HIV Government created

Tell me how? Bottled waters the same, well, even worse in terms of cleanliness.

 

Um. Water just doesn't magically come with fluoride in every shape or form. Cleanliness? Who is talking about cleanliness? Please stop straw-manning...

 

Lmao.

Infracted.

 

So where do you get your water?

And how many years of research in flouride do you have to come to the conclusion that its unhealthy? Or are you some 15 year old conspiracy faggot?

 

"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."
http://www.holisticmed.com/fluoride/

 

Fluoride is perfectly fine in small concentrations. Even in large concentrations, all it does is make your teeth brown. No harm in it at all.

 

Back to Holistic Healing Home Page


Hahahahahaha.

Infracted.

 

Nice debating skills you got there. Reported for spam.

OT: My point still stands unless refuted, please. ^_^ Fluoride is toxic at certain levels therefore shouldn't be forced into the water supply that hundreds of millions drink from.

 

They aren't forced, they have a choice.

You should go drink the water at some third world country since America's water is so unhealthy.

Do you know what holistic means? Same thing as prayer. Being able to cure any disease if you can "think" it away. Ridiculous

 

We're not talking about dirty water, nor did I ever say all water in America is "unhealthy" or polluted with fluoride. STOP STRAW-MANNING EVERY POST.
You're ignoring every bit of info on the site because of one word?

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/02/23/fluorides-deadly-secret.aspx

That's another site.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holistic_health

In alternative medicine, it is believed that the spiritual aspect should also be taken into account when assessing a person's overall well-being. The spiritual aspect implied is claimed not to be associated with any religious ideology.

Oh, and I do believe we can cure certain ailments by "thinking" it away. It's called meditation. Once again, "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."

 

Rofl, what is straw manning? Ridiculous that you give links to sites that have 0 evidence that seems to be STRAW MANNING at anything to make it look legit. Oh, and nice product placement on the right side of the site, seems legit.

The entire contests of this website are based "upon" the opinions of Dr. Mercold.

LOL UPON? COMONNN. He's a doctor, but he's terrible at typing properly?

 

The idiot's argument. Everything is toxic at certain levels. Water is toxic at more that 5 gallons in one day. Vitamins are toxic at certain levels. Everything is toxic at certain levels, and unless you have empirical evidence that the toxic level is currently present in our water supply, and that you do not need to consume massive amounts of water to get that amount, then your argument is bullshit.

 

Ugh someone who is trying to debate but doesn't know what a strawman is. It hurts to be part of the human race sometimes

http://www.fluoridealert.org/iq-studies.aspx

^Some proof the elite are keeping us "dumb" so we stay worker ants.

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/fluoridated-water

http://www.mbschachter.com/dangers_of_fluoride_and_fluorida.htm

A study by Procter and Gamble showed that as little as half the amount of fluoride used to fluoridate public water supplies resulted in a sizable and significant increase in genetic damage. Epidemiology research in the mid-1970's by the late Dr. Dean Burk, head of the cytochemistry division of the National Cancer Institute, indicated that 10,000 or more fluoridation-linked cancer deaths occur yearly in the United States. In 1989, the ability of fluoride to transform normal cells into cancer cells was confirmed by Argonne National Laboratories. Results released in 1989 of studies carried out at the prestigious Batelle Research Institute showed that fluoride was linked to a rare form of liver cancer in mice, oral tumors and cancers in rats, and bone cancer in male rats. Since 1991, the New Jersey Department of Health found that the incidence of osteosarcoma, a type of bone cancer, was far higher in young men exposed to fluoridated water as compared to those who were not.

In addition to the well documented toxic effects of fluoride, fluoride even at dosages of 1 part per million, found in artificially fluoridated water, can inhibit enzyme systems, damage the immune system, contribute to calcification of soft tissues, worsen arthritis and, of course, cause dental fluorosis in children. These are unsightly white, yellow or brown spots that are found in teeth exposed to fluoride during childhood. In 1993, the Subcommittee on Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride of the National Research Council admitted that 8% to 51% and sometimes up to 80% of the children living in fluoridated areas have dental fluorosis. Malnourished people, particularly children, usually targeted for fluoridation, are at greater risks to experience fluoride's harmful effects.

Bolded part: Population control anyone? I mean, to stay on topic at the least

 

Well..It would make sense to create a disease that would control our population because its been proven that in 100 years+ there will be anarchy because our governments wont be able to provide us our basic needs but at the same time its a pretty sketchy thought you know? how would one be able to go through with an order to unleash a virus upon his own brothers and sisters

definitely an interesting theory but I have no say in it tbh
and no I dont ride the governments dick I just have a hard time believing that our own people would poison us like that

 

Believe. 'Cause they've done it before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

 

References to Wikipedia just makes you look dumb.


So at what point, does tooth decay prevention benefits from fluoride outweigh the negative health effects of fluoride as shown in your links. It doesn't because i don't find any of the links posted credible.

http://www.fluoridealert.org/iq-studies.aspx
Seems like they only studied one variable which was floruide. Not quality of school education or quality of life?

Let me disclaim your argument entirely.

http://www.mbschachter.com/dangers_of_fluoride_and_fluorida.htm

"fluoride is more poisonous than lead and just slightly less poisonous than arsenic."

So Fluoride is more poisonous then lead? Never read a article where someone was exposed to lead and didn't get sick. But since fluoride is more poisonous then lead, people should be getting sick from it in mass amounts shouldn't they? At a certain percentage of error, if 100% of the population drinks non-fluoride water, you can still expect 1-2% of cancer compared to the population that would drink fluoride water, there would be no change in cases.

If 100% of a group was to get exposed to lead, there would be more sickness. How else do they track lead in toys? They track it back to the # of cases reporting sickness and the variables/stuff they've been exposed to.

 

Waiting for some sources for your own information then ^_^ and please explain how using wikipedia is dumb for general knowledge?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_washington
BETTER NOT TRUST THAT LINK! Obvious lies there!

 

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/573800 Shows the real truth behind Washington.

Your first link is bullshit. The study is biased (presented in a anti-fluoride site), and does not take many other variables into account such as education; average IQ of the region; statistical significance - which, If you bother to check, is proven statistically insignificant. It also ignores the fact that safe concentrations are considered to be under 1 PPM, and that overdoses are always toxic. - Refer to my previous argument.

Your second says this:

Which just proves you don't know what your talking about

The third site clearly states that fluoride is more toxic than lead. This is not true in the least. Lead is dangerous in the 0.020 mg/l range, while flouride is lethal at 5,000 - 10,000mg/l range(source). Tell me that flouride is more toxic than lead.

You have no citation for your other studies. However, they are probably biased as well since Procter and Gamble manufacture mostly toothpastes and soaps.

 

Well I don't personally trust the government and the amount they put in water. I'll stay away from being forced chemicals in my #1 requirement to survive. (water)

I also never claimed fluoride causes cancer. So I don't know how that quote "proves I don't know what I'm talking about". Strawmanning can be seen here again

 

Strawmanning again, eh? look who's talking

The only negative thing the second link has to say about fluoride is that it causes cancer - which the site then clearly disproves. If you are trying to make a separate point using that site, care to explain so that I can refute that as well.

And they don't force you to drink fluoridated water. Ever heard of water filters? If you're rich enough to care about water fluoridation, you can easily afford a $20 water filter.