Cipro is very harmful on its own.

Combined with other drugs such as steroids or NSAIDs, which is commonly done, it is a disaster for your body and fatal or permanently debilitating in many cases.

Combined with prior heavy metal exposure, it is close to a death sentence or worse for many people including myself.

I was indescribably ill for almost 2 years after taking Cipro. I was lucky that I recovered, many do not. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. 

I don't know any that personally do.  However, dentists are some of the indoctrinated people you will find, and they really can't reevaluate what they were taught in school all that well.  In my discussion on this topic I've found most dentists aren't really all that knowledgeable about fluoride.

In protocols of the Elders of the ADA, we learn that Dentists pushed this fluoridation program because they had the market cornered on fluoride. Dentists have a long relationship with China, that’s why old stereotypical pictures of Chinese had their teeth so prominent.

In my opinion, judging by your writings in this thread, you've got quite an expansive collection of tinfoil hats

Of course you didn't because you more than likely were not in executive management at the agency. The reality is every major governmental department head who is a liberal/socialist/Democrat has an agenda, and you can rest assured that agenda dovetails in nicely with his political party and their ideological beliefs.

You don't get hired to lead the FBI under a liberal/socialist/Democrat Party regime because your greatest selling point in your interview was "I will execute the office of director faithfully to the laws of this land and not allow my ideological or affiliated political party beliefs interfere." Sure they probably all say this in public, but the reality is every major government department head is being influenced by his/her personal ideological or affiliated political party beliefs, or they are simply being told what to do by their boss (e.g. POTUS, governor, etc.). 

And the the rank-and-file staff and lower-tier managers/supervisors working in the department rarely know about it. It's not like Obama met with Comey, or Lerner, and said "hey, department directors, use your power to institute policies and programs that align with our party's beliefs, oh and extra bonus points if what you institute ruffles he jimmies of conservatives and/or Republicans. Oh, and I almost forgot, please remember to send a agency-wide memo to all staff letting them know what we are doing!" 

More than likely the first part of that conversation happens in one form or another at a very high level, but not the latter. Eventually the rank-n-file staff and managers/directors pick up on what is transpiring and those who themselves are died in the wool liberals/socialists/Democrats don't think twice about it. But those that it doesn't sit well with are left with few options to do much about it. 

The answer to that has several parts:

1. Fluoride destroys your teeth and gums. It might prevent cavities (it doesn't really), but it creates other problems which are more lucrative down the road. Excess fluoride creates fluorosis in your teeth and bones, which cause discoloration and cracking which lead to tooth failure. Plus they get to charge you for the "service" of fluorinating you.

2.  The liability associated with admitting any side effects or that the "benefits" are an outright lie are too expensive, it would open them up to lawsuits. The continued use of mercury amalgam fillings is an even better example of this. There is NO REASON for mercury to be in anyone's mouth, but it is STILL DONE IN 2017

3. The dental industry at the end of the day aren't really the ones pushing or pulling very hard on the use of fluoride anyway. It is the Department of Health and the people who control the medical/governmental complex in general.

It's not just regulators who have input on proposed rules.  There is always a comment period in our democratic process which all stakeholders and the public can and do make suggestions / comments that help shape the final rule.

I'm not going to weigh in on that opinion since it was made with such a broad-brush, but I did have a conversation with my dentist not long ago after the hygienist was done cleaning and the dentist came in for a minute to poke/prod around in my mouth. The dentist asked abut the usual things, brushing twice per day, flossing, etc., and asked about diet, specifically about soda pop consumption.

I said I limit myself to two per week - one on Friday during family moving night (popcorn, 12 oz Dr Pepper, and small box of candy) and one usually with lunch on Tuesday. Dentist went on a rant about how he considers soda pop the world's #1 health hazard and if he had the power he would ban it worldwide.

Wanting to get out of there I opted not to engage in a debate with him, but it seemed pretty ludicrous that someone would consider soda pop a greater health concern than drug abuse, cancer, emerging infectious diseases, malaria, and all the other maladies that kill tens of thousands or millions worldwide.     

Let's go down the line. Though debating Alex Jones types is on par with debating liberals.

1. Yes. It happens quite a bit. Drinking gallons and gallons and gallons of water creates a state in the body called hyponatrimia, which means you have reduced your sodium levels to a state where your nerves don't function right. You die from overdillution of your blood.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/woman-dies-after-water-drinking-contest/
http://www.urban75.com/Drugs/drugxtc1.html

2. Yes. That is the most basic of biological concepts: living things die if they don't drink enough water. They also die if they don't eat enough food or if it is too hot or cold for them. It's like saying the sky is blue or that gravity is a thing. At this point I would normally walk the fuck away because you can't fix a retard.

3. Yes. All chemicals are deadly at proper dose and concentration. This was discovered by a scientist named Paracelsus who pioneered in the field of toxicology in the 1500's. See item 1.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracelsus

The whole reason we chlorinate is because of the therapeutic window of chlorine. We chlorinate because it kills things like cholera and dyptheria at a dose that has completely no effect on a non-microscopic organism. Yes the idea is to kill bacteria. Yes with toxic chemicals. yes it works. It works very well. No people don't die from chlorinated water. It's like a billionth of a lethal human dose.

4. See item 3& 1.

5. I don't know enough about manufacturing to comment soecifically, but there are lots of organic and inorganic compounds created as byproducts. Some are useful and some are water. I doubt a manufacturing process yields laboratory grade of any substance though. Arsenic cyanide is a byproduct of making the finish put on Glock slides. Another byproduct of manufacturing is steam which is water (that might go down some chemtrails bullshit)

6. Fluoride is banned in African and Muslim countries. Most poor countries didn't even treat their water at all until the late 90's and early 2000's. Almost 50% of the world still doesn't treat their water. That's why those shitty countries have things like cholera outbreaks.

That's it fuck every single one of those conspiracy theorists. They're worse than ANTIFA

Not sure I'd want it in my water, but getting it in limited amounts via absorbing it from toothpaste or flouride rinse is probably beneficial. It activates osteoblasts, which are bone forming cells. This is why its used as a mouth rinse and in toothpaste. It also does this in skeletal bone if you ingest it. By having it in the water, too much flouride is taken in and too many osteoblasts are activated.

What would be better would be to have people manage it themselves via mouthwash. Then to get enough osteoblast activation, take a strontium pill a few times a week. Strontium activates osteoblasts just like flouride. Otherwise calcium doesn't go where it should as it shuttles in calcium. Its kind of like insulin as in it activates something that shuttles something else. There needs to be a good balance between strontium and calcium

Here some good info on strontium and osteoblasts. Flouride should share many of these effects (within a certain specific dose range)

Osteoblasts play key roles in the mechanisms of action of strontium ranelate

(osteoclasts are bone destroying cells, usually to scavenge calcium)

Not really. I've just done a lot of things and learned a lot of things and I am calling it how I see it.

I can provide you with reference literature if you like for anything I have said. Do you enjoy reading books made of paper?

The "conspiracies" I am bringing to the table here are unfortunately just the current situation of our society.

I truly wish they were nothing more than conspiracies. I try to live a "normal" life, but seeing all the unnecessary suffering around me makes it difficult for me to ignore.

I grew up on a farm with well water.
I didnt have any cavities until I was an adult living in a city with flouride in the water.
Have my second cavity now at age 38.
My Grandpa is 85 and still lives on the same farm with the same well.
Still has all his teeth and has never had a single cavity in his life.

Two sodas a week are never going to hurt your teeth.  It's the constant, daily exposure to sweetened beverages that wrecks your teeth.   Little kids wreck their teeth on fruit juices by sipping them all day every day and the parents are clueless.  Apple juice has roughly the same sugar content and Ph as cola.  All things in moderation.

Two things I have observed: people who habitually drink soft drinks or other sweetened beverages not only wreck their teeth but they're obese, diabetic and have high cholesterol and blood pressure.    The second thing is that people who grew up in desert areas where the water has naturally very high mineral levels have teeth like rocks that do not decay.

https://youtu.be/LQCU36pkH7c

If we're talking about anecdotal evidence, I got a bunch of cavities as a kid on city water, I've had none as an adult on well water.

I've been drinking tap water my whole life, and I seem to be doing fine.  I haven't ever heard of fluorine collecting in the body anyway.

Why?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9285280

https://www.state.gov/j/prm/population/

http://www.un.org/popin/icpd/conference/bkg/wppa.html

possibly the most accurate username on all of arfcom.

Give it a few years. 

How many of the nut jobs in this thread are also anti vaxxers?

I'm betting there's a lot of cross over between the two

Of course there is.

Do you have something to contribute or do you just like to hear yourself bleet?

The only purpose fluoride has in water is to help prevent cavities on the teeth of individuals who do not maintain proper dental hygiene.

1. I'd be willing to bet a large percentage of these target individuals do not drink water; but instead Dr. Pepper, Mountain Dew, and Pepsi, etc. reinforcing their likelihood to develop cavities.
2. I do not like conforming to a practice that has its intentions based on the lowest common denominator of a particular group.
3. Fluoride in water has been proven to be the primary cause of Fluorosis.
4. Reverse Osmosis for the win. I like my water to be.... water.

No.

There is a very low level of chlorine (often now as chloramine) dissolved in the water
coming out of the faucet.

The level is around 0.5 ppm.

I never realized how good water coming from a reverse osmosis filtering unit was until we bought our current home ten years ago. Past homes have always been on city water and there was always just something chemical and not right tasting in the water. At our last home the city water from the faucet you would see specks of little white particulate matter floating around, and it was most evident in the ice cubes made from the water as they melted and the particulate matter would float to the bottom of your glass.

In our current home - well water with a reverse osmosis unit - the water is absolutely crystal clear and has no chemical or odd taste. Ice cubes from the water are also crystal clear and when melted in a glass of water there is no particulate matter. It's some of the best water I've ever had, and has convinced me to always have a reverse osmosis unit in my home. 

And the general public is about as ignorant.  The difference being, when you are the Office of Drinking Water why does it take you years to read the draft.....actually outside their commitee I don't know any VDH that even attempted to read a 94 page doc.  Am I wrong to expect more out of people in the profession?  Very little thought was put into the TCR by VDH.

I did ceramic veneers on a guy that grew up on well water that was naturally high in fluoride.  His teeth were pretty jacked up.

I took it for about 3 days before I had enough. Went into the ER on day two with heart rhythm issues. I've been struggling ever since, and that was a year ago.

I'm really worried it did something to my heart. I get PVC attacks now and they prevent me from exercising.

My department head was actually quite conservative, but he was ultimately a bureaucrat and that was why he advanced up the chain, and folks like me get frustrated and leave.  It's not just a liberal thing, it's a go with the flow, never rock the boat, and appease....appease, appease.  Some of his predecessors were once great military men, but in their civilian role became self absorbed into building the best retirement and then leave.  In Virginia in this industry there are more conservatives in this role, but when they are buying time or just don't care, does it matter if they are liberal or conservative?

Do OTC filters like PUR, Brita, zerowater etc, remove some/any fluoride? I mean really remove, not self-PR info.

"General public" is also in here commenting about fluoride...

No, you need a distillation machine.

There are some spring waters that don't add it it looks like. Avian looks like a low concentration.

Just brush your teef, floss and lay off sweets.

Let's see. Cavities are down, life span is up, and obviously it's not mind control because use fucks are in here bitching about whatever, fluoride included. Am I missing something?

you're not wrong--the 'blue marble' pic is widely recognized as the most tangible precipitator of the environmental movement.  ecosystemic ideas had been around for a long time, but they coalesced around that pic as a unifying element.

+1

Funny how anyone who doesn't agree with you is a sheep.

But what if we just followed along with what you told us, wouldn't be be sheep, just a different type?

I am not asking anyone to follow me, I am simply providing information. You are welcome to do your own research and form your own opinions.

The people who feel the need to post attacks on my character simply because my worldview is not the majority position are contributing nothing to the discussion and can fuck off and die for all I care
.
This is all very personal to me, and if a single person reads this thread and is able to help themselves or a loved one avoid unnecessary pain and suffering, then I have not wasted my time here.

https://fqwallofpain.com/

http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=postlist&Board=203#.WclQg2hSyUk

https://mercurystories.com/stories/

What else should we add to the public drinking water?  Statins? Xanax?  Pretty much all toothpaste has fluoride. People that want fluoride are in luck.  Brush your teeth.  People that don't brush their teeth probably aren't going to have very good teeth down the road anyway.

The tin foil is wrapped just a bit tight in here.

I have no problem with fluoride added to the water.  And absent a weird renal issue it's not building up to any toxic levels in the body with the amounts added to public waters.

1,000% yes it does matter! From my experience the biggest difference between Republicans and Democrats - doesn't matter if it is at the local, state, or federal level - is why they got into government. I'm going to generalize here since this doesn't encompass every single person working for government (and I think at the elite level Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin)...but...

The vast majority of Democrats go into government because the see something wrong with the country, some perceived injustice or unfairness, and they see government as a powerful means to fix it. Over time they develop two purposes as a government employee. The first is as you pointed out - it's just a job and all people want to maximize the benefit they receive from their labor. But the second purpose is their desire to change the city/state/country. Government to them is a vehicle to impose their ideological beliefs on those governed, and by doing so right the wrongs and injustices they perceive. Democrats don't see themselves working in government just to cross T's and dot I's, they see themselves as compassionate change-agents and are always thinking up new policies, new programs, and new ways to help those they think need help and "fix" their perceived problems with the city/state/country. 

Republicans, on the other hand, go into government because the see something wrong with the country that has primarily been brought about by Democrats (onerous regulations, excessive illegal immigration, financially/economical unstable programs (Medicare, SSI, etc.)) and they see government as a powerful means to fix it. Over time they too develop two purposes as a government employee. The first is the same as Democrats - it's just a job and all people want to maximize the benefit they receive from their labor. But their second purpose is basically just to oppose and undo what the Democrats do.

Since football talk is so popular around here lately let me offer an analogy: Democrats in government end up forever on the offensive pushing their ideological agenda towards the end-zone, and making a nice career of it along the way. Conversely, Republicans end up forever on defense trying to stem the tide of Democrat first downs, making a nice career of it along the way.      

So yes, it does matter who is in power. 

We agree, this discussion gets stupid when some think Fl is a disinfectant, or post Alex Jones, or think that none of this even matters (the gov & science disagrees).  Where I'm not clear is how easily poor policy gets enacted.  Is it not a problem?  Have I been unfair to VDH?

The USN used fluoride to kill rodents onboard ship when my dad served. I'll stick to plain old well water, thanks!

Well, it's not like those sites have a pre existing bias or anything...

Same here.  Right now I'm on assignment in a developing country that does not fluoridate their water, and it's obvious.  Tooth decay can lead to all sorts of other health problems too.

It is very easy to enact poor policy in this country and elsewhere.

All you have to do is convince more than half of the general public that its a good idea.

This is child's play because they literally own the means of communication to the general public and the public is dumb as fuck. Facts don't matter, evidence doesn't matter, net results don't matter. The only thing that matters is public opinion, which is easily controlled.

The public has a very short memory and on average is pretty lazy. They have no ability to connect the dots in a scenario of any complexity whatsoever. You can tell the public almost anything, and if you say it enough times, they will believe it because they are too lazy to spend any effort to find out if it is actually true or not.

Look at the people on this website of supposedly "pro freedom" gun owning Americans who come out of the woodwork to say how they would gladly drink fluoride and forcibly subject their neighbors to do the same in spite of the fact that there is zero benefit and only harm in doing so. It is simply conditioned behavior. Herd mentality. It is programmed into our society from day 1.

Now imagine how much worse the general public who gets their "news" from Comedy Central and MSNBC and get their science "knowledge" from Bill Nye and fucking NPR than this place.

That's not a pretty picture.

Mercury amalgams are probably the best example. There is literally no reason to still (or ever) be putting mercury into people, composite fillings are a mature technology and make mercury amalgams completely obsolete.

What if I told you I wanted to implant the most toxic element known to man in your face, next to your brain. And this material will continuously off-gas to provide enough dose rate to ensure that you don't become severely toxic immediately, but 100% later on in life. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

No?

Doesn't matter, FDA not only says its ok, but most government funded healthcare systems will REFUSE PAYMENT FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN A MERCURY AMALGAM FILLING. And the public simply takes it in the ass because they were told its safe by their all knowing government.

Enjoy your persistent neurotoxins which will hobble you further into your pre-arranged indentured servitude which you will perform until you are too unhealthy to do so at which point the "healthcare" system will finish you off while extracting most of whatever you earned in your career. Peasant.

I wish that was an exaggeration, but it is exactly what has happened at the end of life of many of the people I grew up with. Not just a few of them. Most of them.

Are you really so dense that you believe the only thing preventing 3rd world shitholes from having good teeth is a lack of fluoride in their water systems? Are you kidding me?