Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

JoBlackwell — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 05:59:16 GMT

I live in the UK and am involved in nutritional therapies for cancer. We are encountering a lot of misinformation about the efficiency of reverse osmosis filters in removing fluoride from fluoridated tap water.

Does anyone know where we can get hold of concrete scientific data to prove exactly how effective domestic reverse osmosis filters are at domestic fluoride removal (the filters ones we have been recommending use membranes from TopWay Global Inc/FilmTec Corporation in Minneapolis) ?

Many thanks

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

Pol13 — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:06:54 GMT

I would like to know what the difference, if any, is between the fluoride added to water, foods, toothpaste, etc. and the natural fluoride found in green tea. Any of you chemists, etc know about this for sure?

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

Maxmars — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:38:54 GMT

I must echo Tanya below,

At some point you begin to see a pattern emerge which clearly points to something very 'un-American' about the chemicals, toxins, and other factors which we are purposefully exposed to. Ignorance is one thing, but anyone who has studied the historical records can easily see where these 'technological improvements' came from. One hint: It had nothing to do with benefiting mankind! I hate the fact that there is a realistic possibility that eugenics and population reduction have something to do with this. I wish I were wrong, but all indications are that someone - somewhere really does want to harm us all. Isn't that just amazing - after all the decision-makers who are in place to protect us, are actually apathetic or in some cases even aggressively pursuing policies that are contrary to their oaths of office! Go figure.

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

LORENLSMITHHughes — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 03:25:10 GMT

What happened to CHANGE, the democrats main platform? I havent seen any change since their having taken control of congress. To change the FDA, change the Dept of Interior, Dept. of Agrculture, you have to change laws. It seems they have never learned their job discription. Their jobs the ran for and were elected to was to REPRESENT THE PEOPLE not simply to pass laws that generate election contributions. If we the people had any guts, we would sue the buzzards the minute they do anything that is known to be bad for the general population. Where are we using the recall of non-performing

representatives, and why not. Why do we have to resort to the actions that make us look unpatriotic and risk our necks like the signors of the Declaration of Independence. Read it .....we now need an adendum before we get arrested for opposing congress or home security. This may get me listed!!!

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

HappyDaze — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:51:14 GMT

Fluoride is added to town's drinking water. You bathe in it. You drink and cook with it. It ends up back in the rivers....

Are your vegetables and fruits are also grown with fluoridated water? Do commercial food production companies use rainwater or town water? ... How much fluoride is too much? Or is getting rid of the stuff ($$$) the only criteria used by officialdom?

Can't believe that it is recommended for babies teeth (???never knew they had any!!!!) I have seen what is does to kids teeth!!! Horrible brown mottling!

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

croco — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:09:05 GMT

I haven't used fluoridated water in over 6 years plus I haven't used tooothpaste for 1 year and my teeth have never been better.

A year ago I had gum disease and found a natural product called ORAMPLUS which replaces toothpaste and stopped my bleeding gums within days.

Also bicarb soda (baking soda) made into paste is excellent as a tooothpaste substitute without the chemicals!

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

Yod — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 06:13:57 GMT

Speakin' of EMR emissions...I just noticed your plug about Blue Tube. What about hearing aids? I'm especially concerned about crossover aids that carries sound from one ear to the other via wire of FM signal. Know anything about this?

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

Jade007 — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:32:04 GMT

Hi, Do any of you know what reverse osmosis system Dr. Mercola recommends ? Which is the best ? There are so many out there - don't want a crummy one. If any of you know, or have suggestions, let the rest of us know....thanks.

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

Verdianna — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:45:31 GMT

I started my research on this subject about a year back. I started checking all bottled water here in Canada most of it has flouride.

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

wikat — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:15:21 GMT

just wanted to mention that my son is allergic to Fluoride too, although no one ever seems to think that it is a problem when I write to the powers that be regarding the fluorination of our water.

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

anneshq — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:19:08 GMT

I used to work in a pediatric bone marrow transplant unit and because the kids were so immuno-compromised from the near-fatal doses of toxic chemotherapy they were not permitted to drink tap water out of the fear they may contract a dangerous micro-organism from the water. The oncologist would then prescribe daily fluoride tablets to "protect" their teeth. Poison on top of poison! Great science! Is it not surprising that most of these kids did not survive? When will the madness stop?! Only when we empower ourselves with knowledge and seek the truth as if our lives depend on it (because it does!).

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

Fletch — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:25:54 GMT

For reasonable fluoride reduction in a whole house type filtration, without activated alumina, bone char would be the best that I can find.

I had a backwashing filter custom filled with bone char and catalytic carbon but have found this from doulton which is close to what I have: doultonusa.com/.../Heavy-metals-and-VOC-reduction-filters.php

They also make small bone char/Brimac filters too. I like the looks of their ceramic filters as well.

Fletch

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

george tolhurst — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:01:27 GMT

thank YOU DR. MERCOLA FOR CONTINEING TO STUDY AND LEARN AND INFORMING THE PUBLIC. I'VE BEEN FIGHTING THE FLORIDE FIGHT SENSE 1975 AND ITS STILL A DIFFICULT BATTLE. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

wendym55 — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 06:11:18 GMT

The flouride that is added to our water, toothpaste etc. is a bi-product of aluminium smelting. The flouride that you need, is supplied by nature in its natural form, is found in tea. Never buy tea that has flouride added. Added flouride is toxic. You won't get too many governments banning it, as it is a good tool to 'dumb us down'. I am very curious as to why dentists push it so much. The more tooth decay, the more money they make. I reckon they are too dumbed down to realise that they are causing a lot of people, especially children, a lot of health problems. Oh well, I guess all that matters is a good smile when you are dying of bone cancer!!

re: Scientific American Has Second Thoughts About Fluoride

gtigerclaw — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 04:10:49 GMT

It isn't generally known, but our U.S. Government drinks bottled water at our expense, reported in the Tampa Tribune some years ago in an article about the many wasted expenses.

Then, I found the Zephyrhills Spring Water truck outside my St. Petersburg, Florida city hall. I had appointment with the Television dept. guy, and when I asked were they drinking bottled water, he said, "no", but when we walked out into the hallway, here came the truck driver pulling a guerney with 5 five-gallon jugs, and I asked who they were for, he replied: "The mayor's office and city council!". I requested 3 answers: how long has this been going on, what depts. are getting it, and how much are they spending. I received a letter stating it started Dec. 7, 1992, (which is when fluoridation began here), 6 depts are getting (not all city employees), and the costs were for all sports sizes and the gallon jugs and 5 gallon jugs was around $5-6 thousand per year. Oh, and btw, it is not in the yearly budget, but in "Unbudgetted Funding",, so average John Q is not aware of this underhanded action.