Sure, fluoride has been proven time and time again to be effective topically. There is no evidence ingesting fluoride, which is a poison, is good for the body. There is no mechanism in the human body to return fluoride to the teeth topically where it is proven effective once ingested.
Give me a moment, the rest of this post will be updated with a copy/paste from my previous post on the matter because it takes a lot of effort to summarize this topic.
The latest studies indicate fluoride in the drinking supply has little effect compared compared to fluoride toothpaste. So you once it is available the need for adding fluoride to water goes away. This has been supported by numerous studies comparing countries that do not add fluoride to their water.
I studied this in a 400 level water course at UNI. I got to visit wastewater and water plants and speak with operators. I was surprised to learn the fluoride was not naturally occuring in the water supply as it is advertised on the EPA website.
Then I found an article about a small town in Canada that ran out of fluoride because of a downturn in fertilizer manufacturing. I thought to myself what does fertilizer manufacturing have to do with fluoride.
That is when I discovered the truth that it is a toxic by-product of fertilizer manufacturing that is sold to municipalities to be disposed of in our water supply. It is not pharmaceutical fluoride because that would cost too much. Oh and it is contaminated with nasty stuff like heavy metals.
I then did a bunch of research comparing rates of tooth decay in different areas of the world. It really did not appear to make a difference but actual dental care and fluoride toothpaste did.
My presentation was about a hour and a half where I presented all my research. I got an A on it and everyone was very impressed with what I discovered.
Second edit:
We are begginig to understand about healthy mouth biomes which is evident in people who don’t naturally get cavities. If you have never been introduced to the bacteria that causes cavities or if you mouth biome naturally fights off and destroys this bacteria you will never get cavities.
In the future when our technology advances it may be possible to fight cavities without Flourode which is a still a poison even if it is effective.
My presentation was about a hour and a half where I presented all my research. I got an A on it and everyone was very impressed with what I discovered.
I’m didn’t downvote you but the reason this is unpopular here and elsewhere is because it started life as one of many red scares taken up by the KKK and various religious groups with the consensus of opinion (worldwide) being that your view as stated here is just incorrect. Furthermore, your incorrect view is consistently veiled in conspiratorial language using loaded words - “toxic” (dihydrogen monoxide is also toxic in the right amounts), “truth” (which “you” have “discovered” always a popular meme in this crowd). Aluminum has a similar history and it’s always the disenfranchised religious zealots and their armies of nutjobs (one of whom was pictured in the OP) who are doing the cherrypicking of the science.
Dude give it a rest, it isn’t the truth and you know it. You’ve been shown multiple creditable sources proving you are wrong. Stop shouting poison, because literally everything is a poison, the only difference is the dose. Stop spreading misinformation.
There is no evidence ingesting Fluoride, which is a poison, is good for the body. There is no mechanism in the human body to return Fluoride to the teeth topically where it is proven effective once ingested.
This is false. Ingested flouride is distributed to calcified tissues throughout the body, including teeth. In fact, dental flourosis (the actual, clinical symptom of overabsorption of flouride during development) is only possible because of ingestion during early childhood (including before you even have exposed teeth) and even then the symptoms are usually limited to aesthetics.
Fluoride is an avid mineralized tissue seeker.
Approximately 99% of all fluoride retained in the
human body is found in mineralized tissues, mainly
in bone but also in enamel and dentin.
The only claim that you backed up with a source is “flouride less effective now that people also get flouride from toothpaste.” Which is not surprising or controversial. You did not provide evidence that it’s poison, or that metabolized flouride is somehow ineffective compared to localized flouride, which would be nonsense. Flouride plays a role in the mineralization of your teeth, and while it might have an antimicrobial effect in your oral bioflora, its primary mechanism is structural and not limited to topical application.
I have seen an unbelievably compelling body of evidence that cigarrettes are poison, and so chemically addictive that no, it’s not a normal choice a person makes. People often “choose” to quit long before they actually manage to quit.
I have not seen a compelling body of evidence that flouride is poison, and you haven’t changed that. And associating it with fertilizers isn’t some gotcha - it’s a byproduct of converting sulfuric acid to phosphoric acid via phosphate-containing minerals, it’s not like we’re extracting it from cow dung.
If heavy metals are being added to tap water as part of the process - which again citation needed - that has nothing to do with the safety of flouride itself and everything to do with the regulations and regulatory bodies that should be in place to prevent that and monitor tap water for concentrations of substances that have been proven to be poisonous when ingested.
What is false, I stated their is no mechanism to bring fluoride topically back to the teeth where it is effective. You did nothing to refute this.
You are claiming flourode is not a poison is of course ridiculous. And we are not talking like anything could be a poison because even relatively small amount of fluoride introduced to the body can be harmful.
That is why there are safe limits of exposure. Indeed in areas with extremely high levels of naturally occuring fluoride it is recommended to filter it or consume from water sources not effected.
The majority of the time natural occuring levels or the levels introduced artificially are not harmful but that is not my point. My point is it is not necessary when you have adequate dental care as proven in countries that have good dental care and do not artificially introduce fluoride or have natural sources.
Since you did not actually read what I said you don’t understand heavy metals are mixed in with the fluoride extracted from the smoke stack scrubbers of fertilizer plants. Why are fertilizer plants required by law to extract fluoride if it is so safe. Hint: it is not
I have done the research in person. This is not the discussion you think it is and you are obviously trying hard to pretend you know something. I am not here to convince anyone. If you continue to act this way I will happily block you as you should me since we are not having a real conversation at this point.
What is false, I stated their is no mechanism to bring fluoride topically back to the teeth where it is effective. You did nothing to refute this.
Besides the fact that flouride is metabolized and delivered to your calcified tissues, where it plays a role in the mineralization of your teeth? And that the mineralization of your teeth is the main mechanism in flouride reducing cavities? It’s false because topical application isn’t the only way flouride reduces cavities.
And we are not talking like anything could be a poison because even relatively small amount of fluoride introduced to the body can be harmful
… The majority of the time natural occuring levels or the levels introduced artificially are not harmful but that is not my point.
Even relatively small amounts can be harmful, so it’s poison? But the majority of time it’s not harmful. So how exactly is it poison?
I don’t care if you claim to visit a wastewater plant or a fertilizer production site. I don’t see the research you’ve done here. I care that you don’t back up your claims with a single shred of evidence. If you want to make a point about how flouridation can be unnecessary, then you have provided some evidence there. Good work. If you want to claim that it’s poison, then provide the evidence for that too.
Go ahead and block me, if you can’t or won’t do that.
You make a lot of outlandish claims like ingesting flouride helps with cavities. This is nowhere in any literature. It is not my responsibility to prove anything to you that a simple Google search could.
I guess I will provide you one link to help explain something you are in complete denial about.
Simply put it is far cheaper to dispose waste fluoride in our municipal water supplies than to actually treat it. Instead of paying large amounts to make it inert they sell it for profit.
You didn’t know this because you never have actually studied this. I have. Your continued ignorance in this subject is pretty ridiculous. You do seem somewhat civil so I suppose I like wasting my time. Or perhaps I feel it is some sort of perverse test of what I have gone through learning this myself in a high level University class.
Really there is no point because you will just attack the messenger and continue to doubt. I was just here to share my story because I was invited to. You are rude and inconsiderate of this with your misfounded accusations.
Really, as I have pointed out this is all caused by a bacteria. Science has already moved far beyond the discussion we are having and I believe in the future fluoride may not be necessary at all. Until then, I will continue to brush my teeth with fluoride based toothpaste to prevent cavities.
You make a lot of outlandish claims like ingesting flouride helps with cavities
If flouride helps with cavities (it does) and is metabolized when ingested and distributed to your teeth (it is), then I’m going to give you credit enough to assume you can put 1 and 1 together and realize how silly you sound
Sure, fluoride has been proven time and time again to be effective topically. There is no evidence ingesting fluoride, which is a poison, is good for the body. There is no mechanism in the human body to return fluoride to the teeth topically where it is proven effective once ingested.
Give me a moment, the rest of this post will be updated with a copy/paste from my previous post on the matter because it takes a lot of effort to summarize this topic.
Edit:
https://www.cochrane.org/news/water-fluoridation-less-effective-now-past
The latest studies indicate fluoride in the drinking supply has little effect compared compared to fluoride toothpaste. So you once it is available the need for adding fluoride to water goes away. This has been supported by numerous studies comparing countries that do not add fluoride to their water.
I studied this in a 400 level water course at UNI. I got to visit wastewater and water plants and speak with operators. I was surprised to learn the fluoride was not naturally occuring in the water supply as it is advertised on the EPA website.
Then I found an article about a small town in Canada that ran out of fluoride because of a downturn in fertilizer manufacturing. I thought to myself what does fertilizer manufacturing have to do with fluoride.
That is when I discovered the truth that it is a toxic by-product of fertilizer manufacturing that is sold to municipalities to be disposed of in our water supply. It is not pharmaceutical fluoride because that would cost too much. Oh and it is contaminated with nasty stuff like heavy metals.
I then did a bunch of research comparing rates of tooth decay in different areas of the world. It really did not appear to make a difference but actual dental care and fluoride toothpaste did.
My presentation was about a hour and a half where I presented all my research. I got an A on it and everyone was very impressed with what I discovered.
Second edit:
We are begginig to understand about healthy mouth biomes which is evident in people who don’t naturally get cavities. If you have never been introduced to the bacteria that causes cavities or if you mouth biome naturally fights off and destroys this bacteria you will never get cavities.
In the future when our technology advances it may be possible to fight cavities without Flourode which is a still a poison even if it is effective.
I guess you just like to be rude. Reported and blocked.
I’m didn’t downvote you but the reason this is unpopular here and elsewhere is because it started life as one of many red scares taken up by the KKK and various religious groups with the consensus of opinion (worldwide) being that your view as stated here is just incorrect. Furthermore, your incorrect view is consistently veiled in conspiratorial language using loaded words - “toxic” (dihydrogen monoxide is also toxic in the right amounts), “truth” (which “you” have “discovered” always a popular meme in this crowd). Aluminum has a similar history and it’s always the disenfranchised religious zealots and their armies of nutjobs (one of whom was pictured in the OP) who are doing the cherrypicking of the science.
I don’t care if people down vote the truth. I do appreciate you though, thanks.
Dude give it a rest, it isn’t the truth and you know it. You’ve been shown multiple creditable sources proving you are wrong. Stop shouting poison, because literally everything is a poison, the only difference is the dose. Stop spreading misinformation.
But everyone was very impressed with their presentation!
I just shared my story and everything I said was true. I get it you think you are right.
This is false. Ingested flouride is distributed to calcified tissues throughout the body, including teeth. In fact, dental flourosis (the actual, clinical symptom of overabsorption of flouride during development) is only possible because of ingestion during early childhood (including before you even have exposed teeth) and even then the symptoms are usually limited to aesthetics.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21701189/
The only claim that you backed up with a source is “flouride less effective now that people also get flouride from toothpaste.” Which is not surprising or controversial. You did not provide evidence that it’s poison, or that metabolized flouride is somehow ineffective compared to localized flouride, which would be nonsense. Flouride plays a role in the mineralization of your teeth, and while it might have an antimicrobial effect in your oral bioflora, its primary mechanism is structural and not limited to topical application.
I have seen an unbelievably compelling body of evidence that cigarrettes are poison, and so chemically addictive that no, it’s not a normal choice a person makes. People often “choose” to quit long before they actually manage to quit.
I have not seen a compelling body of evidence that flouride is poison, and you haven’t changed that. And associating it with fertilizers isn’t some gotcha - it’s a byproduct of converting sulfuric acid to phosphoric acid via phosphate-containing minerals, it’s not like we’re extracting it from cow dung.
If heavy metals are being added to tap water as part of the process - which again citation needed - that has nothing to do with the safety of flouride itself and everything to do with the regulations and regulatory bodies that should be in place to prevent that and monitor tap water for concentrations of substances that have been proven to be poisonous when ingested.
What is false, I stated their is no mechanism to bring fluoride topically back to the teeth where it is effective. You did nothing to refute this.
You are claiming flourode is not a poison is of course ridiculous. And we are not talking like anything could be a poison because even relatively small amount of fluoride introduced to the body can be harmful.
That is why there are safe limits of exposure. Indeed in areas with extremely high levels of naturally occuring fluoride it is recommended to filter it or consume from water sources not effected.
The majority of the time natural occuring levels or the levels introduced artificially are not harmful but that is not my point. My point is it is not necessary when you have adequate dental care as proven in countries that have good dental care and do not artificially introduce fluoride or have natural sources.
Since you did not actually read what I said you don’t understand heavy metals are mixed in with the fluoride extracted from the smoke stack scrubbers of fertilizer plants. Why are fertilizer plants required by law to extract fluoride if it is so safe. Hint: it is not
I have done the research in person. This is not the discussion you think it is and you are obviously trying hard to pretend you know something. I am not here to convince anyone. If you continue to act this way I will happily block you as you should me since we are not having a real conversation at this point.
Besides the fact that flouride is metabolized and delivered to your calcified tissues, where it plays a role in the mineralization of your teeth? And that the mineralization of your teeth is the main mechanism in flouride reducing cavities? It’s false because topical application isn’t the only way flouride reduces cavities.
Even relatively small amounts can be harmful, so it’s poison? But the majority of time it’s not harmful. So how exactly is it poison?
I don’t care if you claim to visit a wastewater plant or a fertilizer production site. I don’t see the research you’ve done here. I care that you don’t back up your claims with a single shred of evidence. If you want to make a point about how flouridation can be unnecessary, then you have provided some evidence there. Good work. If you want to claim that it’s poison, then provide the evidence for that too.
Go ahead and block me, if you can’t or won’t do that.
Jeez, they just went ahead and blocked me without any threats first. What makes you so special?
You make a lot of outlandish claims like ingesting flouride helps with cavities. This is nowhere in any literature. It is not my responsibility to prove anything to you that a simple Google search could.
I guess I will provide you one link to help explain something you are in complete denial about.
https://origins.osu.edu/article/toxic-treatment-fluorides-transformation-industrial-waste-public-health-miracle
Simply put it is far cheaper to dispose waste fluoride in our municipal water supplies than to actually treat it. Instead of paying large amounts to make it inert they sell it for profit.
You didn’t know this because you never have actually studied this. I have. Your continued ignorance in this subject is pretty ridiculous. You do seem somewhat civil so I suppose I like wasting my time. Or perhaps I feel it is some sort of perverse test of what I have gone through learning this myself in a high level University class.
Really there is no point because you will just attack the messenger and continue to doubt. I was just here to share my story because I was invited to. You are rude and inconsiderate of this with your misfounded accusations.
Really, as I have pointed out this is all caused by a bacteria. Science has already moved far beyond the discussion we are having and I believe in the future fluoride may not be necessary at all. Until then, I will continue to brush my teeth with fluoride based toothpaste to prevent cavities.
If flouride helps with cavities (it does) and is metabolized when ingested and distributed to your teeth (it is), then I’m going to give you credit enough to assume you can put 1 and 1 together and realize how silly you sound