The Current State of the World thread

General Discussion
201

Yeah I’m pretty skeptic too, whether or not there would be a hidden agenda for the people to remove flouride. Everything you said is true and pretty obvious as well. But how can you call it speculation if you don’t try and learn information? The first video is from a man who had researched it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpc7BxVOVfM&feature=feedf

And this video is from a chemist who found a material safety data sheet from a chemical company with a warning that says that it can be harmful to children and infants. Which is what caused me to try and research further on the topic.

I obviously know about scare tactics, and hidden agendas but I also know that sometimes companies are not completely honest, because it is not in their best interest to be honest. Just because the general consensus is that it is not harmful doesn’t mean that you don’t have to go back and recheck facts. The people’s consensus is influenced by opinions of people who stand to profit from it. Such as companies who need to get rid of their aluminum byproducts and chemical waste, and can make money from using the fluoride for water flouridation.

Also 98% of western Europe doesn’t flouridate their water. Maybe sometimes it’s better to think for ourselves than conforming to group-think mentalities. There’s nothing wrong with questioning things.

Maybe if you checked out the video you would see that it’s a thirty minute interview with a man who has done much research on the subject. Not just some silly vid on youtube.

202

Except for the fact that those legal limits of safety were created in order to create a means of disposal for toxic waste and those limits of safety cause far more damage than good. Do some research.

Seeing how uneducated many are in the subject concerning fluoride I’m going to put it in the first post.

203

I’m currently at work, and not at liberty to watch videos–but I’m disinclined toward videos anyway, since they tend to be bullshit. I am unfortunately forced to read to get the facts.

In the case of rechecking the facts, there is a fair bit of oversight into fluoridation and the safe level gets revisited on a frequent basis. I believe there is a current move in the works to adjust the limit by about .5 milligrams per liter lower than it is currently.

There’s nothing wrong with questioning things, but never underestimate the value of the findings. This is something that has been challenged a number of times, and each time, the end result has typically been fine tweaks to the level of concentration.

Individual opinions aren’t worth much unless they’re viewed in the context of the community as a whole. Something that has long plagued the uneasy relationship between scientists and journalists.

The limits were created by the Dept. of Public Health, which does not have any power to enforce/implement the limits. They are overseen chiefly by the EPA, which requests reexaminations of the limits often, and supported by the American Dental Association–which, incidentally, only stands to make more money if the water isn’t fluoridated. Furthermore, the CDC lists water fluoridation as one of the top ten public health achievements of the 20th century. Who, exactly, is the profiteer here? Is everybody in on it?

As for “toxic waste”, toxicity is determined by dosage. Referring to fluoride as toxic waste is dramatic and deliberately misleading. You’re not filling me with confidence in your position.

The only health concern I know of that isn’t drastically overstated (“toxic waste”) is that excessive fluoridation can cause fluorosis in young children.

Is your objection to fluoridation based specifically on the fact that it’s “waste” (i.e. unused material) for “disposal”? As far as I know, it was first implemented in the '50s at the urging of dental advocates working on the basis of controlled studies.

204

We were never meant to be imbibing fluoride (a cumulative poisonous waste metal with a toxic effect on the thyroid gland). Direct application to teeth is beneficial somewhat…but there’s a reason you’re supposed to call poison control if you swallow toothpaste. This is all just so metal processors can save money by dumping their by-product into the water supply. Never drink tap. They always tell you it’s safe. How much do you trust them, when shady deals like these get your city officials kickbacks from refineries who would otherwise have to pay more to properly dispose of their heavy metal waste?

205

I tapped out of this thread when we started becoming a wikipedia hub for flouride

206

I work in an environmental lab that does a great deal of work with the various waste water and drinking water plants for Northern California. CDPH doesn’t create drinking water limits, but they do have the power to enforce them.The regulations up here for all these things are actually quite well enforced (believe me, I have to deal with phone calls from them and our clients regarding data requests that may be even a single day late A LOT, the guys working for CDPH are anal as fuck), which until I worked here and saw it for myself, I would have found VERY skeptical myself. Not so sure about other states, though.

Fun fact: overall, the regulations for waste water (shit that comes out of the sewers), is much more tightly regulated than municipal drinking water and bottled water requirements. In a lot of ways, the water that recently had SHIT in it is cleaner than the water coming out of your faucet.

207

Come back! We have G.I. Joe trivia scheduled for a couple hours from now!! And beer! We have beer! …shit, I think we lost him.

208

somebody said beer?

209

Huh? Oh! Uh…well, it isn’t here RIGHT NOW, per se…uh, but we have Zima’s from like 1995! They’re practically wine, now!

210

I have beer. It’s Canadian Thanksgiving :slight_smile:

211

The hell? There’s a Canadian Thanksgiving? What’s served?

212

…Turkey, stuffing, ham, potatoes, corn, etc.

213

…and in your case, beer :rofl:. I wonder how many other countries serve the same thing around the latter part of the year.

214

Check out this vid. It’s an msnbc interview on wall street corruption.

215

High fructose corn syrup is way more interesting than fluoride in the water

216

True enough, but this thread is starting to lose focus.

217

Yeah, but you can AVOID that. You just need to stay abreast of what they call it. Now it’s “corn sugar”. If fluoride is in your local water, there’s no telling what sources of water are safe.

218

don’t want to derail, but this whole flouride things, its just incredibly uncredible because of those who speak the loudest.

theory 1; they put it in H2O becasue F- allows the government to slowly control you mentally.

it sounds as uncredible as those who advocate that vaccines are bad because there is mercury in the vaccine.

Point is, super trace amounts of fluorine help in the dental health, which reduces the potential of heart diseases, cardiac disease, stroke, caused by horrible decaying teeth. To much and its bad for you. Yes you should question why, because it forces those in power to be careful about how they do what is being called into action.

and why are you giving kids tap water? I remeber reading a pamphlet given out by the city about not giving your kid to much tap water becasue its bad for them. And remember reading a pamphlet about raising kids when i was younger at teh WIC building stating that to much tap water is bad for your kid. Both of which are government institutions.

on track

so, how bad do you think the country would become if Rick Perry or Mitt Romney win the election?

the few spoil the bunch, which is why we can’t have nice things. That’s how it works, these “people”, could change the status qou, but that takes work and “time”, and people won’t be doing that anytime soon. Especially when the prevealing perception of life is, “so much to do, so little time”. Which is a complete fallacy by the way.

yes they did, a lot of people wanted to go to war. then a lot of people didn’t want to go to war.

in this specific case, the few spoiled the bunch.

the few who where really loud about invading the whole of the middle east ruined it for those who didn’t want to go because they could play the “patriotism card” as they pleased and they got what they wanted. So the few in power took advantage of that, because people didn’t want to be labeled as anti-American. when in reality it would have been more american to say the fuck we are going to war.

if these people really didn’t want to go to war, then a lot more people would have spoken out about it. Not wait 10 years until it became the cool thing to do.

and yes the average person could have a say in laws, but this isn’t a democracy (thank fucking god), its a republic. People refuse to do thier part to make it function as such. Its a lot harder to get things done in a Republic so people really don’t give a shit because its to much work and their wants often go ignored because there are thousands of intrest groups all fighting for control.

219

Marginally worse, maybe, unless they get us into another war in addition to the ones we’re already in.

I don’t know. I feel like our most pressing problems are already such a tangled web of fucked-up shit that nobody at the federal level can do much to change it, good or bad. Even a semi-retarded gibbon like Perry.

220

So I bought “Inside Job” the other day after reading this thread. The US has some greedy fucks that need to be sent to prison forever.