@MrDoobious Any increase in diagnosis of mental illness should at least be influenced by better diagnosis. The dose makes the poison. There is no evidence the dose of ethyl mercury from the pre-2002 U.S. vaccine schedule was ever high enough to interact with the brain or be a cause for any concern. In any case, what will convince you that thimerosal-containing vaccines do not cause autism?
@MrDoobious Any increase in diagnosis of mental illness should at least be influenced by better diagnosis. The dose makes the poison. There is no evidence the dose of ethyl mercury from the pre-2002 U.S. vaccine schedule was ever high enough to interact with the brain or be a cause for any concern. In any case, what will convince you that thimerosal-containing vaccines do not cause autism?
I Think this guys been vaccinated against common sense.
How can he say healthier foods when the country is going through an obesity epidemic? Thymerisol-containing vaccines DO cause autism/other brain damage. The link has been proven.
Fluoride does many many bad things. Infertility, lower brain function, contributes to CHD
@MrDoobious Any studies to back that Thimerosal-Autism link? As for fluoride, the dose makes the poison, and the dose in drinking water is quite low, as clearly described in this video. Don't make scare-mongering claims, especially ones so debunked as the Thimerosal-Autism link, without providing at least some independent and reliable references for them.
What are your sources to say that flouride is linked to infertility and brain damage? don't just make hard statements like that without linking factual data to support your claimed statement.
@Catlover123445 Well you wont find that, on EITHER side of the debate. But i think its stupid to put poison into the water just to stop a few dental caries - which is debatable anyway.
Want an inexpensive water filter that looks like a normal Brita filter, but filters out fluoride by up to 80% out of Tap Water plus many other metals and toxins. Take a look wix.com/officeamote/newwater
@tonysmith53214 Vitamin D is also a main component in rat poison. Are you suggesting we should not take Vitamin D supplements either simply because it can and is used in rat poison?
Forced drugging with a carcinogenic neurotoxin is indefensible. Fluoride depletes iodine, causing thyroid problems. It also calcifies the pineal gland. A real sceptic is sceptical about the status quo. You're an establishment propagandist. What you are doing, is the exact opposite of scepticism.
this is filled with techniques of propaganda that astound me. one example is the chart comparing fluoride with sodium and calcium. maybe he should consider the comparisons of lead and arsenic?. another is the comparison of pharmaceutical grade vs. industrial grade fluoride. that is not what needs to be compared and my guess is he is well aware of that. its the other toxic metals that are invariably included in the industrial soup like arsenic and lead. its misleading to say the least.
[pharmaceutical grade vs. industrial grade fluoride]
Hexafluorosilicic acid, I presume what you're calling "industrial fluoride," is hydrolytic (is chemically broken down by water) and reforms as simple hydrofluoric acid [hf], what I presume you refer to as "pharmaceutical" fluoride.
The comparison is accurate, as you will never consume Hexafluorosilicic acid via tap water. It just does not chemically survive intact within that medium.
@Dream0Asylum industrial grade comes with many other toxins like arsenic and lead. you know it and this consensus guy does as well. this isnt mentioned because this piece is agenda driven. just like comparing levels of fluoride and sodium and calcium. ludicrous. why not add puppies in the comparison. dont be a tool.
Quantify this. As it stands, I can get a sample of ground water that naturally contains both of those materials and others that are even worse.
The same minerals that are broken down by industry are also broken down by nature, and when that happens they often lose their constituants (like lead and arsenic) to water.
@Dream0Asylum lets end this...we can discuss science, toxicities, quantities and studies but the bottom line is medicating our drinking water should be unconscionable. why it isnt to you really makes me wonder. there are many other ways for our government to coddle us. cradle to grave. force us to now pay for contraception, force us to drink water that has been medicated so people who choose not to take care of themselves supposedly benefit. why arent we talking precautionary principle here
[should be unconscionable. why it isnt to you really makes me wonder.]
I rebutted your argument from ignorance regarding the science. As a matter of basic liberty, I do not believe in water fluoridation.
[really makes me wonder.]
I imagine you do a great deal of wondering, and then dispelling that wonder via subjective intuition. That is why you've supplied a position and motive to me that can not be supported objectively by my content.
@Dream0Asylum correct, i do a lot of wondering. i guess people as smart as you don't spend time wondering. too bad. subjective intuition? probably guilty to a degree here. i tired of the argument 20 years ago. researched what i thought i needed to make a judgement that wasn't just intuitive and havent thought about it much since. mainly i guess b/c i see what fl really does to teeth. so u can look at the science i will just go by what i see daily and hope my intuition is right.
@Dream0Asylum the good news for me is i will be happy tomorrow for ignorance is bliss but you my friend will still be a tool. i asked you not to be a tool.
@Dream0Asylum Why can't these people just actually do their research, they go around claiming they are open minded yet they ignore information, ignore contradictions, and ignore new evidence that don't support their ideas.
This is not critical thinking people, this is as idiotic as Christian science.
@Dream0Asylum and i have seen the devastating effect on teeth for 30 years. it has been a tremendous money maker for me. its not why i got into the business. you are misguided or have an agenda if you think fluoridation is a net positive. i used to have all the answers to the stupid questions about pollution by dilution but have lost interest because minds never change when there is an agenda. its funny, you probably think co2 is a pollutant and dangerous dont you.
[you probably think co2 is a pollutant and dangerous dont you.]
Contextually yes, and so do you. That context being, concentrations outside of tolerable values.
The poison is in the dosage. Currently, CO2 is within tolerable values given my biology. Should that change for the worse it's going to be an "interesting" time, chemically speaking, within my body. There's a reason why dry-cleaning bags warn against placing them over one's head.
I was unable to look at the specific link that you provided, but I think it's just a study to see if fluoride-18 can be used as a marker in PET/CT scans to detect calcification in arteries. The fluoride has nothing to do with the calcification of the arteries, it's just used to make it show up on the scans.
I knew she couldn't come up with that odd collection of words on her own. She wouldn't even know how the word solution is used in chemistry, so I googled it to see where it came from, but I was suprized by the number of hits.
Most of what she posts, other than her insults, are just cut and paste, an even her insults tend to be rather pathetic.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
In the '60s I heard fluoride was some kind of commie mind control agent. People look for patterns, causation. We abhor mystery. We tend to latch on to the closest answer that excuses us from responsibility and affixes "blame" elsewhere, that tells us we are good and correct. That's why we invented god and the GOP.
How can people believe stuff so dogmatically when they don't even have any clue what it means?
No point in trying to discuss her posts with her. She doesn't come up with any of it or have a clue what it means, so how can she respond when people question and challenge what she posts?
Hey guys! Google Dawn's quote of "The fluoride ion only hypothetically exists as an entity in an ideal solution, ......"
At least 10 hits. She can't come up with a single coherent thought of her own. All of these guys just repeat word for word what they're brainwashed into believing. She doesn't understand any of it well enough to put it in her own words. She's literally just parroting everything.
Good catch... I never would have suspected something that incomprehensible to be a quote. It staggers me that they think of themselves as being critical thinkers, yet they think whatever they are told to think by the leaders of their movement. It's actually quite cult-like.
I think the only solution is to focus on the next generation, teaching them to go to primary sources, to follow evidence and to apply real critical thinking.
Too bad her comment about bacteria got deleted, I forgot wether or not it was gram positive or gram negtive membraned organisms she was claiming her toothpaste killed.
I also wanted to ask her if viruses had gram positive or gram negative membranes. ;-)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Comon guys, it's clear Dawn has no clue about the science behind these studies, and is simply on here to billboard her particular ideology. No desire to learn something, no desire to expand herself, just to display her belief and dig her heels in on the issue. That's the problem with ideology, is that it to easily leads to dogma, where a belief is implacable no matter what evidence to the contrary is thrown at it.
The fluoridated water you drink is not the same product as researched. The only similarity is the fact that the fluoride ion is present in some form. The fluoride ion only hypothetically exists as an entity in an ideal solution, purified water, and tap water is far from pure H2O.
You know what's funny? Dawn has claimed that the fluoride in the water in her area has been twice the level of artificial fluoridation in other areas for 3 decades, and also claims that fluoridated water causes greatly reduced IQ.
It's a good thing that correlation doesn't prove causation or she'd have some serious anecdotal evidence on her side.
The opposite belief, correlation proves causation, is a logical fallacy by which two events that occur together are claimed to have a cause-and-effect relationship. The decay rates have dropped in the non-fluoridated areas of the United States, and in Europe - where fluoridation of water is rare.The world-wide decline in tooth decay over the past four decades has occurred at the same rate in areas that are not fluoridated as in areas that are.
I chuckle to myself occationally when I see thick con-trails not blowing away quickly, just thinking about the fact that there are really people in the world who are afraid of them.
A half-truth is a deceptive statement that adds some element of truth.The statement might be partly true, or totally true, but only part of the whole truth. A half-truth deceives the recipient by presenting something believable & using those aspects of the statement that can be shown to be true as good reason to believe it in its entirety, or as the whole truth. A person deceived by a half truth considers the proposition to be the whole truth & acts accordingly. Hence, deleted comments of mine.
@Dawn2388 It is impossible to make a wise decision without all the facts. C0nc0rdance is an expert at sugarcoating the negative aspects of water fluoridation & deleting/censoring my facts/comments that would jeopardize his views in the video. That is clearly deceptive, and far from honest. It's not bias in my opinion. It is outright dishonesty. There are many studies which prove health problems with water fluoridation that are being ignored by C0nc0rdance & his groupies. Why the deception?
@Dawn2388 Please understand that fact is fact, regardless of the source. Likewise, truth is truth, regardless of the source. Where a motive to lie may truly exist, only actual evidence that the testimony itself IS a lie renders it completely invalid. Using innuendo as an argument is dishonest & deceptive. BTW, Dr. Bruce Spittle is the author of the book, "Fluoride Fatigue. Fluoride Poisoning". A list of his credentials can be found on Amazon. He is not some homeless mentally ill person.
Let's take this particular study as an example in PubMed PMID: 18695947.
(You don't consider PubMed as an activist site, do you?) ",,,which means that children who live in a fluorosis area have five times higher odds of developing low IQ than those who live in a nonfluorosis area..."
Now the CDC states (11/08/2010), that 41% of U.S. adolescents aged 12-15 have dental fluorosis. Now they also have a five times higher odds of developing a low IQ.
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2011 Apr-Jun;29(2):117-20.
"[We included regions] with groundwater fluoride concentrations of less than 0.5 ppm [control] and from 2.5 to 3.5 ppm, respectively"
"Considering these facts and findings it is suggestive that defluoridation of groundwater with excess fluoride in it is an issue which is in a dire need for attention."
@C0nc0rdance Do you actually believe that 4.00 ppm of fluoride in tap water is optimal water fluoridation? What is YOUR definition of "optimal" water fluoridation? There are no laws that regulate the levels of fluoride in tap water in the USA unless it exceeds 4.00 ppm. A "recommendation" of 0.7 ppm is nothing more than that. It isn't seriously monitored on any level. And only checking the levels in tap water once a year is negligent in my honest opinion. (1.9 ppm or higher isn't "optimal")
"Moctezuma (F 0.8+/-1.4 mg/L; As 5.8+/-1.3 microg/L); Salitral (F 5.3+/-0.9 mg/L; As 169+/-0.9 microg/L) and 5 de Febrero (F 9.4+/-0.9 mg/L; As 194+/-1.3 microg/L)."
This is a paper on children receiving 5-10 times the optimal dose of fluoride as well as known toxic amounts of ARSENIC in the drinking water. Groundwater in developing countries is often untested and may contain toxic levels of multiple metals/anions.
"Given these findings, our analyses, though not definitive, do not support concerns that silicofluorides in community water systems cause higher PbB concentrations in children."
This is not a settled issue, and requires more research. Eventually it will be necessary to establish any direct health effect and explain a risk reduction strategy.
By the way, this is a simple way to cite: Biol Trace Elem Res. 2008 Winter;126(1-3):115-20.
What was your impression of the author's use of Mantel–Haenszel method? Were the variances homogenous? Can you locate the mean or median fluoride exposure in the studies under review?
I'm interested to see how you evaluate evidence. What is your process?
LoL Bruce Spittle is in charge. Why does that name sound familiar? Oh, that would be because there were anti-fluoride folk trying to pass off his work as legit. I notice that he's not only the editor of Fluoride, but also the treasurer. Sounds to me like he may be making a profit off of scaring the gullible.
@Primalxbeast [Sounds to me like he may be making a profit]
I'm sure whatever profit he makes isn't nearly like a 20000% mark-up on "fluoride", aka pollution, aka toxic waste sold to municipal water districts to be added to the public's tap water. Who knew pollution could be so lucrative?? All for the sake of poor children's teeth. Those who refuse to eat anything without sugar & get a cavity. Let's also lower their IQ's with fluoride. The gov't should tax sugar & HFCS out of existence.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Dawn2388 You are still using the term "toxic waste". This reveals you as a fool who relies on people having an emotional, rather than rational response to your arguments. This might be effective down at the pub, or wherever you usually converse with people, but the patrons of Concordances channel are not so simple minded.
The fact you are so confident of your position but can not understand this clearly demonstrates you are suffering from dunning-Kruger effect.
@Primalxbeast [making a profit off of scaring the gullible]
Oh, yeah. Let's consider the fear caused by this video... that without fluoride (or fluoridated water), you, all the poor children, and everyone else will succumb to painful, deadly cavities. Fluoride isn't even a nutrient. You can have great teeth without it... unless you live on sugar-filled products. But in reality, if you live on these products every day, no amount of "fluoride" (toxic waste) is going to benefit your teeth.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Primalxbeast I bet Bruce Spittle is pissed off that Paul Connett is moving in on his market!
But Bruce did have a better scam going. If you run your own 'journal' you can manufacture your own body of evidence. In face Fluoride Alert cites his journal heavily.
LoL True, she never bothered to engage anybody in any sort of serious dialog. Anytime anybody refuted anything she said, she either just ignored them or insulted them and then posted another bit of crap that she picked up from some activist website without even understanding the content of what she was posting. Pure mindless parroting.
I guess Wikipedia is some kind of anti-fluoride website?? You just keep making up crap.
Parroting?
I guess hearing the phrase, "water fluoridation is one of the top 10 public health achievements of the modern era", over and over again isn't some kind of parroting??
Pollution?? Toxic waste?? Yeah, right. Tell me another one.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Primalxbeast She is demonstrating he intentions have only ever been to billboard her beliefs.
My department has reopened after the Christmas holidays and anti-fluoridation has become a really interesting discussion. Particularly the "International Society for Fluoride Research" being run out of a beach house just down the road from our university. They also publish a very dodgy journal.
Check them out on street view: 727 Brighton Road, Ocean View, Dunedin, New Zealand
See PubMed PMID: 20580811 "Fluoride in drinking water and dental fluorosis"
The primary findings from this study have shown that fluoride content in hair is highly correlated with fluoride content in drinking water and dental fluorosis level, indicating that hair may be regarded as biomaterial of high informative potential in evaluating prolonged exposure to fluorides & to individual children at risk of fluorosis regardless of the phase of teeth eruption.
@Dawn2388 The best solution for this would be to brush your teeth with a mixture Virgin Coconut Oil & baking soda. Add a little mint for flavor, if you wish. Virgin Coconut Oil is a natural anti-bacterial/anti-fungal/anti-viral product. It is not toxic to consume or use for brushing. You can use it in cooking your food instead of the highly refined polyunsaturated oils & trans-fats. I may create a new product of toothpaste with these ingredients myself. Something that will actually work.
Can anyone tell me what documentary the last sentence on some of C0nc0rdance's videos are from? I mean "Every cell of each plant and animal contains genetic information coded onto the DNA molecule. The model rep..."
The claim that's being made by every anti-Fl activist site imaginable that there are a thousand EPA members against water fluoridation is based on one meeting of a local union composed of a 1000+ people in which LESS THAN 20 PEOPLE showed up to vote. So in one small division of the NTEU which represents 30 gov't organizations, 20 people got together who didn't like fluoride, and that's inflated to a 1000 screaming ppl.
Here's a thought. Drag your sorry ass back to school and take some basic science classes and learn some critical thinking skills so that talking to you isn't completely useless.
Thousands of posts people have wasted on trying to make even the slightest dent in your ignorance ALL POINTLESS, because you haven't actually LISTENED to a single word anybody has said.
Oh that fucking rich coming from you considering the unbelievable number of times that people have shown you to be completely wrong about your claims and how you have had no clue of what you have read and have shown you how what you have read was just quote-mined from the original sources to misrepresent reality, and never ONCE have you owned up to a single mistake.
@Primalxbeast Read the 530 page book in it's entirety. You can't even discuss the book without reading it. Everything quoted out of it will simply be called "quote mining".
Can you be a little more specific? I'm not going to read a 530 page book on my phone, and when I read the summary earlier, I don't recall anything about them thinking water fluoridation was some dire emergency. Maybe that some more research needs to be done and the fluoridarion level reassessed, which is something most of the non-anti-Fl ppl on here have been saying anyway.
@Primalxbeast You will simply have to read it all by yourself. I'm not going to discuss it with you any further. I've already tried that. You referred to it as some kind of new age crap when I attempted to discuss fluoride and Alzheimer's Disease, and the other CNS effects of fluoride. Discussing anything with you has clearly proved useless.
Any search having to do with the subject just yields pages of activists sites. You've been shown repeatedly how they lie and misrepresent information.
Do you have legitimate proof of a thousand EPA members "screaming" over this subject?
If the EPA allows 800 times more fluoride than lead, they can't be screaming that loudly.
I can see them wanting to lower the amount added. As far as I know, the current advised amount is 0.7ppm, but if they made that the MCL, many places would actually be forced to remove fluoride already present naturally.
You just ignore C0nc0ordance when he takes the time to answer you and you have heard more than just my opinion on that load of crap you keep re-posting. Others have pointed out your flawed logic, and it hasn't kept you from parroting the same crap.
I've only heard YOUR opinion on this!! Stop making up crap. I believe there is a reasonable and logical reason why over 1000 EPA members would be screaming over this. This is C0nc0rdance's video. Let HIM answer, please.
Looks like the EPA thinks that arsenic is 400 times more dangerous than fluoride and that lead is 800 times more dangerous based on what you have posted far more than 3 times.
We've already answered that question many times but you never listen.
@Primalxbeast Actually, I'd like to hear C0nc0rdance's opinion on this, if you don't mind. There are over 1000 EPA members screaming over this, among other things.
And heck, I'll ask this a 3rd time. Do you claim the information in this book is invalid?
The claim that LD50 is more toxic than lead & only slightly less toxic than arsenic?
Based on LD50 data from Robert E. Gosselin et al, Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products 5th ed., 1984
The MCL for lead is 0.005 parts per million (ppm). The MCL for arsenic is 0.010 parts per million (ppm). And the EPA allows up to 4.00 parts per million (ppm) for fluoride (pollution) before screaming foul play.
Yes, why should I expect you to care about being wrong about something for an entire month when with less than 5 seconds of research you could have actually been right about something? It's not as if being wrong time and time again about everything else because you haven't bothered to read and understand the actual studies has bothered you any. So much easier just to read the quote-mined crap put out to fool the naive.
I happen to be a she, does that not show up on my profile, and yes when it gets below freezing my patients with people whining about petty crap can get quite low, especially when you're bitching about having to bathe in fluoridated water when I would have really enjoyed a hot bath at that point in time.
Some people just spend their lives looking for petty crap to whine about.
Holy cow she's really reaching. Got no legs to stand on, so is now playing etymological games.
This is what happens when one's conclusions comes from an ignorant ideological dogma rather than critical examination of evidence; there is no room for compromise, no desire to really learn something, and no sense of self-reflection. Just a sense of implacable unwavering purpose to push an agenda no matter how good the argument or how compelling the evidence to the contrary.
I've been interested in science since I was a small child. Some of my first children's books were I-can-read books that were science related. I'm not going to lose my intrest in science just because I happen to be living in a car, and I'd much rather be living in my car than take a chance of ending up renting a room with somebody like you. I've tried renting rooms I'll stick with my car TYVM.
You have to go back 6 hours to the point where Dawn claimed that fluoride caused hardening of arteries, and C0nc0rdance found the study that Dawn's source had quote mined and it turned out that they were just using the fluoride isotope as a marker.
We do actually rank very low compared to other countries in math and science. Part of the problem is our poor education system, but a large part of the problem is religion teaching people not to trust science.
@Primalxbeast [rank very low compared to other countries in math and science]
May have a lot to do with the fact many other countries have discontinued the practice of water fluoridation, yet it continues in the USA. Remember, more than 24 studies have linked fluoride to lower IQ's in children. Do you also dispute this??
Don't claim American's aren't getting enough fluoride to affect their IQ's either. In reality, you don't know exactly how much fluoride is being consumed through toothpaste, food, beverages, bathing, swimming in fluoridated pools, through inhaling pollution, through medications, etc. There is no way you could know. It's hardly being monitored on any level.
You really think it's hard to find out how saturated your body is with fluoride? Take a piss test. Jesus, fluoride is not some evil spirit stalking prey just beyond the realm of science. It's not some wraithy, lurking, unfathomable shadow.
Heck, maybe your local med college would do it for free or just nominal expense. Every lab tech has a human urine cherry to lose.
Go. Unleash thy urine and spill forth thy body's excess ionized molecules and waste products,
@Dream0Asylum Ever tried to get one of those tests done?? When was the last time yours was checked?? When was the FIRST time yours was checked?? And these tests are not all created equal either. Some are more accurate than others. If it is so easy, why don't doctors ever check it??
[If it is so easy, why don't doctors ever check it??]
Because fluoridation isn't exactly illness causation that warrants testing every single person in the united states. However, if symptoms point to fluoride poisoning, a test would be done. It's the same reason why tests for arsenic aren't done when casually you pop in, even though you're probably exposed more often than you'd expect.
[When was the FIRST time ]
I have no symptoms consistent with fluoride poisoning.
@Dream0Asylum I think doctors should at least be checking children who show signs of dental fluorosis which is a clear sign of overexposure to fluoride. Not doing so is negligent in my honest opinion.
I'm amazed at the outright dishonesty of the anti-fluoride people claiming that because a fluoride isotope was used as the marker in a PET scan to find hardened arteries, that fluoride was actually the cause. It's like blaming X-rays for somebody's fractured bone.
[anti-fluoride people claiming that because a fluoride isotope was used as the marker in a PET scan to find hardened arteries, that fluoride was actually the cause.]
Wait. Who said this? It's like saying that radio-iodine causes the multitude of blood vessel irregularities it finds.
[It's like blaming X-rays for somebody's fractured bone.]
That's ok, I think you're propaganda. Aren't thoughts fun? Why it's almost as though anybody can think ... well, anything, regardless of actual evidence and objective reality.
The funny part is, I've actually illustrated a number of times behavior consistent with that of "misinformation agents" and "propagandists" coming from so-called anti-fluoridation activists.
My favorite behavior has been a consistent failure of said activists to actually read their sources.
@Dream0Asylum I also still find it odd that C0nc0rdance would knowingly mislead me in the bio-accumulation of fluoride in the body... claiming he believed it to be "a myth", when he clearly knew otherwise. I also find it odd that someone who claims to be homeless with absolutely no running water would take such an interest in water fluoridation over the last month. None of it adds up, or makes sense... just like water fluoridation.
The video specifically mentions accumulation in osteo-matter as a concern and that it warranted further study. I'm 90% on this, but I've not watched the video since when first it "aired."
Given this, I think it is not likely that he has mislead you and that you have, some-how, mislead yourself.
[someone who claims to be homeless with absolutely no running water would take such an interest in water fluoridation]
@Dream0Asylum This is what your buddy Primalxbeast claimed in one of his comments. He said he was also worried about staying warm on one night that was going to be cold.
C0ncordance, himself told me he thought the accumulation of fluoride was "a myth" in one of his earlier comments. I used Wikipedia as a source to show otherwise. On another video of his 2 years ago, he mentioned the accumulation of fluoride which showed he knew it wasn't a myth. The comment is still on the comments.
I went back through 9 pages of comments and found where I said:
"Can you source the 50% factoid? Because I'd be fairly certain we'd find it to be just another myth, passed uncritically on the Internet."
Note that I challenged the un-sourced assertion that 50% was accumulated, not that fluoroapatite is found in bone. Notice that she STILL hasn't given a primary source in the literature. That's because she accepts uncritically anything written on fluoridealert.
THE FLUORIDE WAS JUST USED AS A FLIPPEN MARKER. MY GOD HOW CAN YOU BE SO DENSE?
Google PET scans and isotopes, it's not that fucking complicated!
The fluoride 18 wasn't there before the flippen test it's just a short lived isotope used to make what they were looking for show up on the scan. It's INJECTED before the scan.
[I think I live in the only first world country with nearly zero scientific literacy.]
It's a false perception created by the fact that intelligent people are often silent until such time as they have something useful to communicate.
Ignorants, on the other hand, are never happier than when they're yapping from a position of authority on a topic of which they have little or no comprehension.
If I'm reading what C0nc0rdance wrote correctly, the amount of fluoride in the pineal gland is dependent in the amount of calcium in the pineal gland and and will only increase when there is more calcium regardless of how much fluoride you drink. The excess fluoride is stored un the bones, not the pineal gland. Sounds like, without the calcium in the pineal gland, the fluorine has nothing to bond to.
Why should anybody waste their time explaining to you what you've misread if you don't even take the time to thank them? People have already wasted too much time tracking down your mistakes.
Stop linking and posting crap when you don't even understand what it means.
How many times is this that people have shown you that you've made a complete mistake in understanding what you've read, and yet you still won't own up to a single mistake, you just link to another piece of crap.
Radioactive isotopes like fluorine-18 and others are needed for PET scans to function.
The conclusion WAS, "An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk."
I don't care if it was a radioactive isotope like fluorine-18 used in a PET scan. The conclusion was NOT that "fluorine-18" is associated with an increased cardiovascular risk. It simply said "fluoride". Take it up with PubMED. How dare them mislead the public.
Oh, the fluorine goes where the calcium is, if there is calcium build up in your arteries (atherosclerosis), then the fluorine goes there and "highlights" it.
@Voidsworn Fluoride calcifies the pineal gland in the brain. There is no reason to assume that it doesn't cause calcification in other organs like the heart.
@Dawn2388 Perhaps, or maybe it increases calcification in those susceptible. I have no abnormal calcium levels nor problems with calcium absorption/elimination, therefore I do not think I have any problem with fluorine/calcium interactions. If one does not already have calcium absorption/elimination problems, then fluoride should not be a problem, provided it is kept at extremely low concentrations.
The way I read it is this: If the coronary arteries absorb (uptake) more fluoride, then that indicates that these arteries are more vulnerable to atherosclerosis. If arteries are subjected to this sodium fluoride and are not able to uptake it, that suggests they are less vulnerable to atherosclerosis. Is that right?
The fluoride that is visible on CT scans is radioactive and injected just prior to imaging. So, there's no way that fluoride can be increasing deposition of lipids, right? You just added it. However, it does migrate to where calcium is present in the arterial walls, and that calcification is what causes artherosclerosis. So this is no different than injecting iodine to image the thyroid... it's an imaging agent used in routine CT/PET scans.
The "Introduction" part of the article spells out how they are testing whether radioactive fluoride is better than radioactive fluorodeoxyglucose at finding calcified arteries. The rest of the article is simply how good radiolabeled fluoride is at imaging cardiovascular disease.
There's a reason it's in "Nuclear Medicine". These are CT imaging researchers, not environmental epidemiologists or toxicologists.
@C0nc0rdance The conclusion WAS, "An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk." And you know that people with kidney disease or diabetes are going to have higher levels of fluoride circulating in their blood stream simply because one can't effectively excrete ingested fluoride very well, and the other drinks much more fluoridated water than one normally would.
@C0nc0rdance New research has just linked your "one of the top 10 achievements" (fluoride) to cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death worldwide. Researchers found that fluoride consumption directly stimulates the hardening of your arteries, a condition known as atherosclerosis that is highly correlated with the #1 killer. It was recently published in the January edition of the journal Nuclear Medicine Communications. (Also see PubMed PMID: 21946616). So much for top 10 achievements.
1. You understand that this paper was about using radioisotope fluoride to measure heart disease risk, and are misrepresenting it on purpose.
2. You never read the paper, and are misrepresenting it through ignorance.
Which is it? Because if it is 1, then I want you to take a long hard look in the mirror. You will see a desperate, sad little person with no honor or integrity. I will now quote from the article in question.
"Combined anatomic and metabolic imaging with sodium [18F]fluoride PET/CT offers a promising, noninvasive method to evaluate atherosclerosis"
From methods:
"Sodium [18F]fluoride was injected intravenously at a dose of 10±2 mCi (370±74 MBq)."
The sodium fluoride was a CONTRAST AGENT for CT scanning. It goes where calcium is found so it permits better resolution of calcification of blood vessels.
You need to learn to think critically, Dawn. You've probably read some summary of this article that misrepresented a CT contrast agent study as some sort of epidemiology prospective study. Did you read the primary article? Did you take the time to skeptically review what you were presented with?
"Vascular calcification, in particular coronary calcification, has been shown to predict vascular events" That's the central point of this paper.
You carefully omitted this prior statement in your quote:
"Sodium [¹⁸F]fluoride PET/CT might be useful in the evaluation of the atherosclerotic process in major arteries, including coronary arteries. An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk."
Do you see what that says? The imaging is useful to DETECT atherosclerosis, not that it CAUSES atherosclerosis.
I know I've embarrassed you by highlighting your failure to understand what you were presented with, but I can't think of any other way to show you that you're being lied to by someone... infowars, it looks like.
You need to wake up and see that this is an intentional deception. Maybe this will be the first time you realize that what you read on your websites is NOT reliable scientific info. I'll send you a link to the original paper, and you can read it.
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrDoobious Any increase in diagnosis of mental illness should at least be influenced by better diagnosis. The dose makes the poison. There is no evidence the dose of ethyl mercury from the pre-2002 U.S. vaccine schedule was ever high enough to interact with the brain or be a cause for any concern. In any case, what will convince you that thimerosal-containing vaccines do not cause autism?
againstjebelallawz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrDoobious Any increase in diagnosis of mental illness should at least be influenced by better diagnosis. The dose makes the poison. There is no evidence the dose of ethyl mercury from the pre-2002 U.S. vaccine schedule was ever high enough to interact with the brain or be a cause for any concern. In any case, what will convince you that thimerosal-containing vaccines do not cause autism?
againstjebelallawz 1 week ago
Comment removed
againstjebelallawz 1 week ago
Vaccinations? Healthier foods????? Drinking fluoride?
I Think this guys been vaccinated against common sense.
How can he say healthier foods when the country is going through an obesity epidemic? Thymerisol-containing vaccines DO cause autism/other brain damage. The link has been proven.
Fluoride does many many bad things. Infertility, lower brain function, contributes to CHD
MrDoobious 1 week ago
@MrDoobious Any studies to back that Thimerosal-Autism link? As for fluoride, the dose makes the poison, and the dose in drinking water is quite low, as clearly described in this video. Don't make scare-mongering claims, especially ones so debunked as the Thimerosal-Autism link, without providing at least some independent and reliable references for them.
againstjebelallawz 1 week ago
@MrDoobious
What are your sources to say that flouride is linked to infertility and brain damage? don't just make hard statements like that without linking factual data to support your claimed statement.
Catlover123445 1 week ago
@Catlover123445 banfluoride. org. nz/categoryblog/68-fluoride-and-human-health
MrDoobious 6 days ago
@MrDoobious
how about a non-biased site without an agenda.. and that doesn't have "blog" in the link. I need a more valid source please.
Catlover123445 6 days ago
@Catlover123445 Well you wont find that, on EITHER side of the debate. But i think its stupid to put poison into the water just to stop a few dental caries - which is debatable anyway.
MrDoobious 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Want an inexpensive water filter that looks like a normal Brita filter, but filters out fluoride by up to 80% out of Tap Water plus many other metals and toxins. Take a look wix.com/officeamote/newwater
WatersNew 1 week ago
Fluoride is the main component in rat poison...
tonysmith53214 2 weeks ago
@tonysmith53214 Vitamin D is also a main component in rat poison. Are you suggesting we should not take Vitamin D supplements either simply because it can and is used in rat poison?
lhvinny 2 weeks ago in playlist Favorite videos
@lhvinny Watch "Fluoride Deception"...
tonysmith53214 2 weeks ago
~ Confirmed ~ Cancer Deaths Linked to Water Fluoridation - Dr. Dean Burk
/watch?v=qq_oQoTdnYc
DianeDi 2 weeks ago
Forced drugging with a carcinogenic neurotoxin is indefensible. Fluoride depletes iodine, causing thyroid problems. It also calcifies the pineal gland. A real sceptic is sceptical about the status quo. You're an establishment propagandist. What you are doing, is the exact opposite of scepticism.
DutchPatriotChannel 3 weeks ago 2
this is filled with techniques of propaganda that astound me. one example is the chart comparing fluoride with sodium and calcium. maybe he should consider the comparisons of lead and arsenic?. another is the comparison of pharmaceutical grade vs. industrial grade fluoride. that is not what needs to be compared and my guess is he is well aware of that. its the other toxic metals that are invariably included in the industrial soup like arsenic and lead. its misleading to say the least.
urbanothepopeofdeath 4 weeks ago 2
@urbanothepopeofdeath
[pharmaceutical grade vs. industrial grade fluoride]
Hexafluorosilicic acid, I presume what you're calling "industrial fluoride," is hydrolytic (is chemically broken down by water) and reforms as simple hydrofluoric acid [hf], what I presume you refer to as "pharmaceutical" fluoride.
The comparison is accurate, as you will never consume Hexafluorosilicic acid via tap water. It just does not chemically survive intact within that medium.
Dream0Asylum 3 weeks ago
@Dream0Asylum industrial grade comes with many other toxins like arsenic and lead. you know it and this consensus guy does as well. this isnt mentioned because this piece is agenda driven. just like comparing levels of fluoride and sodium and calcium. ludicrous. why not add puppies in the comparison. dont be a tool.
urbanothepopeofdeath 3 weeks ago
@urbanothepopeofdeath
[other toxins like arsenic and lead.]
Quantify this. As it stands, I can get a sample of ground water that naturally contains both of those materials and others that are even worse.
The same minerals that are broken down by industry are also broken down by nature, and when that happens they often lose their constituants (like lead and arsenic) to water.
Dream0Asylum 3 weeks ago
@Dream0Asylum lets end this...we can discuss science, toxicities, quantities and studies but the bottom line is medicating our drinking water should be unconscionable. why it isnt to you really makes me wonder. there are many other ways for our government to coddle us. cradle to grave. force us to now pay for contraception, force us to drink water that has been medicated so people who choose not to take care of themselves supposedly benefit. why arent we talking precautionary principle here
urbanothepopeofdeath 3 weeks ago
@urbanothepopeofdeath
[should be unconscionable. why it isnt to you really makes me wonder.]
I rebutted your argument from ignorance regarding the science. As a matter of basic liberty, I do not believe in water fluoridation.
[really makes me wonder.]
I imagine you do a great deal of wondering, and then dispelling that wonder via subjective intuition. That is why you've supplied a position and motive to me that can not be supported objectively by my content.
Dream0Asylum 3 weeks ago
@Dream0Asylum correct, i do a lot of wondering. i guess people as smart as you don't spend time wondering. too bad. subjective intuition? probably guilty to a degree here. i tired of the argument 20 years ago. researched what i thought i needed to make a judgement that wasn't just intuitive and havent thought about it much since. mainly i guess b/c i see what fl really does to teeth. so u can look at the science i will just go by what i see daily and hope my intuition is right.
urbanothepopeofdeath 2 weeks ago
@Dream0Asylum the good news for me is i will be happy tomorrow for ignorance is bliss but you my friend will still be a tool. i asked you not to be a tool.
urbanothepopeofdeath 2 weeks ago
@urbanothepopeofdeath
[i will be happy tomorrow for ignorance is bliss]
If ignorance is the price of bliss, then the price is too damned high.
[but you my friend will still be a tool. i asked you not to be a tool.]
C'est la vie
Dream0Asylum 2 weeks ago
@Dream0Asylum Why can't these people just actually do their research, they go around claiming they are open minded yet they ignore information, ignore contradictions, and ignore new evidence that don't support their ideas.
This is not critical thinking people, this is as idiotic as Christian science.
AkumaADemoncus 2 weeks ago
@Dream0Asylum and i have seen the devastating effect on teeth for 30 years. it has been a tremendous money maker for me. its not why i got into the business. you are misguided or have an agenda if you think fluoridation is a net positive. i used to have all the answers to the stupid questions about pollution by dilution but have lost interest because minds never change when there is an agenda. its funny, you probably think co2 is a pollutant and dangerous dont you.
?
urbanothepopeofdeath 3 weeks ago
@urbanothepopeofdeath
[you probably think co2 is a pollutant and dangerous dont you.]
Contextually yes, and so do you. That context being, concentrations outside of tolerable values.
The poison is in the dosage. Currently, CO2 is within tolerable values given my biology. Should that change for the worse it's going to be an "interesting" time, chemically speaking, within my body. There's a reason why dry-cleaning bags warn against placing them over one's head.
Dream0Asylum 3 weeks ago
@Dream0Asylum i guess you cant help yourself.
urbanothepopeofdeath 2 weeks ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Very educating video.
Tarik360 1 month ago
@PhilNEvo
I was unable to look at the specific link that you provided, but I think it's just a study to see if fluoride-18 can be used as a marker in PET/CT scans to detect calcification in arteries. The fluoride has nothing to do with the calcification of the arteries, it's just used to make it show up on the scans.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
ww w. happysmile.se/dokument/Association_of_vascular_fluoride_uptake_with.3.pdf
is this a significant paper regarding this topic?
PhilNEvo 1 month ago
@AEVautomatic
Preaching to the choir dude. Did you watch the video?
Let's see you convince Dawn and I'll be truely impressed.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance
I knew she couldn't come up with that odd collection of words on her own. She wouldn't even know how the word solution is used in chemistry, so I googled it to see where it came from, but I was suprized by the number of hits.
Most of what she posts, other than her insults, are just cut and paste, an even her insults tend to be rather pathetic.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
In the '60s I heard fluoride was some kind of commie mind control agent. People look for patterns, causation. We abhor mystery. We tend to latch on to the closest answer that excuses us from responsibility and affixes "blame" elsewhere, that tells us we are good and correct. That's why we invented god and the GOP.
Miata822 1 month ago
How can people believe stuff so dogmatically when they don't even have any clue what it means?
No point in trying to discuss her posts with her. She doesn't come up with any of it or have a clue what it means, so how can she respond when people question and challenge what she posts?
For christ's sake woman, get a brain of your own!
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
Hey guys! Google Dawn's quote of "The fluoride ion only hypothetically exists as an entity in an ideal solution, ......"
At least 10 hits. She can't come up with a single coherent thought of her own. All of these guys just repeat word for word what they're brainwashed into believing. She doesn't understand any of it well enough to put it in her own words. She's literally just parroting everything.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast
Good catch... I never would have suspected something that incomprehensible to be a quote. It staggers me that they think of themselves as being critical thinkers, yet they think whatever they are told to think by the leaders of their movement. It's actually quite cult-like.
I think the only solution is to focus on the next generation, teaching them to go to primary sources, to follow evidence and to apply real critical thinking.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@C0nc0rdance Fluoride is fine. You can fluorinate your teeth with it. You will have less cavities.
AEVautomatic 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@C0nc0rdance its scary this comment received so many negative votes.....
Especially since you blatantly reveal one of the "dark secrets" of intelligent, knowing to look up the fucking source...
Excuse my vulgarity, I don't know if its because of trolls or people are just that prideful in their laziness..... I hope former...
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
Shh, everybody be quite.
Come on Dawn which type of membranes do viruses have?
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@resistnzisfutl
It is fun to tease her though.
Too bad her comment about bacteria got deleted, I forgot wether or not it was gram positive or gram negtive membraned organisms she was claiming her toothpaste killed.
I also wanted to ask her if viruses had gram positive or gram negative membranes. ;-)
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
ROFL
I can't vote on comments or see the votes on my phone.
That's so damn funny. Some people have no sense of shame.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Comon guys, it's clear Dawn has no clue about the science behind these studies, and is simply on here to billboard her particular ideology. No desire to learn something, no desire to expand herself, just to display her belief and dig her heels in on the issue. That's the problem with ideology, is that it to easily leads to dogma, where a belief is implacable no matter what evidence to the contrary is thrown at it.
resistnzisfutl 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I find it interesting that the same few people have been upvoting all of Dawn's comments moments after they're made.
I smell someone's sockpuppets in need of a washing.
rkyeun 1 month ago
It is not, "simply the fluoride ion in water," it is a complex recipe of toxic substances.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
The fluoridated water you drink is not the same product as researched. The only similarity is the fact that the fluoride ion is present in some form. The fluoride ion only hypothetically exists as an entity in an ideal solution, purified water, and tap water is far from pure H2O.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@ASparrow1
You know what's funny? Dawn has claimed that the fluoride in the water in her area has been twice the level of artificial fluoridation in other areas for 3 decades, and also claims that fluoridated water causes greatly reduced IQ.
It's a good thing that correlation doesn't prove causation or she'd have some serious anecdotal evidence on her side.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast [correlation doesn't prove causation]
The opposite belief, correlation proves causation, is a logical fallacy by which two events that occur together are claimed to have a cause-and-effect relationship. The decay rates have dropped in the non-fluoridated areas of the United States, and in Europe - where fluoridation of water is rare.The world-wide decline in tooth decay over the past four decades has occurred at the same rate in areas that are not fluoridated as in areas that are.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@ASparrow1
You actually made me LoL. :-)
You know how much I love those conspiracies. ;-)
I chuckle to myself occationally when I see thick con-trails not blowing away quickly, just thinking about the fact that there are really people in the world who are afraid of them.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
A half-truth is a deceptive statement that adds some element of truth.The statement might be partly true, or totally true, but only part of the whole truth. A half-truth deceives the recipient by presenting something believable & using those aspects of the statement that can be shown to be true as good reason to believe it in its entirety, or as the whole truth. A person deceived by a half truth considers the proposition to be the whole truth & acts accordingly. Hence, deleted comments of mine.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@Dawn2388 It is impossible to make a wise decision without all the facts. C0nc0rdance is an expert at sugarcoating the negative aspects of water fluoridation & deleting/censoring my facts/comments that would jeopardize his views in the video. That is clearly deceptive, and far from honest. It's not bias in my opinion. It is outright dishonesty. There are many studies which prove health problems with water fluoridation that are being ignored by C0nc0rdance & his groupies. Why the deception?
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388 Please understand that fact is fact, regardless of the source. Likewise, truth is truth, regardless of the source. Where a motive to lie may truly exist, only actual evidence that the testimony itself IS a lie renders it completely invalid. Using innuendo as an argument is dishonest & deceptive. BTW, Dr. Bruce Spittle is the author of the book, "Fluoride Fatigue. Fluoride Poisoning". A list of his credentials can be found on Amazon. He is not some homeless mentally ill person.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@Dawn2388
Let's take this particular study as an example in PubMed PMID: 18695947.
(You don't consider PubMed as an activist site, do you?) ",,,which means that children who live in a fluorosis area have five times higher odds of developing low IQ than those who live in a nonfluorosis area..."
Now the CDC states (11/08/2010), that 41% of U.S. adolescents aged 12-15 have dental fluorosis. Now they also have a five times higher odds of developing a low IQ.
Weigh a cavity versus IQ loss.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
Others on PubMED regarding IQ are:
PMID: 21911949
PMID: 21237562
PMID: 18038039
And then there is the increased uptake of serum lead levels with silicofluorides:
PubMed PMID: 11233755
PubMed PMID: 17420053
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Dawn2388
I picked a few of these at random.
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2011 Apr-Jun;29(2):117-20.
"[We included regions] with groundwater fluoride concentrations of less than 0.5 ppm [control] and from 2.5 to 3.5 ppm, respectively"
"Considering these facts and findings it is suggestive that defluoridation of groundwater with excess fluoride in it is an issue which is in a dire need for attention."
Not about optimal water fluoridation.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance Do you actually believe that 4.00 ppm of fluoride in tap water is optimal water fluoridation? What is YOUR definition of "optimal" water fluoridation? There are no laws that regulate the levels of fluoride in tap water in the USA unless it exceeds 4.00 ppm. A "recommendation" of 0.7 ppm is nothing more than that. It isn't seriously monitored on any level. And only checking the levels in tap water once a year is negligent in my honest opinion. (1.9 ppm or higher isn't "optimal")
Dawn2388 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Dawn2388 Why did you not response to the valid criticism Concordance raised about the evidence you cited?
Are you unable?
ASparrow1 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Dawn2388
Cad Saude Publica. 2007;23 Suppl 4:S579-87.
"Moctezuma (F 0.8+/-1.4 mg/L; As 5.8+/-1.3 microg/L); Salitral (F 5.3+/-0.9 mg/L; As 169+/-0.9 microg/L) and 5 de Febrero (F 9.4+/-0.9 mg/L; As 194+/-1.3 microg/L)."
This is a paper on children receiving 5-10 times the optimal dose of fluoride as well as known toxic amounts of ARSENIC in the drinking water. Groundwater in developing countries is often untested and may contain toxic levels of multiple metals/anions.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance [may contain toxic levels of multiple metals/anions]
This is also true of the silicofluorides added to the U.S. tap water. It is far from pharmaceutical grade, and contains added contaminants.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Dawn2388
As to serum lead and silicofluorides:
Environ Health Perspect. 2006 Jan;114(1):130-4.
"Given these findings, our analyses, though not definitive, do not support concerns that silicofluorides in community water systems cause higher PbB concentrations in children."
This is not a settled issue, and requires more research. Eventually it will be necessary to establish any direct health effect and explain a risk reduction strategy.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Dawn2388
Did you read the paper you are citing?
By the way, this is a simple way to cite: Biol Trace Elem Res. 2008 Winter;126(1-3):115-20.
What was your impression of the author's use of Mantel–Haenszel method? Were the variances homogenous? Can you locate the mean or median fluoride exposure in the studies under review?
I'm interested to see how you evaluate evidence. What is your process?
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
LoL Bruce Spittle is in charge. Why does that name sound familiar? Oh, that would be because there were anti-fluoride folk trying to pass off his work as legit. I notice that he's not only the editor of Fluoride, but also the treasurer. Sounds to me like he may be making a profit off of scaring the gullible.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast [Sounds to me like he may be making a profit]
I'm sure whatever profit he makes isn't nearly like a 20000% mark-up on "fluoride", aka pollution, aka toxic waste sold to municipal water districts to be added to the public's tap water. Who knew pollution could be so lucrative?? All for the sake of poor children's teeth. Those who refuse to eat anything without sugar & get a cavity. Let's also lower their IQ's with fluoride. The gov't should tax sugar & HFCS out of existence.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Dawn2388 You are still using the term "toxic waste". This reveals you as a fool who relies on people having an emotional, rather than rational response to your arguments. This might be effective down at the pub, or wherever you usually converse with people, but the patrons of Concordances channel are not so simple minded.
The fact you are so confident of your position but can not understand this clearly demonstrates you are suffering from dunning-Kruger effect.
ASparrow1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Primalxbeast [making a profit off of scaring the gullible]
Oh, yeah. Let's consider the fear caused by this video... that without fluoride (or fluoridated water), you, all the poor children, and everyone else will succumb to painful, deadly cavities. Fluoride isn't even a nutrient. You can have great teeth without it... unless you live on sugar-filled products. But in reality, if you live on these products every day, no amount of "fluoride" (toxic waste) is going to benefit your teeth.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Primalxbeast I bet Bruce Spittle is pissed off that Paul Connett is moving in on his market!
But Bruce did have a better scam going. If you run your own 'journal' you can manufacture your own body of evidence. In face Fluoride Alert cites his journal heavily.
It's almost like...a conspiracy!
ASparrow1 1 month ago
Lol, opps, that was ment to be a google search.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
International society for fluoride research new zealand
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
ASparrow1
LoL True, she never bothered to engage anybody in any sort of serious dialog. Anytime anybody refuted anything she said, she either just ignored them or insulted them and then posted another bit of crap that she picked up from some activist website without even understanding the content of what she was posting. Pure mindless parroting.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast [some activist website]
I guess Wikipedia is some kind of anti-fluoride website?? You just keep making up crap.
Parroting?
I guess hearing the phrase, "water fluoridation is one of the top 10 public health achievements of the modern era", over and over again isn't some kind of parroting??
Pollution?? Toxic waste?? Yeah, right. Tell me another one.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
*chuckle*
It's fun to check back from time to time to see how much talking to herself Dawn has done.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Primalxbeast She is demonstrating he intentions have only ever been to billboard her beliefs.
My department has reopened after the Christmas holidays and anti-fluoridation has become a really interesting discussion. Particularly the "International Society for Fluoride Research" being run out of a beach house just down the road from our university. They also publish a very dodgy journal.
Check them out on street view: 727 Brighton Road, Ocean View, Dunedin, New Zealand
ASparrow1 1 month ago
See PubMed PMID: 20580811 "Fluoride in drinking water and dental fluorosis"
The primary findings from this study have shown that fluoride content in hair is highly correlated with fluoride content in drinking water and dental fluorosis level, indicating that hair may be regarded as biomaterial of high informative potential in evaluating prolonged exposure to fluorides & to individual children at risk of fluorosis regardless of the phase of teeth eruption.
Perhaps testing hair is a good idea.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@Dawn2388 The best solution for this would be to brush your teeth with a mixture Virgin Coconut Oil & baking soda. Add a little mint for flavor, if you wish. Virgin Coconut Oil is a natural anti-bacterial/anti-fungal/anti-viral product. It is not toxic to consume or use for brushing. You can use it in cooking your food instead of the highly refined polyunsaturated oils & trans-fats. I may create a new product of toothpaste with these ingredients myself. Something that will actually work.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Can anyone tell me what documentary the last sentence on some of C0nc0rdance's videos are from? I mean "Every cell of each plant and animal contains genetic information coded onto the DNA molecule. The model rep..."
IblameBlame 1 month ago
THANK YOU
TheAwakenedHeretic 1 month ago
seems like a reasonable assessment.
personally, it's something that i've always been on the fence about; still am...
TWITfromURANUS 1 month ago in playlist More videos from C0nc0rdance
I want to see what Dr. Dean Burk has to say about fluoride, don't you? It's an older video, but interesting nonetheless.
Dr. Dean Burk - Fluoride causes cancer
Youtube
/watch?v=ClqK7XvfLg0
It's interesting history if nothing else, don't you think?
Dawn2388 1 month ago
Nice vid.
LOL at the pics @ 3:40 and 7:50
MsHojat 1 month ago
irrelevant
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
The claim that's being made by every anti-Fl activist site imaginable that there are a thousand EPA members against water fluoridation is based on one meeting of a local union composed of a 1000+ people in which LESS THAN 20 PEOPLE showed up to vote. So in one small division of the NTEU which represents 30 gov't organizations, 20 people got together who didn't like fluoride, and that's inflated to a 1000 screaming ppl.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
You don't even come close to understanding anything you read anyway, so I suggest you just switch to picture books.
Maybe you can find some with scary monster pictures if you want something to be afraid of.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast Read the 530 page book. You can't discuss anything you haven't read.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@Dawn2388
Here's a thought. Drag your sorry ass back to school and take some basic science classes and learn some critical thinking skills so that talking to you isn't completely useless.
Thousands of posts people have wasted on trying to make even the slightest dent in your ignorance ALL POINTLESS, because you haven't actually LISTENED to a single word anybody has said.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
Oh that fucking rich coming from you considering the unbelievable number of times that people have shown you to be completely wrong about your claims and how you have had no clue of what you have read and have shown you how what you have read was just quote-mined from the original sources to misrepresent reality, and never ONCE have you owned up to a single mistake.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast Read the 530 page book in it's entirety. You can't even discuss the book without reading it. Everything quoted out of it will simply be called "quote mining".
Don't be silly.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@Dawn2388
pg16 "This report does not evaluate nor make judgements about the benefits, safety, or efficacy of artificial water fluoridation"
Yet you think this is your proof of a thousand EPA members SCREAMING against water fluoridation?
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
Can you be a little more specific? I'm not going to read a 530 page book on my phone, and when I read the summary earlier, I don't recall anything about them thinking water fluoridation was some dire emergency. Maybe that some more research needs to be done and the fluoridarion level reassessed, which is something most of the non-anti-Fl ppl on here have been saying anyway.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast You will simply have to read it all by yourself. I'm not going to discuss it with you any further. I've already tried that. You referred to it as some kind of new age crap when I attempted to discuss fluoride and Alzheimer's Disease, and the other CNS effects of fluoride. Discussing anything with you has clearly proved useless.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
@Dawn2388
Any search having to do with the subject just yields pages of activists sites. You've been shown repeatedly how they lie and misrepresent information.
Do you have legitimate proof of a thousand EPA members "screaming" over this subject?
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
The 2006 National Research Council's Report on water fluoridation shows concerns over the practice of water fluoridation as well.
Google:
"Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards"
Read the whole book online. It's free.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
Over 1000 EPA members clearly have concerns over the levels of fluoride currently allowed in tap water.
Google:
"WHY EPA HEADQUARTERS UNION OF SCIENTISTS OPPOSES FLUORIDATION".
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
Have you ever read the comment sections of Youtube channels with thousands of subscribers before?
It's rare for many of the comments to be by the person who uploaded the video.
Do you go on other Youtube channels with thousands of subs and try to tell people that only the person who made the video is allowed to comment?
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
If the EPA allows 800 times more fluoride than lead, they can't be screaming that loudly.
I can see them wanting to lower the amount added. As far as I know, the current advised amount is 0.7ppm, but if they made that the MCL, many places would actually be forced to remove fluoride already present naturally.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
What is your proof of these 1000 screaming EPA members?
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
You just ignore C0nc0ordance when he takes the time to answer you and you have heard more than just my opinion on that load of crap you keep re-posting. Others have pointed out your flawed logic, and it hasn't kept you from parroting the same crap.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Primalxbeast [heard more than just my opinion]
I've only heard YOUR opinion on this!! Stop making up crap. I believe there is a reasonable and logical reason why over 1000 EPA members would be screaming over this. This is C0nc0rdance's video. Let HIM answer, please.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 3
Looks like the EPA thinks that arsenic is 400 times more dangerous than fluoride and that lead is 800 times more dangerous based on what you have posted far more than 3 times.
We've already answered that question many times but you never listen.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast Actually, I'd like to hear C0nc0rdance's opinion on this, if you don't mind. There are over 1000 EPA members screaming over this, among other things.
So far, I've only heard YOUR opinion.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
And heck, I'll ask this a 3rd time. Do you claim the information in this book is invalid?
The claim that LD50 is more toxic than lead & only slightly less toxic than arsenic?
Based on LD50 data from Robert E. Gosselin et al, Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products 5th ed., 1984
The MCL for lead is 0.005 parts per million (ppm). The MCL for arsenic is 0.010 parts per million (ppm). And the EPA allows up to 4.00 parts per million (ppm) for fluoride (pollution) before screaming foul play.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 7
@Dawn2388
Yes, why should I expect you to care about being wrong about something for an entire month when with less than 5 seconds of research you could have actually been right about something? It's not as if being wrong time and time again about everything else because you haven't bothered to read and understand the actual studies has bothered you any. So much easier just to read the quote-mined crap put out to fool the naive.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
I happen to be a she, does that not show up on my profile, and yes when it gets below freezing my patients with people whining about petty crap can get quite low, especially when you're bitching about having to bathe in fluoridated water when I would have really enjoyed a hot bath at that point in time.
Some people just spend their lives looking for petty crap to whine about.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast [I happen to be a she, does that not show up on my profile]
I really don't check out things like that. Not really interested.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Holy cow she's really reaching. Got no legs to stand on, so is now playing etymological games.
This is what happens when one's conclusions comes from an ignorant ideological dogma rather than critical examination of evidence; there is no room for compromise, no desire to really learn something, and no sense of self-reflection. Just a sense of implacable unwavering purpose to push an agenda no matter how good the argument or how compelling the evidence to the contrary.
resistnzisfutl 1 month ago
Comment removed
resistnzisfutl 1 month ago
Comment removed
resistnzisfutl 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
I've been interested in science since I was a small child. Some of my first children's books were I-can-read books that were science related. I'm not going to lose my intrest in science just because I happen to be living in a car, and I'd much rather be living in my car than take a chance of ending up renting a room with somebody like you. I've tried renting rooms I'll stick with my car TYVM.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast There ARE homeless shelters with running water. That is if you really miss it that much. I bet they even have heat.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum
You have to go back 6 hours to the point where Dawn claimed that fluoride caused hardening of arteries, and C0nc0rdance found the study that Dawn's source had quote mined and it turned out that they were just using the fluoride isotope as a marker.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum
We do actually rank very low compared to other countries in math and science. Part of the problem is our poor education system, but a large part of the problem is religion teaching people not to trust science.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast [rank very low compared to other countries in math and science]
May have a lot to do with the fact many other countries have discontinued the practice of water fluoridation, yet it continues in the USA. Remember, more than 24 studies have linked fluoride to lower IQ's in children. Do you also dispute this??
Dawn2388 1 month ago 3
@Primalxbeast Example is Pubmed PMID: 18695947
Don't claim American's aren't getting enough fluoride to affect their IQ's either. In reality, you don't know exactly how much fluoride is being consumed through toothpaste, food, beverages, bathing, swimming in fluoridated pools, through inhaling pollution, through medications, etc. There is no way you could know. It's hardly being monitored on any level.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 4
@Dawn2388
You really think it's hard to find out how saturated your body is with fluoride? Take a piss test. Jesus, fluoride is not some evil spirit stalking prey just beyond the realm of science. It's not some wraithy, lurking, unfathomable shadow.
Heck, maybe your local med college would do it for free or just nominal expense. Every lab tech has a human urine cherry to lose.
Go. Unleash thy urine and spill forth thy body's excess ionized molecules and waste products,
Dream0Asylum 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum Ever tried to get one of those tests done?? When was the last time yours was checked?? When was the FIRST time yours was checked?? And these tests are not all created equal either. Some are more accurate than others. If it is so easy, why don't doctors ever check it??
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
[If it is so easy, why don't doctors ever check it??]
Because fluoridation isn't exactly illness causation that warrants testing every single person in the united states. However, if symptoms point to fluoride poisoning, a test would be done. It's the same reason why tests for arsenic aren't done when casually you pop in, even though you're probably exposed more often than you'd expect.
[When was the FIRST time ]
I have no symptoms consistent with fluoride poisoning.
Dream0Asylum 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum I think doctors should at least be checking children who show signs of dental fluorosis which is a clear sign of overexposure to fluoride. Not doing so is negligent in my honest opinion.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 3
@Dream0Asylum
I'm amazed at the outright dishonesty of the anti-fluoride people claiming that because a fluoride isotope was used as the marker in a PET scan to find hardened arteries, that fluoride was actually the cause. It's like blaming X-rays for somebody's fractured bone.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Primalxbeast
[anti-fluoride people claiming that because a fluoride isotope was used as the marker in a PET scan to find hardened arteries, that fluoride was actually the cause.]
Wait. Who said this? It's like saying that radio-iodine causes the multitude of blood vessel irregularities it finds.
[It's like blaming X-rays for somebody's fractured bone.]
Or maybe that ...
Dream0Asylum 1 month ago
So now you're saying that the article from pubMED that your source quote mined is itself inaccurate propaganda.
So if you're attacking your source's source, you're back to attacking your own source again.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast Actually, I think this video is propaganda.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
That's ok, I think you're propaganda. Aren't thoughts fun? Why it's almost as though anybody can think ... well, anything, regardless of actual evidence and objective reality.
The funny part is, I've actually illustrated a number of times behavior consistent with that of "misinformation agents" and "propagandists" coming from so-called anti-fluoridation activists.
My favorite behavior has been a consistent failure of said activists to actually read their sources.
Dream0Asylum 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum I also still find it odd that C0nc0rdance would knowingly mislead me in the bio-accumulation of fluoride in the body... claiming he believed it to be "a myth", when he clearly knew otherwise. I also find it odd that someone who claims to be homeless with absolutely no running water would take such an interest in water fluoridation over the last month. None of it adds up, or makes sense... just like water fluoridation.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
[the bio-accumulation of fluoride in the body]
The video specifically mentions accumulation in osteo-matter as a concern and that it warranted further study. I'm 90% on this, but I've not watched the video since when first it "aired."
Given this, I think it is not likely that he has mislead you and that you have, some-how, mislead yourself.
[someone who claims to be homeless with absolutely no running water would take such an interest in water fluoridation]
Clearify?
Dream0Asylum 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum This is what your buddy Primalxbeast claimed in one of his comments. He said he was also worried about staying warm on one night that was going to be cold.
C0ncordance, himself told me he thought the accumulation of fluoride was "a myth" in one of his earlier comments. I used Wikipedia as a source to show otherwise. On another video of his 2 years ago, he mentioned the accumulation of fluoride which showed he knew it wasn't a myth. The comment is still on the comments.
Dawn2388 1 month ago 3
@Dawn2388
[he thought the accumulation of fluoride was "a myth" in one of his earlier comments.]
Am I going to find a very specific context which you have convieniantly omitted? Like, penial gland \ general brain tissue accumulation or some such?
Dream0Asylum 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum Nope.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dream0Asylum
I went back through 9 pages of comments and found where I said:
"Can you source the 50% factoid? Because I'd be fairly certain we'd find it to be just another myth, passed uncritically on the Internet."
Note that I challenged the un-sourced assertion that 50% was accumulated, not that fluoroapatite is found in bone. Notice that she STILL hasn't given a primary source in the literature. That's because she accepts uncritically anything written on fluoridealert.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@C0nc0rdance [accepts uncritically anything written on fluoridealert]
From what I understand, Wikipedia doesn't use fluoridealert as a source for information.
See: Fluoride in Drinking-Water, by John Kirtley Fawell,World Health Organization, page 30.
Do you claim the information in this book is invalid?
The claim that LD50 is more toxic than lead & only slightly less toxic than arsenic?
Based on LD50 data from Robert E.Gosselin et al,Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products 5th ed.,1984
Dawn2388 1 month ago 11
@Dawn2388
"Take it up with pubMED"
You expect me to contact pubMED and have them dumb everything down to the point where you can understand it?
Wouldn't help, you still would just quote mine and take what is said out of context.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance
It's odd that fluorine-18 is the radioactive isotope and that Fluorine-19 is the stable one.
I guess that 9 neutons just isn't good enough for fluorine. ;-P
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
No, this is just that you have absolutely no understanding of what you're reading.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
THE FLUORIDE WAS JUST USED AS A FLIPPEN MARKER. MY GOD HOW CAN YOU BE SO DENSE?
Google PET scans and isotopes, it's not that fucking complicated!
The fluoride 18 wasn't there before the flippen test it's just a short lived isotope used to make what they were looking for show up on the scan. It's INJECTED before the scan.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Primalxbeast Could be one of your "conspiracies" too. (You like those) Take it up with PubMED..
Dawn2388 1 month ago
*sigh*
I think I live in the only first world country with nearly zero scientific literacy.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@Primalxbeast
[I think I live in the only first world country with nearly zero scientific literacy.]
It's a false perception created by the fact that intelligent people are often silent until such time as they have something useful to communicate.
Ignorants, on the other hand, are never happier than when they're yapping from a position of authority on a topic of which they have little or no comprehension.
I blame the gold-star mentality of the '80s.
Dream0Asylum 1 month ago
If I'm reading what C0nc0rdance wrote correctly, the amount of fluoride in the pineal gland is dependent in the amount of calcium in the pineal gland and and will only increase when there is more calcium regardless of how much fluoride you drink. The excess fluoride is stored un the bones, not the pineal gland. Sounds like, without the calcium in the pineal gland, the fluorine has nothing to bond to.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
Why should anybody waste their time explaining to you what you've misread if you don't even take the time to thank them? People have already wasted too much time tracking down your mistakes.
Stop linking and posting crap when you don't even understand what it means.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
Dawn2388
How many times is this that people have shown you that you've made a complete mistake in understanding what you've read, and yet you still won't own up to a single mistake, you just link to another piece of crap.
Radioactive isotopes like fluorine-18 and others are needed for PET scans to function.
Primalxbeast 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Primalxbeast
The conclusion WAS, "An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk."
I don't care if it was a radioactive isotope like fluorine-18 used in a PET scan. The conclusion was NOT that "fluorine-18" is associated with an increased cardiovascular risk. It simply said "fluoride". Take it up with PubMED. How dare them mislead the public.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
Fluoridation is a plot by Communists to contaminate our precious bodily fluids!!!!
(Not funny unless you've seen Dr Strangelove).
RadicalWhig 1 month ago
Oh, the fluorine goes where the calcium is, if there is calcium build up in your arteries (atherosclerosis), then the fluorine goes there and "highlights" it.
Voidsworn 1 month ago
@Voidsworn Fluoride calcifies the pineal gland in the brain. There is no reason to assume that it doesn't cause calcification in other organs like the heart.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388 Perhaps, or maybe it increases calcification in those susceptible. I have no abnormal calcium levels nor problems with calcium absorption/elimination, therefore I do not think I have any problem with fluorine/calcium interactions. If one does not already have calcium absorption/elimination problems, then fluoride should not be a problem, provided it is kept at extremely low concentrations.
Voidsworn 1 month ago
The way I read it is this: If the coronary arteries absorb (uptake) more fluoride, then that indicates that these arteries are more vulnerable to atherosclerosis. If arteries are subjected to this sodium fluoride and are not able to uptake it, that suggests they are less vulnerable to atherosclerosis. Is that right?
Voidsworn 1 month ago
@Voidsworn
The fluoride that is visible on CT scans is radioactive and injected just prior to imaging. So, there's no way that fluoride can be increasing deposition of lipids, right? You just added it. However, it does migrate to where calcium is present in the arterial walls, and that calcification is what causes artherosclerosis. So this is no different than injecting iodine to image the thyroid... it's an imaging agent used in routine CT/PET scans.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
The "Introduction" part of the article spells out how they are testing whether radioactive fluoride is better than radioactive fluorodeoxyglucose at finding calcified arteries. The rest of the article is simply how good radiolabeled fluoride is at imaging cardiovascular disease.
There's a reason it's in "Nuclear Medicine". These are CT imaging researchers, not environmental epidemiologists or toxicologists.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@C0nc0rdance The conclusion WAS, "An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk." And you know that people with kidney disease or diabetes are going to have higher levels of fluoride circulating in their blood stream simply because one can't effectively excrete ingested fluoride very well, and the other drinks much more fluoridated water than one normally would.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance That is what I thought. It is an image enhancer.
Voidsworn 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance New research has just linked your "one of the top 10 achievements" (fluoride) to cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death worldwide. Researchers found that fluoride consumption directly stimulates the hardening of your arteries, a condition known as atherosclerosis that is highly correlated with the #1 killer. It was recently published in the January edition of the journal Nuclear Medicine Communications. (Also see PubMed PMID: 21946616). So much for top 10 achievements.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
I am forced to choose one of two possibilities
1. You understand that this paper was about using radioisotope fluoride to measure heart disease risk, and are misrepresenting it on purpose.
2. You never read the paper, and are misrepresenting it through ignorance.
Which is it? Because if it is 1, then I want you to take a long hard look in the mirror. You will see a desperate, sad little person with no honor or integrity. I will now quote from the article in question.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
Let's start with the conclusion of the paper:
"Combined anatomic and metabolic imaging with sodium [18F]fluoride PET/CT offers a promising, noninvasive method to evaluate atherosclerosis"
From methods:
"Sodium [18F]fluoride was injected intravenously at a dose of 10±2 mCi (370±74 MBq)."
The sodium fluoride was a CONTRAST AGENT for CT scanning. It goes where calcium is found so it permits better resolution of calcification of blood vessels.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
You need to learn to think critically, Dawn. You've probably read some summary of this article that misrepresented a CT contrast agent study as some sort of epidemiology prospective study. Did you read the primary article? Did you take the time to skeptically review what you were presented with?
"Vascular calcification, in particular coronary calcification, has been shown to predict vascular events" That's the central point of this paper.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
Comment removed
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
YES! But they INJECTED a radiolabeled FLUORIDE CONTRAST AGENT to detect CALCIUM.
Methods:
"We retrospectively reviewed the imaging data and cardiovascular history of 61 patients who received whole-body sodium [¹⁸F]fluoride PET/CT studies"
Do you see how you only hear what you want to hear?
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
You carefully omitted this prior statement in your quote:
"Sodium [¹⁸F]fluoride PET/CT might be useful in the evaluation of the atherosclerotic process in major arteries, including coronary arteries. An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk."
Do you see what that says? The imaging is useful to DETECT atherosclerosis, not that it CAUSES atherosclerosis.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance CONCLUSION: An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk.
Spin it however you wish. Delete/censor this comment however you wish.
Dawn2388 1 month ago
@Dawn2388
I know I've embarrassed you by highlighting your failure to understand what you were presented with, but I can't think of any other way to show you that you're being lied to by someone... infowars, it looks like.
You need to wake up and see that this is an intentional deception. Maybe this will be the first time you realize that what you read on your websites is NOT reliable scientific info. I'll send you a link to the original paper, and you can read it.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
@C0nc0rdance I don't read infowars. Try:
naturalsociety . com/breaking-fluoride-linked-to-1-cause-of-death-in-new-research/
Dawn2388 1 month ago