Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(RedOrbit)   Fluoride, which is put into water supplies to fight tooth decay and control minds of citizens, found to be produced in stars before they go supernova   (redorbit.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

880 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Aug 2014 at 4:50 PM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2014-08-23 03:24:14 PM  
Communist conspiracy.
 
2014-08-23 03:53:01 PM  
You're telling me stars produce elements?

Shocking.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-08-23 03:59:02 PM  
Appropriate that the article is from RED orbit.

Fluorine is a byproduct of stellar fusion, not a main product like helium, carbon, oxygen, iron, and nickel.
 
2014-08-23 04:06:50 PM  
NEWS FLASH
other than hydrogen and most helium
every single atom in your body, in the solar system, and the whole universe came from inside an exploding star

you are literally made from stardust
 
2014-08-23 04:07:05 PM  
The Birchers are not going to be happy about this
 
2014-08-23 04:16:13 PM  
... hmmm

img.fark.net
 
2014-08-23 04:21:52 PM  
I'll just leave this here
 
2014-08-23 04:30:20 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The Birchers are not going to be happy about this


They will be pining for a better age, with an ashen look on their faces, aspen themselves the important question:  Is it oakay to drink the water?
 
2014-08-23 04:52:55 PM  
So if we drink keep drinking the water, we're going ... to ... EXPLODE?!
 
2014-08-23 04:54:16 PM  
♫ We are stardust,
We are golden,
We are billion-year-old carbon fluorine .. ♫
 
2014-08-23 05:08:18 PM  
You know when fluoridation first began?

Nineteen hundred and forty six.

1946.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-08-23 05:09:52 PM  
1 + 9 + 4 + 6 = 20

You know what happened in 20?

Jesus finished going through puberty.  His parents hoped he'd find a nice Jewish girl and settle down.
 
2014-08-23 05:21:10 PM  
So I'm drinking star skeet.
 
2014-08-23 05:27:23 PM  
We are made of star stuff
 
2014-08-23 05:31:35 PM  

JerseyTim: You know when fluoridation first began?

Nineteen hundred and forty six.

1946.

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-08-23 05:45:25 PM  
I think I got this from Fark.

fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net
 
2014-08-23 05:53:06 PM  

dittybopper: MaudlinMutantMollusk: The Birchers are not going to be happy about this

They will be pining for a better age, with an ashen look on their faces, aspen themselves the important question:  Is it oakay to drink the water?


Nice. We can aways count on yew to spruce up a thread.
 
2014-08-23 05:59:42 PM  
Why stop with Fluoride? Let's add some tranquilizers to Ferguson's water supply.

/ya know, since the government's already established the precedent of adding things to the municipal water supply...
 
2014-08-23 06:07:57 PM  
Some day you will find me
Caught beneath the landslide
In a champagne supernova in the sky
Some day you will find me
Caught beneath the landslide
In a champagne supernova
A champagne supernova in the sky
 
2014-08-23 06:20:20 PM  

namatad: NEWS FLASH
other than hydrogen and most helium
every single atom in your body, in the solar system, and the whole universe came from inside an exploding star

you are literally made from stardust


Here, take this hydrogen, run it through a couple of stars, and look, you've got Margaret Thatcher!
 
2014-08-23 06:22:19 PM  
One of my toxicology students from a few years back wrote a paper on fluoride. The term project was to write about a toxicant, and we randomly assigned chemicals. Anyways, his was angled towards the conspiracy side of it, and it was just riddled with errors.

My favorite part was when he used a review paper and cherry-picked the one paragraph from that review paper to prove how horrible fluoride is. I saw the reference in his paper and decided to read the review article for myself - and surprise, surprise, the review paper only included that one to show that there was some evidence claiming fluoride was dangerous, but the vast majority of research showed it was safe in the levels used in the US. The student ignored the 50+ papers that showed it was safe, and used the one article that showed it wasn't from that review article. He also ignored the conclusions from the review paper in order to push his own agenda.

/Decided to turn it into a lesson on how to read scientific papers and about forming conclusions off the evidence - rather than shaping the evidence to fit our predetermined conclusions.
 
2014-08-23 06:38:17 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: I'll just leave this here


Before I even clicked, I knew it was either Carl Sagan or Dr Strangelove.
 
2014-08-23 06:49:05 PM  
i939.photobucket.com
"Thank you?"
 
2014-08-23 07:01:13 PM  

mark12A: Why stop with Fluoride? Let's add some tranquilizers to Ferguson's water supply.

/ya know, since the government's already established the precedent of adding things to the municipal water supply...


I am impressed by your multi-year project to, no matter what the issue, not only be wrong, but also figure out a way to hate on black people in the process. It's... like... everything you do. I can't think of anything that I love or hate that I bring up as much as you bring up, directly or indirectly, how much you look down on African-Americans. It's morbidly impressive.
 
2014-08-23 07:04:01 PM  

mgshamster: One of my toxicology students from a few years back wrote a paper on fluoride. The term project was to write about a toxicant, and we randomly assigned chemicals. Anyways, his was angled towards the conspiracy side of it, and it was just riddled with errors.

My favorite part was when he used a review paper and cherry-picked the one paragraph from that review paper to prove how horrible fluoride is. I saw the reference in his paper and decided to read the review article for myself - and surprise, surprise, the review paper only included that one to show that there was some evidence claiming fluoride was dangerous, but the vast majority of research showed it was safe in the levels used in the US. The student ignored the 50+ papers that showed it was safe, and used the one article that showed it wasn't from that review article. He also ignored the conclusions from the review paper in order to push his own agenda.

/Decided to turn it into a lesson on how to read scientific papers and about forming conclusions off the evidence - rather than shaping the evidence to fit our predetermined conclusions.


http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_w it h_dioxygen_difluoride.php

Interesting read to say the least.

The inverse to your argument is that studies have shown that the absence of fluoride in drinking water did not have adverse effects on dental hygiene (in Great Britain IIRC). Yeah they have different ideas about straightening teeth to get that perfect smile but... If excess fluoride in the body does cause calcification of the pineal gland as has been suggested... And it is literally a third eye... For the heck of it I switched to a non-fluoride toothpaste (Tom's of Maine) and have used it for a year or so with no increase in dental issues.
 
2014-08-23 07:24:22 PM  
STARGAZING, Mandrake? CHILDREN'S stargazing?
 
2014-08-23 07:28:22 PM  
DON'T YOU GET IT? THEY ARE USING THE WATER TO MAKE US GO SUPERNOVA TO BLOW UP THE PLANET FOR XENU!!!
 
2014-08-23 07:41:23 PM  
We got as flyer from a elderly man going door to door, said he was running for city council. The entire flyer was crammed absolutely full, every single inch with anti-floride and anti-obama ravings on the front and what can only be generously described as a insane resume on the back. If I didnt live in Texas I would assume it was some form of public art piece. But its Austin Texas, his odds of winning are pretty good.
 
2014-08-23 08:01:10 PM  

Oneofthesedays: mgshamster: One of my toxicology students from a few years back wrote a paper on fluoride. The term project was to write about a toxicant, and we randomly assigned chemicals. Anyways, his was angled towards the conspiracy side of it, and it was just riddled with errors.

My favorite part was when he used a review paper and cherry-picked the one paragraph from that review paper to prove how horrible fluoride is. I saw the reference in his paper and decided to read the review article for myself - and surprise, surprise, the review paper only included that one to show that there was some evidence claiming fluoride was dangerous, but the vast majority of research showed it was safe in the levels used in the US. The student ignored the 50+ papers that showed it was safe, and used the one article that showed it wasn't from that review article. He also ignored the conclusions from the review paper in order to push his own agenda.

/Decided to turn it into a lesson on how to read scientific papers and about forming conclusions off the evidence - rather than shaping the evidence to fit our predetermined conclusions.

http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_w it h_dioxygen_difluoride.php

Interesting read to say the least.

The inverse to your argument is that studies have shown that the absence of fluoride in drinking water did not have adverse effects on dental hygiene (in Great Britain IIRC). Yeah they have different ideas about straightening teeth to get that perfect smile but... If excess fluoride in the body does cause calcification of the pineal gland as has been suggested... And it is literally a third eye... For the heck of it I switched to a non-fluoride toothpaste (Tom's of Maine) and have used it for a year or so with no increase in dental issues.


As a toxicologist, I do have to note that there can be profound differences with relatively minor changes in the chemistry of a compound. Dioxigen difluoride (FOOF) can have significantly different effects than fluoride (F-). The doses may also be wildly different when it comes to adverse effects. So just because FOOF is bad at one dose, it does not follow that any other fluorinated compound will also have those same effects at the same dose. Some will be even more toxic, some less. It entirely depends on the chemistry.

Remember, dose makes the poison (and so does the chemical, and route of administration).

Even ultra pure water can be toxic, as it will leach important minerals and salts from your system. Regular drinking water is toxic at doses of a gallon or more within a short time period (tens of minutes), or even less if you try breathing it.

Fluoridated water has benefits at low concentrations, to the point that areas with naturally occurring fluoride have the fluoride removed to bring it down to the dose with the beneficial effects.

So really, while you're perfectly within your purview to avoid fluoride, it isn't something you have to worry about. Especially if avoiding it is costing you extra money. If it doesn't cost you more and doesn't cause problems, then by all means keep doing what you're doing. But if it does, then the benefits of avoidance (peace of mind) does not outweigh the risk of avoidance (higher cost).

/almost everything in toxicology and public health is measured on a risk/benefit system. :)
 
2014-08-23 08:14:30 PM  

mgshamster: Oneofthesedays: mgshamster: One of my toxicology students from a few years back wrote a paper on fluoride. The term project was to write about a toxicant, and we randomly assigned chemicals. Anyways, his was angled towards the conspiracy side of it, and it was just riddled with errors.

My favorite part was when he used a review paper and cherry-picked the one paragraph from that review paper to prove how horrible fluoride is. I saw the reference in his paper and decided to read the review article for myself - and surprise, surprise, the review paper only included that one to show that there was some evidence claiming fluoride was dangerous, but the vast majority of research showed it was safe in the levels used in the US. The student ignored the 50+ papers that showed it was safe, and used the one article that showed it wasn't from that review article. He also ignored the conclusions from the review paper in order to push his own agenda.

/Decided to turn it into a lesson on how to read scientific papers and about forming conclusions off the evidence - rather than shaping the evidence to fit our predetermined conclusions.

http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_w it h_dioxygen_difluoride.php

Interesting read to say the least.

The inverse to your argument is that studies have shown that the absence of fluoride in drinking water did not have adverse effects on dental hygiene (in Great Britain IIRC). Yeah they have different ideas about straightening teeth to get that perfect smile but... If excess fluoride in the body does cause calcification of the pineal gland as has been suggested... And it is literally a third eye... For the heck of it I switched to a non-fluoride toothpaste (Tom's of Maine) and have used it for a year or so with no increase in dental issues.

As a toxicologist, I do have to note that there can be profound differences with relatively minor changes in the chemistry of a compound. Dioxigen difluoride (FOOF) can have si ...


I know. The reference to FOOF was totally unrelated. It's just such an insane compound!
 
2014-08-23 08:19:07 PM  

doglover: You're telling me stars produce elements?

Shocking.


Yea, WTF?  This reads like a kindergarden primer.  Once you are in 6th grade you better already know this...but perhaps the key was that the spectral emissions for Fluorine are in the IR spectrum and may have been hard to see thru the atmosphere?

Either way, WTF?
 
2014-08-23 09:07:52 PM  

Mangoose: DON'T YOU GET IT? THEY ARE USING THE WATER TO MAKE US GO SUPERNOVA TO BLOW UP THE PLANET FOR XENU!!!


Ha-ha, what a kidder. What Mangoose meant to say is that he respects all religions and he'll be back to see everyone after an taking an extended sea journey. Until then all inquiries about Mangoose as well as his paychecks can be directed to the Religious Technology Center, care of the Suppressives Rehabilitation Unit, L.Ron Hubbard Wing.
 
2014-08-23 09:08:07 PM  

bmwericus: spectrum


damn near killed im.
 
2014-08-23 09:19:03 PM  

Oneofthesedays: mgshamster: Oneofthesedays: mgshamster: One of my toxicology students from a few years back wrote a paper on fluoride. The term project was to write about a toxicant, and we randomly assigned chemicals. Anyways, his was angled towards the conspiracy side of it, and it was just riddled with errors.

My favorite part was when he used a review paper and cherry-picked the one paragraph from that review paper to prove how horrible fluoride is. I saw the reference in his paper and decided to read the review article for myself - and surprise, surprise, the review paper only included that one to show that there was some evidence claiming fluoride was dangerous, but the vast majority of research showed it was safe in the levels used in the US. The student ignored the 50+ papers that showed it was safe, and used the one article that showed it wasn't from that review article. He also ignored the conclusions from the review paper in order to push his own agenda.

/Decided to turn it into a lesson on how to read scientific papers and about forming conclusions off the evidence - rather than shaping the evidence to fit our predetermined conclusions.

http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_w it h_dioxygen_difluoride.php

Interesting read to say the least.

The inverse to your argument is that studies have shown that the absence of fluoride in drinking water did not have adverse effects on dental hygiene (in Great Britain IIRC). Yeah they have different ideas about straightening teeth to get that perfect smile but... If excess fluoride in the body does cause calcification of the pineal gland as has been suggested... And it is literally a third eye... For the heck of it I switched to a non-fluoride toothpaste (Tom's of Maine) and have used it for a year or so with no increase in dental issues.

As a toxicologist, I do have to note that there can be profound differences with relatively minor changes in the chemistry of a compound. Dioxigen difluoride (FOOF) can have si ...

I know. The reference to FOOF was totally unrelated. It's just such an insane compound!


Ah. I apologize for misunderstanding. Yes, the link was a good read. Thank you for sharing. :)
 
2014-08-23 10:09:49 PM  
let your face shine...go supernova.
 
2014-08-23 11:02:49 PM  
I thought most stars just got their teeth capped nowadays.
 
2014-08-23 11:26:21 PM  

mgshamster: One of my toxicology students from a few years back wrote a paper on fluoride. The term project was to write about a toxicant, and we randomly assigned chemicals. Anyways, his was angled towards the conspiracy side of it, and it was just riddled with errors.

My favorite part was when he used a review paper and cherry-picked the one paragraph from that review paper to prove how horrible fluoride is. I saw the reference in his paper and decided to read the review article for myself - and surprise, surprise, the review paper only included that one to show that there was some evidence claiming fluoride was dangerous, but the vast majority of research showed it was safe in the levels used in the US. The student ignored the 50+ papers that showed it was safe, and used the one article that showed it wasn't from that review article. He also ignored the conclusions from the review paper in order to push his own agenda.

/Decided to turn it into a lesson on how to read scientific papers and about forming conclusions off the evidence - rather than shaping the evidence to fit our predetermined conclusions.


Sounds like he now writes for Dr. Mercola's website.

/fark that quack
 
2014-08-24 12:12:48 AM  

machoprogrammer: mgshamster: One of my toxicology students from a few years back wrote a paper on fluoride. The term project was to write about a toxicant, and we randomly assigned chemicals. Anyways, his was angled towards the conspiracy side of it, and it was just riddled with errors.

My favorite part was when he used a review paper and cherry-picked the one paragraph from that review paper to prove how horrible fluoride is. I saw the reference in his paper and decided to read the review article for myself - and surprise, surprise, the review paper only included that one to show that there was some evidence claiming fluoride was dangerous, but the vast majority of research showed it was safe in the levels used in the US. The student ignored the 50+ papers that showed it was safe, and used the one article that showed it wasn't from that review article. He also ignored the conclusions from the review paper in order to push his own agenda.

/Decided to turn it into a lesson on how to read scientific papers and about forming conclusions off the evidence - rather than shaping the evidence to fit our predetermined conclusions.

Sounds like he now writes for Dr. Mercola's website.

/fark that quack


Ha! Mercola is quite the quack. And he's very polite; it's a calculated maneuver in order to garner more support (they're mean, so they're wrong; I'm nice and professional, therefore I'm right).

I've had multiple students over the past several years who believe quack science, even though they're tox majors. They get flustered when I use the very principles we teach in the class and use in the lab to show how the quack science is wrong: "you just performed the experiment, doesn't the principles exemplified in your dose/response curve show that it's the dose that makes the poison? So how could it be toxic at any dose?"
 
2014-08-24 12:45:42 AM  
Fluoride is a red herring, chlorine is the chemical they put in the water to subdue the population.
 
2014-08-24 12:49:56 AM  

Jeng: Fluoride is a red herring, chlorine is the chemical they put in the water to subdue the population.


I encourage people who believe this to avoid chloride in all its forms at all cost.

/well, more like people who have a huge fear of anything chlorine.
 
2014-08-24 08:03:07 AM  
Somebody alert Food Babe.
 
2014-08-24 09:21:59 AM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
Artist's rendition of a star about to go supernova
 
2014-08-24 10:36:44 AM  
Haven't they known this for quite awhile?
 
2014-08-24 01:04:04 PM  

ElPollotonto: Haven't they known this for quite awhile?


The article is light on details, but what was discovered is kind of cool. While we know that the elements come from the stars in general, the new research shows us exactly which type of stars fluorine comes from, where in the life cycle, and opens the doors to be able to calculate (mathematically and chemically) how it is produced and in what quantity.

/Not an astronomer, so my knowledge may be off. But this is what I gathered from other articles.
 
2014-08-24 04:53:44 PM  

mgshamster: Jeng: Fluoride is a red herring, chlorine is the chemical they put in the water to subdue the population.

I encourage people who believe this to avoid chloride in all its forms at all cost.

/well, more like people who have a huge fear of anything chlorine.


Our politicians give us lots of bromides.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report