Did You Know?
allnurses is the largest community for nurses on the web. We now have over 388,721 members! Join today to network with other nurses, laugh, share, and much more.
| Advertisement Sponsored Links | | | | No. 11 | 
Aug 25, 2008, 09:39 PM
 Re: Do you think fluoridating our water is bad for us?
O.K., but what about everything else has lied to us about?
 | | No. 12 |
Aug 25, 2008, 09:41 PM
Re: Do you think fluoridating our water is bad for us?
Oh, no doubt we've been lied to about these kind of things. I nitpicked that one thing because my dh is on Celebrex! But he was on Bextra when it was pulled off the market--eeks!
| | No. 13 |
Aug 25, 2008, 10:22 PM
Re: Do you think fluoridating our water is bad for us? Originally Posted by Patti SW  You trust the government? They would never lie to us would they???
Tobacco was safe too, right? How about Celebrex and Vioxx? What about the recent tomato, chicken, beef, lettuce, spinach and the list will go on and on. What about all of those things? What about the airline flaws? I think to blindly believe everything the government tells you is not really smart. I worked for the government. The politicians are well paid by lobbyists. Please try to be a little more open minded. You my not like Micheal Moore but, he was trying to tell another side to a story. WAKE UP PEOPLE. The federal, state and county government staff just want to keep their jobs. I know I was one of them. I took your tax dollars and spent the heck of it. Did very little in return and let the federal and state officials blow smoke up the tax payers.
I would respond, but I don't think you actually read my post beyond the fact I took a contrary opinion to the intent of this thread.
| | No. 14 |
Aug 26, 2008, 01:18 AM
Re: Do you think fluoridating our water is bad for us? Originally Posted by hypocaffeinemia NBC news runs stories on what people will pay attention to as the are an ad-revenue based company...
For instance, claiming that the H2SiF6 in fluoridated water is somehow lower grade than in other applications.
Let's go back to freshman chemistry, here: H2SiF6 is H2SiF6 no matter what the source. The atoms making up the molecules don't give a hoot about whether they were created as a byproduct in industry or in a pharmaceutical lab, it's the same chemical.
Now, you might say that the H2SiF6 released into the water is impure and contaminated with other products of industrial waste, but last I checked drinking water goes through an insanely thorough cleaning process and the federal, state, and local governments routinely test water supplies for danged near everything with ppm limits.
I never claimed that H2SiF6 is lower grade than in "other applications". It is a different compound entirely. I dont even know of any "other applications". NaF is the compound in toothpaste. I guess they didnt discuss that until sophomore Chemistry.
There may have been an "insanely thorough cleaning process" the last time you "checked". The last time i checked, however, our water supplies nationwide were contaminated with multiple pharmaceuticals from the urine of the people who took them. Of course i obtained that fact from CNN, and theyre probably just "running stories on what people will pay attention to", like NBC.
As a side note, it seems a little ludicrous to propose a position such as "dont worry, if impurities get in there too, then we will filter them out with our insanely thorough cleaning process". A parallel could be, "No need to keep a sterile field for this foley insertion, we have Macrobid".
Joey Hensley is an actual MD. Arvid Carlsson is also an MD, who won the Nobel Prize in medicine. These men followed more than their guts to recommend against water fluoridation. Before dismissing ideas as tin-foil conspiracy theories, so should nursing students.  | | No. 15 |
Aug 26, 2008, 07:26 AM
Re: Do you think fluoridating our water is bad for us?
So do you have any arguments or just appeals to authority and appeals to ridicule?
I don't care what the initials are behind their name. Deepak Chopra and Mehmet Oz both have MDs behind their name and are chock full of some of the looniest ideas this side of the flat earth people.
The question is: does water flouridation work?
The studies out there show it works very well at preventing dental caries.
The next question is: if it works, what can we do to perfect it's delivery system?
And that's where we're at. I never said it was perfect or we couldn't make it better. I just argued against the nonsense of running around throwing out scare words like "[it] is industrial waste" (quote from you) and claiming it's use to be manipulation from big aluminum.
Acids and their associated salts are often waste products in industrial applications and it's good to see us find uses for such products in the name of ecoconservation.
As for water contaminated with pharmaceuticals, what are the ppm's?
You can find traces of anything everywhere, and it's not above a news org to run with a story about toxic chemicals in our water, even when the ppm is so incredibly low it makes homeopathic substances look concentrated by comparison.
Dose determines toxicity, not mere prescence.
| | No. 16 |
Aug 26, 2008, 11:30 PM
Re: Do you think fluoridating our water is bad for us? Originally Posted by hypocaffeinemia
The question is: does water flouridation work?
The studies out there show it works very well at preventing dental caries.
The next question is: if it works, what can we do to perfect it's delivery system?
This is a very good, logical train of thought, and I appreciate your clear thinking.
Yes, water fluoridation works (i.e. reduces tooth decay)
So, I supposed we could work towards improving the system except right now we are basically experimenting with the health of millions of US citizens because it is not standardized or very well regulated. Heck, at least an experiment would organize the data in a useful fashion, and monitor people for illness and injury. Experimenting on the un-knowing citizens might actually be better than what is currently being done.
Also, I still have a problem with medicating people against their will. I liken this to immunizations. I personally believe in them, I get my flu shot every year and if I had kids they'd get their shots too....but I dont' think anyone should be FORCED to get immunizations (or Fluoride)...that's just my personal opinion and I know plenty of compassionate, intelligent people who DO think kids should be forced to get all their shots and those people make some very good points, I just personally disagree on a fundamental level.
| | No. 18 |
Aug 27, 2008, 08:02 PM
Re: Do you think fluoridating our water is bad for us? Originally Posted by Patti SW I agree. I thought we lived in a free country where we could make our on decisions whether they are good of bad. Fluoridation works for preventing tooth decay, but, does it cause harm? Why should we be forced in a free country to have fluoridized water? I have lived on this earth a few years now and know we are told what the government wants us to know. They always apologize when they are wrong from their forced experiences but, who the he-- cares. You are dead and death is as final. We all are the guinea pigs for the government and the only ray of light is our children and their children. Maybe one day they will get it right! God I hope so. Don't be fooled by all of the studies. There is a study to prove or disprove anything and everything. The ones we hear about are the ones the lobbyists and people who we vote for with all our trust want us to know only to find out they were bought out. Then what?
The United States Constitution grants our federal government the power to promote general welfare.
Likewise, if it were a free country, why must we have prescriptions to obtain medications-- and then only the FDA approved medications? If this were a free country, why must we have speed limits or any traffic laws at all? Same reason-- to promote the general welfare. 
A "free country" isn't compatible with a sea of acronyms: DEA, ATF, FDA, FCC, FAA, USDA, OSHA-- all place limits on our freedoms to promote general welfare.
If you think there is a study to prove and disprove everything, I kindly suggest you take a course in which you learn to analyze studies. Not all studies are created equal in methodology or relevance. Just because two studies may superficially contrast each other doesn't mean the particular subject of the study is in the air. No one and nothing will have perfect methodology; this is why peer review, followup studies, and such are so important.
|
| 196 members
1,815 guests 2,011
| 3 | | | 46 | | | 0 | | | 7 | | | 10 | | | 23 | | | 2 | | | 14 | | | 63 | | | 14 | |
| 44 | | | 1 | | | 13 | | | 2 | | | 10 | | | 17 | | | 11 | | | 16 | | | 16 | | | 42 | | | 14 | | | 21 | | | 23 | | | 20 | | | 24 | |
|
Nursing News