Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Carry_Okie
"Why make [fluoride] compulsory?"

It's not.

And what makes you think I proposed it be made so?

92 posted on 11/16/2002 10:17:32 PM PST by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]


To: okie01
"Why make [fluoride] compulsory?"

It's not.

Oh it's NOT? Tell that to the poor folks that have it dumped into their water supply.

95 posted on 11/16/2002 10:25:26 PM PST by FormerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies ]

To: okie01
It's not.

It is if they add it to PUBLIC drinking water. You are assuming there is a benefit. There isn't.

I did a fair amount of research on this topic about a year ago. I had no opinion on the subject but was concerned about the dose my daughter was receiving. Her dentist was prescribing oral fluoride pills in addition to treatments and toothpaste. Her primary teeth were presenting evidence of fluorosis (which I later found the World Health Organization lists as indication of a toxic dose). What I found was that as long as the diet had adequate calcium and boron, there was no benfit to the use of fluoride for prevention of dental caries and increasing indication of neurological harm.

The final nail in the "pro-fluoride" argument came when I started searching the literature for indication of dietary fluoride deficiency in any field outside dentistry. Teeth are bone. If fluoride is a necessary constituent for proper bone formation, or augments healthy bone condition, one would expect to find that in the literature. I found nothing but the contrary.

102 posted on 11/16/2002 10:37:34 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson