Simple fluoride question

[Without Rights]

I think I didn't make my point clear; Your original clam was that there was a conspiracy of aluminum and phosphate companies. Having begun to explore a little about the economics of the aluminum industry (actually only one company within the industry), I came upon some information that suggests that aluminum companies are losing sales to phosphate companies. This would be information needed to make a complete economic theory of the conspiracy, wouldn't it?

30 yrs after the fact, I'd say no.

Dodging the point by using a secondary dictionary definition? You're smarter than that. You understood the point that scientific proof is achieved in part by a preponderance of evidence. If you want to be taken seriously, avoid poor debate tactics like this.

I am not dodging the point. The reason I posted the definition was because I meant the same thing when I said evidence and proof. I changed the vocab for no special reason like you where trying to insinuate.

I agree; it is progression - which is why I noted that it was an _apparent_ self-contradiction which would have had to been addressed in the future if you hadn't. But all this misses the point; There is demand outside of water utilities - which means some of the statements you've made supporting your theory are wrong.

I already cleared that up in an earlier post by saying "there is no significant demand"

Are the phosphate and aluminum industries competitors in the fluoride business? Are they partners in the conspiracy? How does this lowering demand for sodium fluoride change the economics for the aluminum industry?

Yes, yes, it is bad for aluminum industry but that was out of their control because the people demanded they stop using it, according to the same source that says NaF is no longer used.

You've provided evidence regarding supply, demand and cost of disposal for sodium fluoride and aluminum companies (again, strictly speaking only one company). Can you provide the same for Hexafluorosilicic acid and phosphate companies?

No time to look into right now, later.

 

[Without Rights]

The point is, advertising costs money (even if _some_ of it is paid for by someone else). How much do they spend on it? One more time - it is insufficient to simply assert that "it's covered" or "it's paid for."

Impossible to answer unless I am on the Board of Directors.

Just how many people minimum (roughly) at the aluminum and phosphate companies must be knowingly exposing the public to danger for this conspiracy to actually be workable?

1

 

[Without Rights]

oops

 

[Without Rights]

A false dichotomy is not about false choices but about incomplete ones. You ask him if it's beneficial. Beneficial and harmful are not the only two possibilities.

I asked him a y or n question which is a true dichotomy, not a false one. I never said is it beneficial or harmful, I only said is it beneficial. That leaves it open for him to answer anyway he feels. If he wanted to say "I don't think it is beneficial but I don't think it is harmful either" he could of. False dichotomy forces a choice between two answers and that never happened.

That's not what you said.

Yes I did. Just because I say one source is compounded by another doesn't mean that it is only a problem when compounded. Like a knife in the back compunds the damage done by a knife in the stomach, that doesn't mean the knife in the stomach is fine and dandy.

Well, that's funny, because I recall somebody asking you to explain what the difference was. I'd like to know, because I'd also like to know how come that demand doesn't affect prices.

Read post to Mr D about crest's website

Actually, it was just a little joke. Thanks for missing it entirely.

Nice sense of humor. Is joking your last line of defense to avoid admitting that you weren't paying attention?

Uh-huh. But is there a difference in the end product ? And are the materials used to make them the same ?

Yes there is a difference. Like I said before, industrial fluoride contains arsenic, toothpaste is arsenic free. And the materials are different also. Aluminum Fluoride is not used to make toothpaste or dental fluoride.

 

[Without Rights]

Not necessarily. The question is simple and the answer is simple. Unfortunately, so are many people.

Who is simple?

 

[Belz...]

I asked him a y or n question which is a true dichotomy, not a false one. I never said is it beneficial or harmful, I only said is it beneficial. That leaves it open for him to answer anyway he feels. If he wanted to say "I don't think it is beneficial but I don't think it is harmful either" he could of. False dichotomy forces a choice between two answers and that never happened.

Alright, but it was a leading question.

Yes I did. Just because I say one source is compounded by another doesn't mean that it is only a problem when compounded. Like a knife in the back compunds the damage done by a knife in the stomach, that doesn't mean the knife in the stomach is fine and dandy.

Indeed. In other words it's hard to know what the hell you're saying.

Nice sense of humor. Is joking your last line of defense to avoid admitting that you weren't paying attention?

Are insults yours ?

Yes there is a difference. Like I said before, industrial fluoride contains arsenic, toothpaste is arsenic free. And the materials are different also. Aluminum Fluoride is not used to make toothpaste or dental fluoride.

Thank you. That answers my question.

 

[Whiplash]

I haven't read this entire thread, I just wanted to pop in as I was passing by this forum and I couldn't help but notice the humor in seeing this thread sitting there.. A "simple fluoride question" spanning 9 full pages of debate. I guess it wasn't such a simple question after all. I will have to read this later for fun.

Forgive my derail.

 

[Disbelief]

Yes there is a difference. Like I said before, industrial fluoride contains arsenic, toothpaste is arsenic free. And the materials are different also. Aluminum Fluoride is not used to make toothpaste or dental fluoride.

So, if they use industrial fluoride in the water, then your real beef would be with the arsenic in it? If this is the only difference, then this would have to be the real root of your problem.

 

[Without Rights]

Alright, but it was a leading question.

Your right, I was trying to lead him into having a discussion about the health aspects. What would have been the proper way to do that in your world?

Indeed. In other words it's hard to know what the hell you're saying.

It would be hard to comprehend if your too busy trying to find fault in it and not really trying to understand. I can't make a simple comment to you, I have to include every aspect into every sentence or you will jump to conclusions.

Are insults yours ?

My what?

 

[Without Rights]

So, if they use industrial fluoride in the water, then your real beef would be with the arsenic in it? If this is the only difference, then this would have to be the real root of your problem.

No. Arsenic is a major problem but the real difference is the swallowing of Fluoride. When you brush, you spit it out. When the dentist Fluoridates your teeth he installs a dental dam. You don't swallow Pharma Fluoride, you rub it on your teeth just like the science behind it says you should do. Swallowing only damages your body, including the teeth.

 

[Disbelief]

No. Arsenic is a major problem but the real difference is the swallowing of Fluoride. When you brush, you spit it out. When the dentist Fluoridates your teeth he installs a dental dam. You don't swallow Pharma Fluoride, you rub it on your teeth just like the science behind it says you should do. Swallowing only damages your body, including the teeth.

Now, all you need to do is show that you get all of the fluoride out of your mouth after brushing your teeth and that you swallow none of it.

 

[Belz...]

Your right

My right ?

I was trying to lead him into having a discussion about the health aspects.

No, you were trying to lead him into a good/bad scenario, with nothing in between. I was just mentioning that it was a false dichotomy. Sheesh.

I have to include every aspect into every sentence or you will jump to conclusions.

Really? Where did I jump to conclusions ? In fact, coming from you, it's rather funny, because you seem to be under the impression that I think that fluoride is harmless.

My what?

Rights, it was just a few hours ago:

Nice sense of humor. Is joking your last line of defense to avoid admitting that you weren't paying attention?

Are insults yours ?

Your what ? Your last line of defense to avoid admitting that you weren't paying attention.

Again, sheesh.

 

[Belz...]

Now, all you need to do is show that you get all of the fluoride out of your mouth after brushing your teeth and that you swallow none of it.

I've always swallowed the whole toothpaste without ill effects.

 

[Disbelief]

I've always swallowed the whole toothpaste without ill effects.

That's what you think. Now you are easily manipulated, so I will PM you my address so you can send me all your money.

 

[Belz...]

Sorry, Dis. Somebody beat you to it.

 

[Mr.D]

I am not dodging the point. The reason I posted the definition was because I meant the same thing when I said evidence and proof. I changed the vocab for no special reason like you where trying to insinuate.

If you're not going to engage in an intellectually honest discussion, should I bother?

(Meanwhile: I notice elsewhere in the thread, Disbelief asked a question that I was saving up for later)

 

[Thunder]

Wow. This really is the thread that never ends. It just goes on and on...my friends.

 

[apathoid]

One question about flouride that bugs me is WHY its in the water at all? Whats the reason? Im sure Im missing something but surely its not some idea that they are somehow trying to help us care for our teeth? Please tell me theres some sensible reason!

The Rooskies are trying to contaminate and poison our precious bodily fluids. Thats why I stick with distilled water and thats why the Rooskies drink Vodka.

Purity of Essence, Peace on Earth

Sorrrry, I couldn't resist!

 

[sackett]

Now they even want to put in ice cream, Mandrake. Kids' ice cream. Can you believe it?

You'll answer to the Coca Cola Corporation.

I mean, a BIG plane like a 52, comin' in LOW, fryin' the chickens in the roost, hell yes they can make it!

Mein Fuerher! I can valk!

 

[Without Rights]

Now, all you need to do is show that you get all of the fluoride out of your mouth after brushing your teeth and that you swallow none of it.

What is your point? Is is that since some people don't rinse properly we should go ahead and put it in the water supply?