecessary.

Do you think that the governments priority in a recession is to add fluoride to peoples water? its not neccisary any more we have tooth paste these days its not needed the same way it was 50 years ago!

Doesn't mean you can't be critical of the so called evidence claiming it is an health risk

Theres lots of scientific evidence and papers to back this up.

Again most are show toxic effects at high concentrations irrelevant to the Irish situation.


And anyway where is your scientific evidence to say that it doesnt harm people or the eco system??

Again it is all about concentration, fluoride is toxic just not at the level it is in Irish water.

Your asking me to prove it and show the scientific sources of my concerns and i have ive named the lead scientist in it and posted up some links, wheres your evidence to clearly show me its not harmful?
There has never been a health and safety report on this to prove that its safe for human consumption or the environment

The US EPA recommend a concentration below 2mg/L, which they say in itself is not toxic. Waterford has a conc 8 times less than that.

Where are you getting your sources from? The US yeah its a small little country that, I have found US reports on banning Fluoride.

Where are you getting your info from your not backing it up at all with any facts your just writing it, your not showing your source!

Why are they adding it? why? for our teeth? dont you have a tooth brush and toothpaste at home that already contains Fluoride??????

jh79

Your stance is against accepted opinion so the onus is on you to convince why the accepted opinion should change?

What should happen in areas in which there is a natural high concentration of fluoride?

Waterford has a fluoride conc of 0.753mg/l, have you a paper that show this to be a toxic concentration?

Why do you think they add it to our water supply?

changeling

Flouride may be at low levels in our water supply but the concern lies in the fact that it builds up in our soft tissue and bones to a toxic level. Some people can tolerate it more than others, but these (eventual) levels of toxicity lead to all sorts of health issues for individuals.

The hydroflourisillic acid (flouride) added to our water supply is a by product of the fertiliser manufacturing industry , it is basically convenient for our water authorities to add it to our water, really doesnt cost them as much as it would to clean up the environment if these places were to dispose of it themselves.

The point is , if I and others do not want it in our water supply, it is not up to us to prove why we dont want to ingest this poison.
The reverse osmosis filters DO NOT remove good minerals from the water, but why should I have to fork out 300 -400 euro to remove something that is absolutely no benefit and is proven by endless peer reviewed scientific studies to harm people over long periods of ingestion?
http://worldtruth.tv/the-poison-in-your-water-is-fluoride/

http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/fluoride.htm

jh79

changeling wrote: »

Flouride may be at low levels in our water supply but the concern lies in the fact that it builds up in our soft tissue and bones to a toxic level. Some people can tolerate it more than others, but these (eventual) levels of toxicity lead to all sorts of health issues for individuals.

The hydroflourisillic acid (flouride) added to our water supply is a by product of the fertiliser manufacturing industry , it is basically convenient for our water authorities to add it to our water, really doesnt cost them as much as it would to clean up the environment if these places were to dispose of it themselves.

The point is , if I and others do not want it in our water supply, it is not up to us to prove why we dont want to ingest this poison.
The reverse osmosis filters DO NOT remove good minerals from the water, but why should I have to fork out 300 -400 euro to remove something that is absolutely no benefit and is proven by endless peer reviewed scientific studies to harm people over long periods of ingestion?
http://worldtruth.tv/the-poison-in-your-water-is-fluoride/

http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/fluoride.htm [/QUOTE]


These findings have been debunked before, and the topic considered a conspiracy theory by most. Whether it is necessary is debateable, but it is not considered a health risk by mainstream scientists. Ask yourself why this pops up on websites such as "worldtruth" or "fluoride alert".

How do you propose to remove the fluoride naturally occurring in the water supply given that if what you propose is correct it would have the same negative effects and toxicity? If you do not recognise that concentration is important, then you are going to suffer the toxic effects anyways from the fluoride already present.