Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Report raises flag on fluoride

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Health Donate to DU
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 10:17 PM
Original message
Report raises flag on fluoride
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-03-22-fluoride-water_x.htm


The EPA's ceiling on fluoride in drinking water is 4 milligrams per liter, or 4 parts per million. That's four times the concentration recommended to fight cavities, which is 0.7 to 1.2 parts per million, the American Dental Association says.

...................................

The report notes that infants and young children are exposed to three to four times as much fluoride as adults because of their low body weight. But adults are vulnerable because of fluoride accumulation in bones.

People exposed to water at or above the EPA's upper limit over a lifetime are at increased risk for bone fractures and a rare, crippling bone-and-joint condition called skeletal fluorosis, the panel finds.

Though a few studies appear to show a connection between fluoride and bone cancer, the National Academies committee called the results "tentative and mixed." A large study at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine is expected to shed some light on the subject this summer.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Skink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Some people even think it corresponds to obesity and Diabetes
they may be right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. That is a ceiling for naturally occuring fluoride in water
not the RDA for cavity prevention and certainly not what they add to water.

I grew up with non fluoridated water and a mouthful of metal fillings by the time I was 12. I see people now who are getting their first cavities in their 20s.

The difference? Fluoridation.

Funny that DU is becoming the posting place of choice for the old John Birch pet conspiracy theories about fluoride!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lizz612 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. John Birch?
Is that the "Purity Of Essence" guy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Google "John Birch Society"
and prepare for a severe case of deja vu.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lizz612 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I know
I just feel that any discusion of flouridated water is incomplete without a reference to "Gen. Jack D. Ripper." Not particularty appropriate at times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Yeah, it really does work. .Anybody that was arround back then knows.
And, as with all drugs, correct dosage makes all the difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. if you actually would read the article
They are talking about flouride in excess of the amount usually put in the water, generally in areas that have natural fluoride in wells--just a study in USA Today, not a John Birch oriented publication.

I have to say that I find critical thinking a little low here sometimes, as electricity helping cancer cells is lumped for no reason with Hulda Clark, and a study about excess fluoride in the water, but still within EPA standards, reported in USA today, is lumped for no reason with the John Birch Society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Please try to understand.
The reason why a study showing electricity killing cancer cells but not healthy ones is "lumped with" the zapper is not because we think they're related - they're NOT, and THAT'S THE POINT. Clark's Zapper is a scam, a fraud, a waste of money and bringer of false hope.

Us crazy critical thinkers wanted to jump right in and point out that the study was NOTHING LIKE what Clark promises with her zapper. We're not "lumping" it together with her, we're applying appropriate skepticism and making sure to distinguish between legitimate scientific discovery and Clark's fraudulent claims. We don't want people being misled and causing harm to themselves or their loved ones by foregoing traditional treatment in favor of quackery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 07:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Health Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC