UGHHHH.... Let me drop some knowledge on you for a minute buddy... Water fluoridation was first used by the Hitler and the Nazi's in Germany, as it was shown to make the population more docile, and easier to control. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFDJSOvqK-I]The Fluoride and Nazi Germany - YouTube[/ame] Also, many psycho-medications and anti depressions have fluoride in them....to protect their teeth, right? :roll eyes: Index of Fluorinated Pharmaceuticals So, Dr. know it all, what makes you think that the worlds greatest superpower, wouldn't wan't to fluoridate the water supply so it could more easily steer the masses into complying with their agendas? Because the evidence shows it is a deadly neurotoxic chemical, and does not provide any dental benefits. So, theres a reason why they are doing it. wake up.
I guess you don't understand... I would like this thread to stay in this section of the forum, I don't care about your personal views and you obviously don't seem to be acknowledging the fact that I was the person who posted the fucking thread. I believe wholeheartedly that our gov't would do something such as that, however talk of speculation such as that does not belong in this subforum. So take your elitest attitude and shove it.
That website says that the fluoride studies they've used were from China, India, Iran, and Mexico. This makes me extremely wary of the findings.
No, they do not have fluoride. They have fluorine. Aqueous fluoride and organic fluorine are two completely different things. That's like saying diamonds, graphite, steel and oil are all the same because they have carbon. Congrats, you just showed everyone how little science you know.
Oh wow I didn't even catch that. It's like saying you can breathe underwater because there's an oxygen atom in water.
Hey Dr. Smartass, Flourine is also fucking dangerous to your health. Fluorine in Medicine - Dangerous Prescription Drugs Fluorine Poison Is Rampant in Pharmaceuticals You do realize that fluorine was used in a form in the atomic bomb, right? Flouride and Flourine ARE POISONS that are approved to be in our food, water, and pharmaceuticals. It is NOT safe to ingest fluoride, it has no place in someone's metabolic system. Whats even WORSE is that they do not even provide any benefits either. http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2008/02/03/the-lies-of-fluoridation-and-who-benefits/ Scientific study on how fluoride actually HAMRS teeth, and causes dental flourosis. http://www.nofluoride.com/nrc.cfm So, Why are they there? No need for the name calling. Mat369 .
From Wikipedia: Organofluorine compounds In order for fluoride poisoning to occur, a compound must release fluoride (F−) ions. Whereas most organofluorine compounds may not release F− because of the strength of the carbon–fluorine bond and its tendency to strengthen as more fluorine atoms are added to a carbon, others do, such as methoxyflurane. The fluorine atom is pervasive in drugs, e.g. Prozac, and many other substances such as freon, Teflon, and blood serum (PFOS, PFOA, and PFNA). Organofluorine compounds, however, that are fluoroalkane based do not release F− under biological conditions because of their stability. That means they are attached to the carbon and arent going anywhere...and your sources still suck
Let's try to act like a grown up, shall we? You're sources don't cite a single scientific study about the health affects of fluorine in regards to its metabolically-induced release from organics. Not one. In fact, one of your "sources" also say dioxin is dangerous because of the fluorine. Strange because dioxin doesn't even have fluorine in it, it only has carbon and oxygen. Basically what you cited is a bunch of random blogs written by people with no scientific background that are designed to spread propaganda to those with even less scientific background, and you are eating it up. As UU_ood said, by your and your sources' rational, we should be able to breath underwater because water has an oxygen atom in it, gasoline should be edible because it has carbon in it, and table salt should explode when dissolved in water because that's what elemental sodium does. Obviously those don't happen, so I think we can agree that there is a fundamental difference between the (i) chemical properties of an element and (ii) the chemical properties of a molecule with that element in it. Can we agree on this? But to answer your question "why are they [fluorine atoms] there?", it's quite simple. Fluorine is a strong electron withdrawing group, meaning when bound to other atoms it creates polarity within the molecule. This helps the drug be water soluble, and it helps establish properly sized and a structurally tuned three-dimensional hydrogen bonding network that can interact with their target molecule in a specific manner. Thankfully, as TinTizzy pointed out, these carbon-fluorine bonds are not broken down by our metabolism, so no fluoride is released, and the fluorine atoms are excreted as rest of the molecule is excreted. We all know pharmaceuticals have their negative side effects. This has been known forever, and any time anyone takes a drug they should be aware of these things. No one is saying drugs can't come without consequences, but to blame these side effects on the fluorine atom attached to the drugs and somehow link it to the supposed conspiracy of fluoride in our drinking water is downright asinine.
can we get some clarification on that 'may'? may release may not release? may accumalate over time and cause serious damage may not, dont you think that vaguness should not be part of the general description? also fun fact: source:Fluorine Facts - Periodic Table of the Elements
Found an interesting review on the metabolism of fluorinated compounds. In the concluding paragraph, he states: Some other interesting quotes: Thus, there seems to be sufficient precedent that addition of fluorine atoms to drugs actually minimizes their toxicity because it lowers their ability to be metabolized to toxic compounds. As explained in multiple posts above your's, there is a monumental difference between the chemical properties of an elemental substance and all possible molecules with said element. Just because one fluorinated compound is toxic does not make all fluorinated compounds toxic. If that were true, then all carbon-containing compounds would be toxic. All nitrogen-containing compounds would be toxic. All oxygen containing compounds would be toxic. Every single compound in the world would be toxic. How many times does this logical fallacy need to be explained?
at the end of the day... these are the same people who produce results which then produce statements like: do you remember how they conducted that research? its like this: they start with an end result they need and start backwards. you want to trust that? thats fine.. im going to be a bit more sceptical, i must not be getting enough flouride in my system, mmm yummy delicious flouride goodness
Those of you who avoided having cavities, and other dental problems, thanks to fluoride, have no idea how lucky you are. Kids whose parents give them bottled water are getting more cavities.
I agree with Garrison, back as a kid I lived in a town without fluoride in the water ended getting 3-4 cavities by the time I was 4. Moved to a different city with fluoride in the water and never got cavaties ever again. I'm sure this was talking about China and India where they have crazy amounts of fluoride in their water.
Whole Health Source: Malocclusion: Disease of Civilization, Part VIII Whole Health Source: Unrefined vs. Refined Carbohydrates and Dental Cavities Whole Health Source: Reversing Tooth Decay Whole Health Source: dental health. Children of parents who don't feed their kids shit also don't get cavities. I wonder what's the better option? Poison? Or healthful diet? Shouldn't we at least get to choose for ourselves?
If you had even bothered to read Garrison's article you would have seen tooth decay had occurred in children with good diets.