Metropol

Rob Del Monte wrote:but what do you think of fluoridation?

Getting a tad too close to the day for handing it in, is it?

Don't get desperate, go with the flow.

Flow, water, flouride, geddit?

mAY AS well get the ball rolling:

Well,

i think that this 'public health procedure' is just a euthamism for 'Mass-, non-discriminative-, unconsentual-medication.

The website that i cited mentioned that one of the possbile side-effects of fluoridation, fluorosis, causes a whitening of teeth, which it goes onto say, is not regarded as un-attractive.

This puts the source in disrepute, in my opinion, because it is really saying that the illness that results from their campaign makes you more attractive, but in the disguise of saying that it is really saying that the physical changes are not ugly. We all know the connotations of 'whitening', and 'whiter teeth'.

The website I cited also mascaurides (sp.?) as the impartional website that gives you "all you need to know". It doesn't mention that there is controversy, without saying that it is minority, and not mainstream. STill not going into detail.

B.T.W., I got this website, from a link (to a third-party website) from my water company's (that doesn't fluoridate) website.

The thing that swings it to me, and makes it unacceptable to me, is that there is no consent, and every treatment should have consent (exept in extreme cases).

Possible conspiracy theoriies?

Is there an ultierior motive?

I'm just me, and don't know.

I take it you've been granted an extension?

Errrr?

Homework or penis?

Rob Del Monte wrote:mAY AS well get the ball rolling:

Well,

i think that this 'public health procedure' is just a euthamism for 'Mass-, non-discriminative-, unconsentual-medication.

The website that i cited mentioned that one of the possbile side-effects of fluoridation, fluorosis, causes a whitening of teeth, which it goes onto say, is not regarded as un-attractive.

This puts the source in disrepute, in my opinion, because it is really saying that the illness that results from their campaign makes you more attractive, but in the disguise of saying that it is really saying that the physical changes are not ugly. We all know the connotations of 'whitening', and 'whiter teeth'.

The website I cited also mascaurides (sp.?) as the impartional website that gives you "all you need to know". It doesn't mention that there is controversy, without saying that it is minority, and not mainstream. STill not going into detail.

B.T.W., I got this website, from a link (to a third-party website) from my water company's (that doesn't fluoridate) website.

The thing that swings it to me, and makes it unacceptable to me, is that there is no consent, and every treatment should have consent (exept in extreme cases).

Possible conspiracies?

Is there an ultierior motive?

I'm just me, and don't know.

[/quote]


Are you for real? You're doing my head in?

Though to be fair to the web site, they do outline the rest of fluorosis here:

http://www.fluorideinformation.com/topi ... &sub=402#6

Apparently when fruit and vegetables are given water containing fluoride they grow rapidly...



Source: The department of spurious statistics

Rob Del Monte wrote:Though to be fair to the web site, they do outline the rest of fluorosis here:

http://www.fluorideinformation.com/topi ... &sub=402#6

Since you appear to really want to have a debate on fluoridation, I have produced a small promotional image to encourage people to "join the debate".



You are welcome to use this image in your signature if you want.