Honestly I don't care about improving my teeth with fluoridated tap water -- fluoride is already in all of your food (because it's in the air)... Most health organizations support that fluoride is only affective when applied directly to smooth tooth surfaces. My main concern is getting too much fluoride through tap water consuption.
Here's an interesting quote in reference to your comment, though I'm not really worried about my teeth with regards to fluoride...
"In some developing countries where sugar consumption is low - Nigeria and Uganda, for example - people are too poor to buy fluoride toothpaste, don't drink fluoridated water, don't visit dentists and certainly don't drink expensive bottled water. Yet according to the World Health Organization, their tooth-decay rates are half that of the United States."
Quote:
Originally posted by iroc409
some of those teeth don't appear to be very well cared-for in the first place.
if it is in fact poison, and does no good unless directly applied (other than the similarity of drinking the water to using mouthwash), then:
a) why has the overall dental health improved over the past several years since it's accepted in the drinking water, and why would country schools to a weekly flouride treatment for student to make up for the lack of flouride?
b) why haven't more people had problems due to the toxicity of flouride in our drinking water?
i am curious. i've heard some debate over the alleged flouride conspiracy, and i do realize that flouride can be very dangerous, but never anything substantial enough to prove it to me.
also, i don't belive i'd blame the US' obesity problem on flouride, i'd accredit that to laziness.
|
As for proof... I will see if I feel different after a month of drinking and cooking better water. Honestly I don't like the taste of tap water anyway, not to mention the high levels of chlorine used in my town -- chlorine is not healthy either.
Check this out
The pineal gland is very interseting, but you can research it on your own...
"When Luke found out that the pineal gland - a little gland in the center of the brain, responsible for a very large range of
regulating activities (it produces serotonin and melatonin) -was also a calcifying tissue, like the teeth and the bones, she
hypothesized it would concentrate fluoride to very high levels. The gland is not protected by the blood brain barrier and has a
very high perfusion rate of blood, second only to the kidney.
Luke had 11 cadavers analyzed in the UK. As she predicted she found astronomically high levels of fluoride in the calcium
hydroxy apatite crystals produced by the gland. The average was 9000 ppm and went as high as 21,000 in one case. These
levels are at, or higher, than fluoride levels in the bones of people suffering from skeletal fluorosis. It is these findings which
have just been published.
It is the ramifications of these findings which have yet to be published. In the second half of her work she treated animals
(Mongolian gerbils) with fluoride at a crack pineal gland research unit at the University of Surrey, UK (so there is no question
about the quality of this work). She found that melatonin production (as measured by the concentration of a melatonin
metabolite in the urine) was lower in the animals treated with high fluoride levels compared with those treated with low levels."