Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,719
- Reactions
- 10,371
I'm sorry it annoys you gg, it seems it was a fairly traumatic experience for you as a youngster.
You don't really, except by analysing the points I make. That can't hurt you... unless you have an adgenda against me or are uncomfortable with being shown your long held trust of some powerful medical professionals is ill-founded.
How do we know that you "are completely open, honest, factual and not corrupt?"
I'm sorry it annoys you gg, it seems it was a fairly traumatic experience for you as a youngster
The above was in answer to my question;
It doesn't take much analysis of the "points" you make, to work out your agenda. You are using fluoridation of water as a handy prop to pursue a vendetta against the medical profession. You claim you are a behavioral psychologist. I noticed you practicing your craft on GG;
Perhaps you had some traumatic experience as a youngster that has embittered you against the medical profession.
So Calliope, what is your adgenda... are you claiming the medical profession is above reproach, are you just being an annoying troll, or have you some constructive input to the issue of fluoridation?
It is very strange that a "professional person" claiming to be lawyer can't spell "agenda" or "credibility." I'm afraid your "credability" is shotIf you were a 'professional' person on whom you communication was being relied upon, you would be guilty of negligence by misquoting and misrepresenting the facts and fraud if you stood to gain from it
I agree. Medicating, unnecessarily, an entire population when there's an acceptable alternative of those who wish to consume fluoride doing so individually, is imo just wrong, not to mention a huge waste of money.The cost-benefit argument is absolute BS.
How is it cost-effective to pour 12L fluoridated water down the toilet with every flush?
How about the kilolitres of poolwater, reticulation, ...
It would be far more cost-effective to concentrate on what causes tooth decay. If, as common sense would suggest, teeth decay from insufficient brushing and sugary, acidic drinks: Add fluorides to coke and lemonade! Get some research done that measures the damage each does, then mandate the adequate dosage to neutralise the ill effects. Add some to chocolate, jellybabies, whatever is found to cause decay. But don't force a "cure" on all those who don't need it.
You have no interest in it, yet leap to rubbish the concerns that Whiskers and many others express.I have no interest in the fluoride issue, nor any other conspiracy theories. As far as I'm concerned the debate is dead in the water in spite of your attempts to resurrect it.
I have not seen where Whiskers has claimed to be either a lawyer or a behavioural psychologist. What he said wasIt is very strange that a "professional person" claiming to be lawyer can't spell "agenda" or "credibility." I'm afraid your "credability" is shot
I have no idea what these qualifications are, and don't consider it especially relevant to the debate about fluoride.I have a basic understanding of science, but as you know from earlier, I have qualifications in accounting and law and behavioural psychology.
I think it's a good additive and believe the Dentists and Doctors on it by the way, but this is about the debate.
So on the Debate.
1. Most folk against Fluoride operate on the fringes of their professions.
2. Many are doctors' wives or people with other strange beliefs with bugger all else to do.
3. I can find nothing against fluoridation by googling major health, dental, public health, medical and scientific journals and the WHO.
4. This post will make absolutely no difference to the belief of believers that it is bad.
I agree. Medicating, unnecessarily, an entire population when there's an acceptable alternative of those who wish to consume fluoride doing so individually, is imo just wrong, not to mention a huge waste of money.
You have no interest in it, yet leap to rubbish the concerns that Whiskers and many others express.
Twisting people's words in order to further have a go at them is imo unhelpful.
I can't make any informed assessment, can't find any relevant literature indicating it is bad, and likewise end up deferring to the professionals about it.
Mandatory fortification
Since October 2009, regulations have required that non-iodised salt be replaced with iodised salt in all bread except organic bread and bread mixes for making bread at home. However, manufacturers can choose to add iodised salt to bread mixes if they wish. Additionally, salt-free breads will not contain iodised salt. This action was taken to address the re-emergence of deficiency in Australia and New Zealand.
+1 here.
I can't make any informed assessment, can't find any relevant literature indicating it is bad, and likewise end up deferring to the professionals about it.
I had a guy apply for a job once, resume was incredible but I first realised that I had an interesting character when I brought him a glass of water and he asked "Is that tap water?". I said yes and ask why upon which he spent the next 5 minutes telling me about the problems with fluoride and how it is used in China to keep the population dumb etc.
Was an interesting interview.
And...shock, horror;
.
Now that's a useful contribution from you Calliope.
Research shows fluoride is antaganistic to calcium and iodine uptake, especially in low iodine diets as much of the fluoridated world is heading. The proponents of fluoridation have no choice but to advocate extra iodine supplementation.
Often it's better sustainable and holistic economics to consume less to gain more health and wealth.
My objection is to mass fluoridation of water systems with contaminated industrial grade fluoride.
I would start by differentiating this thread "Fluoridation" from the previous "Fluoride" thread, in the sense that I accept there may be some benefit in fluoride products like tooth paste for some people if they choose to use them, but having our health bureaucrats demand we put filthy contaminated fluoride by-products in our drinking water is quite another.
From what I'm hearing at least two councils in the Burnett region have decided to turn off or not connect to fluoridation.
Bundaberg has dug it's heels in and told the Qld chief health officer Dr Jeanette Young (who by the way is demanding that we fluoridate our water) to knick off, you are not going to tell us what to do with our water. Apparently only two of the 10 councilers are in favor of fluoridation, but will not support it because of the ongoing costs to the local council.
The Mayor has arranged a public debate for Jan 30, but so far Dr Young and the pro-fluoride lobby are refusing to show up, rather they organised a seperate pro-fluoridation meeting a week or so ago, where they could have their say without any 'credible' counter information being discussed. They are on record as saying the science is black and white and the noisy minority who dissagree are seriously miss-informed... and that's just the tame end of the abuse critics have got from Qld health and the pro-fluoridation lobby.
I see a similar story developing on the Gold Coast where the push to get rid of fluoridation since the LNP won office and gave them the option to opt out of the filthy excuse for healthier teeth.
C'mon people, it's time to have a closer look at the inaccurate and sometimes plain untruthful 'advertising' the pro-fluoridation lobby are peddling.
You wouldn't happen to be mates with Wendy McClelland of Dereel by chance??
I don't think either the vaccination or iodised salt analogy is valid.Interesting point. My initial reaction was to compare it to vaccinations but herd immunity doesn't really factor in here. A better analogy might be iodised salt? Interesting to note that when I read the wikipedia entry, they mentioned fluoridated salt.
So did his concerns prompt you to do any research about the potential damage to vulnerable individuals in consuming fluoride?I had a guy apply for a job once, resume was incredible but I first realised that I had an interesting character when I brought him a glass of water and he asked "Is that tap water?". I said yes and ask why upon which he spent the next 5 minutes telling me about the problems with fluoride and how it is used in China to keep the population dumb etc.
Was an interesting interview.
Exactly. Plus the fact that just a tiny proportion of this medicated water is actually consumed by people.How many people regularly drink significant quantities of tap water these days?
Most of the younger generation seem to see water as product that comes in a bottle and simply won't drink from the tap. If the shop's out of bottled water then they'll buy fizzy drinks or something else instead.
If people aren't drinking the tap water then it's irrelevant whether or not there's fluoride added to it.
So did his concerns prompt you to do any research about the potential damage to vulnerable individuals in consuming fluoride?
Ditto iodised salt. This is simply available for those who wish to use it.
So what is your point? You have the choice of making your own or buying organic, many varieties of which are freely available.Unless of course, if you eat bread. Then you have no choice unless you eat organic bread or make you own.
So what is your point? You have the choice of making your own or buying organic, many varieties of which are freely available.
It's entirely different from mass medication of tap water.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?