Jump to content

Fluoride


hissingsid

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, HeliX said:

It is almost impossible to control studies for something added to the water supply. But we know that too much fluoride is harmful. We know that people drink vastly differing quantities of water. We know that fluoride is most effective (and safest) when topically applied rather than swallowed.

What is this harm? Do you think that there are many people in the Republic of Ireland who suffer from this harm? Or in Australia/USA/Canada/New Zealand?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Like I said. It's not like diamonds. It's an element. There are strict controls on what you can use. If you are talking about it being contaminated with things that are not fluoride that could apply to anything we use/eat/drink in life. 

So are diamonds an element - carbon.

Strict controls. Yep, we've heard all about those. Like the ones they had at Chernobyl, or Windscale, or the strictly binding security guarantees given to Ukraine in the Budapest Memorandum. If there's one thing we know for sure in this life, it's that shit happens. Why go looking for it when you really don't need to?

And as for the water authority here, they need to try harder in getting the chlorination levels right before they graduate to anything more demanding or controversial.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Josem said:

What is this harm? Do you think that there are many people in the Republic of Ireland who suffer from this harm? Or in Australia/USA/Canada/New Zealand?

Fluorosis, damaging effect on child development, cost to benefit ratio, potential link to thyroid problems. Difficult to measure the harms on a country-wide level, but given better options available it seems daft to risk the harms.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, woolley said:

So are diamonds an element - carbon.

Strict controls. Yep, we've heard all about those. Like the ones they had at Chernobyl, or Windscale, or the strictly binding security guarantees given to Ukraine in the Budapest Memorandum. If there's one thing we know for sure in this life, it's that shit happens. Why go looking for it when you really don't need to?

And as for the water authority here, they need to try harder in getting the chlorination levels right before they graduate to anything more demanding or controversial.

Not to be a knob (well, maybe), but diamonds are not an element.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Not to be a knob (well, maybe), but diamonds are not an element.

Carbon is an element. It expresses as 3 allotropes, one of which is diamond, and all of which are 100% carbon. For the purposes of this discussion it is an element and 100% naturally occuring - or industrially processed, like fluoride.

Edited by woolley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Yes they are: Diamond is a solid form of the element carbon (the technical term is allotrope).  Whereas a  fluoride is a compound of the element fluorine, so it isn't.

 

3 minutes ago, woolley said:

Carbon is an element. It expresses as 3 allotropes, all of which are 100% carbon. For the purposes of this discussion it is an element and 100% naturally occuring - or industrially processed, like fluoride.

It's been a long time since my last Chemistry class, but I'm reasonably confident that an allotorope is not the same as an element and that "element" specifically implies non-bonded. Though I am willing to be wrong and also a double-knob for being a knob about being wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HeliX said:

 

It's been a long time since my last Chemistry class, but I'm reasonably confident that an allotorope is not the same as an element and that "element" specifically implies non-bonded. Though I am willing to be wrong and also a double-knob for being a knob about being wrong.

Well if it's bonded, it's only bonded with itself because it's 100% carbon, as is graphite. Same stuff, but differently arranged atoms within the molecule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, woolley said:

Well if it's bonded, it's only bonded with itself because it's 100% carbon, as is graphite. Same stuff, but differently arranged atoms within the molecule.

You are correct o some repscts. But diamonds are not put into water supply or food. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

You are correct o some repscts. But diamonds are not put into water supply or food. 

Well you might break your teeth on them but they wouldn't have a slow acting effect on you over many years. This cannot be guaranteed with fluoridation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

I think my view has not been understood . Probably my fault. 

1. Do I think fluoridation works. Yes

2. Do I think it safe. Yes

3. Do I think we should adopt it. No.

Great debate today though. That's why we are here. 

Why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...