Acne.org Products
This vindicates the "conspiracy theorists" who have been shouting the truth about fluoride for decades!
Just for those that don't know.... A conspiracy theorist is someone who dosen't agree with the official "status quo" and is publicly ridiculed for not going along with the crowd. The "status quo" is usually dictated by government officials, politicians, doctors, scientists, etc.
Unfortunately, most people blindly accept anything an authority figure tells them. The average person never bothers to do their own research or ask follow-up questions.
This is why people in positions of power can get away with lying all the bloody time. No one ever says "enough is enough".
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
"Top scientists" and "doctors" have been actively lying about the dangers of fluoride for decades... Will the public finally wake up and realize they can't put faith into these government sell-outs any longer?? Unfortunately, most people will remain ignorant and apathetic by choice...
But for those of you with the courage to go against the status quo... You will be rewarded with the knowledge needed to protect yourselves and your loved ones in the days ahead.
here's the link:
http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz22e0qqDCO
.
from my own experience it seems brushing your teeth with flouride toothpaste has a stronger negative effect then the flouride added to water supply, but its possible different geographical areas have different levels of flouride. when i switchced from flouride free back to flouride toothpaste for a short period of time, my dreams during sleep were absolutly suppressed, and i felt different.
no the government doesnt really give as crap about your dental health very much, i still believe the flouride agenda is a dark and malicous one, because the debate started a long time ago with good evidence to suggest it was a bad idea. but then again, people/politicians must understand the scientific method to weed out bad studies that spin the entire topic and make it unclear to the less scientific illiterate, so its possible there is nothing evil about it, it actually does make the enamel on your teeth stronger in the correct doses, but the bad effects are, interfering with melatonin production, and lowering your intelligence level. i say find another way to improve dental health, like regulating sugary foods to the sale of adults only, and putting warning labels on these sugary foods. but who cares what i think right!!
Ugghh.. so much hype, so little substance. This is hardly a reversal of position. I really don't get the fluoride conspiracy theorists. All this data comes from the government's own research. The National Academy of Sciences looked at new evidence and decided to recommend lowering the maximum amount of fluoride allowed in drinking water.
It's never been in question that fluoride wouldn't be dangerous in high enough doses. Again, all this data comes from government funded studies - not from conspiracy mongerers. If this really is a conspiracy they are doing a very bad job at it (being the govenrment and all) and even actively undermining it by doing these pesky fluoride safety studies.
It is
from my own experience it seems brushing your teeth with flouride toothpaste has a stronger negative effect then the flouride added to water supply, but its possible different geographical areas have different levels of flouride. when i switchced from flouride free back to flouride toothpaste for a short period of time, my dreams during sleep were absolutly suppressed, and i felt different.
no the government doesnt really give as crap about your dental health very much, i still believe the flouride agenda is a dark and malicous one.
Well, the flouride added to our water is a byproduct of the synthetic fertilizer industry and big ag wants to keep that revenue stream. And you know how much influence they have.
I've always been really curious as to why the government would add flouride to drinking water. Among all the other things they could be doing, why do they supposedly care about our teeth so much? Then I read
Beginning in the late 1940s, aided by mass industry lead lobbying campaigns, the government encouraged municipal water authorities to add fluoride to their community™s drinking water.
So it makes more sense. Some lobbying group encouraged the government to add it into drinking water, and THEN "research" was probably done to find beneficial effects of flouride. Like how good it is for your teeth 
Edit: Actually, this article is like a year old. Not only that, but the article just talks about lowering the levels...not really the reversal the headline mentioned. I withdraw my like. Lol.
The EPA did indeed reverse it's position by going from a claim that fluoride is fully beneficial, to admitting it's actually dangerous, especially for children. That should be good enough for anyone with a basic mental capacity to research and select fluoride-free alternatives. Especially those of you with young children....
If you are complaining that government isn't doing enough to back up it's statements, you're clearly missing the point of this post.
If you expect something is going to change, regardless of when and what government agencies admit, you don't understand the point of this post.
The point of this post is to highlight that: Doing your OWN research and taking your OWN informed actions are the only ways to protect yourself from fluoride, and a myriad of other dangerous issues we are being bombarded with on a daily basis.
If you're just sitting there, waiting for daddy government to take actions that are in your best interest, I'm afraid you are going to be sitting for an awfully long time...
Stop acting indignant and start encouraging others to think and act for themselves. Spread knowledge and awareness to those you love.
Good day to you all.
.
Stop acting indignant and start encouraging others to think and act for themselves. Spread knowledge and awareness to those you love.
Hmmm I don't know if you were talking to me, but I certainly wasn't doing that. I was just saying, the title of the thread made it seem like something had happened that hadn't. I don't expect anything from the government, believe me.
Why is it that these conspiracy and fear-mongerers always claim that those who don't fully agree with them lack 'basic mental capacity' or are retarded or indoctrinated in some other way.
In absence of serious corruption (wouldn't be surprised if that's the case) I really doubt that EPA would say fluoride is completely harmless and beneficial. The dangers of fluoride have been known for decades, especially to young children.
EPA is also not the agency responsible for adding fluoride to water. EPA regulates maximum levels of contaminants allowed in drinking water. Fluoride is, and has always been, one of those contaminants.
Anyone who is interested of a hype-free account of this thing can read National Academy of Sciences publication: Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards, freely available for all.
Teh review was commissioned by EPA itself to periodically check that the regulations are in line with current scientific evidence. NSA concluded that the maximum allowed concentrations were too high and so EPA lowered them. There's also a section of neurotoxicity of fluoride and they make pretty scary reading. At levels previously allowed by EPA fluoride can lower IQ and cause neurotoxicity.
Note also that these regulations concern both natural and added fluoride. This means that natural fluoride is removed from water in areas where it occurs in high concentrations.
So I really struggle to see any conspiracy or foul-play here. Based on this (and only this) it seems like EPA is doing a pretty good job.
Now, should we add fluoride to drinking water? That's a completely different matter and more of a political question anyway.
Saying they are doing a good job is a stretch. For example right now they are working on requiring an increase in the percent of ethanol in gasoline which is a just plain stupid area to focus on when the goal is to protect the environment even if it was made with a crop that was good for the purpose. But most of our ethanol is made with corn, a load yield per acre crop that requires tons of fertilizer that washes into our waterways were it is a really, really bad thing. Because big Ag lobbies for it.
Saying they are doing a good job is a stretch. For example right now they are working on requiring an increase in the percent of ethanol in gasoline which is a just plain stupid area to focus on when the goal is to protect the environment even if it was made with a crop that was good for the purpose. But most of our ethanol is made with corn, a load yield per acre crop that requires tons of fertilizer that washes into our waterways were it is a really, really bad thing. Because big Ag lobbies for it.
Agree with you here. As I mentioned in my post I was commenting their performance only based on the fluoridation issue.
Now, should we add fluoride to drinking water? That's a completely different matter and more of a political question anyway.
I come to help people free their minds and heal their bodies. Therefore I will continue to advise that everyone avoid fluoride at all costs.
If someone doesn't agree with this suggestion, then it is my right to consider them detrimentally indoctrinated into their corrupt systems of government, mentally incapable of processing the required information, or both.
Furthermore, I find it despicable when someone like you agrees with an important health issue, (the toxicity of fluoride) but decides to convolute the issue at the expense of other people's health. I don't play your politics good sir. I am here to advocate the complete elimination of fluoride in people's diet. I am also here to encourage free thinkers, who are often labeled as "conspiracy theorists" in the modern era.
.
I pretty much agree. I think the evidence against fluoride is clear enough that anyone who is for it is seriously missing something. Either information, or the correct screws in their brains. I don't really run into too many people who are for it, though. Honestly most normal people (normal as in, don't pay attention to health stuff) I've met agree that it is probably toxic, they just don't care.
It's really sad, because I believe that "not caring" or apathetic feeling is a symptom of fluoride poisoning.
^ yes. But you were doing the same thing in our discussions on GM foods and other crap big ag and our government do to our food. Unless I'm thinking of someone else.
You're obviously thinking of someone else, because I wasn't arguing in favor of Big AG. I was arguing that GMO'd crops are here to stay, and will only become more prevalent as time goes on. I also argued that "writing your congressman" and "sending online petitions" as you suggested,was an ineffective method to try and change the system.
My suggestion was and always is: Take the measures required to protect yourself and stop worrying about what big daddy government is doing to protect your personal interests (Hint: he's not protecting your interests and never will.)
^^ You're obviously thinking of someone else. Because I wasn't arguing in favor of Big AG. I was arguing that GMO'd crops are here to stay, and will only become more prevalent as time goes on. I also argued that "writing your congressman" and "sending online petitions" as you suggested, is a ineffective method to try and change the system.
My suggestion was and always is: Take the measures required to protect yourself and stop worrying about what big daddy government is doing to protect your personal interests (Hint: he's not protecting your best interests and never will.)
^ yes. But you were doing the same thing in our discussions on GM foods and other crap big ag and our government do to our food. Unless I'm thinking of someone else.
You're obviously thinking of someone else. Because I wasn't arguing in favor of Big AG. I was arguing that GMO'd crops are here to stay, and will only become more prevalent as time goes on. I also argued that "writing your congressman" and "sending online petitions" as you suggested, is a ineffective method to try and change the system.
My suggestion was and always is: Take the measures required to protect yourself and stop worrying about what big daddy government is doing to protect your personal interests (Hint: he's not protecting your best interests and never will.)
(We should quote each other more because I'm pretty sure people keep thinking that the wrong person is talking to them since we're all posting so fast lol)
Yes. When I first moved to North Carolina from California I was really upset to find out the water in my new area was fluoridated. For some reason I was under the impression that it wasn't... anyway, I spent some time being really angry, and trying to fight this... I wrote letters to the city, and the water department, and everyone I could. I tried to rally others to join me. But no one seemed to care. Not even my friends who I thought of as "awakened" or whatever. And the guy from the water department was incredibly rude to me. I wanted to wage war against him, but without an army at my side, I just couldn't do it.
It was at that point that I kind of said "screw it" and decided to just take care of myself. See, before I had been so concerned with all the innocents who didn't know about fluoride and who were being poisoned every single day. But if they don't have it in them to wake up and care about themselves, why should I waste my energy? I bought a water distiller and stopped worrying about it after that.
It was at that point that I kind of said "screw it" and decided to just take care of myself. See, before I had been so concerned with all the innocents who didn't know about fluoride and who were being poisoned every single day. But if they don't have it in them to wake up and care about themselves, why should I waste my energy? I bought a water distiller and stopped worrying about it after that.
I think telling people once is enough. If they accept it or decide to do more research, wonderful! If not, that is their choice. Let them live with the consequences of their choices. Let your consciences be clear as long as you've given to them the opportunity to gain a new perspective.
Ugh.. more stupid and pointless straw man arguments.
Where did I say fluoride is not toxic? I said several times that the toxicity of fluoride has been known for decades. And I pointed out to the section at NAS publication where they talk about neurotoxicity of fluoride. And I said that it makes for a scary readings because it's been shown to lower IQ at levels previously approved by the EPA, that is 4 mg/L.
Now please tell me how do you go from that into saying that I don't think fluoride is toxic? You are constructing such a massive straw man here that when I burn it the fires will be visible from the moon!
I come to help people free their minds and heal their bodies. Therefore I will continue to advise that everyone avoid fluoride at all costs.
If someone doesn't agree with this suggestion, then it is my right to consider them detrimentally indoctrinated into their corrupt systems of government, mentally incapable of processing the required information, or both.
If someone isn't capable of making coherent arguments without resorting to ad hominem attacks, then it is my right to consider them equal to quacks and severely deficient in logic and critical thinking skills.
Furthermore, I find it despicable when someone like you agrees with an important health issue, (the toxicity of fluoride) but decides to convolute the issue at the expense of other people's health.
And you just keeping piling on the straw to your man! How exactly am I convoluting the issue? By not considering EPA a criminal organization? By not thinking that everything the government does is pure evil? By making a statement that water fluoridation is more of a political than scientific issue? By trusting the scientific review by National Academy of Sciences over your emotionally-laden arguments?
I am also here to encourage free thinkers, who are often labeled as "conspiracy theorists" in the modern era.
My suggestion is that you begin by encouraging free thinking in yourself first. It's not free thinking to uncritically accept stuff that Mike Adams at NaturalNews and Alex Jones push. It's not free thinking to label everything the government does as bad and evil. That, my good sir, is dogmatism. Free thinking means looking at the evidence without bias or emotional involvement (as far as possible) and coming to conclusion based on that.
I made a perfectly reasonable and valid arguments at this discussion. But you deem it necessary to attack me because I don't agree with your fear-mongering position.
And people aren't labeled conspiracy theorists because they advocate ideas out of sync with mainstream. They are labeled conspiracy theorist because they resort to baseless fear-mongering.
Where did I say fluoride is not toxic? I said several times that the toxicity of fluoride has been known for decades.
You have a serious reading comprehension problem sir. I distinctly acknowledged your belief that fluoride is toxic. We are in complete agreement on that and always have been. These are my exact words:
I find it despicable when someone like you agrees with an important health issue, (the toxicity of fluoride) but decides to convolute the issue at the expense of other people's health.
If you read that sentence very slowly and very carefully, you will see that I fully acknowledge your stance on fluoride. It seems you are the one who is creating arguments out of nothing, by misrepresenting what I say; "straw man" arguments, if you will.
How exactly am I convoluting the issue? By not considering EPA a criminal organization? By not thinking that everything the government does is pure evil?
You are convoluting the issue by playing political games. We are not here to discuss everything government does and does not lie about. That is an exercise in folly, because ultimately, it dosen't matter.
The government lies sometimes. That is a fact. For any rational person, that is enough to question the integrity of everything that the government states. It is not a blanket statement that you have to reject everything they tell you. It's simply a reason why you should do your own research and decide for yourself what you believe to be true. Take everything into consideration from all sources before reaching your own personal conclusion.
I am here to inform people about the dangers of fluoride based on knowledge you and I both agree on. The only person here who is being hostile and detrimental to that effort is you. I am going to focus on the positive and accept that we both agree on the dangers of fluoride and be happy that we may help inform some people who may not be aware of that fact.
I wish you a good day sir.
.
You are convoluting the issue by playing political games. We are not here to discuss everything government does and does not lie about. That is an exercise in folly, because ultimately, it dosen't matter.
The government lies sometimes. That is a fact. For any rational person, that is enough to question the integrity of everything that the government states. It is not a blanket statement that you have to reject everything they tell you. It's simply a reason why you should do your own research and decide for yourself what you believe to be true. Take everything into consideration from all sources before reaching your own personal conclusion.
Yes, goverments and politicians lie. I think that's granted, and not something I ever questioned.
The only thing I question is your senseless fear-mongering. You started this dicsussion claiming that EPA changed position, claiming that EPA has said before that fluoride is non-toxic and completly beneficial.
I called you on this BS. Fluoride is, and has been for decades, seen as contaminant in water. And that's why it's regulated. Now, if you can show me when and where EPA has said that fluoride is non-toxic and completely beneficial, then I'll be happy to join your crowd demonizing the EPA.
You know, funny things happen when you start to distinguish shades of gray in issues. Like salt. It's beneficial in small doses, but dangerous in high doses. Research suggests that it's the same with fluoride. In concentrations of 0.7 mg/L it prevents cavities. But in higher doses, and the risks starts increasing from 2mg/L it can cause skeletal problems, and in even higher doses it might lower IQ and be neurotoxic.
By the way, you've twice now accused me of playing political games. Would you care to define what you mean with that.
