Harvard Study Finds Fluoride Lowers IQ

[OsO]

let me ask folks a question... if there are other safer ways to get the positive effects of fluoride on the teeth (i.e. brushing), then why take the chance this is true at all? the potential pros do not outweigh the potential cons, not even close, so why risk it?

if people are that worried about they cot damn teeth why dont you just brush 4 extra times a day and after every meal and just be good... cuz some of yall muufukkas is not making any sense right now.

water fluoridation means we ingest it when we drink, we absorb it through our skin in the shower and when we wash our hands, and it also means it gets into our food when we cook. thats an incredible amount of DAILY exposure and ACCUMULATED exposure over time.

do we have any idea how much of this fluoride we are absorbing into our bodies on a DAILY basis? No.

do we have any idea how much fluoride is ACCUMULATING in our bodies after repeated DAILY EXPOSURES? No.

do we know conclusively about the long term effects of fluoride on the human body? No.

is there evidence that fluoride is harmful to the body? Yes.

are there other ways to get the benefits of fluoride for the teeth. Yes.

water fluoridation is state sponsored... does the state have a history of putting poisons in the water, food, air, and even into the soil of the earth itself. Yes.

ima let yall figure the rest out... and i suggest that if any of you water fluoridation fan boys are in law school or in the police academy that you drop out immediately cuz you will not be effectively maneuvering thru any legal paradigms anytime soon.

im not tryna be belligerent but cot damn man start using yalls muthafukking brains.

i dont give a fukk whether you THINK fluoride is safe or not, or whether you THINK youre ingesting a safe amount of fluoride or not because those are fukking opinions... until you know for 100% fact that the shyt youre ingesting ON A DAILY BASIS is 100% safe for you and your family then you should be limiting your exposure to it, point blank fukking period.

more investigation and research must be done before we drink another drop. period.

and we CANNOT JUST IGNORE THE EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT DOESNT FIT INTO OUR BELIEF SYSTEMS! thats ignorance fam.. and its fukking reckless and irresponsible

after reviewing all the information thats available on this topic its obvious.... that we need to investigate this subject further. but you dont continue ingesting the fluoridated water in the meantime that doesnt make any fukking sense






somebody please tell me if im buggin... please... because i just dont get some of these thought processes

 

[Serious]

Damn conspiracy theorist have high jacked the thread

kingsmen how do you explain your own IQ?

Pretty low, breh guarantee he aint smashing random pawgs across the world with no remorse.......

 

[OsO]

Damn conspiracy theorist have high jacked the thread



Pretty low, breh guarantee he aint smashing random pawgs across the world with no remorse.......

instead of responding intellectually, you respond with this nonsense.

first off, you act like stopping water fluoridation is a response to some conspiracy theory when in fact its a logical response to a health concern that many other countries have done already. opposing and ceasing public water fluoridation is nothing new.. in fact right now we are playing the most american of games... catch up. shout out to sean and wesely. we are catching up with the rest of the world who already know fluoridating the public water supply may not be safe, so its not worth the potential risk.

if something may be potentially toxic in the amount we are ingesting, then we have to stop ingesting the substance at those rates until more testing can be done and more definitive conclusions can be reached. thats common sense.

but we cant ignore the issue like it doesnt potentially exist, or downplay it because it doesnt fit into our beliefs because thats completely illogical, and also dangerous in this case.

and you got a "science" avy too... shame on you

edit: lol and your title says "question everything"

 

[Serious]

I'm on vacation breh, I'm just trolling til I get back. No rational thinking will be done on my part.....


*gets my 88m3 on*

 

[acri1]

let me ask folks a question... if there are other safer ways to get the positive effects of fluoride on the teeth (i.e. brushing), then why take the chance this is true at all? the potential pros do not outweigh the potential cons, not even close, so why risk it?

if people are that worried about they cot damn teeth why dont you just brush 4 extra times a day and after every meal and just be good... cuz some of yall muufukkas is not making any sense right now.

water fluoridation means we ingest it when we drink, we absorb it through our skin in the shower and when we wash our hands, and it also means it gets into our food when we cook. thats an incredible amount of DAILY exposure and ACCUMULATED exposure over time.

do we have any idea how much of this fluoride we are absorbing into our bodies on a DAILY basis? No.

do we have any idea how much fluoride is ACCUMULATING in our bodies after repeated DAILY EXPOSURES? No.

do we know conclusively about the long term effects of fluoride on the human body? No.

is there evidence that fluoride is harmful to the body? Yes.

are there other ways to get the benefits of fluoride for the teeth. Yes.

water fluoridation is state sponsored... does the state have a history of putting poisons in the water, food, air, and even into the soil of the earth itself. Yes.

ima let yall figure the rest out... and i suggest that if any of you water fluoridation fan boys are in law school or in the police academy that you drop out immediately cuz you will not be effectively maneuvering thru any legal paradigms anytime soon.

im not tryna be belligerent but cot damn man start using yalls muthafukking brains.

i dont give a fukk whether you THINK fluoride is safe or not, or whether you THINK youre ingesting a safe amount of fluoride or not because those are fukking opinions... until you know for 100% fact that the shyt youre ingesting ON A DAILY BASIS is 100% safe for you and your family then you should be limiting your exposure to it, point blank fukking period.

more investigation and research must be done before we drink another drop. period.

and we CANNOT JUST IGNORE THE EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT DOESNT FIT INTO OUR BELIEF SYSTEMS! thats ignorance fam.. and its fukking reckless and irresponsible

after reviewing all the information thats available on this topic its obvious.... that we need to investigate this subject further. but you dont continue ingesting the fluoridated water in the meantime that doesnt make any fukking sense






somebody please tell me if im buggin... please... because i just dont get some of these thought processes

What you don't seem to understand is that the government did plenty of testing on the effects of fluoride before it was introduced to the water supply. You keep saying there's been no testing or research but that's bullshyt. Also, plenty of other countries besides the US have fluoridated water. Some other countries also have fluoridated salt and milk, which people would probably also think was a conspiracy.

And there is not evidence that the amount of fluoride in the water supply is unsafe. You're just being paranoid. In fact they tested it for five years in Grand Rapids from 1945-1950, and besides reduced tooth decay there were no harmful effects. However, I'm pretty sure no amount of testing would be enough for you want to believe it's a conspiracy and have already decided it's harmful. That said I'd be surprised if anybody in this thread knows anybody who ever got sick from water fluoridation.

In 1956, they scheduled fluoride to be added to the water supply in Columbus, Ohio. Sure enough, right on June 1st, the city started getting phone calls about how people's water didn't taste right, their goldfish were dying, their dogs were getting sick, etc. Problem? Last minute problems delayed the introduction of fluoride to the water supply until July. Same thing is going on in this thread.

The government does get away with too much bullshyt to be waste time on stupid conspiracy theories like this. It's a distraction from actual issues. Instead of worrying about foreign policy, racism in drug laws, or why such a small portion of the population has most of the wealth, nikkas want to worry about fluoride in water.

 

[OsO]

What you don't seem to understand is that the government did plenty of testing on the effects of fluoride before it was introduced to the water supply. You keep saying there's been no testing or research but that's bullshyt.

i never said there was no testing, i am saying there has not been enough testing. im saying there are too many red flags, too many unknowns, and too much at stake to be putting this shyt in the public water supply... again, i think this is common sense.

Also, plenty of other countries besides the US have fluoridated water. Some other countries also have fluoridated salt and milk, which people would probably also think was a conspiracy.

and many countries have also rejected public water fluoridation, whats your point? if your friend bobby jumps off a bridge are you going to jump too?

And there is not evidence that the amount of fluoride in the water supply is unsafe. You're just being paranoid.

from the opening post:

Harvard Study Finds Fluoride Lowers IQ - Published in Federal Gov't Journal - MarketWatch

Harvard University researchers' review of fluoride/brain studies concludes "our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children's neurodevelopment." It was published online July 20 in Environmental Health Perspectives, a US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences' journal (1),

Further, the EPA says fluoride is a chemical "with substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity."

In fact they tested it for five years in Grand Rapids from 1945-1950,

5 years cmon son

The government does get away with too much bullshyt to be waste time on stupid conspiracy theories like this. It's a distraction from actual issues. Instead of worrying about foreign policy, racism in drug laws, or why such a small portion of the population has most of the wealth, nikkas want to worry about fluoride in water.

its not a conspiracy and its not a theory. public water fluoridation is happening, and has been happening for decades.

let the conspiracy theory shyt go and focus on the EVIDENCE at hand. how can you be more brainwashed about conspiracy theories than an actual conspiracy theorist? brainwashed to the point where it actually impedes your rational thinking?! and how do you reconcile the fact you think of yourself as a skeptic but yet REFUSE to be skeptical about water fluoridation, despite the EVIDENCE to the contrary?!

listen... i am not asking you to believe the government is putting poison in the water to kill people, so please put that thought out of your mind.

i am asking you to reconsider your position on pubic water fluoridation in light of the evidence at hand that it may be unhealthy. at the MINIMUM we should cease and desist all public water fluoridation until we find out all the facts... thats it, thats all im saying. can you agree with that?

really think about what im saying

 

[acri1]

i never said there was no testing, i am saying there has not been enough testing. im saying there are too many red flags, too many unknowns, and too much at stake to be putting this shyt in the public water supply... again, i think this is common sense.




and many countries have also rejected public water fluoridation, whats your point? if your friend bobby jumps off a bridge are you going to jump too?




from the opening post:





5 years cmon son




its not a conspiracy and its not a theory. public water fluoridation is happening, and has been happening for decades.

let the conspiracy theory shyt go and focus on the EVIDENCE at hand. how can you be more brainwashed about conspiracy theories than an actual conspiracy theorist? brainwashed to the point where it actually impedes your rational thinking?! and how do you reconcile the fact you think of yourself as a skeptic but yet REFUSE to be skeptical about water fluoridation, despite the EVIDENCE to the contrary?!

listen... i am not asking you to believe the government is putting poison in the water to kill people, so please put that thought out of your mind.

i am asking you to reconsider your position on pubic water fluoridation in light of the evidence at hand that it may be unhealthy. at the MINIMUM we should cease and desist all public water fluoridation until we find out all the facts... thats it, thats all im saying. can you agree with that?

really think about what im saying

That's the problem, there isn't any real EVIDENCE that's it's harmful, it's just your assumption. And like I said, there's already been plenty of testing. We've had fluoridated water for many decades and people have been studying the effects the whole time. What would it take to satisfy you that water fluoridation is safe? C'mon son, people only live so long. It's sounds like you've already come to the conclusion that it's unsafe.

As far as the article you posted, miss me with that, it's already been explained why it's BS but this is a little more to the point.

Fluoride Lowers Your IQ: B.S. Headline of the Week
By: David Wong

Here's a quick case study on how bullshyt is born into the world. First, remember that when we're browsing the news each morning to make sure our favorite athlete hasn't gone to jail yet, most of us only read the headlines, or maybe give the actual story a quick skim. You didn't need a study to tell you that, you do it yourself. So if somebody's goal is to push a bullshyt agenda, all they need is a headline.

For instance, search Google News for "fluoride" and you'll find a shocking article showing that, holy shyt, fluoride lowers your IQ! The stuff in your toothpaste! The stuff cities put in drinking water!

Wow, this is the story of the year! And it explains so much! This is why everyone is stupid these days, and why actors have such beautiful teeth but are also such dipshyts! It's even on the front page of Reddit:

And you know it's true, look at the source! It came from world-class news agency Reuters, reporting on a Harvard study. No need to click that shyt to see what it actually says! Ah, let's try anyway. Yep, that's Reuters news agency all right:

Wait a second ... what's that tiny print below the headline?

So it's not a news story. Reuters apparently has a section of their news website where instead of publishing news, they publish unedited press releases from whoever writes them, and then anyone else in the world is able to quote the headline and say it's "from Reuters." So I could send them a press release saying I have the world's biggest dikk and wait for them to post it on their site, then my friends and I can turn around and cite Reuters as the source. "Hey, don't take my word for it, ladies! It came from Reuters! Here it is on their site!" Anyway, the headline claims:

Harvard Study Finds Fluoride Lowers IQ

Simple, unambiguous and damning. But then in the story itself, the first thing we see is a quote from the study that is way, way, way less definite than the headline:

"Our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children's neurodevelopment."

So now it's the "possibility."

Then they say:

"The children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ than those who lived in low fluoride areas," write Choi et al.

Whoa! OK, now, which areas? Like, is Milwaukee worse than Dallas? Well, let's follow the link in the press release to the study and then the additional details of the study. In some tiny print you'll find they're talking about China and India, and they are not motherfukking talking about fluoride in toothpaste or stuff being added to drinking water. In those countries, their water supply is contaminated with mega-doses of fluoride that seeps into wells from the soil. They're getting toxic levels up to 20 times higher than what you get in your drinking water.

The fact that fluoride -- and lots of other things you consume every day -- is dangerous in toxic mega-doses is not news. Well, shyt, who would submit such a misleading press release, knowing that its alarmist headline would get spread from blog to blog, and from one news portal site to another? It actually says in the press release ...

Ah. The Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation. This whole thing is part of the bullshyt anti-fluoride conspiracy theory that goes all the way back to nutjobs who thought water fluoridation was a communist mind-control plot.

And it works, because again, they know you'll just read the headline and then quote it as an interesting fact around the water cooler tomorrow. Bullshyt achieved!

Fluoride Lowers Your IQ: B.S. Headline of the Week | Cracked.com


Anyway, I DO consider myself a skeptic. That means being skeptical of the government, but also being skeptical of people with agendas on the Internet. If there was convincing evidence that water fluoridation (at current levels) was harmful I'd be more than open to changing my position. The problem that there really isn't. We've had fluoridated water since before my parents were born and there have been plenty of studies on the effects, and no one has found it harmful at current levels. I'm just not going to go to ihatefluoride.com and assume that it's an unbiased opinion.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

leyet, you aint built for a logical discussion, take your ball and go back home

 

[thekingsmen]

That's the problem, there isn't any real EVIDENCE that's it's harmful, it's just your assumption. And like I said, there's already been plenty of testing. We've had fluoridated water for many decades and people have been studying the effects the whole time. What would it take to satisfy you that water fluoridation is safe? C'mon son, people only live so long. It's sounds like you've already come to the conclusion that it's unsafe.

As far as the article you posted, miss me with that, it's already been explained why it's BS but this is a little more to the point.




Fluoride Lowers Your IQ: B.S. Headline of the Week | Cracked.com


Anyway, I DO consider myself a skeptic. That means being skeptical of the government, but also being skeptical of people with agendas on the Internet. If there was convincing evidence that water fluoridation (at current levels) was harmful I'd be more than open to changing my position. The problem that there really isn't. We've had fluoridated water since before my parents were born and there have been plenty of studies on the effects, and no one has found it harmful at current levels. I'm just not going to go to ihatefluoride.com and assume that it's an unbiased opinion.

You aren't a skeptic if you are Pro-Fluoride. You are skeptic to those who oppose it. Sadly you addressing Reuters of not being responsible for those content is true that in the Libya stand-point, they made up alot of articles and then later on claimed not responsibility in the mistakes. I wouldn't be surprised since Reuters is owned by the Rothschild family. You believe in those who run things and oppose the rest of the human race.

 

[Type Username Here]

That's the problem, there isn't any real EVIDENCE that's it's harmful, it's just your assumption. And like I said, there's already been plenty of testing. We've had fluoridated water for many decades and people have been studying the effects the whole time. What would it take to satisfy you that water fluoridation is safe? C'mon son, people only live so long. It's sounds like you've already come to the conclusion that it's unsafe.

As far as the article you posted, miss me with that, it's already been explained why it's BS but this is a little more to the point.




Fluoride Lowers Your IQ: B.S. Headline of the Week | Cracked.com


Anyway, I DO consider myself a skeptic. That means being skeptical of the government, but also being skeptical of people with agendas on the Internet. If there was convincing evidence that water fluoridation (at current levels) was harmful I'd be more than open to changing my position. The problem that there really isn't. We've had fluoridated water since before my parents were born and there have been plenty of studies on the effects, and no one has found it harmful at current levels. I'm just not going to go to ihatefluoride.com and assume that it's an unbiased opinion.

What a fantastic post and article friend. Notice that the counter-argument ceased.

 

[OsO]

That's the problem, there isn't any real EVIDENCE that's it's harmful, it's just your assumption. And like I said, there's already been plenty of testing. We've had fluoridated water for many decades and people have been studying the effects the whole time. What would it take to satisfy you that water fluoridation is safe? C'mon son, people only live so long. It's sounds like you've already come to the conclusion that it's unsafe.

As far as the article you posted, miss me with that, it's already been explained why it's BS but this is a little more to the point.




Fluoride Lowers Your IQ: B.S. Headline of the Week | Cracked.com


Anyway, I DO consider myself a skeptic. That means being skeptical of the government, but also being skeptical of people with agendas on the Internet. If there was convincing evidence that water fluoridation (at current levels) was harmful I'd be more than open to changing my position. The problem that there really isn't. We've had fluoridated water since before my parents were born and there have been plenty of studies on the effects, and no one has found it harmful at current levels. I'm just not going to go to ihatefluoride.com and assume that it's an unbiased opinion.

read the first post again:

Harvard Study Finds Fluoride Lowers IQ - Published in Federal Gov't Journal - MarketWatch

Harvard University researchers' review of fluoride/brain studies concludes "our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children's neurodevelopment." It was published online July 20 in Environmental Health Perspectives, a US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences' journal (1),

Further, the EPA says fluoride is a chemical "with substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity."

pay special attention to the bold. this is Environmental Health Perspectives, the journal in question:

Environmental Health Perspectives: Monthly Journal of Peer-Reviewed Research and News on the Impact of the Environment on Human Health

Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) is a monthly journal of peer-reviewed research and news published by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services. EHP's mission is to serve as a forum for the discussion of the interrelationships between the environment and human health by publishing in a balanced and objective manner the best peer-reviewed research and most current and credible news of the field. With an impact factor of 7.04, EHP is now the second-ranked journal in Public, Environment, and Occupational Health and the third-ranked journal in Environmental Sciences.

the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF) on the other hand is not the source of this report, they are simply reporting on the report.

so what were you saying again?

If there was convincing evidence that water fluoridation (at current levels) was harmful I'd be more than open to changing my position. The problem that there really isn't.

leyet, you aint built for a logical discussion, take your ball and go back home

What a fantastic post and article friend. Notice that the counter-argument ceased.

from philosopher to hater/cheerleader.... sad

 

[Type Username Here]

read the first post again:



pay special attention to the bold. this is Environmental Health Perspectives, the journal in question:

Environmental Health Perspectives: Monthly Journal of Peer-Reviewed Research and News on the Impact of the Environment on Human Health

Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) is a monthly journal of peer-reviewed research and news published by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services. EHP's mission is to serve as a forum for the discussion of the interrelationships between the environment and human health by publishing in a balanced and objective manner the best peer-reviewed research and most current and credible news of the field. With an impact factor of 7.04, EHP is now the second-ranked journal in Public, Environment, and Occupational Health and the third-ranked journal in Environmental Sciences.

the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF) on the other hand is not the source of this report, they are simply reporting on the report.

so what were you saying again?













from philosopher to hater/cheerleader.... sad

Brother, the man presented an article and facts that challenged this press release report that was just sensationalized doo-doo butter. It was both insightful and factually correct.

For the record, not that you care, I'm anti-Fluoride in the water system BTW.

 

[thekingsmen]

Brother, the man presented an article and facts that challenged this press release report that was just sensationalized doo-doo butter. It was both insightful and factually correct.

It's like showing you a youtube video and claiming it to be the 100% Gospel.

 

[Type Username Here]

It's like showing you a youtube video and claiming it to be the 100% Gospel.

It depends on who the video is from.

If the youtube video is made by an expert in the field, a person that was awarded his title, has credibility in his/her field and has material outside of that video, I might be inclined to trust him/her.


The problem is that you trust any amateur with video editing software that pushes your agenda.

 

[acri1]

read the first post again:



pay special attention to the bold. this is Environmental Health Perspectives, the journal in question:

Environmental Health Perspectives: Monthly Journal of Peer-Reviewed Research and News on the Impact of the Environment on Human Health

Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) is a monthly journal of peer-reviewed research and news published by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services. EHP's mission is to serve as a forum for the discussion of the interrelationships between the environment and human health by publishing in a balanced and objective manner the best peer-reviewed research and most current and credible news of the field. With an impact factor of 7.04, EHP is now the second-ranked journal in Public, Environment, and Occupational Health and the third-ranked journal in Environmental Sciences.

the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF) on the other hand is not the source of this report, they are simply reporting on the report.

so what were you saying again?













from philosopher to hater/cheerleader.... sad

I didn't say the study wasn't legit or that the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation was the source for the study, so we don't disagree there. But the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation was the organization that decided to take the study, add an alarmist/misleading headline, and submit the story to Reuters knowing people would misinterpret it in a way that would suit their purposes.

The point is, the study applies to a population whose water supply is contaminated with MUCH larger concentrations of fluoride than are allowed in countries where there is intentional water fluoridation. It's a completely different situation and not at all comparible to the water fluoridation in the US or other countries where it's allowed. Apples and oranges.