Quote:

---

Crasher said:

Quote:

---

Cervantes said:

Quote:

---

Crasher said:

Care to respond to either of my posts containing the science behind it?

---

I recently posted how the Pineal Gland has not been proven to release DMT but you cleverly overlooked it in order to ask someone else to post the same thing.

---

except I said

Quote:

---

While the pineal gland hasn't been proven to produce DMT, it does in fact produce Melatonin, also known chemically as N-acetyl-5-methoxytryptamine.

Is it a stretch to believe that it's produced in the same gland responsible for a chemically similar compound?

---

I also said it was certainly endogenous, and if it isn't native to the pineal gland, where a chemically analogous substance is created (melatonin,) then it's native to another area known for production of a similar compound, serotonin (in the gut)

both of which seem to be effected by fluoride.

How is that cleverly missing your point? are you suggesting we don't make it internally?

---

Quote:

---

Viveka said:
I find it amusing how defensive people get when you want to start a discussion about fluoride and suggest that it might potentially have negative effects.  It's almost like they feel they have to defend fluoride since they know they've been consuming the shit their entire lives and if they admit it's potentially harmful, they'll look like a dipshit.

My position is that carrying out a public health/dentistry "experiment" by adding a toxic compound to municipal water supplies in the name of cavity prevention is unethical.  It's forced medication, especially upon those who have not the resources or wherewithal to seek water elsewhere.  It's a pretty basic case and I've never seen a legitimate argument to the contrary. 

Any argument defending water fluoridation will consist of one or both of the following points:

1.  Fluoride is not proven to be harmful at 2-5 ppm, the suggested level in drinking water.

2.  Fluoride in water is a public service since it reduces dental costs overall.

Argument one is flawed because there really is no way to scientifically demonstrate that fluoride is not potentially harmful at 2-5 ppm, especially given the lack of any control group, and especially considering that sometimes the level is above this and that fluoride is administered in other forms throughout a person's lifetime, thus increasing their overall exposure to above the 2-5 ppm in their drinking water.  Also, we know that fluoridosis is a widespread problem, and even if that is the only negative effect(not likely) then the Hippocratic oath has already been busted.

Argument two is flawed for many reasons.  Kids are swabbed with fluoride in school.  Toothpaste not containing fluoride is very uncommon.  People are already getting their fluoride.  Some people will argue that "the poor" are especially vulnerable to the purportedly negative effects of a lack of fluoride in their diet, apparently because they're just too poor and stupid(the Eric Cartman argument) to know they should be getting their fluoride.  If this is really the case, then save the municipality some money and send "the poor" fluoride tablets in the mail 3x a year and they can choose to take it or not. 

Also, concerning the "safe" level for fluoride in drinking water, I challenge anyone who disagrees with my position to demonstrate how this determination was made.  You should find that little research effort to yield some interesting results.

Not to mention that the amount of time drinking water spends being absorbed by tooth enamel versus the amount of time it spends in our bodies, washing food, cleaning us externally is but a tiny fraction, so it would seem that, if nothing else, there is a gross misapplication of our forced medication happening.

I won't go into the history of fluoride right now but anyone who disagrees with my position should read about Harold Hodge as a starting point.  The man who played a central role in implementing fluoridation of the water supply and who was also exposed later for his involvement in the planning and implementation of clandestine medical experiments on unwitting participants to determine safe levels of uranium and plutonium exposure(notice a common theme here?).

---

Quote:

---

Crasher said:
I appreciate you keeping it real. However, it's a known fact that you're an NWO conspirator who helped cause disastrous earthquakes just days ago.

Have a good weekend brother!

---