Fluoride

Hi Julia/CFD,

Funny thing is, at the time of my IBS I did a mountain of reseach and fluoride did not factor in the information I had on hand. I mentioned it to my gastro guy when I finally worked out the issue and he didn't really comment one way or the other, which I thought odd (same with the dentist).

It was only after I stumbled on the answer that I was able to find the relevant research and info to support my experience.

What will I do if it flares up in the future? Guess I will have to drink more bottled water or get a decent filter. I could send the invoices to the premmiers department, but won't hold my breath on that one

CFD, I'll let that one go through to the keeper

Wow there are some 'interesting' theories (at best in this thread). I haven't been on here for a month, and why did I choose to read this thread first!

Fluoride in the water is a public health issue, nothing more, nothing less. The science behind adding fluoride to the diet, in whatever form, is solid. There is enough evidence to suggest that in the majority of the population, the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. There is also a body of data that suggests that adding fluoride to the water may, and I stress MAY, cause problems, but the sample sizes are generally very small, and therefore may not be statistically significant. There is plenty of room for more study in this area that is for sure. Remember, nothing can be proven or disproven 100%

As to why fluoride is choosen over anti-depressants or the like, it is mainly a cost thing, but because anti-depressants alter brain function, it would be hard to rationalise it's use. Like has been mentioned previously, I'd be more worried about what my water picks up from the ancient water pipes. Julia, without having a go at you, or your condition, which I think is genuine, were you able to fully investigate the water infrastructure at the place you stayed? Were you able to rule out other causes of the discolouration?

Over consumption of fluoride has similar effects to overuse of anti-inflammitary drugs and pain-killers, and with society's tendancy to rely on these drugs, fluoride may be unfairly blamed. As for the example regarding IBS, that is a prime example of why we don't swallow toothpaste, and why children's toothpaste has little or no fluoride in it... because kids swallow more toothpaste than us adults.

In my battle with CFS and depression, I have had considerable contact with the complimentary medical industry. There are a lot of people pushing their own barrows, with their own agendas, no different to doctors prescribing certain medicines because some sales rep dumped 100 free pens on their desk. Just because something is 'natural' or 'alternative' doesn't mean you should leave your common sense at the door. There are just as many companies pushing their 'natural' therapies as there are pushing 'mainstream' medicine. Take it all with a grain of salt, or in this case, fluoride.

Kimosabi.... *sigh*
Teeth don't grow back.
Fillings don't get pushed out, they fall out because the tooth has continued to rot underneath it.
Cayenne pepper is a stimulant, so if you used it cure bleeding etc, it would be counter productive. It actually promotes the reduction of platelet stickiness which in turn means that the body takes longer to form a blood clot.
I've had my tonsils out, and I don't have polio. I wonder if Murali had his out...
Vaccines usually have a dead, or modified version, of the target illness, so that the body can build up an immunity to it.
Hot/cold alternating showers only provide a short term stimulating effect in the lay person, and going for a brisk walk will give you better long lasting results.

I could go on, but, you know....

Sprinter79 said:

Wow there are some 'interesting' theories (at best in this thread). I haven't been on here for a month, and why did I choose to read this thread first!

Fluoride in the water is a public health issue, nothing more, nothing less. The science behind adding fluoride to the diet, in whatever form, is solid. There is enough evidence to suggest that in the majority of the population, the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. There is also a body of data that suggests that adding fluoride to the water may, and I stress MAY, cause problems, but the sample sizes are generally very small, and therefore may not be statistically significant. There is plenty of room for more study in this area that is for sure. Remember, nothing can be proven or disproven 100%

As to why fluoride is choosen over anti-depressants or the like, it is mainly a cost thing, but because anti-depressants alter brain function, it would be hard to rationalise it's use. Like has been mentioned previously, I'd be more worried about what my water picks up from the ancient water pipes. Julia, without having a go at you, or your condition, which I think is genuine, were you able to fully investigate the water infrastructure at the place you stayed? Were you able to rule out other causes of the discolouration?

Over consumption of fluoride has similar effects to overuse of anti-inflammitary drugs and pain-killers, and with society's tendancy to rely on these drugs, fluoride may be unfairly blamed. As for the example regarding IBS, that is a prime example of why we don't swallow toothpaste, and why children's toothpaste has little or no fluoride in it... because kids swallow more toothpaste than us adults.

In my battle with CFS and depression, I have had considerable contact with the complimentary medical industry. There are a lot of people pushing their own barrows, with their own agendas, no different to doctors prescribing certain medicines because some sales rep dumped 100 free pens on their desk. Just because something is 'natural' or 'alternative' doesn't mean you should leave your common sense at the door. There are just as many companies pushing their 'natural' therapies as there are pushing 'mainstream' medicine. Take it all with a grain of salt, or in this case, fluoride.

Kimosabi.... *sigh*
Teeth don't grow back.
Fillings don't get pushed out, they fall out because the tooth has continued to rot underneath it.
Cayenne pepper is a stimulant, so if you used it cure bleeding etc, it would be counter productive. It actually promotes the reduction of platelet stickiness which in turn means that the body takes longer to form a blood clot.
I've had my tonsils out, and I don't have polio. I wonder if Murali had his out...
Vaccines usually have a dead, or modified version, of the target illness, so that the body can build up an immunity to it.
Hot/cold alternating showers only provide a short term stimulating effect in the lay person, and going for a brisk walk will give you better long lasting results.

I could go on, but, you know....

Click to expand...

I'll come visit you in hospital after you've been butchered by modern medicine, pity you wouldn't have realised that there were alternatives because you've been dumbed down by the Flouride in the Water.

*sigh*

well It's been an amusing experience reading these posts.. thanks all
You'd think if other countries have gone away from fluoride, then it's possibly not quite as harmless as they say.

Coincidentally this talk of the anticancer drug which gives people "dead jaw". As Keating would have said .. put a few moral or ethetical hurdles between a drug company and a pile of money, and watch em sail over them , round em, under em - who cares, just GIMME THE MONEY.

Trouble is, Julia, it sounds like there aren't enough people to back you in a class action against the state govt - shame. Sounds like you'd give them a run for their money.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/11/2116052.htm
Drug makers react to 'dead jaw' concerns
Posted Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:01pm AEDT
Updated Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:02pm AEDT
Drug manufacturers have moved to reassure the public they will provide better warnings on a group of bone-strengthening drugs that can cause a debilitating side-effect known as "dead jaw".

The move has been prompted by a 7:30 Report investigation into the drugs, which include Fosamax, Actonel and Zometa.

The drugs are commonly prescribed to treat bone cancer and osteoporosis but they can also cause a condition that rots away patients' jaw bones and can leave them unable to eat.

Oral surgeon Dr John Hennessy says he has seen a steady increase in the number of patients with "dead jaw" or osteonecrosis.

"What occurs is widespread death of what was previously healthy bone," he said.

"The condition is progressive [and] incurable and surgically moving into remove the dead bone often in fact makes the problem worse."

Click to expand...

Whiskers said:

The formula goes: Thought + belief = Action.

Click to expand...

whisk.. the other formula goes :

lack of thought + lack of belief = TV
(glub glub ,,, glub glub)

PS (perhaps I should say (most) commercial TV - other than sport of course )

lack of thought + lack of belief + lack of action = TV ?

Sprinter, shame you weren't here earlier, thank you for clearing this all up so convincingly. And I am sure Julia will appreciate you pointing her in the right direction as to what really may have caused the problem with her teeth.

Sprinter79 said:

Wow there are some 'interesting' theories (at best in this thread).

Click to expand...

You said it.

2020hindsight said:

lack of thought + lack of belief + lack of action = TV ?

Click to expand...

Guess What, I don't watch TV anymore...

Research + Belief + Action = 10KG Weight Loss + Off all Pharmaceutical Medicines + More Energy + Better Mental Clarity + Feel Great

But I'm just a Kook, what would I know...

Just a couple of further points: reverse osmosis filtration, I'm told by the manufacturers, discards up to four parts of water for every drinkable part it produces. One unit reduces this to two for one.
So there is a certain irony in this in view of governments urging us to reduce our water use.
About 1% of water is used for drinking.
That's a lot of fluoride on the cabbage patch and down the toilet.

Julia said:

~~and down the toilet.

Click to expand...

You found a good use for it!
(All that healthy, strong, white porcelain)

Merk drug company vaccines admits injecting cancer viruses

This stunning censored interview conducted by medical historian Edward Shorter for WGBH public television (Boston) and Blackwell Science was cut from The Health Century due to its huge liability--the admission that Merck drug company vaccines have traditionally been injecting cancer viruses (SV40 and others) in people worldwide.

This segment of In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood & Bioterrorism, produced and freely contributed by consumer protector and public health expert, Dr. Leonard Horowitz, features the world's leading vaccine expert, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, who explains why Merck's vaccines have spread AIDS, leukemia, and other horrific plagues worldwide.

Click to expand...

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=327_1195303011

Kimosabi said:

Merk drug company vaccines admits injecting cancer viruses

Click to expand...

Is cancer a virus now is it? Sh*t hey?

Well hasn't this thread turned into quite a slanging match.

I chose to sit out for a while after being threatened with physical violence by one member, labelled an A Hole by another and then given the bird by Mr Whiskers. I've had my own posts on other threads deleted for far less.

To me, you no longer have a creditable argument when you must resort to this kind of behaviour.

Chops - I find your posts amusing and insightful. Your response to Kimosabi's alternative therapy claims are obviously well researched and well thought out.

AndyKM - Irritable Bowel Syndrome is not caused by Fluoride in the concentrations added to drinking water. If it was, we'd all be farting like the proverbial and slugging down peppermint oil like i's going out of fashion. High concentrations of self-ingested Flouride or toxic doses of Fluoride from environmental pollutants are a whole different health issue and are a moot point in this discussion.

Kimosabi - push your tonics and therapies elsewhere mate. This thread is about Fluoride, it's not a Conventional medicine Vs Alternative Medicine debate. It's basically a thread about public choice, as is my interpretation of Julia's main gripe that got this whole debate started. I can't believe the moderators of this forum haven't pulled your postings an opened a new thread, because most of them have nothing to do with Fluoride.

Sprinter79 - thank you for bringing the debate back to some level of sensible discussion.

Julia - I final word to you.
I am not part of a lobby group. Unless you consider an entire profession to be a lobby group. Contrary to statements made on this forum by yourself and others, dentists, and most other health professionals are also free thinkers. We are not bound by what we are taught at university by the "educators". University merely teaches us to think intelligently and scientifically about what we do in life and question the logic of propositions placed before us.
We (dentists that is) are not automatons that do as we are told by a greater authority. We are bound by a professional ethical code to DO NO HARM and that should not be overlooked. It is incumbent upon us as it is all health professionals to constantly update our knowledge and keep in line with contemporary academic and clinical knowledge.Currently, there is much more scientific support for the use of Fluoride in drinking water than against it. That is not my opinion, that's just how it is my friend (for the moment at least)
There is nothing sinister in the ADA or the AMA or WHO (or any other health group you might like to find a three letter acronym for!) supporting the use of Fluoride at concentrations of 1ppm or less in the drinking water as a means for reducing the incidence of dental decay. They are recommending BEST CURRENT PRACTICE on a population health basis.
Minority groups and people with certain health conditions may not like this, but you have a right to protest (as you have very vocally here), which I support. Doesn't mean you'll get your way though. As I have said before and will say again - greater good.

To all of you who actively remove Fluoride from your drinking water and avoid the use of Fluoridated toothpaste etc......
I hope you never have the pleasure of seeing a 2 year old child screaming in pain at your local hospital emergency department with a dental abcess on a grossly decayed tooth that requires urgent extraction under general anesthesia. When you've seen a few hundred of them, you might start thinking twice about the benefits of Fluoride.

Over and Out.

BraceFace said:

To all of you who actively remove Fluoride from your drinking water and avoid the use of Fluoridated toothpaste etc......
I hope you never have the pleasure of seeing a 2 year old child screaming in pain at your local hospital emergency department with a dental abcess on a grossly decayed tooth that requires urgent extraction under general anesthesia. When you've seen a few hundred of them, you might start thinking twice about the benefits of Fluoride.

Over and Out.

Click to expand...

Now hang on just a doggone minute!

After all the talk of science etc, you resort to an emotive argument that is quite possibly a non sequitur? Lets have some substantiation and some link between non-fluoridation and tooth abscesses in two year olds, ruling out other factors.

As the graph of fluoridated and non-fluoridated nations posted earlier suggests, there are other factors at play other than fluoride.

On another matter, If you have been threatened on this forum, please let one of the mods know immediately who the perpetrator of this threat is.

BraceFace said:

...a 2 year old child screaming in pain at your local hospital emergency department with a dental abcess on a grossly decayed tooth that requires urgent extraction under general anesthesia. When you've seen a few hundred of them, you might start thinking twice about the benefits of Fluoride.

Click to expand...

probably due to mothers giving infant kids bottled sugar water (fruit "juice") when they go to sleep, and the slow top-up trickle of juice gives their teeth a brilliant acid wash for flaming hours

like
lol
I'm not sure that fluoride is the only parameter in this equation is it?

(and PS - even fluoride won't help there)

Julia said:

Thanks, Wayne, at least for a suggestion. Will look into it.

As Wayne has said, the issue is not dental health. If people want to use fluoride to protect their teeth they can easily add it themselves. It is not necessary to mass medicate the whole population so that those of us who cannot drink fluoridated water are deprived of a basic need.
Also it seems pretty stupid to water our gardens and flush our toilets with fluoride.

Click to expand...

Every State in Australia except queensland already has flouride in the water,...

Putting floride in the water is the best way to make sure it gets to everyone,... rich and poor.

I grew up in brisbane but now live in sydney and I think it's a great idea,...

Even if there are a few people who can't have floride I think the benefit to the rest of the population will out way the inconvience to the few,

and yes your probally right we shouldn't be flushing our toilet or watering our lawn with any drinking water at all not just floride added drinking water.

Julia said:

Knobby, this doesn't constitute a scientific study. I spent one month in an area where there is fluoride in the water. My teeth at the end of that time were so brown with fluorosis that they looked rotten. Not just a "faint, almost indiscernible mottling" as the pro fluoride lobby suggests, but dark, solid brown. Had to get them all veneered.

I had no idea what had happened until I went to the dentist on arriving home and he immediately deduced that I had been drinking fluoridated water.

This only affects a small proportion of the population, but it is a very real concern to those who are affected.

I am utterly delighted for everyone who wants to consume fluoride to do so.
It is easy to add it via fluoride tablets. It should not be forced on the rest of us.

I'm with Happy's comment that too many children are for ever sucking on sweet drinks/corrosive fruit juice and other varieties of poor nutrition.

I don't see that the principle is too different from saying that because such a high proportion of the population appears to be depressed these days, then we should all consume anti depressants in our water supply.

Or cholesterol-lowering agents because so many people refuse to modify their diet and exercise to bring their risk of heart disease down.

Or any other number of similar examples.

Click to expand...

I think it's better for 1 person to have to remove the floride than 100,000 of us have to worry about adding it our selves,.... not to mention the number of kids who will miss out.

Julia said:

Just a couple of further points: reverse osmosis filtration, I'm told by the manufacturers, discards up to four parts of water for every drinkable part it produces. One unit reduces this to two for one.
So there is a certain irony in this in view of governments urging us to reduce our water use.
About 1% of water is used for drinking.
That's a lot of fluoride on the cabbage patch and down the toilet.

Click to expand...

I don't know what sort of crazy setups they are talking about,...

yes reverse osmosis machines do require an amount of water be used to back flush the system,.. to flush out all the impurities that in effect have been filtered out of your water, but nowhere near the amount of water gets used as you are saying, epspecially because the water is already clean.

I was a machine operater on a reverse osmosis machine that was used to turn salt water from a dirty mangrove river into drinking water for locals and my machine used 400L of water on the backflush cycle every 12,000L of drinking water produced.

BraceFace said:

Well hasn't this thread turned into quite a slanging match.

I chose to sit out for a while after being threatened with physical violence by one member, labelled an A Hole by another and then given the bird by Mr Whiskers. I've had my own posts on other threads deleted for far less.

To me, you no longer have a creditable argument when you must resort to this kind of behaviour.

Chops - I find your posts amusing and insightful. Your response to Kimosabi's alternative therapy claims are obviously well researched and well thought out.

Click to expand...

So... you LIKE a bit of slanging mixed with humour, when it supports your position.

AndyKM - Irritable Bowel Syndrome is not caused by Fluoride in the concentrations added to drinking water. If it was, we'd all be farting like the proverbial and slugging down peppermint oil like i's going out of fashion. High concentrations of self-ingested Flouride or toxic doses of Fluoride from environmental pollutants are a whole different health issue and are a moot point in this discussion.

Click to expand...

Braceface, you protest at others making generalised unscientific statements, but you do the same. The one thing that I find in the pro fluoride arguement is they don't mention fluoride is becoming an increasing pollutant in our enviornment and varies higher in communities near the many types of industry that emit fluoride pollutants. It is only logical that the amount added to the water supply will be sufficient to cause overdoses in those areas, notwithstanding that some people may have lower tolerance levels of which IBS is an early symptom.

Kimosabi - push your tonics and therapies elsewhere mate. This thread is about Fluoride, it's not a Conventional medicine Vs Alternative Medicine debate. It's basically a thread about public choice,

Click to expand...

Public choice... so kimosabi is not allowed the choice to express alternatives to adding more fluoride into our food chain that is increasingly being contaminated by fluoride etc.

Julia - I final word to you.
We are bound by a professional ethical code to DO NO HARM and that should not be overlooked. .

Click to expand...

Ethical code to DO NO HARM.

Currently, there is much more scientific support for the use of Fluoride in drinking water than against it. That is not my opinion, that's just how it is my friend (for the moment at least)

Click to expand...

By your own admission the issue of DO NO HARM is very very far from unamious. Shouldn't this alone prompt you to err on the side of caution and at least instigate a research project by independant researchers that all sides can agree to accept.

Minority groups and people with certain health conditions may not like this, but you have a right to protest (as you have very vocally here), which I support. Doesn't mean you'll get your way though. As I have said before and will say again - greater good.

Click to expand...

For me your professional ethical code of DO NO HARM does not reconcile with your attitude of 'people with certain health conditions that are adversely affected by adding fluoride just have to wear it for the greater good', especially since your opinion is not even a mojority in world terms, let alone clear cut.

But then this,

To all of you who actively remove Fluoride from your drinking water and avoid the use of Fluoridated toothpaste etc......
I hope you never have the pleasure of seeing a 2 year old child screaming in pain at your local hospital emergency department with a dental abcess on a grossly decayed tooth that requires urgent extraction under general anesthesia. When you've seen a few hundred of them, you might start thinking twice about the benefits of Fluoride.

Click to expand...

absolutely dispells any notion of a 'professional' let alone 'ethical' opinion.

What an extraudinary emotional, unscientific distortion of the facts to promote an opinion.

I have seen communities in africa who have beaming white teeth, adults and children alike. They don't have fluoridated water... but they don't have processed foods high in sugars either. Isn't it also reported in dentistry literature that the commercial production of sugar (I think about the 1700's) to add to our diet was a turning point in dental health!

Over and Out.

Click to expand...

And to finish on this note is synomonous with emotional brat tantrum syndrome, picKing up his toys and going to play somewhere else.

Come on Braceface, get your act together and address the issues in a professional and ethical manner.

Whiskers said:

Braceface, I am having a bit of trouble with the credability of your arguement.

You say you have a strong scientific opinion and I can't let some of the flase and misleading claims go by without comment. Hmmm.

You say that fluoride is added to water supplies as a public health issue... and for the greater good.

1. Isn't it the truth that fluoride is only found on the earths crust in minisqule amounts, that is until industry started mining the earth?
   
   
2. Isn't it the truth that fluoride was originally added to town water supplies in the US via industrial pollution?
   
   
3. Isn't it further the truth that the first study ever done into fluoride in town water supplies was by the US industrial polluters (in the face of law suits) to determine how much fluoride people could tolerate without sustaining obvious damage to peoples health?
   
   
4. Isn't it true that industry scientists were the first to promote the use of fluoride as a protection of young childrens teeth as a means of leaving most of the fluoride toxic waste in the enviornment, particularly finding it's way into water supplies... and to make the opponents appear like quacks and lunitics?
   
   
5. Unlike other elements like chlorine that rise out of boiling water with steam... fluoride concentrates in the remaining water. So we have higher levels of fluoride in any food made from water particularly boiling water and particularly baby foods!
   
   
6. Fluorine is a very volatile substance readily reacting with all but two elements on earth. The salts of fluorine are among the most toxic natural poisons along with arsnic and lead.
   
   
7. Fluoride is polluted into the atmosphere ending up on our crops and in our food and water by numerous industries including coal fired power plants, oil refineries the superphosphate industry, aluminum smelters, zinc smelters, brickworks, ceramic works and steel mills.
   
   
8. Fluoride is a persistent and non-degradable poison that accumulates in soil, plants, wildlife, and humans.
   
   
9. Unlike many other elements fluorine is not essential for any living thing on earth! It is not naturally incorporated in the necessary building blocks of any living thing!

Given the history of fluoride, one good reason why not many doctors or dentists speak out publicly against fluoridation is simply because they rely on the patronage of the pharmacutical industry who rely on other industry. Speak out and risk being blacklisted out of a job.

And conversely many of the strongest advocates of fluoridation are on the payroll or kick-back list of the polluting industries.

What in amongst all those facts, particularly no 9, says fluoridation of the water supply is in the greater public health benefit let alone necessary for good teeth?

I would like to hear you in your responsible 'scientific' hat, agree or dissagree point by point.

Click to expand...

Whiskers said:

So... you LIKE a bit of slanging mixed with humour, when it supports your position.

I have seen communities in africa who have beaming white teeth, adults and children alike. They don't have fluoridated water... but they don't have processed foods high in sugars either. Isn't it also reported in dentistry literature that the commercial production of sugar (I think about the 1700's) to add to our diet was a turning point in dental health!

And to finish on this note is synomonous with emotional brat tantrum syndrome, picKing up his toys and going to play somewhere else.

Come on Braceface, get your act together and address the issues in a professional and ethical manner.

Click to expand...

Whiskers, you are right, some of my comments are fairly broad statements. The thing is, and this is the essence of my last "emotional brat tantrum syndrome" comment, is that I have a significant other life outside my nom-de-plume Braceface. As it is, this is the most times I have ever posted on any internet forum in my life in such a short period. Man, I could be doing much more enjoyable and productive things than sticking my neck out to support good public health policy. And this is what I am planning on doing - I've said my 20c worth, now someone else can have their turn.
I'm going to go home to my family.....

Whiskers, I have done the study and I have put in the hard yards to earn my qualification and if necessary, I could submit to you hundred's if not thousands of scientific articles published in peer-reviewed journal's that support the use of fluoride in the drinking water. Here's the thing though, if I actually had the time (which I don't) or the inclination (which I also don't) I wouldn't be pushing the pro-fluoridation idea on an Australian Shares forum.I would be promoting the cause to people who might actually be able to do something about it.

As I have stated before, I am not a lobbbyist, I just work at the coalface of the dental health industry, and I see, almost every day, the benefits of fluoride to dental health. That's how I form my educated OPINION.That and many years of tertiary training. I'm not sure how you form your opinion - perhaps you would like to state your qualifications for the record.

Mate, if you didn't like me bringing a human side to the discussion with my very last comments - tough. That is the real world mate. The decisions our governments make also affect the people who have no say - children. The decision to fluoridate the water supply is good for children's dental health and by default good for you and me as taxpayers (I assume you have a job)

And don't even try to compare African children with almost zero refined carbohydrate in their diet to children in "western" societies who are fed sugar from day one. All you are doing is showing your ignorance about the disease process of dental caries and the role fluoride plays in disease prevention.

You want lecture to me about being ethical and professional!?
Remember this from your earlier post #114........
:321:

You crack me up.