If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Bozeman Daily Chronicle)   Not content with convincing parents not to vaccinate their kids, blithering idiots are now trying to stop cities from fluoridating drinking water in an effort to preserve their precious bodily fluids   (bozemandailychronicle.com) divider line 502
    More: Dumbass, Bozeman, fluoridation, fluorides, American Dental Association, drinking water, city commission, Missouri River, natural rights  
•       •       •

7372 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Mar 2012 at 9:05 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



502 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-25 04:44:37 PM

actualhuman: agentshadow: Can anyone answer these simple questions? If adding fluoride to our water really WAS in our best interest, then why is it the only thing they add to our water to supplement our health? Why not add other essential vitamins and minerals?

Because the water-soluble vitamins that a person will benefit from depends too much on the individual and their diet. Most people eating a reasonably healthy diet won't need any supplemental vitamins.


Then why does the FDA have an RDA on vitamins?
 
2012-03-25 05:01:15 PM
I really need to study harder for my internet dentistry degree. Especially for these threads.
 
2012-03-25 05:08:01 PM

pedrop357: pedrop357: However, that doesn't change that there are myriad and far more effective ways to deal with them then mass treatment of a shared water supply.

I should elaborate on why I feel this is a justification AGAINST fluoridating water.

Fluoride is but one small part in fighting various tooth ailments, some of which can lead to bigger problems down the road. There are more effective ways to deal with those problems and those solutions can be found everywhere.

Given how low the bar has been placed for justifying fluoride in the water, I can't help but wonder what other things would be allowed to be placed in the water. Is there anything that can be added to water that can't meet the low threshold for improvement that fluoride does?

I'm not that far off. Right now, people justify fluoridating water because it's chlorinated. Why is it a stretch for someone to justify adding something like vitamins by stating that "why is this is a problem, we already add fluoride and chlorine to the water?"

In response to my posts, someone else mentioned that various things are fortified and suggested that people are morons for opposing these "preventative measures". They stopped short of justifying fluoridation based on the fortification of other things.


No, people (and by "people," I mean, "the government that represents the people") justify fluoridation because it's been shown to benefit the general population. Anyone equating fluoridating tap water with chlorinating it is doing it wrong. The arguments for fluoridation stand on their own merits.
 
2012-03-25 05:14:53 PM

wood_stones: Why would putting a medical/dental agent in the water be the best method of getting it onto your teeth?

Perhaps adding to the toothpaste would be sufficent....o wait...


FTFA: "Teeth can be treated topically or systemically with fluoride, Wales said. Topical fluoride, included in toothpaste, protects the surface of the tooth. Systemic fluoride, swallowed through drinking water, incorporates into tooth structure to make teeth more resistant to cavities forever."
 
2012-03-25 05:19:55 PM

Cretony38: actualhuman: agentshadow: Can anyone answer these simple questions? If adding fluoride to our water really WAS in our best interest, then why is it the only thing they add to our water to supplement our health? Why not add other essential vitamins and minerals?

Because the water-soluble vitamins that a person will benefit from depends too much on the individual and their diet. Most people eating a reasonably healthy diet won't need any supplemental vitamins.

Then why does the FDA have an RDA on vitamins?


Wwwwwwow.

/backs away slowly
 
2012-03-25 05:34:14 PM
www.peppersmith.co.uk

I just want to say that George Washington did not have access to fluoridated water.
 
2012-03-25 05:59:45 PM
Amos Quito: [www.peppersmith.co.uk image 253x267]

I just want to say that George Washington did not have access to fluoridated water.


Amos. You have to stop agreeing with things I agree with. I feel wierd.
 
2012-03-25 06:23:23 PM
farking paranoid rednecks have infiltrated Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Norway, Scotland, Sweden, and Switzerland too! Now they're all toothless freaks.
 
2012-03-25 06:39:43 PM

BronyMedic: /naturalistic fallacy, anyone?



Some entrepreneurial type needs to market "all-natural" fluoride toothpaste, in much the same way they market unpasteurized milk or unprocessed foods. Just say that industrially processed fluoride is bad, but straight-from-Mother-Earth fluoride is good.

They'll make MILLIONS!
 
2012-03-25 06:47:58 PM
Beaten to the punch by Burt's Bees:
1.bp.blogspot.com

Sad to see they also make fluoride-free toothpaste. Oh well, if there's a market demand for it, why not?
 
2012-03-25 07:06:47 PM
Wow. There are a lot of dumb, crazy people.

I mean holy fark, if you're getting your evidence from a retarded youtube video you're just too farking stupid. Too farking stupid, I can't even type now because that's how farking stupid you are.

Jesus farking Christ.
fark. So farking stupid.
 
2012-03-25 07:48:41 PM
THIS IS WHAT BLITHERING IDIOTS ACTUALLY BELIEVE
media.tumblr.com
/on a Hot day
 
2012-03-25 08:34:28 PM

jigger: farking paranoid rednecks have infiltrated Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Norway, Scotland, Sweden, and Switzerland too! Now they're all toothless freaks.


Ha ha, and 90% of the United Kingdom and they're fine. (Googles British teeth.) Oh wait ...

Link (new window)
 
2012-03-25 08:35:29 PM
img.myconfinedspace.com
 
2012-03-25 08:40:59 PM

Mitch Taylor's Bro: No, people (and by "people," I mean, "the government that represents the people") justify fluoridation because it's been shown to benefit the general population. Anyone equating fluoridating tap water with chlorinating it is doing it wrong. The arguments for fluoridation stand on their own merits


If I head a nickel for every person in every debate over fluoridation who brought up chlorination to justify why it's OK to add fluoride to the water, I'd be rich.
 
2012-03-25 08:49:11 PM

Mitch Taylor's Bro: You can buy bottled water at most grocery stores. In many areas, you can have it delivered, to your door, too. Assuming you bathe, do laundry with a conventional washing machine and use dishes, cookware and utensils that require washing, you still benefit from having water pumped directly to your house even if you don't drink it. And if the level of fluoride in your tap water meets government guidelines, drinking it won't kill you, either. So, it's not unreasonable to drink fluoridated tap water. Decades of infrastructure neglect may have created water quality problems that affect the taste (and sometimes the safety) of tap water, but that's not due to fluoridation.


The point is that people don't get a choice about their incoming water supply and certainly cannot choose another water company. As such, it seems very wrong to me for anything to be added to the water aside from that which is absolutely necessary to make it drinkable regardless of just how swell an idea it is.

It's one thing to not filter minerals out (ie., bypass), it's another thing entirely to add something to it that wasn't there to begin with (again, aside from those thing necessary to make it drinkable.)

Fluoride is not necessary to make the water drinkable and only serves another goal, which can be achieved in other ways on an individual, voluntary basis.

In the end, my issue with fluoride is that it's imposed on everyone whether they want it or not and the bar for it's introduction is low enough to justify adding all sorts of things to water. All of this is very wrong in my opinion.
 
2012-03-25 09:15:41 PM

JrNeutron: /pure water dehydrates the body


No it doesn't. It also ceases to be 'pure' as soon as it gets a bit of saliva or stomach acid in it. There's no problem drinking (reasonable quantities of) pure water as long as the rest of your diet contains enough salt and other electrolytes.
 
2012-03-25 09:18:21 PM
Best thing about threads like this is that, after you read all the posts....the two digit IQ Derp are always the ones...:

Siding with the Government on everything

Lack reason and logic (as one Farker already said..flouride isn't good for you if your nephrologist says stay away from it if you have kidney problems)

Believe Al Gore is a scientist

And, many cities already are removing flouride from the water. So much so...states are now trying to interfere to make them put it back in.
 
2012-03-25 09:21:35 PM

pedrop357: In the end, my issue with fluoride is that it's imposed on everyone whether they want it or not and the bar for it's introduction is low enough to justify adding all sorts of things to water. All of this is very wrong in my opinion.


The bar is public health. Efficient and low cost.
Boy, that's a low bar indeed. A giraffe with an oversized pope-hat could do the limbo under that bar.

So, so wrong!
 
2012-03-25 09:26:38 PM

Mitch Taylor's Bro: FTFA: "Teeth can be treated topically or systemically with fluoride, Wales said. Topical fluoride, included in toothpaste, protects the surface of the tooth. Systemic fluoride, swallowed through drinking water, incorporates into tooth structure to make teeth more resistant to cavities forever."


Also a little fluoride makes bones stronger and increases resistance to osteoporosis.
 
2012-03-25 09:32:04 PM

CreamFilling: theoneontheleft: So, from a blithering chemists' perspective:

Adding sodium fluoride to an acid, such as stomach acid, immediately creates hydrogen fluoride (NaF + HCl -> HF + NaCl). This is an extremely dangerous chemical, and it's on a fairly short list of things most chemists just stay away from if possible, or at least be very very carefuly with if they can't avoid it. It causes nerve damage, can precipitate calcium in the blood, and even dissolves glass. Or, from wiki: "Hydrogen fluoride gas is a severe poison that may immediately and permanently damage lungs and the corneas of the eyes. Water solutions (hydrofluoric acid) are a contact-poison with the potential for deep, initially painless burns and ensuing tissue death. By interfering with body calcium metabolism, the concentrated acid may also cause systemic toxicity and eventual cardiac arrest and fatality, after contact with as little as 160 cm2 (25 square inches) of skin."

So yea, I'd be up for not dosing myself with even small amounts of that every single day for the rest of my life.

Wait, are you actually a chemist? Because you sound like you never even took high school chemistry. Your theory is that NaF and HCl are tightly bound compounds even when dissolved in water, but once they're exposed to one another the Flouride ion and the Sodium ion they're so drawn to one another they become this newly born, incredibly hostile compound. Completely ignoring the fact that HCl is another highly corrosive acid that your body produces liters of a day, don't you see the problem with your assumption?


Post-doc chemist, actually. Why do you think I assumed NaF and HCl are tightly bound? They're written that way in the equation to describe how they're mixed, but you get the same result from separating the ions of noncovalently bound species: Na+ + F- + H+ + Cl- -> HF (predominantly bound together) + Na+ +Cl-. Since HF is a weak acid in dilute solution (see wiki), it floats away as a single entity until it starts chewing up something. I don't worry about HCl because the stomach has mucus linings designed to deal with it and keep it out of the rest of the body. If it turns out that this system also keeps HF from permeating into the rest of the body, then I don't see any reason for concern, but I also don't see any reason to just assume that this is the case (it'd have to also go through the intenstines, and its lower polarity than HCl might allow it to diffuse through the lining). I should say I don't think this means fluoridation is causing us any harm, but I don't see any benefit whatsoever (unless you're brushing your teeth with nonfluoridated toothpase, such as straight baking soda), and there's a plausable mechanism by which it could cause harm. My logic dictates that in this case it's more logical to avoid the possible rick.
 
2012-03-25 09:46:02 PM

actualhuman: alexandermals: verbal_jizm: theoneontheleft: Angel of Death: theoneontheleft: So, from a blithering chemists' perspective

A chemist who isn't an expert on the medical effects of his chemicals but who opines on the same anyway is indeed blithering.

Angel of Death: theoneontheleft: So, from a blithering chemists' perspective

A chemist who isn't an expert on the medical effects of his chemicals but who opines on the same anyway is indeed blithering.

My guess is you're trolling, but: how expert do you have to be to know that you shouldn't ingest things that dissolve glass? Aside from that, as someone who's worked as a lab safety coordinator overseeing HF users and has had to sit through multiple training sessions on HF use, I think I'm pretty well qualified to opine on its medical effects.

I'm sure, as a chemist, you know how dangerous chlorine gas is, or even bromine gas. I'm assuming you never go swimming/hot tubbing in chlorinated or brominated water and would warn all parents to prevent their children from doing the same. I'm assuming you also avoid apples and apple products because they contain cyanates and arsenic.

Off subject much? I believe we were discussing fluoride in the water.

His point, for those of you who don't have enough chemistry to follow it, was that things that are highly toxic at high concentrations can be heathful, if not necessary for life, at lower concentrations. The implication is that you and your "chemist" friend are pulling this stuff out of our rectal cavities. Because you are.


Swimming in a dilute chlorine solution occassionally I'm totally cool with. But drinking even small amounts of it daily, no- because ingestion of a chemical is an entirely different thing. But more to the point: if we didn't already have fluoridated toothpaste, I'd be all for adding NaF to water, as the dental benefit would clearly outweight any potential cost. But if you already have flouride in toothpaste, then added fluoride in water does nothing for you. at all. zero. nada. Zilch. Why would you ever intentionally put a chemical in your body that even might possibly cause harm, if you know it won't do anything good? As long as Crest is around, I don't see any justification for taking that risk.

Granted, yes, perspectivewise, people's fatty foods and lack of excerise will do many many times more damage to their bodies than fluoride in water could ever even dream of doing, but for the record this chemist thinks fluoridated water isn't a great idea.
 
2012-03-25 09:55:21 PM
Where I live, I'd never actually heard about the people that oppose fluoride in the water for a long time. Eventually I'd heard that some people oppose it from a girl from WA (very far from me) and while I did believe her, I thought it was some obscure little WA cult or something. But seeing how many people in this thread actually oppose it, I weep for how many paranoid lunatics there are in a civilized country. I'm at least glad that you're far enough away from me that you don't actually get to vote on anything that impacts me.
 
2012-03-25 10:04:04 PM

theoneontheleft: Swimming in a dilute chlorine solution occassionally I'm totally cool with. But drinking even small amounts of it daily, no- because ingestion of a chemical is an entirely different thing. But more to the point: if we didn't already have fluoridated toothpaste, I'd be all for adding NaF to water, as the dental benefit would clearly outweight any potential cost. But if you already have flouride in toothpaste, then added fluoride in water does nothing for you. at all. zero. nada. Zilch. Why would you ever intentionally put a chemical in your body that even might possibly cause harm, if you know it won't do anything good? As long as Crest is around, I don't see any justification for taking that risk.


False.

Ingested flouride helps in different ways to topically applied fluoride.
The risks are miniscule, the benfits are not.
 
2012-03-25 10:16:13 PM

pedrop357: Mitch Taylor's Bro: No, people (and by "people," I mean, "the government that represents the people") justify fluoridation because it's been shown to benefit the general population. Anyone equating fluoridating tap water with chlorinating it is doing it wrong. The arguments for fluoridation stand on their own merits

If I head a nickel for every person in every debate over fluoridation who brought up chlorination to justify why it's OK to add fluoride to the water, I'd be rich.


I'd bet it's much closer to forty cents (new window) ;-)
 
2012-03-25 10:21:57 PM
Jesus H. Toothless Christ... some of you have more problems than fluoride in your water.

We just voted to put it back in my town's water, despite the pseudosciency bullshiat DVD that was distributed to every single house. I imagine it's the same YouTube video some are referring to in this thread. It's professional-looking, to be sure. But pause on some of the studies they show briefly and actually read them. It is to laugh. My favorite was the one about children in one part of China who have lower IQs than in another region because their fluoride level is higher. If you look at the actual amount of fluoride, they're comparing 2.8 ppm vs 1.3 ppm. The current CDC recommendations are for 0.7 ppm, so the "smart" Chinese kids are still getting nearly twice as much fluoride as kids here. This is merely one example from a disk full of crap.

It's very simple: There is less tooth decay in populations with access to fluoridated water than in areas without, whether naturally occurring or added to city water. If all these anti-fluoride scaredycats were right, then where are all these cases of bone cancers and poisoning? I actually had a local anti-fluoride advocate tell me that we don't know the true toll because they don't do autopsies on all the supposed heart attack victims. Seriously, it's all a giant conspiracy. *wink wink*
 
2012-03-25 10:33:13 PM

RealAmericanHero: Where I live, I'd never actually heard about the people that oppose fluoride in the water for a long time. Eventually I'd heard that some people oppose it from a girl from WA (very far from me) and while I did believe her, I thought it was some obscure little WA cult or something. But seeing how many people in this thread actually oppose it, I weep for how many paranoid lunatics there are in a civilized country. I'm at least glad that you're far enough away from me that you don't actually get to vote on anything that impacts me.


It's true, there is a large segment of our population with undiagnosed mental illness. This thread is simply further proof of that. Imagine if they found out about all the lead piping and solder in the water supply lines. Not that it's anything compared to the leaded paint chips they've obviously been sucking on since birth.
 
2012-03-25 10:44:17 PM

Ivo Shandor: JrNeutron: /pure water dehydrates the body

No it doesn't. It also ceases to be 'pure' as soon as it gets a bit of saliva or stomach acid in it. There's no problem drinking (reasonable quantities of) pure water as long as the rest of your diet contains enough salt and other electrolytes.


Since pure water means that there is nothing in it that also means no electrolytes in it and when you ingest it or get it on your skin the water will take the electrolytes from your body. There is a nuclear reactor at my school that uses a pool of purified water to cool the reactor. If you stick your hand in it the water will dry out your skin. If you drink it the water will dehydrate your body.
 
2012-03-25 10:54:05 PM

JrNeutron: Ivo Shandor: JrNeutron: /pure water dehydrates the body

No it doesn't. It also ceases to be 'pure' as soon as it gets a bit of saliva or stomach acid in it. There's no problem drinking (reasonable quantities of) pure water as long as the rest of your diet contains enough salt and other electrolytes.

Since pure water means that there is nothing in it that also means no electrolytes in it and when you ingest it or get it on your skin the water will take the electrolytes from your body. There is a nuclear reactor at my school that uses a pool of purified water to cool the reactor. If you stick your hand in it the water will dry out your skin. If you drink it the water will dehydrate your body.


This is incorrect. However, continue drinking Brawndo.
 
2012-03-25 11:00:01 PM

JrNeutron: Ivo Shandor: JrNeutron: /pure water dehydrates the body

No it doesn't. It also ceases to be 'pure' as soon as it gets a bit of saliva or stomach acid in it. There's no problem drinking (reasonable quantities of) pure water as long as the rest of your diet contains enough salt and other electrolytes.

Since pure water means that there is nothing in it that also means no electrolytes in it and when you ingest it or get it on your skin the water will take the electrolytes from your body. There is a nuclear reactor at my school that uses a pool of purified water to cool the reactor. If you stick your hand in it the water will dry out your skin. If you drink it the water will dehydrate your body.


Why would the removal of electrolytes dry out the skin?
 
2012-03-25 11:08:07 PM

JrNeutron: Ivo Shandor: JrNeutron: /pure water dehydrates the body

No it doesn't. It also ceases to be 'pure' as soon as it gets a bit of saliva or stomach acid in it. There's no problem drinking (reasonable quantities of) pure water as long as the rest of your diet contains enough salt and other electrolytes.

Since pure water means that there is nothing in it that also means no electrolytes in it and when you ingest it or get it on your skin the water will take the electrolytes from your body. There is a nuclear reactor at my school that uses a pool of purified water to cool the reactor. If you stick your hand in it the water will dry out your skin. If you drink it the water will dehydrate your body.


Lucky bastard. My school is stuck with one of those shiatty old Candu reactors.
 
2012-03-25 11:23:07 PM

pellies: JrNeutron: Ivo Shandor: JrNeutron: /pure water dehydrates the body

No it doesn't. It also ceases to be 'pure' as soon as it gets a bit of saliva or stomach acid in it. There's no problem drinking (reasonable quantities of) pure water as long as the rest of your diet contains enough salt and other electrolytes.

Since pure water means that there is nothing in it that also means no electrolytes in it and when you ingest it or get it on your skin the water will take the electrolytes from your body. There is a nuclear reactor at my school that uses a pool of purified water to cool the reactor. If you stick your hand in it the water will dry out your skin. If you drink it the water will dehydrate your body.

This is incorrect. However, continue drinking Brawndo.


I have first hand experience with that happening. What knowledge do you have that makes you think that you're right?
 
2012-03-25 11:23:17 PM
I've noticed drinking fluoridated makes my sperm stronger and thicker compared to bottled water.

/Must be the extra electrolytes
 
2012-03-25 11:24:25 PM

AlanSmithee: The bar is public health. Efficient and low cost.
Boy, that's a low bar indeed. A giraffe with an oversized pope-hat could do the limbo under that bar.

So, so wrong!



So, we're good to go with vitamins and vaccines, since "public health" is the bar?

Efficient and low cost are not the only things that matter.

I'd also dispute that it's efficient and low cost to add something the municipal water supply where most water is used to wash clothes, dishes, and water landscaping. Most places don't see the need to reduce the mineral content of hard water as the cost isn't justified to filter water that's primarily used to water landscaping.
 
2012-03-25 11:36:10 PM

pedrop357: AlanSmithee: The bar is public health. Efficient and low cost.
Boy, that's a low bar indeed. A giraffe with an oversized pope-hat could do the limbo under that bar.

So, so wrong!


So, we're good to go with vitamins and vaccines, since "public health" is the bar?

Efficient and low cost are not the only things that matter.

I'd also dispute that it's efficient and low cost to add something the municipal water supply where most water is used to wash clothes, dishes, and water landscaping. Most places don't see the need to reduce the mineral content of hard water as the cost isn't justified to filter water that's primarily used to water landscaping.


Well, I'm a postdoc biochemist. However, aside from that I have washed glassware in nanopure water for hours at a stretch. No drying occurred. Also, If anything the water would move into the cells through the process of osmosis if that kinda thing wasn't tightly controlled by the cell membranes of epithelial cells.
 
2012-03-26 12:02:40 AM
Sorry that post was meant for JrNeutron.
 
2012-03-26 12:44:30 AM

pedrop357: Mitch Taylor's Bro: You can buy bottled water at most grocery stores. In many areas, you can have it delivered, to your door, too. Assuming you bathe, do laundry with a conventional washing machine and use dishes, cookware and utensils that require washing, you still benefit from having water pumped directly to your house even if you don't drink it. And if the level of fluoride in your tap water meets government guidelines, drinking it won't kill you, either. So, it's not unreasonable to drink fluoridated tap water. Decades of infrastructure neglect may have created water quality problems that affect the taste (and sometimes the safety) of tap water, but that's not due to fluoridation.

The point is that people don't get a choice about their incoming water supply and certainly cannot choose another water company. As such, it seems very wrong to me for anything to be added to the water aside from that which is absolutely necessary to make it drinkable regardless of just how swell an idea it is.

It's one thing to not filter minerals out (ie., bypass), it's another thing entirely to add something to it that wasn't there to begin with (again, aside from those thing necessary to make it drinkable.)

Fluoride is not necessary to make the water drinkable and only serves another goal, which can be achieved in other ways on an individual, voluntary basis.

In the end, my issue with fluoride is that it's imposed on everyone whether they want it or not and the bar for it's introduction is low enough to justify adding all sorts of things to water. All of this is very wrong in my opinion.


People may not have a choice about the water that comes into their homes, but they don't have to drink it. And it's not like you get charged for water you don't use, so if you don't drink the water that comes out of the faucet, you just pay for the water you use to water your lawn, wash your clothes, etc. And who says tap water needs to be drinkable?

Fluoridating tap water is an extremely cost-effective way to lower the rate of tooth decay in the general public. According to the article, Bozeman, MT spends about $35k/year on fluoridation. According to Wikipedia, there are about 37k people in that city. So, it costs less than a dollar per year per resident to reduce tooth decay 20 to 40% (new window). Do you really want people to have to get prescriptions from their dentists for dietary fluoride supplements to achieve these benefits? How much do you think that would cost? I'm sure the pharmaceuticals industry would love it. Or would you rather have tooth decay in the general population increase by 20 to 40%?
 
2012-03-26 12:58:42 AM

BronyMedic: khyberkitsune, Please. Please stop embarrassing yourself. I'm begging you.



I just want to say that you, BronyMedic and actualhuman, have just kicked the living shiat out of your debate opponents.

When they had to start insulting your job, because you had crushed their every assertion: total victory.
 
2012-03-26 02:11:28 AM
Dear Drew,
I would like to withdraw my request of last month for a 'derp' button to be added to the next Fark upgrade. After reading this thread I realise I don't need the RSI.

yours affectionately,
Nonzero
 
2012-03-26 04:41:54 AM

KimNorth: REFERENCE FROM A.D.A.M.
Poisonous Ingredient
Sodium fluoride
Triclosan

Where Found
Various toothpastes

Symptoms
Swallowing a large amount of regular toothpaste may cause stomach pain and possible intestinal blockage.
These additional symptoms may occur when swallowing a large amount of toothpaste containing fluoride:
Convulsions
Diarrhea
Difficulty breathing
Drooling
Heart attack
Salty or soapy taste in the mouth
Slow heart rate
Shock
Tremors
Vomiting
Weakness


Do you have any objective measure of "large amount"?

1ppm? 5ppm? 9ppm? 100ppm? What is a "large amount"?
 
2012-03-26 05:36:38 AM

Philbb: KimNorth: [scare stuff]

Do you have any objective measure of "large amount"?

1ppm? 5ppm? 9ppm? 100ppm? What is a "large amount"?


KimNorth was told there'd be no math!
 
2012-03-26 06:49:45 AM

pellies: pedrop357: AlanSmithee: The bar is public health. Efficient and low cost.
Boy, that's a low bar indeed. A giraffe with an oversized pope-hat could do the limbo under that bar.

So, so wrong!


So, we're good to go with vitamins and vaccines, since "public health" is the bar?

Efficient and low cost are not the only things that matter.

I'd also dispute that it's efficient and low cost to add something the municipal water supply where most water is used to wash clothes, dishes, and water landscaping. Most places don't see the need to reduce the mineral content of hard water as the cost isn't justified to filter water that's primarily used to water landscaping.

Well, I'm a postdoc biochemist. However, aside from that I have washed glassware in nanopure water for hours at a stretch. No drying occurred. Also, If anything the water would move into the cells through the process of osmosis if that kinda thing wasn't tightly controlled by the cell membranes of epithelial cells.


I've seen it happen first hand, someone touched the pool of purified water in the reactor and their skin became dryer because of the water having no electrolytes or anything in it so the water sought them from his skin.
 
2012-03-26 08:04:47 AM
pellies: JrNeutron: Ivo Shandor: JrNeutron: /pure water dehydrates the body

No it doesn't. It also ceases to be 'pure' as soon as it gets a bit of saliva or stomach acid in it. There's no problem drinking (reasonable quantities of) pure water as long as the rest of your diet contains enough salt and other electrolytes.

Since pure water means that there is nothing in it that also means no electrolytes in it and when you ingest it or get it on your skin the water will take the electrolytes from your body. There is a nuclear reactor at my school that uses a pool of purified water to cool the reactor. If you stick your hand in it the water will dry out your skin. If you drink it the water will dehydrate your body.

This is incorrect. However, continue drinking Brawndo.


Why are you ignorant to the basic kinetics of water molecules in aLittle.Alex: BronyMedic: khyberkitsune, Please. Please stop embarrassing yourself. I'm begging you.


I just want to say that you, BronyMedic and actualhuman, have just kicked the living shiat out of your debate opponents.

When they had to start insulting your job, because you had crushed their every assertion: total victory.


Yes, but my victory was cheapened by him actually admitting he was a troll. :(
 
2012-03-26 08:05:36 AM
Ahem. The above post should have excluded the part to pellies. I'm not in any mood to discuss diffusion in the AM.
 
2012-03-26 09:25:30 AM

randomjsa: The anti-vaccination crowd usually has children.


Yes, but they won't live long. Nature is kind of self-correcting that way.
 
2012-03-26 09:39:00 AM

Little.Alex: BronyMedic



I've had an account since early 08, and this is the first time I've ever Favorited someone. I just didn't want to miss a reply.

Thanks for hanging in there, BronyMedic.
 
2012-03-26 11:19:29 AM

NephilimNexus: randomjsa: The anti-vaccination crowd usually has children.

Yes, but they won't live long. Nature is kind of self-correcting that way.


Actually no, vaccination is a concept that only makes sense if there is "herd" immunity, without such measures we run the risk of having even vaccinated peoples contracting a disease which while usually not lethal to a vaccinated person can be, especially given the prevalence or lack of proper treatment that might be administered on the part of the unvaccinated person, thus creating a new deadlier strain of an otherwise vaccine contained bio-agent. These are the idiots who either have no concept of the small pox vaccinations or forgot, the world is better without that horror still lurking.
 
2012-03-26 12:22:06 PM

newton: bravian: [files.myopera.com image 320x240]

/the anti-fluoride crowd are the cutest form of paranoid nutcases

Go to school jackass.
How Fluoride Can Cause Hypothyroidism (new window)

Dr. Jerry Tennant describes how fluoride "bullies out" the iodine (an essential component) in the thyroid hormone, which regulates the body's voltage. If your body does not have proper voltage, it will not "heal" like it should because "healing" is simply cells reproducing to create new cells, which then replace the older damaged cells, and -50 mV's of voltage is required for cells to do this. This means that sufferers of lowered body voltage induced by fluoride consumption are more vulnerable to all types of diseases and injuries.


"body voltage"?
Hahahaha that's priceless!!
 
2012-03-26 06:01:08 PM
subby, quick, look, your ignorance is showing.
 
2012-03-26 11:52:27 PM

Soundman: Wasn't there some conspiracy thing about how fluoride is being used to dumb down America?


No one here in America can figure that out.
 
Displayed 50 of 502 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report