Remove this Banner Ad

Conspiracy Theory Fluoride

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Hard_to_Beat

Brownlow Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Posts
11,162
Reaction score
6,126
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Maybe the tin foil hat wearing crowd were right all along?

If the scientific link between fluoride exposure and a noted decreased in IQ is a conspiracy theory, then perhaps the Harvard researchers who just confirmed such a link should be tarred and feathered by the ‘evidence-based’ medical media. In a telling review of a variety of studies that have demonstrated just how significantly fluoride can damage the brain and subsequently your IQ, Harvard University scientists stated ”our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment.”

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/harvard-study-published-federal-govt-journal-confirms-fluoride-lowers-iq/#ixzz2LDvlvyQu

Discussion

Findings from our meta-analyses of 27 studies published over 22 years suggest an inverse association between high fluoride exposure and children’s intelligence. Children who lived in areas with high fluoride exposure had lower IQ scores than those who lived in low-exposure or control areas. Our findings are consistent with an earlier review (Tang et al. 2008), although ours more systematically addressed study selection and exclusion information, and was more comprehensive in a) including 9 additional studies, b) performing meta-regression to estimate the contribution of study characteristics as sources of heterogeneity, and c) estimating pooled risk ratios for the association between fluoride exposure and a low/marginal Raven’s test score.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/
 
Interesting links. But the brain is all about chemical stimulants. When they provide the evidence that fluoride creates a chemical imbalance that becomes detrimental to learning and understanding, I will pay attention. For now it is simply a statement that one group has a higher IQ than another.

Providing an inverse association tells us little in regards to social constraints and educational funding.

Kids in a Sydney private school will, on average, have a higher IQ than kids in a public school in rural areas.
 
Interesting.

I think something to point out is the study is regarding the health effects of high exposure to fluoride , not drinking water levels.

It was also conducted in China where toxic levels of fluoride are produced as an air pollutant by coal burning.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9518433.

The combustion of high fluoride-content coal as an energy resource for heating, cooking, and food drying is a major exhaust emission source of suspended particulate matter and fluoride. High concentrations of these pollutants have been observed in indoor air of coal-burning families in some rural areas in China

Also...


There’s another problem: The research reported an association—kids exposed to lots of fluoride have lower IQs—yet it didn’t account for other potential differences between the children that could explain it. Were the kids in fluoride-contaminated areas also exposed to lead? The authors of the meta-analysis don’t know. (They know that some of the kids were also exposed to arsenic and iodine; when they tried to statistically control for these exposures, fluoride seemed less dangerous, but still bad.) The children could also have differed in socio-economic status or education, both of which can affect intelligence.


I reached out to the U.S.-based co-author of the study, Anna Choi, an environmental health scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health. She declined an interview but emailed me that the results “do not allow us to make any judgment regarding possible levels of risk at levels of exposure typical for water fluoridation in the U.S.” She added, however, that it’s also impossible to conclude that American kids are not at any risk.


http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl...oseph_mercola_says_yes_on_the_huffington.html
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I didn't grow up with fluoride in my water. So unless it makes adults dumber, I will just enjoy my healthy teeth with none of the consequences.

Because, you know, it's all about how stuff affects me.
 
Why are there inverted commas around 'evidence based'?

Mainly because the website is a biased piece of shit ,shat out by an antiscience crybaby. But of course "evidence based " studies are completely valid when they can be twisted to suit their own political agenda.

If you look the "about" section on the website , you'll notice this claim ; the body will respond much better than it does to most side-effect ridden pharmaceuticals. One such example is how vitamin D is nearly 800% more effective than vaccines at preventing the flu.

They then provide this study to back it up ;http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2010/03/10/ajcn.2009.29094.abstract

I guess they were hoping no one would actually read the study , because it shows their claim to be absolute bullshit.
 
From the same 'investigative journalist' HTB has quoted in the OP.

Fluoride exposure at typical water fluoridation levels is known to decrease IQ across the board and leading medical heads have confirmed it is fueling cancer and other disease as well, but what about fluoride levels around 5,000 times that found in most drinking water? With one of the most popular doctor recommended ‘extra fluoride’ toothpaste brands by Colgate, you get a massivesodium fluoride blast of 5,000 PPM — around a 5,000 times increase from the average water fluoridation levels of .07 to 1 PPM.

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/toothpaste-kids-5000-more-iq-fluoride-fluoridated-areas/#ixzz2LQFEoZ9X

surprised everyone doesn't have cancer and a negative iq. credibility right there.

not to mention:
Anthony is also a founding member of Natural Attitude, a leading developer of super high quality spagyric formulations.

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/toothpaste-kids-5000-more-iq-fluoride-fluoridated-areas/#ixzz2LQGWqgSK

alarmist conflicted douche trying to scare people. idiots who pretend like they actually read scientific studies whilst only reading highly biased, emotive commentary falling for it. classic.
 
In this day and age it seems totally unnecessary to put fluoride in drinking water. Everyone uses toothpaste with it included anyway.

As someone who drinks about 5 litres of tap water a day, personally I'd rather they weren't adding stuff to it.I understand why chlorine is added but nothing else thanks all the same.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I like my avatar, don't all you fluoride lovers?
 
I don't like the vermin they use warfarin to eradicate, either.
I know people on that, if they hadn't used nicotine, perhaps they wouldn't have to avoid all those foods and have all those blood tests to stay alive with warfarin?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

That post doesn't make any sense.
Warfarin is an a means to an end, its not healthy, it requires careful management.

We don't get management with fluride, nor are we told what it is actually meant to achieve, which is what everyones problem with it is.
 
It's nothing to get excited over. It's one of those things we need in trace amounts in our diet but it is performs a vital function in keeping us healthy. The usual source we get it from naturally is water. Just that in some places the water is deficient in the amount we need. So we top it up to the level required for good health.

*shrug*
 
It's nothing to get excited over. It's one of those things we need in trace amounts in our diet but it is performs a vital function in keeping us healthy. The usual source we get it from naturally is water. Just that in some places the water is deficient in the amount we need. So we top it up to the level required for good health.

*shrug*
You got any references for that?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom