/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5817574]

So my friend is very big into conspiracy theories and believes that the new world order is putting fluoride in water to give everyone cancer and make every dumber, because the new world order just likes to be a group of evil dicks with nothing better to do.

I on the other hand think that someone like DOW chemical just wants to make a quick buck selling fluoride to city/state governments and they don't care too much about the side effects. I also think the more likely problem is going to be an increase in kidney stones and maybe heart problems due to hardening of fat around arteries.

At any rate I'm trying to find some scholarly articles about health effects of fluoride causing hardening of fat or kidney stones. So far I've gone through JSORT and PubMed anywhere else I should look?

[Anonymous No.5817579]

>>5817574

Is your friend also concerned about the amount of mercury put in the air by burning coal? Or does he just have an OCD tick about flouride.

[Anonymous No.5817583]

>I on the other hand think that someone like DOW chemical just wants to make a quick buck selling fluoride to city/state governments and they don't care too much about the side effects.
Unless those chemical companies also infiltrated the government and every university public health department to plant agents in all the federal and private laboratories, there aren't any side effects to worry about and the benefits are demonstrable. Also if that was the case they wouldn't need to sell fluoride they could just give themselves good tax breaks.

>I also think the more likely problem is going to be an increase in kidney stones and maybe heart problems due to hardening of fat around arteries.
There is no known mechanism for fluoride to influence these phenomena. Kidney stones are made of calcium oxalate, not fluoride, and fat hardening has nothing to do with fluoride either.

[Anonymous No.5817587]

Just ask him to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunction_fallacy

Then ask him to assign probabilities to each of his conjunctions (the probability of the NWO existing, the probability of them existing AND that they put fluoride in the water, the probability of them existing AND they put flouride in the water AND they do it to make people be dumber, etc etc)

[Anonymous No.5817640]

It's no surprise that the new world order would do such a thing.

[Anonymous No.5817651]

>>5817583
>Unless those chemical companies also infiltrated the government
Uh, well, yeah, they have, that's not even a conspiracy theory at this point so much as a matter of fact
>the benefits are demonstrable.
Not true at all
>Also if that was the case they wouldn't need to sell fluoride they could just give themselves good tax breaks.
Doing 2 things that are both profitable is better than only doing 1 thing that is profitable...

[Anonymous No.5817654]

>>5817651
>a matter of fact
i.e. "because I say so"

[Anonymous No.5817659]

>>5817651
>and every university public health department to plant agents in all the federal and private laboratories
Missed off that bit.

>Doing 2 things that are both profitable is better than only doing 1 thing that is profitable...
Why would such a powerful chemical company bother going to such great lengths and risks to perpetrate a conspiracy just so they can sell fluoride to put in water. Pretty sure there are far easier ways for such a company to make money which doesn't require poisoning everyone.

[Anonymous No.5817665]

>>5817651
Slow down with all the citations bro, I'm having a hard time reading through all the sources!

[Anonymous No.5817672]

>>5817574
1. Sodium Fluoride, the chemical used in water fluoridation is not toxic except in doses exceeding about a half a gram. Average NaF concentration in the US is about 0.7 mg/L.

2. NaF doesn't accumulate in excess in the human body unless your intake is about 10-20 times what would be the average intake from tap and other sources (see 'Excretion of retained fluoride in man', Journal of Applied Physiology)

3. #1 and #2 mean you'd have to drink an absolutely absurd amount of tap water in an absurdly short amount of time (a couple thousand liters in a few days) in order to start to see the effects of NaF poisoning. You'd die of overhydration LONG before then

[Anonymous No.5817695]

>>5817651
No, you're just flat-out wrong here. Just because you don't think the benefits are significant or noteworthy doesn't mean they're no demonstrable.

As to the government infiltration - I meant to refer more to federal research agencies like the CDC rather than ones with regulatory clout.

[Anonymous No.5817708]

inb4 muh harvard study

Say, I haven't seen that GMO faggot in a couple days. Wonder if he'll show up too.

[Anonymous No.5817725]

>>5817640
I chuckle whenever conspiritards talk about the NWO because of them.

Also because they're fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.5817862]

Do you drink lots of green tea like me? http://poisonfluoride.com/pfpc/html/green_tea___.html

just learned this today.. thanks to /ck/, though I better share

[Anonymous No.5817864]

>>5817862
>http://poisonfluoride.com
>/ck/
They're only good for discussing optimal ketchup storage.

[Anonymous No.5817870]

> In general, I think concerns about fluoride are overblown. I've heard arguments against fluoride ranging from that it may cause bone cancer to the notion that putting fluoride in the water supply is a government plot to destroy our brains. High amounts of fluoride over several years can cause brittle bones, but this is extremely rare. Fluoride is toxic in very large quantities and can cause gastrointestinal symptoms and sometimes even death

how can they even write this and not see how illogical and broken their arguments are?

[Anonymous No.5817875]

>>5817870
> A trend that is working against the dental health gains made by adding fluoride to public water supplies is the increased use of bottled water. A rise in cavities among children reported in 1998 - after years of decline - may be due to consumption of bottled water, which typically contains minimal levels of fluoride. If your children drink bottled or filtered water, be sure they get supplemental fluoride (ask your dentist to prescribe the proper dosage). If you drink bottled or filtered water, be sure to use a toothpaste containing fluoride. Or, sip more tea; green or black , just hold the sugar.

did you catch that?

> If your children drink bottled or filtered water, be sure they get supplemental fluoride

everyone make sure your children drink their flouride! otherwise.. all their teeth will fall out (and they wont get brain damage and turn into easy to control sheep)

[Anonymous No.5817878]

> after discovering drinking one to two gallons of super-strength tea a day resulted in harmful levels of fluoride in her body, causing her bone pain. Specifically, the woman was suffering from spine pain attributed to hyper-dense bones. When tested for the cause of her symptoms, the results showed high levels of fluoride in her urine

but what lovely teeth she had, right?

[Anonymous No.5817881]

>>5817870
>>5817875
>>5817878
Here's the tinfoil faggot we've been waiting for.

[Anonymous No.5817882]

While consuming high levels of fluoride has been known to boost bone density, it also results in bone brittleness and can lead to skeletal fluorosis, resulting in: Bone pain, Calcified ligaments, Bone spurs, Fused vertebrae, Difficulty moving joints

but at least you don't have to waste time brushing your teeth!

[Anonymous No.5817883]

>>5817881
well you didn't need to introduce yourself like that!

[Anonymous No.5817890]

> Fluoride is a toxic substance that can have profoundly negative effects on your body. If you consume large amounts of green tea for health benefits you might want to invest time in researching a brand that indeed is quite low in fluoride. We aren't just whistling Dixie here folks. This is a real threat and you simply need to avoid brands that can dump loads of this toxic heavy metal into your skeleton.

> This study has made it quite clear that tea can be a source of fluoride. In fact, studies have shown, and experts have come forth to testify, that the risk of consuming fluoride far outweighs any possible benefit.

> Whether you are drinking tea for its taste or its antioxidant health benefits, you can feel free to drink up with these extracts. However, if you choose to drink tea that has not had its fluoride content tested, you should be aware of these fluoride facts.

> Fluoride is more toxic than lead and is used as a pesticide for mice, rats, and other small pests.
> The fluoride used in tap water is not closely monitored and often contains high levels of carcinogens like arsenic.
> The fluoride we ingest from the water supply and from a number of other sources is associated with a number of negative health effects such as cancer, weakened bones and osteoporosis.

>>5817881
"Why should I listen to scientific facts? The government would never do anything to harm us! Fluoride is good! Anyone who disagrees is just a contrail/free energy nut"
Yeah, you're lost feel free to ignore me and post your canned pro-flouride crap - no one is listening. I'm posting it for people who still think for themselves and care about their own health.

[Anonymous No.5817896]

Fluoride isn't harmful but it's unnecessary in water, if you aren't lazy and regularly brush your teeth with normal tooth paste

Some people are against because ALCOA lobbied in favor of water fluoridation back in the 30's or so, with the purpose of getting rid of their fluoride byproduct

[Anonymous No.5817897]

>>5817890
>i'm using the science
>you are all sheeples!
Tinfoil nut go away.

[Anonymous No.5817908]

There is not point in talking about any harmful effects unless dose is also included. Everything is toxic, including water, in high enough amounts.

[Anonymous No.5817926]

>>5817870
>HIGH amounts over SEVERAL years can cause brittle bones but this is EXTREMELY rare
"High amounts" here means something on the order of 4-5 times what people normally ingest... on a continual basis for several years... and even then it's still rare.

>Fluoride is toxic in VERY LARGE quantities
"Very large" here refers to about a gram of NaF. That translates to about 1400 liters of water. Planning on going for a water-chugging record anytime soon?

[Anonymous No.5817960]

>>5817672
It might not be outright poisoning that we're worried about.

You can be exposed to a carcinogen, and never reach levels that poison you. However, the carcinogen can still cause damage to the body.

[Anonymous No.5817963]

>what is a metabolism
Retard.

[Anonymous No.5817965]

>>5817896
>Fluoride isn't harmful
Ask any chemist if they'd willingly handle or even get near something containing elemental fluoride.

[Anonymous No.5817968]

>>5817963
dawg, your emitting beta particles everywhere. Stop decaying.

[Anonymous No.5817974]

>>5817965
>ignoring the rest of the sentence
Ask any chemist if they'd be willing to slap you.

[Anonymous No.5817979]

>>5817965
If the elemental fluoride is in aqueous solution in the mg/L range, any chemist that isn't an idiot wouldn't have a problem handling it.

[Anonymous No.5817982]

>>5817965
>elemental fluoride

>clearly hasn't taking high school level chemistry

come back when you graduate

[Anonymous No.5817981]

you are all arguing about nothing

the issue is that adding this chemical to the water supply is needless, we shouldn't accept it. its pollution.

[Anonymous No.5817996]

>>5817659
>Missed off that bit.
Well I don't really think fluoride is poisonous just unnecessary.

>Why would such a powerful chemical company bother going to such great lengths and risks to perpetrate a conspiracy just so they can sell fluoride to put in water.
You kidding bro? Major corporations fund bullshit studies so they can sell more of their product all the time, just look at the tobacco industry, how many studies did they come out with saying cigarettes aren't bad? And countless other industries have done it, when you have huge multinational corporations like Dow funding a few bullshit studies is chump change compared to the revenue from contracts with hundreds if not thousands of municipal water suppliers starting fluoridation programs nationwide.

[Anonymous No.5817999]

>>5817996
nice to see someone with rational sensible ideas

[Anonymous No.5818001]

>>5817878
>one to two gallons of super-strength tea a day
because that's totally analagous to the much much much lower levels of fluoride in the water supply (which most people don't even drink a gallon a day) right

[Anonymous No.5818007]

>>5817965
Ask any chemist if they'd willingly handle or even get near something containing elemental chlorine.
And yet millions of pool owners across America regularly put large amounts of chlorine in their pools.
It must be a conspiracy by the Jews to attempt to get millions of people to expose their bodies to poison and destroy their skin so they have to buy acne medication and skin cancer treatments!

[Anonymous No.5818008]

>>5817996
>Major corporations fund bullshit studies so they can sell more of their product all the time, just look at the tobacco industry, how many studies did they come out with saying cigarettes aren't bad?
And those studies they fund are done in-house by contract scientists.

[Anonymous No.5818009]

>>5817965
Any chemist would have no problem handling something containing flouride at a 0.7mg/L concentration. For any harm to be caused you'd need to drink over 1400 litres of tap water over a very short time.

[Anonymous No.5818010]

>>5818007
> using broken analogies to dishonestly rubbish arguments that you aren't capable of actually refuting

[Anonymous No.5818013]

>>5817965
>not understanding the difference between elemental fluorine and fluoride ions
Also, chemists do, in fact, handle fluorine; though it is highly reactive.

[Anonymous No.5818021]

>>5818007
Saved.
This is exactly how stupid these /pol/ faggots who drop by here are with muh gmo and muh floriums.

[Anonymous No.5818125]

>>5817965
Get thing we're putting Sodium Fluoride in the water instead of raw elemental fluoride

[Anonymous No.5818164]

>>5817665
alol
(Actually laughed out loud)

[Anonymous No.5818167]

It's a shitty conspiracy theory because iodized salt is a common household item and the sale of iodine supplements isn't regulated. Iodine bonds with fluoride and lets you excrete it harmlessly. All of the fuss about fluoride health comes from the same hipsters who decided that they were too good for iodine and decided that it was an evil chemical. Now the western world has a shocking amount of people with an iodine deficiency.

[Anonymous No.5819369]

>>5817890
>...dump loads of this toxic heavy metal into your skeleton
>heavy metal
>fluoride

[Anonymous No.5819441]

>>5819369

>heavy metal

hue hue hue hue hue hue

[Anonymous No.5819454]

>>5817651

I can't hear you through your tinfoil suit

[Anonymous No.5819461]

>>5818010
actually it's a very valid analogy.

What's broken is the idea that "because chemists don't want to touch large quantities of elemental fluoride that small amounts (in a different form) must automatically be detrimental to your health"

His analogy is about as good as an analogy can get

[Anonymous No.5819488]

>>5817583
>>5817654
>>5817659
>>5817665

Don't know much about Fluoridation of water, but in regards to large companies following regulations (in particular Dow Chemicals)...
Union Carbide (now fully owned by Dow), was responsible for THE LARGEST industrial disaster in history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster

Not only did they actively provide false material to the local authorities (and hence the wrong medical treatment/first aid was provided in the immediate aftermath leading the more deaths), but to date not a single person has been prosecuted for this disaster and the US government has actively protected US employees directly responsible.

This is not the only instance where Union Carbide has flaunted local laws, just the largest and most well known example. Closer to home (for me), is the fact Union Carbide used to produce Agent Orange for the Vietname war in Rhodes NSW, Australia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes,_New_South_Wales
The dumped their waste directly into Homebush Bay and the levels of dioxins in the soil and the water are of the order 1000 times greater than the "safe" levels as described by the EPA (local evironmental protection agency). After Union Carbide left, they left behind two large crates of dioxins which could be seen from the trains. The water is still toxic and fishes, oysters and other marine life are not safe to consume. It has only been in recent years (and after some major remdiation) that this land could be used again, no thanks to Union Carbide or the Dow Company which were directly responsible in the first place.

You'd have to be a fool to take the word from such a company that their products produce no harm when they have quite clearly shown they are capable of evading prosecution when caught red handed causing many serious and long term problems...

[Anonymous No.5819531]

At least once a month someone comes from somewhere to create a fluoride thread on /sci/
People haven't cared on /sci/ for a while, they aren't going to start caring, no matter how many sources you cite.
Said thread maker will then have their thread bumped periodically.
The shit posting about conspiracies will continue and still, no one will care.

[Anonymous No.5819544]

>>5819531
there is no conspiracy

they really are polluting our water with flouride for no good reason

and it is a harmful substance

[Anonymous No.5819551]

>>5819544
Yeah, harmful when you drink about 1400 litres of it. Is that really going to affect your life?

[Anonymouѕ No.5819564]

>>5819488
>and the levels of dioxins in the soil and the water are of the order 1000 times greater than the "safe" levels as described by the EPA (local evironmental protection agency).
>greater than the "safe" levels as described by the EPA
>You'd have to be a fool to take the word from such a company that their products produce no harm when they have quite clearly shown they are capable of evading prosecution when caught red handed causing many serious and long term problems...

You're contradicting yourself here.

You also still haven't shown how dysfunctional governance in India applies to fluoride distribution in the US/Western World, except that both is "chemicals".

[Anonymouѕ No.5819566]

>>5817996
>You kidding bro? Major corporations fund bullshit studies so they can sell more of their product all the time, just look at the tobacco industry, how many studies did they come out with saying cigarettes aren't bad? And countless other industries have done it, when you have huge multinational corporations like Dow funding a few bullshit studies is chump change compared to the revenue from contracts with hundreds if not thousands of municipal water suppliers starting fluoridation programs nationwide.

So you're saying the fluoride conspiracy is bigger than the tobacco one? Because the latter was linked to lung cancer et al several decades ago already.
The fluoride companies must have an extremely well-funded and well-trained circle of plants in every science institution and government agency of the world.

[Anonymous No.5819590]

>>5819551
I don't get it, why would you support them intentionally polluting our water? really, think about it, it doesn't make any fucking sense. You're either brainwashed or paid to post pro-flouride stuff here

[Anonymouѕ No.5819600]

>>5819590
2/10
Atleast you tried.

[Anonymous No.5819602]

>>5819590
Fluoride, in small amounts, is beneficial for your teeth. When it goes into your body some of it is retained in your saliva which remineralises tooth enamel, counteracting the demineralisation from plaque acid. Some is also retained in the bones and other calcium rich areas (the effects of which can only detrimental if you consume it to excess) and the rest is expelled from the body via urination.

They've got studies showing that water fluoridation reduces tooth decay.

http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/publications/synopses/Eh41_Flouridation_PART_A.pdf

[Anonymous No.5819609]

>Fun fact:

If you tried drinking the amount of tap water that contains enough fluoride to cause actual damage you would probably die of water intoxication before you'd even got 1% of the way there.

>Another fun fact:

The amount of fluoridated water required to do actual fluoride related damage is about 20 times the mass of the average human.

[Anonymous No.5819614]

>>5819602
medicine which you may not need

[Anonymous No.5819613]

>>5819602
just brush your teeth instead of being forced to take medicine

[Anonymous No.5819617]

>>5819614
I just posted a study that showed that fluoridation of water reduces tooth decay

[Anonymous No.5819627]

>>5819613
>>5819614
I really don't know what you're complaining about anyway, it's good for you and has no adverse effects in the amounts present.

It basically just comes down to MUH FREEDOMS.

[Yaldabaoth !!3OKz2BKt5ju No.5819665]

>>5819609
More like bullshit. The fluoride accumulates in the body, so after years of being exposed to contaminated water results start to show.

[Anonymous No.5819680]

>>5819665
Yeah that's only when the concentrations are much higher than they are currently. It's at 0.7 mg/L so that stuff doesn't happen.

There's no clear association between water fluoridation and cancer, no significant effect on bone strength (heck, it usually improves it with the right dosage). The only actual adverse effect that has been shown by study is a placebo effect when people are scared that the water is fluoridated.

[Anonymous No.5819684]

>>5819680
ok so if larger amounts of flouride are harmful should we:
(A) leave things as they are
(B) pollute our water supply with a small level of flouride

which step takes us closer towards having poisonous toxic water?

[Anonymous No.5819685]

>>5819684
When I say larger, I mean larger than they currently are, which is 0.7 mg/L

The current level is beneficial for teeth and bones so that's cool but we shouldn't add much more because then it gets too much and may start to have adverse effects

[Anonymous No.5819686]

>mfw this thread is still here

[Anonymous No.5819690]

fluoride makes pretty crystals.

[Yaldabaoth !!3OKz2BKt5ju No.5819692]

>>5819680

>no significant effect on bone strength (heck, it usually improves it with the right dosage)

Except it doesn't retard. To suggest a mineral that is a toxin to the body would increase the strength of the bones is pure stupidity. Hey, dumbshit, bones aren't just rocks, so adding random minerals to be deposited in them doesn't make them stronger. It would logically degrade the structure of the bone and thus cause it to weaken or, at best, cause no noticeable change.

>The only actual adverse effect that has been shown by study is a placebo effect when people are scared that the water is fluoridated.

You're full of shit.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/

[Anonymous No.5819701]

>>5819692
Study shows the fluoridation at the current dosage may slightly lowers overall fracture risk compared with no fluoridation and higher fluoridation, it definitely doesn't have a bad effect on it.

>Study
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/publications/synopses/Eh41_Flouridation_PART_A.pdf
>Summary of study
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/media/media/rel07/Fluoride_Flyer.pdf

As for the placebo thing

>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9332806?dopt=Abstract
"The results do not support the theory that the symptoms considered in this study are caused by the physical effect of fluoridated water. On the other hand, the significant reduction in the number of symptoms only after the respondents had become aware of the discontinuation of fluoridation reveals that fluoridation may have psychological effects which present as perceived symptoms."

>http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/
"high fluoride content in water may negatively affect cognitive development."

Well no shit, that's why you need to account for natural levels of fluoride in ground water so you don't end up overdosing it.

[Anonymous No.5819704]

>>5819692
Yaldabaoth im on your side but can you please be less aggressive and offensive towards people? Are you new at this? You're never going to be in a position where the majority of people show that they're listening to what you're saying or respond with respect - if you keep reacting so angrily you'll burn out and be unable to contribute further. You're posting decent info just calm on the insults.

[Yaldabaoth !!3OKz2BKt5ju No.5819718]

>>5819701
>Well no shit, that's why you need to account for natural levels of fluoride in ground water so you don't end up overdosing it.


If any substance causes lowered IQ when consumed it obviously shouldn't be in fucking water or, at the very least, not without a person's consent although even that is a stretch. For all we know, the amount that is considered "high fluroide content" is already the amount being put into water, as the study stated that 4.55 ml/L as the "high" and .89 ml/L as the "reference" was given to those exposed to contaminated drinking water. The fluoride put into drinking supplies is 2.2 ml/L, but i'm sure this number can go down or up. Still the fact that it's already confirmed that twice the amount per liter of fluoride put into drinking water will cause neurological damage shows that the OP's friend is right in his assumption that fluoride is put into water specifically to dumb down the population even further. Furthermore the fluoride put in drinking water supplies, sodium fluoride, is different than the fluoride naturally occurring in nature making the attempt to justify the dumping of fluoride into water supplies by stating that people drink naturally occurring fluoride water and are fine is not valid. The idea that this unbelievable drawback can be negated by a "maybe" chance of "slightly" lowering a fracture RISK is equally retarded and cannot be said to be a rational trade off.

[Yaldabaoth !!3OKz2BKt5ju No.5819720]

>>5819704
If you're not reading the content of my posts because of statements I've made in regards to the opposition, then I really could care less about what you think as you're obviously retarded. And, to be fair, I don't insult people randomly, only those who show themselves to be what I call them out to be.

[Ananamoose No.5819736]

[Anonymous No.5819738]

>>5819718
>If any substance causes lowered IQ when consumed it obviously shouldn't be in fucking water
Only in high dosages numb nuts, like 4.55 mg/L which is about 5 times the amount put in western water supplies (0.7-1.2).

>The fluoride put into drinking supplies is 2.2 ml/L
No it's 0.7-1.2 mg/L depending on climate (lower concentration in warmer climates where more water is consumed).

>Still the fact that it's already confirmed that twice the amount per liter of fluoride put into drinking water will cause neurological damage shows that the OP's friend is right in his assumption that fluoride is put into water specifically to dumb down the population even further.
Oh look, more conspiracy bullshit, even if we ignore your incorrectly high numbers for existing fluoride concentrations the fact that their not putting enough in there to cause neurological damage either shows that they're trying to avoid that or that they're idiots and don't know how much will dumb down the populace.

>Furthermore the fluoride put in drinking water supplies, sodium fluoride, is different than the fluoride naturally occurring in nature making the attempt to justify the dumping of fluoride into water supplies by stating that people drink naturally occurring fluoride water and are fine is not valid.
Let me tell you something about ionic compounds. When they dissolve the ions separate and behave independently to the "partner" ions so the fluoride ions in a solution of calcium fluoride are going to do the same thing as ones in a solution of sodium fluoride. The only difference here is the presence of sodium ions but if you've ever put salt table on a meal then you'll have consumed those with no ill effects (unless it's in excess but that's the case with fucking everything).

Post continued in a sec

[Anonymous No.5819740]

>>5819718
>>5819738
>The idea that this unbelievable drawback can be negated by a "maybe" chance of "slightly" lowering a fracture RISK is equally retarded and cannot be said to be a rational trade off.
The bone thing is a minor benefit, the real benefit is the reduction of tooth decay and general improvement of dental health. The fluoride ions retained in saliva cause the remineralisation of tooth enamel, counteracting the effects of plaque acid.

That big study I posted earlier mentions this as well.

[Anonymous No.5819744]

>>5819738
>salt table
*tabel salt

whoops

[Anonymous No.5819745]

>>5819744
>tabel
bloody hell

*table

[Anonymous No.5819748]

>>5819744
>>5819745

[Yaldabaoth !!3OKz2BKt5ju No.5819753]

>>5819738

>Only in high dosages numb nuts, like 4.55 mg/L which is about 5 times the amount put in western water supplies (0.7-1.2).


Any amount of fluoride will accumulate in the body. The amount they gave was obviously just to "speed things up", but the same results will happen to anyone who gets the same amount of fluoride in their bodies. It doesn't matter if the fluoride content is 5x less, it is still there and will still accumulate.


>No it's 0.7-1.2 mg/L depending on climate (lower concentration in warmer climates where more water is consumed).

Bullshit again. http://www.fluoridationfacts.com/science/papers/aspects_of_toxicity.htm

Even if it were, the fact is that the fluroide would accumulate in your body regardless of the amount per liter eventually unless purged, but if it is deposited in the bodies bones I think it'd also be deposited elsewhere in the body, and with the sudies showing IQ drops it's obviously in the fucking brain.


> the fact that their not putting enough in there to cause neurological damage either shows that they're trying to avoid that or that they're idiots and don't know how much will dumb down the populace.

And you're retarded as you continue spouting the "HURRRZ NUT ENUF" garbage. It IS enough as it WILL accumulate in the body over time. 5x less simply means it will take 5x longer to show results(not 100% certain on the exact length but the point still stands), but it will still show them.

[Yaldabaoth !!3OKz2BKt5ju No.5819756]

>>5819738
>When they dissolve the ions separate and behave independently to the "partner" ions so the fluoride ions in a solution of calcium fluoride are going to do the same thing as ones in a solution of sodium fluoride.


No they fucking don't. The calcium flouride solubility is vastly different than that of the sodium fluoride, which is why the sodium flouride is toxic to humans. \


>but if you've ever put salt table on a meal then you'll have consumed those with no ill effects (unless it's in excess but that's the case with fucking everything).

Holy shit this must be what they spew to the retarded masses that show even the slightest bit of intelligence. This refuse might fool a fool but anyone capable of rational thought would see the folly in your arguments. Yet it's not just sodium alone you massive dumpshit. The properties of sodium fluoride are vastly different than sodium alone, it's not just the sum of its parts in regards to molecules.

[Anonymous No.5819762]

>>5817965
you mean Fluorine

[Anonymous No.5819799]

>>5819753
>Any amount of fluoride will accumulate in the body. The amount they gave was obviously just to "speed things up", but the same results will happen to anyone who gets the same amount of fluoride in their bodies. It doesn't matter if the fluoride content is 5x less, it is still there and will still accumulate.
Or the amount that accumulates over that time with the lower concentrations isn't enough to cause significant harm. The study you posted said that children in lower fluoride areas were fine in the neurodevelopmental department and that the adverse effects only occurred in adults with extremely high levels of fluoride.

>Bullshit again
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5727a1.htm

Says right there, 0.7-1.2 mg/L depending on climate.

>but if it is deposited in the bodies bones I think it'd also be deposited elsewhere in the body, and with the sudies showing IQ drops it's obviously in the fucking brain.
Yeah but probably not in high enough amounts to actually cause damage. Has people been doing less well in IQ tests over time in the US?

>And you're retarded as you continue spouting the "HURRRZ NUT ENUF" garbage. It IS enough as it WILL accumulate in the body over time. 5x less simply means it will take 5x longer to show results(not 100% certain on the exact length but the point still stands), but it will still show them.
I talked about this earlier. Another thing to consider, the high fluoride affects neurological development. If it takes 5x as long to accumulate enough fluoride to hinder development then by that time the brain's probably going to have gotten past that stage meaning that the effects are nullified because the buildup is too slow.

[Anonymous No.5819802]

>>5819756
Ok I'll admit my chemistry spouting was a bit off at that point.

Yes Sodium Fluoride is more soluble than calcium fluoride but they still only put pretty freaking tiny amounts in there. As for the toxicity, you need to have a dosage of about a gram for it to be lethal which is about 1400 litres worth of tap water. That's a dose, not a total amount before you start going on about accumulation.

[Anonymous No.5819845]

>>5817574
Giving everyone cancer? Are you serious? Does he actually say that? If so, he must've had an amateur lobotomy at some point in his life. Sure, the proposition of it making people dumber is also stupid, but nowhere near as stupid as giving people cancer.

[Anonymous No.5819860]

>>5819845
Yeah this is another retarded thing about conspiracy theories.

Why would a government want to give every one cancer / make everyone's bones break / give everyone bad teeth / make everyone dumber etc.

[Anonymous No.5819864]

>>5819860
there is no conspiracy theory, they are actually adding these toxic chemicals to our water

it doesn't matter if they're actually trying to clean peoples teeth or not, it's still happening and it's appalling

[Anonymous No.5819865]

>>5819864
>toxic chemicals
Stop using loaded language. Anything is toxic with a high enough dose. The dose in the water supply is nowhere near harmful.

[Anonymous No.5819870]

>>5819864
Trace amounts of poison taken over time build up resistance to that poison. Also, there is a (relatively) high amount of radiation in fish. You might as well call that appalling too.

[Anonymous No.5819871]

>>5819864
>Implying water is not toxin chemical in high doses
I wonder how they allow citisens to freely consume water. They should like implement limitations on the amount supplied.

[Anonymous No.5819903]

Fluorine is the one of the most most abundant minerals in the earths crust. You will injest it whether you wish to or not. Some areas (india for example) have massive problems with naturally occuring fluorine in the groundwater.
They have to lower their standards for drinking water because the water is naturally way higher than the FDA would approve of in a murica.
A certain amount is beneficial, too much is damaging, just like everything it must be consumed in moderation.