Ireland has the sickest population in Europe

Daithi 1

Another article in an Irish paper today regarding fluoridation of our good water...

Gladys Ryan Born: October 24th, 1921 Died: February 23rd, 2013 Gladys Ryan, who died last Saturday aged 91, was a household name in Ireland in the early 1960s when she took a High Court action against the State to prevent the addition of fluoride to the national water supply.

The case lasted 65 days and then went on appeal to the Supreme Court. She lost her action and fluoride remains in the public water.

The case is well-known to all law students as a key study in textbooks to this day. The Supreme Court, while rejecting Ryan’s appeal, defined certain constitutional rights in relation to bodily integrity which featured in later cases such as the Mary McGee contraception action.

Described as an environmentalist before the term was known, Gladys McConaghie was born in Dublin in 1921 and grew up on Leeson Street. Her father was from a farming background in Co Derry. Her education was interrupted by serious illness in her teens.

While studying to be a singer she worked in Switzer’s department store on Grafton Street. She met John Ryan, who was from Cobh, Co Cork, in the Dublin musical society in which they were both active. They married in 1948 and had five children. They lived in Terenure and later on Grace Park Road, Drumcondra. Although qualified as a barrister, John Ryan worked most of his life as company secretary to ACC Bank and, while fully supportive, was not a party to the action in the fluoride case.

Gladys Ryan did not work after her marriage and her decision to challenge the government was seen as incredible at a time when the State was considered all powerful.

The couple became involved in the nascent ecology movement and John Ryan co-founded the Irish branch of the British Soil Association. In 1960, the Fianna Fáil minister for health, Seán MacEntee, brought forward the Fluoridation of Water Supplies Act and, as the newspapers headlined at the time, a housewife challenged the validity of the Act as an “invasion of family rights”.

Ryan argued it was unconstitutional to interfere with the public water supply since people had no option but to drink it. Those who wanted fluoride could get it elsewhere in such products as toothpaste, she argued.

The government, by whom it was seen as a modernising move which would immensely improve the then poor state of children’s teeth, fought the case robustly. They were supported by the dental profession.

The attorney general, Andreas O’Keeffe, maintained the case was not about the merits or demerits of fluoridation but was about the right of the Oireachtas to enact legislation.

Ryan, who was represented in court by Seán MacBride SC, argued that fluoridation was an infringement of human rights because it removed choice. She presented numerous international experts who maintained it caused more damage than it was designed to cure.

The action was backed by a loose federation of people with environmental and health concerns and was funded on a shoestring. Ryan’s lawyers worked on a pro bono basis and witnesses’ expenses were paid by fundraising. When the case ended in 1965, after the Supreme Court upheld the High Court decision in the case, the legal costs were calculated at £230,000, an enormous sum when £2,500 would buy a good house. The State never sought costs.

There was huge disappointment at the result and a disillusionment with politics remained with the Ryans for the rest of their lives.

They retired into private life and ceased campaigning, despite strong views . Their family said the couple put themselves through an awful lot for what they believed in and their defeat had a negative impact on their lives. Former Fine Gael minister Richie Ryan (no relation), who acted as Ryan’s solicitor, said this week she was a very brave woman who raised a splendid family. “They were private people who took no pleasure in taking the case but believed it was important and they had an obligation to pursue it in the public interest.”

Gladys Ryan is survived by her children, Catherine, Michael, John, Louis and Mark, by eight grandchildren and one great grandchild. Her husband died in 1990.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/obituaries/2013/0302/1224330695524.html

Daithi 1

Daithi 1 wrote: »

....Gladys Ryan....

Summary:

Woman lives in several areas of Dublin City, ingests a load of fluoridated water and dies at the age of 91.

Problem?

ManMade

JJayoo wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean.

Why not add fluoride to water? No major health organisation is concerned at our levels of less than 0.0008g(0.6-0.8ppm legal limit) of fluoride per 1000g of water. Or less than 0.00008% of the water.

My name is URL

ManMade wrote: »

Why not add fluoride to water?

Why not add low doses of lithium to water?

Daithi 1

Deleted User wrote: »

Summary:

Woman lives in several areas of Dublin City, ingests a load of fluoridated water and dies at the age of 91.

Problem?

Since she was so strongly against fluoridation, she probably never drank it.

It's probably worth noting that the case was won on the technicality that the woman lived in an area where there was a well and fresh unfluoridated water could be pumped from the ground, so she wasn't being forcefully medicated. She had the option, unlike most of us today.

ManMade

My name is URL wrote: »

Why not add low doses of lithium to water?

No health benefits I guess. Now tell me why not add fluoride?

JJayoo

ManMade wrote: »

Why not add fluoride to water? No major health organisation is concerned at our levels of less than 0.0008g(0.6-0.8ppm legal limit) of fluoride per 1000g of water. Or less than 0.00008% of the water.

Fluoride accumulates in the Pineal Gland.

"By old age, the average pineal gland contains about the same amount of fluoride as teeth (300 mg F/kg) since dentine and whole enamel contain 300 and 100 mg F/kg, respectively [Newbrun, 1986]". Luke 2001

It is important to note that

"Fluoride does not accumulate in brain. Of all tissues, brain has the lowest fluoride concentration [Jenkins, 1991; Whitford, 1996; Ekstrand, 1996]. It is generally agreed that the blood-brain barrier restricts the passage of fluoride into the central nervous system" Luke 2001

So the brain has a mechanism (the Blood-brain barrier) to stop certain chemicals getting in. But the problem is that.

"the human pineal gland is outside the blood-brain barrier [Arendt, 1995]. It is one of a few unique regions in the brain (all midline structures bordering the third and fourth ventricles) where the blood-brain barrier is weak. Cells in these regions require direct and unimpeded contact with blood [Rapoport, 1976]. Therefore, pinealocytes have free access to fluoride in the bloodstream" Luke 2001

JJayoo

In conclusion, the human pineal gland contains the highest concentration of fluoride in the body. Fluoride is associated with depressed pineal melatonin synthesis by prepubertal gerbils and an accelerated onset of sexual maturation in the female gerbil. The results strengthen the hypothesis that the pineal has a role in the timing of the onset of puberty. Whether or not fluoride interferes with pineal function in humans requires further investigation.

Luke 1997

The part in Bold is my concern. To the best of my knowledge further investigation of this has never occurred.

http://meridianenergies.net/the-effect-of-fluoride-on-the-physiology-of-the-pineal-gland/

My name is URL

ManMade wrote: »

No health benefits I guess. Now tell me why not add fluoride?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1699579

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfqlojsnmhcw/rss2/

http://www.imt.ie/opinion/guests/2009/05/lithium-for-water-supply.html

Adding lithium to water supplies would be of benefit to some people.. just like how adding fluoride is of benefit to some people.

What benefit is it to people who already take proper care of their teeth, and have sufficiently high intakes of the mineral from other sources.. toothpaste, mouthwash, foods? Should they not be allowed to decide whether they want medicated water pumped into their home? They're already paying for the infrastructure and will soon be paying for the water itself.

Here's a list of foods etc containing fluoride, and the typical amounts of it within each product - http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/fluoride.pdf

gurramok

I think we're most likely to be the most sick as we don't go to the doctor as much as our fellow Europeans because it cost too much!! 60 quid a pop, eh that stops people seeing the doc, fluoride teeth or not!

KAGY

Daithi 1 wrote: »

• The fluoridating agent used in Ireland is hydrofluorosilicic acid (chk), a component of toxic waste industrial chemicals.

What about dihydrousoxide a byproduct of burning fossil fuels that can be fatal if inhaled in large enough quantities

Daithi 1

KAGY wrote: »

What about dihydrousoxide a byproduct of burning fossil fuels that can be fatal if inhaled in large enough quantities

What about it ?

Daithi 1

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Since she was so strongly against fluoridation, she probably never drank it.

Where's your evidence for this?

I know you think evidence isn't a necessary component of science - otherwise you'd never have started this thread - but in fact it is.

She was at the end of a fluoridated water supply chain, and she died at the age of 91.

My grandmother is still going at the age of 89, and she drinks tap water that is fluoridated. Problem?

Daithi 1

The Irish Sun have picked up the story today.. The tide is turning..

ALMOST half a century after fluoride was first added to our water supply, one alarming concern is being increasingly voiced: Is it poisoning us?
Our Government insists the practice is a safe, effective way of guarding the population against dental decay.
But Ireland is now the only EU nation with a mandatory policy of adding fluoride to our water.
And countless countries have either halted or banned fluoridation in the face of growing scientific evidence that it does more harm than good.
Environmental scientist Declan Waugh goes as far as to label the Irish policy, put in place in 1964, “a silent catastrophe”.
It is a belief born out of painful personal experience.
He explained: “Three years ago I was diagnosed with chronic tendonitis in both shoulders, caused by calcification of ligaments.
“I was asked to go in for surgery but I didn’t go because I wouldn’t have been able to hold our child. During the course of my research I found out that a clinical sign of fluoride is calcification of ligaments.
“I stopped drinking tap water and using fluoridated toothpaste and reduced my tea consumption.
“I’d had chronic symptoms for almost six years and they totally disappeared within one month.”
Last year, Declan compiled a report based on 1,217 fluoridation studies from 250 of the world’s top medical and scientific journals — and the results were shocking.
The National Academy of Sciences in America, for instance, found links with thyroid disorders, diabetes, cancer, neurological illnesses, gastro-intestinal diseases, skeletal and muscular-skeletal pain and low IQ.
And known side-effects of the additive would appear to explain Ireland’s worryingly high rates of neurological and cardiovascular illness, diabetes and bone disorders, and even Alzheimers and autism.
Declan also compared incidences of 26 diseases in the Republic with the non-fluoridated North and found that, in each case, they were far higher here. He said: “There is no doubt in my mind that the levels of sickness in Ireland are related to our water fluoridation.
“Some of the brightest, most scientifically competent individuals have come out and said the practice is unsafe.
“Over 3,500 medical doctors and professors from around the world have signed a petition to get this practice stopped in the few countries where it continues.”
Despite the growing body of evidence, though, there are no plans to ban fluoridation in Ireland.
In its most recent position statement, the Irish Expert Body on Fluoride and Health insisted that the practice is safe.
However, campaigners here insist that the Government has to accept that it is medicating the population with a substance that has never been tested for safety. Declan pointed out: “It comes down to the precautionary principle.
“If a risk cannot be proven to not exist, then you should not continue with a policy.
“At this stage it’s not even a risk.
“We know for definite, based on the health statistics in Ireland, that fluoridation has a negative impact on health.”
Case study
AISLING Fitzgibbon credits her fluoride-free diet for curing the severe depression that dogged her for four years.
The 26-year-old, who is planning legal action against the State for violation of bodily integrity, revealed: “In 2010 I’d never heard of anything to do with fluoride.
“I was very sick with depression and the anti-depressants I was being treated with weren’t working.
“I went to a nutritional therapist in the UK who pointed out that our water is fluoridated and that this can have a detrimental effect on the thyroid gland — depression can manifest from thyroid dysfunction.
“We got a reverse osmosis filter fitted at home, which clears the fluoride from drinking water.
“I came off all medication and quit using fluoride toothpaste and within seven months I felt great.”
Delighted with her new quality of life, Aisling set up the Girl Against Fluoride campaign and has roped in the likes of Independent TD Luke ‘Ming’ Flanagan to urge a Government rethink on mandatory fluoridation. She revealed: “So far, about 11 local councils have voted to remove fluoride from the water system but they can’t actually do anything about it because it’s written into law. It’s crazy this is still the case.
“Ireland and Singapore are the only two countries in the world with a policy of mandatory fluoridation.
“I know that when it was introduced in 1963 it was seen as best practice, but the effects of fluoride over time have now become obvious.”
The Tralee, Co Kerry woman is determined to raise awareness of the issue, admitting: “So many people are still unaware of what’s in the water. They don’t know what fluoride is and what it can potentially do.
“I know it’s uncomfortable to think that our Government allows a potentially harmful practice — but that is the case.
“The rest of Europe has come to the conclusion that water should not be fluoridated, so why is it taking our Government so long?”


Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/feeds/smartphone/ireland/4821915/Does-medication-in-our-mains-do-more-harm-than-good.html#ixzz2MUBYRAba

My name is URL

Deleted User wrote: »

My grandmother is still going at the age of 89, and she drinks tap water that is fluoridated. Problem?

Does she still have her own teeth? :pac:

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

Does she still have her own teeth? :pac:

Mostly. She lost a few in the days before they started fluoridating the local water supplies, but she hasn't lost any since.

I also have an aunt who lives in Dublin and drinks tap water. She's 92.

The evidence in favour of fluoridation has tripled since the thread started.

Problem?

My name is URL

Deleted User wrote: »

Mostly. She lost a few in the days before they started fluoridating the local water supplies, but she hasn't lost any since.

I also have an aunt who lives in Dublin and drinks tap water. She's 92.

The evidence in favour of fluoridation has tripled since the thread started.

Problem?

Good for her.. she's in an incredibly small minority for someone her age

What about those who have lost their teeth already.. why should they be expected to ingest medicated water all their lives? Or those that actually bother with personal hygiene and dental care.. you know; responsible people.. why should they need to ingest medicated water all their lives just because a few disgusting deadbeats refuse to brush their teeth and fork out on visits to the dentist?

I guess you'll also claim that most people you know who drink fluoridated water have no fillings etc. I'll call bull**** on that one preemptively

You want fluoridated water pumped into your home.. then fine. It doesn't mean it should be pumped into everyone elses just because you can't look after your own oral hygiene.

Capt'n Midnight

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Oh that's grand then, once it's only the Chinese. Nothing for me to be concerned about then. :rolleyes:

Only the Chinese that have drinking water with many times our maximum limits.

(and Indians and other people who live in areas with very high natural fluoride levels that are far in excess of anything that has been added to water)

JJayoo

Only the Chinese that have drinking water with many times our maximum limits.

(and Indians and other people who live in areas with very high natural fluoride levels that are far in excess of anything that has been added to water)

Once again.

JJayoo wrote: »

Fluoride accumulates in the Pineal Gland.

"By old age, the average pineal gland contains about the same amount of fluoride as teeth (300 mg F/kg) since dentine and whole enamel contain 300 and 100 mg F/kg, respectively [Newbrun, 1986]". Luke 2001

It is important to note that

"Fluoride does not accumulate in brain. Of all tissues, brain has the lowest fluoride concentration [Jenkins, 1991; Whitford, 1996; Ekstrand, 1996]. It is generally agreed that the blood-brain barrier restricts the passage of fluoride into the central nervous system" Luke 2001

So the brain has a mechanism (the Blood-brain barrier) to stop certain chemicals getting in. But the problem is that.

"the human pineal gland is outside the blood-brain barrier [Arendt, 1995]. It is one of a few unique regions in the brain (all midline structures bordering the third and fourth ventricles) where the blood-brain barrier is weak. Cells in these regions require direct and unimpeded contact with blood [Rapoport, 1976]. Therefore, pinealocytes have free access to fluoride in the bloodstream" Luke 2001

Aquarius34

gurramok wrote: »

I think we're most likely to be the most sick as we don't go to the doctor as much as our fellow Europeans because it cost too much!! 60 quid a pop, eh that stops people seeing the doc, fluoride teeth or not!

No.

Aquarius34

Deleted User wrote: »

The evidence in favour of fluoridation has tripled since the thread started.

Problem?

No it hasn't.

Aquarius34

Aquarius34 wrote: »

No it hasn't.

Oh Hai Aquarius34.

Yes it has - Daithi's old lady friend was the first, but since then we've had my gran and my aunt. That's now three where there was one - hence, tripled.

People drinking tap water that has been fluoridated by the Council, and then getting old. Problem?

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

Good for her.. she's in an incredibly small minority for someone her age

What about those who have lost their teeth already.. why should they be expected to ingest medicated water all their lives? Or those that actually bother with personal hygiene and dental care.. you know; responsible people.. why should they need to ingest medicated water all their lives just because a few disgusting deadbeats refuse to brush their teeth and fork out on visits to the dentist?

I guess you'll also claim that most people you know who drink fluoridated water have no fillings etc. I'll call bull**** on that one preemptively

You want fluoridated water pumped into your home.. then fine. It doesn't mean it should be pumped into everyone elses just because you can't look after your own oral hygiene.

I'm claiming nothing other than that some people I know - and one cited by the OP - have lived to a ripe old age while drinking fluoridated tap water. If you want to make a pile of assumptions about me or my views, that's entirely a matter for yourself.

Did you know that fags cause gum disease, and that more teeth are lost because of gum disease than by dental caries?

You'd do better to give up yer oul' cigs than to moan about the water supply. Just saying.

Aquarius34

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh Hai Aquarius34.

Yes it has - Daithi's old lady friend was the first, but since then we've had my gran and my aunt. That's now three where there was one - hence, tripled.

People drinking tap water that has been fluoridated by the Council, and then getting old. Problem?

We are growing old, dumb, docile, brain damaged and sick.

Daithi 1

Here is Declan Waugh's report on Public Health Investigation of Epidemiological data on Disease and Mortality in Ireland related to Water Fluoridation and Fluoride Exposure. Available to read and download for those interested.


http://www.enviro.ie/Public%20Health%20Investigation%20of%20Epidemiological%20data%20on%20Disease%20and%20Mortality%20in%20Ireland%20related%20to%20Water%20Fluoridation_Waugh%20D_Febuary%202013%20Master.pdf

Aquarius34

Fluoride is more poisonous than lead, and yet we dump fluoride in our drinking water. Isn't that a bright idea?

It's not even a debate, it's quite frankly stupid and evil to support fluoridation. The people who support fluoride are people who are doped on fluoride and elitists and there is certainly a lot of them on this website.

studiorat

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Fluoride is more poisonous than lead, and yet we dump fluoride in our drinking water. Isn't that a bright idea?

Jesus wept...

Aquarius34

studiorat wrote: »

Jesus wept...

You will too when fluoride is taken out of our drinking water

Jimoslimos

books4sale wrote: »

Whatever the effects, why would we take the chance. Just take it out, it's not natural and not neccessary. This is the 21st Century not the 1940's, we have modern dental care in Ireland now.

Define 'natural' please. Is modern dental care 'natural'? Is any water treatment necessary?

Sure we all have kettles at home and could be boiling our water or adding chlorine tablets ourselves. It's an outrage the government are doing it for us (at an overall lower economic cost).

JJayoo wrote: »

Fluoride accumulates in the Pineal Gland.

I'm not how this relates in any way to fluoridation of water supplies (which in many cases is much lower than seen naturally elsewhere).

Fat accumulates in the arteries, are you going to campaign against that.

My name is URL wrote: »

What benefit is it to people who already take proper care of their teeth, and have sufficiently high intakes of the mineral from other sources.. toothpaste, mouthwash, foods?

Probably little to none, but the strategy of public health policies is to reach the widest possible audience. Schools are often targeted in this way in many areas, head-lice checks, eyesight, hearing tests, etc, regardless of whether these are needed or not for every single pupil.

Would you object to young girls receiving the cervical cancer vaccine?

So long as an above average dose is shown to be non-detrimental then I don't see the problem.

Aquarius34

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Define 'natural' please. Is modern dental care 'natural'? Is any water treatment necessary?

Sure we all have kettles at home and could be boiling our water or adding chlorine tablets ourselves. It's an outrage the government are doing it for us (at an overall lower economic cost).

Well there are natural ways to clean our water and at least make it more environmentally friendly to do so.

Fluoride is something that certainly does not need to be added. Your arguments are inherently flawed. If the government were concerned on money, they wouldn't be putting fluoride in it.

But it's an elitist program to do so.

I'm not how this relates in any way to fluoridation of water supplies (which in many cases is much lower than seen naturally elsewhere).

I'm pulling you up on your lies again, which proves furthermore you are elitist to the highest degree here.

Natural fluoride is not the same as sodium fluoride. The fact that you would keep stating it does when you've have been shown time and time again that it's false proves your position to be fraudulent. That fact that you would type in print for everyone to see, shows just how far you are willing to go,to be so malicious on this falsity.

Fat accumulates in the arteries, are you going to campaign against that.

Fats is needed for the body, it's not posion. You cannot compare. No one is forcing fat down people's throat or dumping into our water.

So long as an above average dose is shown to be non-detrimental then I don't see the problem.

The dosage argument is over and discussed already it's not an argument that stands for fluoridation when it's in our drinking water. You have to drink it, clean with it, wash with it, eat with it. We are constantly been drugged on it. Think of how much fluoride is absorbed into your body during a shower....

AnonoBoy

I propose that scientific evidence be done away with forever and let's just take anecdotal evidence as fact from now on shall we?

AnonoBoy

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Think of how much fluoride is absorbed into your body during a shower....

Please tell me you've beaten this evil elite plot by vowing to never wash again! :pac:

Aquarius34

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Please tell me you've beaten this evil elite plot by vowing to never wash again! :pac:

This issue been discussed is not a laughing matter, if you want to laugh, go to the humour forum and poke jokes.

jh79

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Well there are natural ways to clean our water and at least make it more environmentally friendly to do so.

Fluoride is something that certainly does not need to be added. Your arguments are inherently flawed. If the government were concerned on money, they wouldn't be putting fluoride in it.

But it's an elitist program to do so.



I'm pulling you up on your lies again, which proves furthermore you are elitist to the highest degree here.

Natural fluoride is not the same as sodium fluoride. The fact that you would keep stating it does when you've have been shown time and time again that it's false proves your position to be fraudulent. That fact that you would type in print for everyone to see, shows just how far you are willing to go,to be so malicious on this falsity.



Fats is needed for the body, it's not posion. You cannot compare. No one is forcing fat down people's throat or dumping into our water.





The dosage argument is over and discussed already it's not an argument that stands for fluoridation when it's in our drinking water. You have to drink it, clean with it, wash with it, eat with it. We are constantly been drugged on it. Think of how much fluoride is absorbed into your body during a shower....

Fluoride is the same no matter the source. That is just basic chemistry. A high concentration of Calcium fluoride would have the same effect as a low concentration of Sodium fluoride due only to their differences in solubility, nothing to do with one being "natural". Explain to me how an F- anion can be natural or synthetic?

Aquarius34

jh79 wrote: »

Fluoride is the same no matter the source. That is just basic chemistry. A high concentration of Calcium fluoride would have the same effect as a low concentration of Sodium fluoride due only to their differences in solubility, nothing to do with one being "natural". Explain to me how an F- anion can be natural or synthetic?

Calcium Fluoride occurs naturally in our water, sodium fluoride does not.
Calcium flouride does not have the same effect as sodium fluoride, if it did, then why would they add sodium fluoride if it occurs already naturally. It's because they are not the same and they react differently in our bodies Calcium fluoride does accumulate in our bodies but it's not as poisonous as sodium fluoride.

jh79

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Calcium Fluoride occurs naturally in our water, sodium fluoride does not.
Calcium flouride does not have the same effect as sodium fluoride, if it did, then why would they add sodium fluoride if it occurs already naturally. It's because they are not the same and they react differently in our bodies Calcium fluoride does accumulate in our bodies but it's not as poisonous as sodium fluoride.

If the fluoride ion is the problem then it doesn't matter which it came from. They add sodium fluoride because it is more efficient , a smaller concentration is needed to get the desired mg/L fluoride. A water supply with 1ppm fluoride from Calcium fluoride is the same as a water supply with 1ppm fluoride from Sodium fluoride.

AnonoBoy

Aquarius34 wrote: »

This issue been discussed is not a laughing matter, if you want to laugh, go to the humour forum and poke jokes.

The way you're discussing the issue is a laughing matter.

Facts and science are your friend when you want them to be aren't they? If something backs you up you're all for it but when it's clearly proving you wrong suddenly "Scientists don't know everything". That's how it works with you and that's why you're so hilarious to read.

Aquarius34

jh79 wrote: »

If the fluoride ion is the problem then it doesn't matter which it came from. They add sodium fluoride because it is more efficient , a smaller concentration is needed to get the desired mg/L fluoride. A water supply with 1ppm fluoride from Calcium fluoride is the same as a water supply with 1ppm fluoride from Sodium fluoride.

No it isn't more efficient it's more poisonous. Sodium fluoride is bad for your bones, and if it's bad for your bones it's bad for your teeth, and you are forgetting one important fact.

Swallowing fluoride has no benefit whatsoever.

Cool Mo D

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Calcium Fluoride occurs naturally in our water, sodium fluoride does not.
Calcium flouride does not have the same effect as sodium fluoride, if it did, then why would they add sodium fluoride if it occurs already naturally. It's because they are not the same and they react differently in our bodies Calcium fluoride does accumulate in our bodies but it's not as poisonous as sodium fluoride.

When dissolved in water fluoride from calcium fluoride is completely 100% identical to fluoride from sodium fluoride. Fluoride occurs naturally in some water supplies but not in others - that is why they add it.

And by the way 'natural' does not mean 'healthy' and 'unnatural' does not mean healthy.

If you want to get pedantic about it, nature is a meaningless word, since humans are products of nature, anything we do, make or create is automatically natural. The line between what is considered natural and unnatural is completely arbitrary.

jh79

Aquarius34 wrote: »

No it isn't more efficient it's more poisonous. Sodium fluoride is bad for your bones, and if it's bad for your bones it's bad for your teeth, and you are forgetting one important fact.

Swallowing fluoride has no benefit whatsoever.

it is only toxic at a certain concentration. It has nothing to do with the source.
Sodium Chloride is ok at low concentrations just like Sodium Fluoride.

AnonoBoy

Aquarius34 wrote: »

No it isn't more efficient it's more poisonous. Sodium fluoride is bad for your bones, and if it's bad for your bones it's bad for your teeth, and you are forgetting one important fact.

Swallowing fluoride has no benefit whatsoever.

This just in: Posting in bold bypasses the need for scientific studies, review and evidence.

More as we get it.

Aquarius34

Cool Mo D wrote: »

When dissolved in water fluoride from calcium fluoride is completely 100% identical to fluoride from sodium fluoride. Fluoride occurs naturally in some water supplies but not in others - that is why they add it.

And by the way 'natural' does not mean 'healthy' and 'unnatural' does not mean healthy.

Sodium Fluoride is a toxic waste that needs disposing of, saving the aluminium and mining industries millions in waste disposal fees. The 'parts per million' is not a medical dose, it is a guide to industrial polluters.

Calcium fluoride occurs naturally in our water and is by far less toxic.

If you want to get pedantic about it, nature is a meaningless word, since humans are products of nature, anything we do, make or create is automatically natural. The line between what is considered natural and
unnatural is completely arbitrary.

Wtf are you on about?

Aquarius34

jh79 wrote: »

it is only toxic at a certain concentration. It has nothing to do with the source.
Sodium Chloride is ok at low concentrations just like Sodium Fluoride.

No it is quite simply Toxic.

The elite want to not overtly kill us but to slowly docify and poison us so that we are easily controlled and it goes generally unnoticed. It's not going unnoticed anymore however.

Sodium fluoride is more poisonous than lead, and is used in insecticides, rat poison etc.

jh79

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Sodium Fluoride is a toxic waste that needs disposing of, saving the aluminium and mining industries millions in waste disposal fees. The 'parts per million' is not a medical dose, it is a guide to industrial polluters.

Calcium fluoride occurs naturally in our water and is by far less toxic.




Wtf are you on about?

So it is not fluoride in itself that's the problem but "sodium fluoride"?
PPM is a unit of concentration.

There is no such thing as natural and synthetic because everything on this planet and possibly the universe is made up of the elements as listed in the periodic table.

Aquarius34

AnonoBoy wrote: »

This just in: Posting in bold bypasses the need for scientific studies, review and evidence.

More as we get it.

Repeating lies doesn't make it true!

Aquarius34

jh79 wrote: »

So it is not fluoride in itself that's the problem but "sodium fluoride"?
PPM is a unit of concentration.

There is no such thing as natural and synthetic because everything on this planet and possibly the universe is made up of the elements as listed in the periodic table.

Stop trying to negate from the actual point and problem.

jh79

Aquarius34 wrote: »

No it is quite simply Toxic.

The elite want to not overtly kill us but to slowly docify and poison us so that we are easily controlled and it goes generally unnoticed. It's not going unnoticed anymore however.

Sodium fluoride is more poisonous than lead, and is used in insecticides, rat poison etc.

NaF is also a treatment for oesteoprosis

AnonoBoy

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Repeating lies doesn't make it true!

Neither does merely posting something in bold or claiming that your lizard DNA intuition told you something but yet you still do both. :rolleyes:


Of course you're right not to trust me. I'm a shill for the elite, paid vast amounts of money to try and discredit you on the internet in case your dangerous truths get out to the world and people of earth (our slaves!) manage to free their minds from our enslavement.

jh79

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Stop trying to negate from the actual point and problem.

Sodium Fluoride gives Na+, F-
Calcium Fluoride gives Ca2+, F-

The F- is the same in both cases with the same properties.

AnonoBoy

jh79 wrote: »

Sodium Fluoride gives Na+, F-
Calcium Fluoride gives Ca2+, F-

The F- is the same in both cases with the same properties.

Sssshhhh..... science and facts don't work on him.