Posted on 11/22/2002 7:33:34 PM PST by FormerLurker
No, we are talking about flouridated water, we always have. And there, the concentration will be 1ppm.
Not if there is an accident, where they release WAY more fluoride than they should. And not in the case of fluoride treatments either Tom. You are mixing apples with oranges here... We are not talking about your "optimal limit". We are talking maximum possible concentations of fluoride ions from specific compounds...
For anyone interested in what this solubility discussion is really about,here is a post on the last thread where this subject was just brought up, you will see that all that is discussed is flouridated water.
And just about every link I saw on a google search was either a rant against vaccines or a class action law suit. I personally have not studied this, but when I see class action suits my BS meter immidiately starts to peg. I want to see hard scientific peer reviewed double blind negative studies published in reputable journals, not internet sites.
Ground water has been measured at up to 100 ppm fluoride levels. That blows your 1 ppm ideological argument "out of the water"...
I wasn't discussing 1 ppm levels to begin with BTW. I was talking about MAXIMUM concentrations in relation to the different fluoride compounds, specifically as to what would be available when a 3 year old boy weighing 30 pounds swallowed the fluoride gel containing 50 mg of sodium fluoride from a fluoride treatment. I was comparing that to what would be present in the way of fluoride ions if the compound had been calcium fluoride instead of sodium fluoride. The 3 year old boy in question died by the way.
$750,000 Given In Child's Death In Fluoride Case. Boy, 3, Was in City Clinic for Routine Cleaning
Perhaps you came into the discussion midway and didn't realize what we were talking about. I wasn't talking about what would happen with 1 ppm levels, although Tom was trying to divert the discussion in that direction.
One ppm fluoride from calcium fluoride is EXACTLY the same as one ppm fluoride from sodium fluoride.
While true that the number of fluoride ions is the same, the solution IS NOT THE SAME. In one, there are free calcium ions, and in the other, there are free sodium ions. With calcium fluoride, even if the fluoride ion bonds with another calcium ion in the bloodstream, it has put into the bloodstream another calcium ion from the original compound. So the net effect is that there is no loss of calcium ions. On the other hand, with a sodium fluoride solution, if a calcium ion bonds with a fluoride ion, there is a net loss of one calcium ion, and a gain of one sodium. Calcium ions are crucial for neurotransmitter activity, so when enough calcium ions are lost, there is at first neurological dyfunction, and then death in high enough concentrations of fluoride.
The same holds true with potassium ions, although not to as great of a degree if the solute is calcium fluoride, as fluoride prefers calcium if it has a choice between the potassium and the calcium ion. With sodium fluoride as the solute, then there are less calcium ions available, so the fluoride ion bonds with potassium. Potassium is crucial for neuron celluar activity. In fact, these chemical reactions affect the electrolyte levels, which can cause mental illness..
ELECTROLYTES AND MENTAL ILLNESS
Suppose, for the sake of argument, you had one form of fluoride that completely dissociated in a given amount of water and another that was 60% soluble in the same amount of water and you wanted to end up with a certain concentration of free fluoride ion in the same amount of water (assuming that that concentration desired per unit volume of water was attainable given the solubility of the less soluble form), you'd have to add fewer moles of the more soluble form to equalize the concentrations of fluoride ions between the two containers--but in the end the concentrations would still be exactly the same.
We weren't talking about situations less than maximum concentrations, we were talking about what happens when you exceed the maximum concentration of calcium fluoride, which has a maximum solubility of 16 ppm, and sodium fluoride, which has a maximum solubility of 42,200 ppm. If had 50 mg of each compound, ALL of the sodium fluoride would dissolve, whereas only 32% of the calcium fluoride would. And of course, atomic weight DOES come into play when determing the amount of fluoride ions available from the dissolved compounds..
There is really nothing controversial about this. They use to put mercury in the vaccines, now they don't. Mercury is a poison, this is also an undisputed fact. There was never a valid reason for adding it to the vaccine mixture and surely no valid benefit for injected it into babies or children. This is why they don't do it anymore (at least I don't think they add it anymore).
That isn't even a study, it is simply their opinion. But it is a TRUE example of junk science, where simply because a trade organization with a vested interest spouts an opinion, people fall over themselves to believe it. You can see full well what happens to a neuron when exposed to mercury ions in post 140.
If you can't believe your eyes, then perhaps you should take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself why. Either you are very naive, or your understanding of this topic is less than that required to appreciate what is being presented. Perhaps you have a vested interest.
Anything coming from the ADA is junk science, and if you had read the main article, you'd see WHY that is...
Some people here are so against marijuana, which is INFINITELY safer than mercury, yet they'd prefer to permanently fry their brain cells with mercury if they get the chance. What a double standard, and how blatently dumb.
The video I linked should say; "this is your brain, and this is your brain on mercury." The thing is, instead of the video being a propaganda ploy using a skillet and some eggs, it uses REAL brain cells and REAL mercury. Sheesh...
This is why they don't do it anymore (at least I don't think they add it anymore).
They've removed it from pediatric vaccinations, but it IS still present in some other vaccines, the flu shot being one of them. Up to 35 ug in that one I think...
Frankly, I love the taste of fluride in the morning!
Here is another post (361) from the other thread that makes it clear we were discussing optimally flouridated water, NOT flouride treatments.
FL: Since a solution of calcium fluoride will be limited to a maximum solubility of 16 ppm, there will ONLY be 16 ppm of fluoride ions available in blood if the solute is calcium fluoride. With a maximum solubility of 42,200 ppm for sodium fluoride, the concentration of fluoride ions available could increase to 42,200 ppm, although a human would die well before that concentration was reached. And again, once the maximum solubility is reached, ie. the solution becomes saturated, any excess solute is simply held in aqueous suspension and is easily excreted.
So the problem with sodium fluoride is that there is virtually NO limit as to the number of fluoride ions available in the solution, where death will occur WELL before the solution reaches saturation.
A mantra for the age of the Trial Lawyer!
Thanks for the info, also for all the info on fluoride. It is amazing how many things get put into the public domain as "safe" that are actually known poisons. I say you need to be your own guide in this world, don't take anything for granted. If it is a known poison, and can cause death or illness then it should not be ingested in any quantity or ppm. This appears to be common sense to me. Apparently most people lack what little common sense is required to avoid injesting poison.
So you didn't support Bush when he refused to lower the arsenic standards in drinking water?
I just checked my son's snack bag of cheetos, in a 1 1/8 oz bag it contains 350 mg of sodium. Using your logic, that should have put him in a coma.
1 ppm of NaF is a drop in the bucket compared to the total amount of sodium we get in our diets.
Not so Tom, in either of your statements. It is clear from the fact that anyone going to post 19 on THIS thread, they'd see that by clicking the "from another thread" link at the top of that post, that we were discussing MANY things on that thread. In fact, that link goes directly to post 407 on that thread, and several posts before that post were in reference to various fluoride deaths, the case of the 3 year old boy specifically in post 394.
In fact, in post 121 of this very thread, I referred back to post 394 after we began our conversation today ..
And as far as your ridiculous insistance on this imaginary 1 ppm figure, you have yourself posted information on water sources with fluoride levels exceeding 2.0 ppm, where although it is claimed to be naturally occuring, there is an obvious possibility of artificial fluorides seeping into the water from agricultural runoff or groundwater seepage.
In fact, let me refresh your apparently EXTREMELY poor memory, post 328.
In fact, we discussed ground water at levels of 100 ppm in post 374
In fact, let me post something here from the above link..
But wait, there's more. Although those water systems with "naturally occuring fluoride" DON'T fluoridate their water, they ARE subject to leeching from irrigation and ground water (which itself can have levels of up to 100 ppm of fluoride). They are also subject to air pollution and spillage from drains. As such, they sometimes have BOTH sodium fluoride AND calcium fluoride, and may have higher levels of fluoride than 4 ppm of BOTH compounds.Fluoride Intake
In fact, THERE IS MORE than just that in post 374, as there I ALSO brought up fluoride levels in food...
From Total Daily Fluoride Intake
1977 "... Recent studies indicate that the total intake of fluoride is as high as 3 mg/day rather than the earlier figure of 1.5 mg/day, primarily because of increases in the estimated levels of fluoride in food. (1970) Balance data presented by Spencer also suggest a higher retention by bone, nearly 2 mg/day rather than the 0.2 mg/day indicated earlier. ... These findings are important . . . a retention of 2 mg/day would mean that an average individual would experience skeletal fluorosis after 40 yr, based on an accumulation of 10,000 ppm fluoride in bone ash." [phase 3 Crippling Skeletal Fluorosis] Drinking Water and Health, Safe Drinking Water Committee, National Academy of Sciences, NAS/NRC, 1977 p. 371-372As stated above, fluoride has a cululative effect, and builds up in both bones and tissues over time. There's more that just the forms of fluoride we've discussed. There's also (cryolite sodium aluminum fluoride), Na3AlF6, which is used as a pesticide in agriculture. It has HIGH concentrations in produce, and can have as much as 180 mg/kg in a head of lettuce...Fluorine Excretion and Balances in Adult Men -- intake @4-14 mg/day, absorption =94% -- 40% retained Trace Elements In Human and Animal Nutrition, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (1987) p.378
1991 Estimated daily fluoride intake, adults in optimally fluoridated area: up to 6.6 mg/day .. in areas with 2 to 4 ppm fluoride in water: up to 7+ mg/day. Review of Fluoride Benefits and Risks, Department of Health and Human Services, February 1991 p17
For anyone interested in what this solubility discussion is really about,here is a post on the last thread where this subject was just brought up, you will see that all that is discussed is flouridated water.
Are you being purposely misleading and deceptive again Tom?
I have not been aware of all the things that are in our drinking water or what Bush has done or not done. All I know is that tap water tastes disgusting and now I am beginning to understand why.
ANyone wanting to go back to the last thread can see what we were discussing. Since you are evading the question, I'll ask again. Seeing as how "natural" and "artificial" fluoride is identical, and, as you admit, many areas of the country have natural fluoride levels at or above the recommended level. Why don't we see elevated amounts of disease in the fluoridated areas vs. those without?
And if natural fluoride is so prevalent, how can it be such a damgerous toxin at the levels present.
The current standard for arsenic is 50 parts per billion, you must have really sensitive taste buds.
Here is another post (361) from the other thread that makes it clear we were discussing optimally flouridated water, NOT flouride treatments.
Hmmm. I wonder why you didn't post a link to post 361?
Perhaps it's because I was responding to your ridiculous assertion that BOTH calcium fluoride and sodium fluoride TOTALLY dissolve in ANY amount of solution. I had given you a boiling water analogy in post 346, and in post 361 I was responding to your statement in post 360, "So your boiled water example is backwards. Although I don't think it is valid anyway".
In fact, in post 361, you even asked me to give a link to calculations for solubility in relation to temperature, which I did give you in addition to the actual equation for a electrolyte solution in post 363.
I also had to straighen you out on terminology in post 348.
So no Tom., we weren't only discussing water supplies with 1 ppm fluoride..
Tom: OK. Now that we have established that tap water with natural and adjusted fluoride are identical, how do you explain the lack of problems in comminities with naturally fluoridated water?
BTW Tom, you didn't link my answer to THAT question.
From post 362:
Now that we have established that tap water with natural and adjusted fluoride are identicalAnd BTW Tom, we have NOT established that, we have established just the opposite. The tap water IS different obviously, as the tap water from a fluoridated water system is a solution of sodium fluoride, whereas the tap water from a naturally occuring source is a solution of calcium fluoride.
Nice try.
And again Tom, NICE TRY....
You're welcome. Hopefully I've helped a few people here with this thread.
It is amazing how many things get put into the public domain as "safe" that are actually known poisons. I say you need to be your own guide in this world, don't take anything for granted.
It's amazing that there are those that openly advocate the ingestion of a known poison by ALL Americans, adults, children, and even infants (in the form of fluoride drops and fluoridated infant formula).
If it is a known poison, and can cause death or illness then it should not be ingested in any quantity or ppm. This appears to be common sense to me. Apparently most people lack what little common sense is required to avoid injesting poison.
Some people are quite warped it seems. Perhaps a bit too much fluoride and mercury. That IS a very real possibility..
Are you saying you didn't write that post?
Here is another link. You are plainly discussing flouridated water and solubility:
The argument falls apart when you consider the solubility of the compounds, sodium fluoride and calcium fluoride. It is when that water is BOILED that the difference between the two come into play. Water that has been treated with sodium fluoride has both Na+ and F- ions dissolved, whereas water with naturally occuring calcium fluoride has Ca+ and F- ions. As the water evaporates, the concentration of fluoride increases. Without going into the calculations for solubility in relation to temperature, where solubility of fluorides increase in relation to an increase in temperature, let's take a look at what happens in each case...
Flouridated water is what we've been discussing, if you keep insisting differently, I'll post EVERY word you said on the matter in the other thread.
Now quit playing games and answer the questions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.