Fluoride

[woolley]

1 minute ago, Jarndyce said:

MF is awash with experts in solid-state physical chemistry - who knew?

I just ask Mrs W BSc (Hons) PhD Cambridge. Much easier than bothering my own arse learning this stuff.

[wrighty]

14 minutes ago, Jarndyce said:

MF is awash with experts in solid-state physical chemistry - who knew?

It probably is!

For the avoidance of doubt: Carbon is an element, and both diamond and graphite are forms of it. In a diamond the atoms are arranged in a tetrahedral lattice, in graphite they are arranged in hexagonal ‘sheets’ with loose electronic bonds between sheets. The two structures explain the difference in physical characteristics. 
 

The only difference between industrial diamonds and natural ones is when and how they were produced, and impurities. They’re stucturally and chemically, in essence, the same. 
 

Fluorine is an element. Highly reactive. Gaseous fluorine consists of molecules consisting of 2 fluorine atoms. Fluoride is an ion - the atom plus an extra electron giving it a negative charge, and making it highly stable and non reactive when either in solution, or bound by ionic bonds in a crystal. 
 

Industrial fluoride is the same as natural fluoride, except that with modern chemical processes is purer and more readily dosed than the stuff you find naturally. 

[WTF]

so, with or without the waistcoat ?

[Jarndyce]

26 minutes ago, wrighty said:

49 minutes ago, Jarndyce said:

MF is awash with experts in solid-state physical chemistry - who knew?

It probably is!

For the avoidance of doubt: Carbon is an element, and both diamond and graphite are forms of it (etc)

Most kind - but I have no such doubts to avoid.   Why?   Because, along with many other members of the MF, I am an expert in solid-state physical chemistry!!   Huzzah!!  😀😃😁

Edited May 15, 2023 by Jarndyce
Needed more smileys

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, woolley said:

Why not?

Because I think everyone should have confidence in the public water supply. OK, I may think that worries about fluoride are irrational and unfounded,  but that's irrelevant in the broader scheme of things. Some people have genuine concerns and they should not be scared off what is, essentially,  a public water supply. It's not the right medium for introducing medication. Regardless of its benefits to our choppers..

[AcousticallyChallenged]

Interestingly, non wholemeal flour has been fortified by law since the 1940s. 

In other words, the government has dictated that chemicals and poisons, as some would call them, have to be added to all flours aside from wholemeal. 

Even in the 1940s, there was a campaign for “pure” bread. 

Of course, look at it from the other side and you could say that for 80-odd years, flour has a better nutritional profile than it otherwise would. 

It’s amazing the spin you can put on things. 

[genericUserName]

7 hours ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Interestingly, non wholemeal flour has been fortified by law since the 1940s. 

It’s amazing the spin you can put on things. 

I am happy for drinking water to be fortified provided that wholemeal water also remains available at no additional cost.

Perhaps @Josem and his Tax Payer Alliance could pay for that

[Jarndyce]

16 minutes ago, genericUserName said:

I am happy for drinking water to be fortified provided that wholemeal water also remains available at no additional cost.

Would that be brown water with bits in?

[La Colombe]

14 hours ago, Jarndyce said:

MF is awash with experts in solid-state physical chemistry - who knew?

MF is awash with tedious bores who are expert in everything. Not only tediously boring but prolific with it. All the good posters are gone. 

[Jarndyce]

18 minutes ago, La Colombe said:

All the good posters are gone. 

At the risk of being tediously boring - what does that imply about you?  😉

Edited May 16, 2023 by Jarndyce
.

[La Colombe]

Nothing. 

[Roger Mexico]

6 hours ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Interestingly, non wholemeal flour has been fortified by law since the 1940s. 

In other words, the government has dictated that chemicals and poisons, as some would call them, have to be added to all flours aside from wholemeal. 

But the minerals and vitamins added to non-wholemeal flour (calcium, iron, thiamine (Vitamin B1) and niacin (Vitamin B3)) are mainly there because they are taken out of the flour in the milling process.  That's why they're not necessary to add to wholemeal - it has them anyway.  And with most vitamins etc[1] overdosing isn't possible, you just piss out the excess.

However fluoride is safe only below quite a low level.  The World Health Organization recommends a maximum level of 1.5 milligrams of fluoride per litre of water (mg/l), though the effective safe level may be a bit higher.  The normal level for fluoridation is 1.0 milligram, though Ireland reduced theirs to 0.7 milligram in 2007 due to dental fluorosis, which can be serious in some cases, but normally only has cosmetic effects.  But it does mean that there is less space for overconsumption that with certain other chemicals in our diets.

 

[1]  Except for Vitamin A.  Which is why you should never eat polar bear liver.

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

though Ireland reduced theirs to 0.7 milligram in 2007 due to dental fluorosis

Do you have a reference for this?

[Roxanne]

2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

1]  Except for Vitamin A.  Which is why you should never eat polar bear liver.

For sure. It’s the one vitamin that you really do need to stick to the recommended daily dose. 

Sadly, you can buy it online at 3/4 times the daily dose and, without proper research, think you’ll do better by taking more. An overdose can result in VitaminA toxicity  Not something one would want to experience twice  

This Is why I would never eat polar bear liver. 

 

[Roger Mexico]

58 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Do you have a reference for this?

Yup:

Subsequently, the Forum on Fluoridation, established by the Department of Health to independently review CWF, issued several policy recommendations to attain maximum protection against dental caries and minimise the incidence of enamel fluorosis. One recommendation, redefining the optimal level of fluoride in drinking water from 0.8–1.0 mg/L to 0.6–0.8 mg/L with a target value of 0.7 mg/L, was implemented in 2007.