Comment Archives: stories: Feature: Politics: Last 30 Days
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
Oh look, an OHSU doctor was just caught red-handed stealing signs outside the headquarters of Clean Water Portland. The good doctor also works for the Oregon Health Authority, the state agency that was deliberately delaying the results of the new Oregon Smile Survey.
http://www.katu.com/politics/Man-caught-st…
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
Adding Fluorosilicic Acid to our public water supply does nothing to address the many deep, systemic issues that have created uneven medical access and nutritional access/education/habits among poor communities. As long as the cheapest and most accessible food is processed, sugary, and nutrient deficient, and as long as our healthcare system is controlled by for-profit interests, health problems like dental caries in poor (mostly minority) communities will continue to manifest, no matter how many additional chemicals we put in the water or air.
I'm reminded of when I used to teach in high schools and saw kids show up daily with nothing but Twizzlers or other candy in their backpacks for breakfast. This is a problem fluoridation CAN'T solve.
What fluoridation DOES do, however, is increase the daily chemical load on our bodies and our ecosystem, proposing a new substance to consume and inject into our biosphere over the long term. Portland's water already has three "sanitizing" agents in it. Is making it even more of a chemical soup really the wise thing to do in this day and age? With a planet and populace already ailing from the widespread and indiscriminate use of chemical agents, we might finally begin to question the wisdom of the "better living through chemistry" panacea, and we can instead begin to consider more sustainable, deeply curative approaches to fundamentally social issues of this type.
Water and air are basic to life, free and necessary to all. Is this not reason enough to protect their purity, and to find more acute solutions to acute problems such as the one fluoridation proposes to "solve?"
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
There is a worldwide movement to stop forced Fluoridation of public water systems. It is successful in many communities.
My hope is that Fluoridation of public water systems will soon be a thing of the past!
===
Our water WILL NOT BE POISONED with toxic industrial waste, which is exactly what Fluorosilicic Acid is. Our water will not be contaminated. Get out of our water system with your drugs and industrial waste. Make your money elsewhere.
There are very likely grounds for a lawsuit if this measure passes, according to the Oregon State Bar.
See this page: http://www.osbar.org/publications/bulletin…
And please see this page. http://www.fluoride-class-action.com/for-a…
Please share with everyone freely. Thank you!
===
http://fluoridefreekansas.org/2012/11/vict…
Read what happened in Wichita! Victory against the MACHINE.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
Find out the answers to the three questions asked by Howard Patterson, M.E.M. in the video below.
The Real Questions about Fluoridation.
#1. Does it work?
#2. Is it safe?
#3. Is it safe for the environment?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYej_OgZHE
Fluoridation and the Environment (high resolution)
Howard Patterson, M.E.M./Flying Karamazov Brothers
Published on Apr 11, 2013
The actual science on fluoridation: its effect on salmon and the environment, efficacy for dental health, and safety for human consumption. Please watch before you vote!
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
Jesus get a room you two! Also after having a bad day I want to thank the person who was upset at the Mercury for "publishing under the guise of journalism". Holy fuck I needed that laugh. Also whoever pointed up that this publication's strength was witless hipster self promotion was also correct and should win something along with the 500th commenter! Oh, and I am voting no in part due to the ethics of how this is being done, and concerns in terms of overall public health. But I encourage the trolling, my this is exciting. Oh, and Mercury, you blow and...eh whatever been said already and I am still stunned there are people shocked at this,lol
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
"natural news"
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
"Fluoride is a toxic molecule that wreaks extensive, often irreversible, havoc on the body. The thyroid is particularly affected by fluoride exposure because its store of iodine is depleted. Iodine deficiency depresses the thyroid's metabolic and immune functions, resulting in hypothyroidism and lowered immunity.
Unlike iodine, which the body cannot store long-term, fluoride is a problematic and persistent toxin. Its effects are systemic and only about half of what is ingested can be excreted; the rest is stored in bones and tissues, blocking access to other elements, like iodine.
Fluoride and iodine are both halogens. Fluoride, the negative ion of the element fluorine, easily displaces iodine in the body because it is much lighter and therefore more reactive.
Fluoride exposure can come from multiple obvious and not-so-obvious sources. In addition to dental hygiene products and drinking water, many breakfast cereals, juices from concentrate, soda and other processed foods contain alarming levels. Fluoride-containing pesticide use means that the environment is being flooded with fluoride by conventional agriculture (http://www.fluoridealert.org/f-pesticides.htm). Also, many antidepressants contain large amounts of fluoride and are widely prescribed, often for a lifetime of use.
Lack of iodine shuts down production of thyroxine, the thyroid prohormone that controls metabolism, and, in one way or another, impacts every aspect of health.
But the action of iodine in the thyroid is not limited to metabolism; it also has an important immune function. If the thyroid is deficient in iodine, a critical step in immunity will be reduced or eliminated." Marianne Leigh
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031317_fluoride_iodine.html#ixzz2Sl8hN2US"
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
More synonyms in that entry: healing, elixir, placebo, treatment
Fluoride is also an elixir, a placebo and a treatment by your logic.
I need to clarify what an ad hom attack is for you btw. It would have been an ad hominem if I would have said "well your opinions don't matter because you're a troll." Asking if you're participating in behavior that is like a troll is not an attack on your credibility. It's a question about your intent.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
http://thesaurus.com/browse/medication
You'll find a word there that starts with d. Maybe thesaurus.com is in on the conspiracy as well!
Fluoride in the water is being used for EXACTLY the same purpose as that link.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
It's a legitimate question given you won't respond to a single refutation against your evidence.
Anyway. Let's recap.
1. Europe isn't a progressive hive mind
2. That Chinese study wasn't in a controlled environment
3. Lobbyists aren't inherently evil and neither are PACs. (Unless you consider lobbying for the Umatilla and emergency room doctors evil.)
4. Your definition of drug is bizarre and unfounded.
Since you haven't refuted anything up there, I win!
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
@Home said: "tcraighenry: Are you for real? druginfo/meds is in the url. The first section id 'Why is this medication prescribed?' WTF?"
Yup, WTF, indeed. Why, when it talks about products labeled as medications with fluoride in them, do you then call fluoride a drug. You're making a leap that your link doesn't support.
"I was refuting the statement "fluoride is not a drug." Which is a common, and intentional error, on the pro side."
No, you didn't refute anything. Nowhere in that link is fluoride called a drug, which is what you're claiming it is. The pro side isn't making an error in pointing this out and you have yet to support your claim to the contrary. It seems the common and intentional error lies in your argument, not the argument on the pro side.
"It is being used as a drug - the NIH agrees."
No, it is being used in products labeled as medications. It is *this* specific definition that NIH agrees with. They do *not* call it a drug, as you do.
"I know the pro side hates it being called a drug, because then you can say it forced medication, and be entirely accurate. Still that pesky thing called the truth."
No, the pro side sees the ridiculous idea of calling a mineral a drug because it isn't a drug. You need it to be falsely labeled a drug for your argument about "forced medication" to have any weight, which it does not.
Is adding iodine to salt forced medication, too? Do you even know why iodine was added to salt?
So, yes, about the pesky thing called truth. You don't seem to be working with much of it on your side.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
tcraighenry: ? Your ad hominem does not serve this discussion. Perhaps you should look in a mirror.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
I gotta ask at this point. Homer are you just trolling?
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
A topical cream for something like acne is also a medication. Would you call that a drug?
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
Errr, that last post should have been directed at LobicSabre.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
tcraighenry: Are you for real? druginfo/meds is in the url. The first section id "Why is this medication prescribed?" WTF? I was refuting the statement "fluoride is not a drug." Which is a common, and intentional error, on the pro side. It is being used as a drug - the NIH agrees. I know the pro side hates it being called a drug, because then you can say it forced medication, and be entirely accurate. Still that pesky thing called the truth.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
Prescription medication =/= drug. Would you call a topical cream a drug? Not to mention the word "drug" doesn't really mean anything in a medical sense.
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
Lobbyists:
Jessica Adomson lobbies for:
Northwest Career Colleges Federation
Oregon Public Broadcasting
Brielyn Atkins lobbies for:
Oregon Violence Against Women PAC
Christel Allen lobbies for:
American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
Oregon Association of Naturopathic Physicians
Oregon Housing Authorities
James Anderson lobbies for:
American College of Emergency Physicians, Oregon Chapter
Jeff Anderson lobbies for:
United Food & Commercial Workers Local 555
Anyway, just a few names from our state.
http://www.oregon.gov/OGEC/Pages/forms_pub…
(I believe they have to register, so there's your list.)
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
@Homer said: "LobicSabre: Funny, the NIH seems to think fluoride is a drug - http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginf…"
Funny because they never actually call it a drug on that page. Did you read it before you posted that link.
Further, why would you reference a page talking about medicinal fluoride when we're talking about fluoride added to public drinking water? The two are similar things, but not the same. Nowhere in that page does it talk about fluoridated water. It talks about fluoridated dental products.
Your false equivalency makes your argument invalid.
RSSGoing to Seattle?
Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”
@Spindles - not condoning sign-stealing, but your side is into arson - check the KATU link you posted.