Re: nutrients in food

On 28 Apr 2005 18:49:57 GMT, [email hidden] (John Sankey)

Quoted message said:

Iodine is there, but not chloride - I'll check out the availability
of data. Fluoride is like Vitamin A - necessary in small amounts,
poisonous in large.

Nothing special about that. All minerals are poisonous in large. For
iron, there is probably the narrowest range btw. optimum amount and
acute toxic dose. Much lower ratio than for almost everyone else.

But in amounts, we are talking about mg. For other, like selenium it
is in microgram range, lower than for cyanide. But too little, which
is most common, the "toxic effect" is more pronounced than when
overdosed. Most trace elements are having a small therapeutic range in
dose, and both below and above that range, there might be
deleteriu\ous, and even deadly side effects, like Keshan disease in
China and white muscle disease in sheep and pig in Scandinavia and New
Zealand.

Flouride is not necessary in any amount.

TC

John Sankey said:

Iodine is there, but not chloride - I'll check out the availability
of data. Fluoride is like Vitamin A - necessary in small amounts,
poisonous in large.

TC wrote:
:: Flouride is not necessary in any amount.

Are you sure about that?

http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/minerals/fluoride/index.html

:: John Sankey wrote:
::: Iodine is there, but not chloride - I'll check out the availability
::: of data. Fluoride is like Vitamin A - necessary in small amounts,
::: poisonous in large.

--
Juhana

Juhana Harju said:

TC wrote:
:: Flouride is not necessary in any amount.

Are you sure about that?

Positive.

TC

TC wrote:
:: Juhana Harju wrote:
::: TC wrote:
::::: Flouride is not necessary in any amount.
:::
::: Are you sure about that?
::
:: Positive.

Anything to back your unusual claim? References? Studies?

--
Juhana

TC said:

Positive.

You don't need apatite formed in your bones?? Must be special for you.

TC said:

Here is the first one:

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/caries/nidr-dmft.html

Conclusions

Does water fluoridation reduce tooth decay? i] This study and other
recent studies (3-8) show that there is currently no significant
difference in tooth decay rates in F and NF areas and that decreases in

Be careful to draw worldwide conclusions on data from areas naturally
almost overloaded with fluor. Most other places are lacking it and
adding fluorine to drinking water (or more safely, to tooth paste and
alike) increases both dental hardness and bone density. Overloading
does the opposite.

A parallell., don't draw conclusions about Se in food on data sampled
in seleniferous areas. That's what you are trying to. Too much F is
dangerous, and the studies cited are such studies telling what doses
you should not get exposed to. But it is not a valid argument that
doses should be indefinitely low, in fentogram or lower doses daily as
you states.

I am not aware of any credible studies that found that we are in fact
lacking in fluoride. All we have is very poorly done studies, most
coming from the 1940's (very, very poor science, if you can call it
science at all), that indicate that fluoride increases tooth hardness.
And no science exists to show that our teeth were too soft to begin
with.

Dental caries are a direct result of refined carb consumption. To
presume to treat caries with fluoride is to ignore simple common sense.
Cutting out refined carbs will be infinitely more effective than adding
a poison, errrr "medication" to the water supplies.

Fluoride originated from the aluminum industry as a waste product. Then
it was quickly discovered to be a toxic waste product. It etches glass.
The fluoride in the air at aluminum smelters etched the glass. A modern
aluminum smelter requires a 5 mile buffer zone, because the fluoride
kills off or damages plant and animal life for up to 5 miles from the
plant. Today, the fertilizer industry produces a vast amount of
fluoride.

Fluoride was used as a pesticide against rodents and an insecticide
against roaches and ants. It is a corrosive flux ingredient used in
welding and soldering.

Fluoride has been described by Dr. Charles A. Brusch, former director
of the Massachusetts Medical Center in Cambridge, as a "highly toxic
protoplasmic poison that is 15 times stronger than arsenic." The U.S.
Dispensary, 24th edition (used by pharmacists) states further that
"fluorides are violent poisons to all living tissue because of their
precipitation of calcium. They cause a fall in blood pressure,
respiratory failure and general paralysis. Continuous ingestion of
nonfatal doses (as in the water supply and fluoride in toothpaste)
causes permanent inhibition of growth." Calcium metabolism is also
affected by fluorine. Since bone picks up 30 percent less calcium in
the presence of fluorine, it produces an increasing level of
osteoporosis.

Hell of a way to get rid of a toxic waste. Add it to the water system
in small amounts and ascribe to it some nebulous pseudo-useful
attribute. Eventually there is so much fluoride in the entire
ecological system that you can't blame the aluminum and the fertilizer
industries for poisoning the environment. As despicable as it is, it is
pretty damned creative.

TC

Alf Christophersen said:

TC said:

Here is the first one:

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/caries/nidr-dmft.html

Conclusions

Does water fluoridation reduce tooth decay? i] This study and other
recent studies (3-8) show that there is currently no significant
difference in tooth decay rates in F and NF areas and that decreases

in

Quoted message said:

Be careful to draw worldwide conclusions on data from areas naturally
almost overloaded with fluor. Most other places are lacking it and
adding fluorine to drinking water (or more safely, to tooth paste and
alike) increases both dental hardness and bone density. Overloading
does the opposite.

A parallell., don't draw conclusions about Se in food on data sampled
in seleniferous areas. That's what you are trying to. Too much F is
dangerous, and the studies cited are such studies telling what doses
you should not get exposed to. But it is not a valid argument that
doses should be indefinitely low, in fentogram or lower doses daily

as

Quoted message said:

you states.

I would like to see some science to back your assertions as you
presented them. So far all I've heard is some wild allegations about
the miraculous effects of fluoride on caries in your part of the world,
when even the most optimistic science that i have seen, even the
industry sponsored science, has only shown very tiny and tenuous
changes in caries incidence.

If what you claimed is true then we truly have a miracle drug here.

TC

Alf Christophersen said:

TC said:

Says who? The people who introduced the fluoride? I'd like to see

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

studies that say that. You are dreaming in technicolor. 100% BS.

Statistisk Sentralbyrå has run surveys annually about how many
children has been treated for caries and other diseases. Unlike US
there is a free dentist to children before 18 year.

Quoted message said:

Maybe you lost your teeth to poor nutrition. That is BS. Show me

some

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

science to back your assertion that fluoride has near-100%
effectiveness in preventing caries. That is absolute nonsense.

Poor nutrition?? So you think everyone not living in US has a poor
nutrition??

I would rather say opposite. I had a splendid nutrition, my parent
being about richest of the region. But access to sweets was not
totally restricted.
But in children later who both got sweets and fluor, state money used
on dentists filling caries cavitates fell down to a minimum.

Now, when use of fluorine has gone back a lot, state money used for
caries is almost skyrocketing.

TC said:

I would like to see some science to back your assertions as you
presented them. So far all I've heard is some wild allegations about
the miraculous effects of fluoride on caries in your part of the world,
when even the most optimistic science that i have seen, even the
industry sponsored science, has only shown very tiny and tenuous
changes in caries incidence.

If what you claimed is true then we truly have a miracle drug here.

No, it wouldn't.

The reason is that fluoride is far lower in these areas. About 1/10000
of what you would be exposed to, unless you live around Utah (if my
mind don't fail completely) where a small district also is very low in
fluorine in soil.

Show us the science behind your assertions or shut up.

TC

Alf Christophersen said:

TC said:

I would like to see some science to back your assertions as you
presented them. So far all I've heard is some wild allegations about
the miraculous effects of fluoride on caries in your part of the

world,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when even the most optimistic science that i have seen, even the
industry sponsored science, has only shown very tiny and tenuous
changes in caries incidence.

If what you claimed is true then we truly have a miracle drug here.

No, it wouldn't.

The reason is that fluoride is far lower in these areas. About

1/10000

Quoted message said:

of what you would be exposed to, unless you live around Utah (if my
mind don't fail completely) where a small district also is very low

in

Quoted message said:

fluorine in soil.

Is this your "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle
them with your [censored]" approach to debating?

Show me the science to support your assertions. Show me the studies
that show near 100% improvement in caries incidence.

TC

Alf Christophersen said:

TC said:

I would like to see some science to back your assertions as you
presented them. So far all I've heard is some wild allegations about
the miraculous effects of fluoride on caries in your part of the

world,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when even the most optimistic science that i have seen, even the
industry sponsored science, has only shown very tiny and tenuous
changes in caries incidence.

Ever seen the formula Ca5(PO4)3F ??

Must be dreadful dangerous since it contain fluoride, following your
way of argumenting.

Well, without it your bones will fold nicely together, your enamel
will be soft and tender and do not help you in chewing, and caries

are

Quoted message said:

totally free to attack.

In many countries this is lacking more or less due to too low F-
intake. But, too much can do much harm too. Like all other minerals.

But, as with H2SO4, in form of HF it may do really lot of harm.

(DId you know that in your urine, you [censored] lot of SO4-- ??
Must be very dangerous following your argumentation, see what harm
H2SO4 do) Or, like with H20, too much may drown you.