Are you not able to read? This is overexposure.
So is vanilla flavoring used in all those candies and cakes you eat. Point?
Anti-flouride pill
Jason Wright
Daniel Robinson
I'm glad anons are starting to pick up on this tactic. I suggest real anons cut down on calling posters Kikes or ZOG(even if they are) because it makes shills stand out more when they use it on us to derail a thread.
As always, awareness is the best tactic against shills. It's always obvious because they don't want people to focus on their actual argument, but to just be on their side because they called other anons Kikes for disagreeing with them and think that makes them fit in.
Sage for off topic.
Nolan Allen
I thought it's some kind of mixture/derivative that also serves as disinfectant, but it seems that Americans are actually putting it in water supply just to "prevent tooth decay" lel
That's how most countries disinfect tap water.
I know for a substance that they claim is good for removing fluoride residue from the body, but I still have to see some tests confirming that.
Brody Harris
Acute poisoning is not an issue, long term negative health impact is.
He said it keeps being added every cycle and accumulates. That is of course retarded. Fluoride is already all over the environment, where do you think they get it in the first place to put it in the water?
Josiah Thompson
Fluoride is naturally occurring in the ground, and present in most groundwater.
Ayden Watson
That's correct, and most of the US have water supplies which overexpose them to flouride.
theguardian.com
0.7 ppm (which is the same as parts per liter) is only 0.1 away from the maximum safe flouride level, and that's added flouride. That doesn't even take into account existing flouride in water, and it was only lowered after decades of having absurdly high levels. The average natural occuring amount is around 0.4 to 0.5 ppm, which puts the average at about 0.11 or 0.12 ppm. Look up your own flouride levels for your town, I can almost guarantee it is at unsafe levels.
As stated in my post, it's not an argument in itself against it, as the source does not matter as long as it's pure. It's only an interesting fact. Although industrial "waste" byproducts are almost certainly impure in practicality.
Funny that you accuse me of not being able to read when apparently you yourself can't.
Aiden Thompson
Did I get the country right?
Gavin Rivera
...
Jayden Martin
Again, teeth can be repaired or replaced. Brains can't.
If the potential benefits of fluoride are "less cavities" then the potential risks (brain damage and IQ loss) far outweigh the potential benefits.
Even if fluoride only caused brain damage sometimes and only a little (and I suspect that it is far worse than that), it would still be far too much. ANY amount of brain damage due to "tooth care" that is FORCED upon a largely unsuspecting public is TOO MUCH.
Far too much.
Henry Moore
If drinking flouride was beneficial for teeth, dentists would prescribe flouride pills especially in areas where water is unflouridated. But they don't.
If you think about it rationally it doesn't even make sense, flouride is only beneficial when applied directly to teeth, not consumed. Do you drink mouthwash or toothpaste for your teeth? Water is only in contact with your teeth for second when you swallow, simply using flouride toothpaste is exponentially more effective. Very silly that it was ever even suggested.
It is and adding flouride increases the level in water to an amount that decreases potential IQ in fetuses.