Nov 07 2012
Scaremongering to Sell Water Filters
There is an obvious survival advantage to the emotion of disgust – we should fear putting unhealthy, tainted, contaminated, or poisonous substances into our bodies. Emotions, however, are a double-edged sword. They are an effective evolutionary mechanism for motivating creatures to engage in certain behavior, but they also tend to be crude and undiscriminating – inadequate to deal with our complex modern society.
A dispassionate consideration of objective scientific evidence is the optimal strategy for deciding on which foods and substances are safe to consume, but it is far easier to scare people about toxins than to reassure them with data. We see this frequently with the anti-vaccine movement, and also with anti-fluoridation attitudes. It is easy to scare people with the idea that there are “chemicals” in our drinking water.
One company, San Diego Pure Water, seems to have made such scaremongering into a marketing strategy. Their website is full of articles and videos claiming that fluoride is the “the greatest fraud that has ever been perpetrated.”
Let’s take a look at their specific claims. They claim:
Fluoride may lower a child’s IQ according to 24 independent studies that have reported an association between fluoride exposure and reduced IQ.
They don’t provide the 24 references, however. The notion that 24 studies support the claim that fluoridation reduces IQ is little more than an urban legend passing around anti-fluoride sites. If you follow the links, when present, they simply refer to other anti-fluoride sites making the same claims.
There are studies looking at the relationship between fluoride and IQ. A recent review and meta-analysis published by Harvard researchers actually reviewed 27 such studies. They concluded that there is a relationship between high fluoride exposure and lower IQ. However - the studies largely compared high levels of exposure that exceed EPA limits, to low levels of exposure that are at the level of fluoride added to some public water supplies and within the safety range set by the EPA.
So, if anything this meta-analysis demonstrated that the levels of fluoride in the US drinking water supply are safe and associated with a higher IQ.
Toxicity is always about dose. There is no evidence that the level of fluoride in US drinking water poses a significant health risk or lowers IQ. The quoted studies refer to higher levels of fluoride that are considered above the safe limit, and therefore their findings are not applicable to drinking water. Still, it may be effective marketing to use such studies to scaremonger about fluoride in order to sell water filters.
Another claim made on the site is that:
Fluoride accumulates in the body according to the National Research Council “it is apparent that fluorides interfere with brain functions,” and it adds to the formation of beta-amyloid deposits which are associated with Alzheimer’s.
They further argue that fluoride increases the uptake of aluminum by the brain, which causes Alzheimer’s dementia. The hypothesis that aluminum causes AD has been around for over 40 years without definitive evidence that it plays a significant role. The bottom line is similar as for fluoride - high levels of aluminum are certainly toxic, but there is no evidence that ordinary levels of everyday exposure pose any risk.
Conclusion
We are exposed to countless substances in our food and water. At high concentrations any of them are potential toxins. There are a large number of animal and toxicology studies showing that fluoride, aluminum, mercury, and many other substances are toxic – this is not in dispute. This data, however, is not necessarily applicable to the levels of exposure from the environment, food, vaccines, or other relevant sources.
The amount of fluoride in particular in our drinking water is carefully regulated by the EPA and there is no evidence of any measurable toxic effects at this exposure level. In fact, the evidence often cited by anti-fluoridation activists shows that such low levels are, if anything, safe.
331 Responses to “Scaremongering to Sell Water Filters”
I feel the same way about the bits that used to be put at the bottom of Brita water filter commercials warning that pregnant women especially shouldn’t drink tap water, never with any explanation of why. I suspect that it’s supposed to be scaremongering over lead and copper from the pipes or somesuch, but I also haven’t seen any evidence that these water filters appreciably fix the problem.
“So, if anything this meta-analysis demonstrated that the levels of fluoride in the US drinking water supply are safe and associated with a higher IQ.”
No, it only demonstrates that subtoxic fluoride levels are associated with higher IQ than toxic levels. One could reasonably infer that zero fluoride levels might be associated with higher IQ than subtoxic levels. Apparently neither the meta-analysis nor the underlying studies studied this.
This is a small point but we shouldn’t hold ourselves to a lower standard of precision than we demand of the scamsters and dreamers.
“All substances are poisons: there is none which is not a poison. The right dose differentiates a poison and a remedy.” Paracelsus (1493-1541).
A while back, Portland, Oregon (finally) decided to fluoridate its water. The mayor made a clear and point-by-point rebuttal (with clear references) to each point. This effort was promptly met with a deluge (torrent?) of denial, accusation, and demand for “freedom to choose”.
In 1993, Milwaukee had a problem with cryptosporidium in the water. Hundreds of thousands became ill and 104 with already weakened immune systems died. The city spent many millions rebuilding the entire system. There is still a brisk business in drinking water delivery. Many poor people still haul jugs back and forth from the coop or Whole Foods to refill them with “pure” water in the belief that city water remains “toxic”. When I tell them that I’ve been drinking tap water for all these years, they are not moved. Something about the word “toxin”–same with caused of cancer. Every time someone is diagnosed, friends go on about which toxin or chemical exposure may have caused it.
The fact that some cancers ARE caused by exposure to carcinogens just makes this all seem very logical to these people. The success of some lawsuits (whether or not they were based in fact) also reinforce these ideas.
Well, I would write more, but I have a “THANK YOU JESUS” sign to paint.
Thanks for bringing up aluminium and AD. The story I learned (lo, so many years ago) is that a rash of researchers tried to replicate the original finding and could not. That’s when it was realized to be an artifact of the brain histology preparation. Alas, journals are loath to publish negative findings, so the myth still circulates. It’s like whack-a-mole.
@Janet: Tammy > Tommy – you got it! (from a fellow cheesehead)
Nothing to add about water filtration, but did you know that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry publication CAS # 7440-66-6 states that you can be exposed to toxic amounts of zinc by licking zinc grave monuments? Bridle your oral passions when visiting cemeteries !
@Janet @Rabbit
We cheeseheads are disproportionately represented here. Can I help paint your sign, Janet?
http://www.denverpost.com/environment/ci_21942819/denver-detects-lead-tapwater-urges-residents-limit-exposure
I’ve never has a statistics class, but can high lead levels in 8 out of 60(not random) homes in a city with a population of 1.3 million possibly be a significant test?
“This month, all 1.3 million metro residents served by Denver Water must be notified and advised of precautions they can take.”
Toxicity is in the dose, but also in the duration of exposure – especially for substances that tend to accumulate rather than be rapidly metabolized and cleared. I don’t have any concerns about amounts of flouride in the water supply or the quality of most tap water in general and agree water filtration systems (and even plain bottled water) are often a waste of money – although sometimes the water does taste better than tap water. I’m more concerned with accumulation of fat soluble chemicals like Bisphenol A, PBDEs (fire retardants), PCDDs (dioxins), and their resulting combined effects over time.
A sample of 60 is not sufficient to estimate the actual prevalence, but does constitute what is called an existential finding — i.e., the thing exists.
The size of the city, however, is basically irrelevant. If you did take a truly random sample that was only a bit larger, you could make a reasonably reliable estimate of prevalence in a city of 1,000, or a city of 8 million. That’s something of an oversimplification because the big city might have a geographically heterogeneous distribution, so even with a fairly large sample you might happen to miss, or hit, some hot spots. So you wouldn’t actually take a random sample from a list of addresses, you would take a geographically evenly distributed sample of households.
One more thing, however. Most lead in tapwater comes from plumbing, not the water supply. Old plumbing uses lead solder which can eventually start to leach into the water. If you have PVC plumbing, no problem. If you have old plumbing:
a) Let the water run till it’s cold before you consume it. (That way you know it hasn’t been sitting in your pipes long enough to dissolve any lead.)
b) Do not consume hot tap water. Draw cold water and heat it on the stove. (Hot water leaches more lead.)
If you do that, you should be fine.
I admit, I use a water filter and drink bottled water. Not because I’m afraid of any toxins – the problem is, my tap water doesn’t taste very well and from time to time it gets brownish. The reason is simple, high iron levels. Not high enough to be dangerous, as our water authorities assure us (and I do believe them), but high enough to influence the taste. However, when I visit my parents in another city, I always drink tap water, there it tastes just great.
We use a Brita pitcher because my wife says she can taste the chlorine (she might) but I haven’t replaced the filter in quite sometime and she hasn’t said anything (maybe because she adds a hint of grapefruit flavor) so I’m just gonna let it go until she says something.
@ mho: See my post at 1:24 AM on Dr. Gorski’s article about “chelation” for elevated blood lead levels:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/the-result-of-the-trial-to-assess-chelation-therapy-tact-as-underwhelming-as-expected/
The City of Denver ran those test through their water authority…
http://www.denverwater.org/WaterQuality/LeadPlumbingAwareness/
My wife is a dental nurse and she says there is a significant downside to not getting enough fluoride during early childhood when the teeth buds are forming. Fluoride is essential to growing and sustaining strong teeth during childhood. Fluoride has less benefit for adults but still helps strengthen and repair tooth enamel.
Weak teeth and porous tooth enamel leads to tooth loss, gum disease and other oral infections which can lead to serious health issues in later life.
Its a myth that fluoridation is adding an “unnatural” chemical to the water supply. Fluoride is added to the water supply only in areas where there is not a enough naturally occurring fluoride.
So the bottom line is that the removal of fluoride from the water supply will adversely effect the dental health of children who, of course, will only reap the consequences of this decision later in life. Some children will be lucky enough to receive fluoride supplementation at the dentist’s office but most will simply be at risk at being fluoride deficient.
Of course toxicity is only one of the platforms in alt-med. Needless vitamin and mineral supplementation is the other.
I sense that a “safe and organic” form of fluoride, in homeopathic doses of course, will be on the market soon.
Adding fluoride to municipal drinking water amounts to forced medication on consumers who don’t get a choice (many of us don’t want it), with no control over the dosage. Plus, there’s no way of knowing how much fluoride anyone is getting through tap water, since individual water consumption varies widely, and little kids get the same dose per glass as full-grown adults. This is not science.
http://www.amazon.com/Fluoride-Deception-Christopher-Bryson/dp/1583227008/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1352318169&sr=1-1&keywords=fluoride+deception
Stan, fluoride levels are carefully titrated to achieve a dose that is safe of even the benign side effect of mild fluorosis – to the point that some municipalities actually remove fluoride from their heavily-mineralized water supplies. Fluoridation is a preventive intervention that cheaply and equitably prevents cavities, and opposition to it means more cavities for poor families, who are disproportionately impacted by the rich’s unfounded need to be “free” from safe, effective treatments. It means time taken away from work, by citizens generally without health insurance, who can ill-afford it, to pay for fillings that cost a disproportionate and unnecessary chunk of their paycheck, and lack the time and money to invest in preventive care like fluoride treatments, more expensive toothpastes and visits to the dentist.
All so your precious fluids can be protected from imaginary contamination.
Cloaking your demands to be “free from unwanted interventions” is a rhetorical strategy used to appeal to emotions due to a lack of sound actual science. It should be opposed for the same reason you would oppose efforts to be “free” from speed limits or vaccination – the common good is greatly enhanced, and the adverse outcomes are nil. Health freedom is a specious argument used to distract from the real point – that your emotions have over-ridden your ability to trust a real expert.
The anti-fluoride people were the first denialists I met. At a party around 15 years ago, consisting of many left-wing community activist types (not trying to generalize but that’s who they were), an anti-fluoride conversation began around the dinner table. After listening to several minutes of assertions about rat poison in the water supply and lowered IQs, I said, “I’m over 30 years old, and I’ve never had a cavity. When I was very young, my mum gave me multi vitamins with fluoride.”
Cue crickets. After a minute of awkward silence, they then resumed the anti-fluoride convo as if I hadn’t spoken.
Montreal doesn’t have fluoridated water while Toronto does. A friend in Montreal recently quipped that the biggest houses in that city are owned by dentists.
When I was a kid at primary school, my country was still a part of the Soviet block. We did not have water fluoridation, but guess what? We had compulsory fluoridation at school. Once in a while we would be marched to bathrooms, where we would brush our teeth with a nasty-tasting, fluoride-containing liquid. Or we would be given small fluoride tablets. And nobody asked our parents for permission. Now, that is forced medication if I know one. We also had a dentist at school and we were marched to her at regular intervals. And if a kid had a cavity, she would fill it on the spot, free of charge, unless the kid promised that their parents would take them to a dentist immediately – and that was checked too. And you know what? I visit a dentist just to have plaque removed, because I have no cavities.
Anecdata, I know, but I thought I would share my story with you.
@stanmrak
“who don’t get a choice”
Bullhockey. Don’t buy city water. Poke a well. Have Culligan deliver. Catch rainwater on your tongue. No one is tying you to a gurney and pouring fluoridated water down your pie hole.
The “individual choice” argument does have some merit. That merit is heavily outweighed by the general public benefit – especially since there are no rational grounds for anyone to choose the other way. But it’s not meaningless.
Sure, water fluoridation is supported by “science.” We’ve seen this before, with “tobacco science,” “lead science” (as in gasoline) and “asbestos science.” Remember when science insisted these were safe, too? Wake up folks. This is not real science- it’s a sophisticated con job designed to rake in profits for the aluminum industry.
The original sales job for water fluoridation was done by the Mellon institute, the same people who sold us asbestos as safe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3y8uwtxrHo
@stanmrak
Tobacco science?
Lead science?
Asbestos science?
Really?
Where are the peer reviewed scientific studies that purport to show tobacco, lead or asbestos to be safe? I’m not saying that it is inconceivable that such studies exist but I would like to see when they were done and under what conditions. And while I admit that it isn’t inconceivable I am more inclined to believe that you’re full of baloney and are going to cite the opinions of some random scientist and call that tobacco science or asbestos science.
You’ve made an extraordinary claim so let’s all see your extraordinary evidence.
Is stanmrak a wit or just full of …
Janet-
I truly cannot understand how Portland can play politics with water safety–the water board clings desperately to 1950′s standards for water storage and treatment . Because of this, basic improvements don’t get made and the water is not up to the standard it should be. I cannot wholly blame the people for overreacting beings there hasn’t been a lot of calm, educated voices in the public debate. “Keep Portland Weird” morphed into inappropriate public stances on water. I consider fluoridation a minor victory in the long march ahead {fixing uncovered reservoirs, tightening restrictions on public access to treated water, adding cryptosporidium treatment}. I’m not saying that Portland water is unsafe or undrinkable–it simply isn’t up to modern standards.
Another strange thing I’ve noticed about people with water filters–they rarely do upkeep on them. So after going through all the trouble to filter the already clean water, they then fail to take good care of the apparatus and subsequently undoing the small benefits gained.
cervantes and lilady thanks for the additional info on the statistics and lead questions.
stanmrak–
Simply calling oneself a scientist does not make one’s actions “science”. I think what you’ll find after looking into “tobacco science” and “lead science” is a collection “scientists” paid to find/generate data that didn’t fit neatly into the bulk of the science. You should look at the bulk of the data before letting people make scientific claims.
You also claim that it’s impossible to figure out fluoride dosing–that statement is rubbish. Fluoride is tracked and regulated in municipal water just like heavy metals, turbidity, coliform and a whole host of other aspects. And while it is impossible to say EXACTLY how much fluoride a person may consume, it is possible to make educated estimates (average & maximal exposure).
You’re worried about choice you say? Well, when was the last time your bottle of water (or soda or soup) listed the amount of fluoride in it? Or listed the heavy metal content, turbidity, coliform, etc? This isn’t on the label because nobody makes a choice of what to eat & drink based on this information. Given free space on the label, most companies brag about “organic”, “sugar-free” or “low sodium” rather than “No fecal coliform”, “Meets FDA standards of turbidity”, or “Exceeds toxic metal safety standards”.
windriven:
Except if he did that in certain areas of the western USA he may end up with an even higher dose of fluoride. Some city water systems actually remove excess fluoride because their ground water has it in high concentrations. It was the cause of Brown Stain in Colorado, which was noticed by a dentist because even though the children’s teeth had brown spots they had much fewer caries.
Ah, yes. I have interesting memories of the well water we had in Texas. It smelled of sulfur. While it made my parents’ mixed drinks taste funky, it did wonders for my teenage skin (reduced acne!).
Many many years ago just as the Napa Valley was starting to be a vacation destination we stayed in the “Roman Spa Motel” in Calistoga, CA (which was right next door to its tiny police station). The same town that had its name attached to bottled water we could buy in the grocery store. It brought back memories of the Texas water with the funky sulfur smell in the jakuzzi, and even more so in the shower!
(Just checked, and there is a Roman Spa Resort in Calistoga, which is nothing like motel we stayed in over thirty years ago! Though from Google Street View, it is still a small charming town.)
@Chris
“Ah, yes. I have interesting memories of the well water we had in Texas. It smelled of sulfur.”
Not sure where in Texas that was but I’ve been to a few towns in Texas where I’m convinced the sulfurous smell derived from the immediate proximity to hell.
According to the CDC..
If a public water supply is fluoridated, the following notice shall be posted in the water system’s consumer confidence report: “Your public water supply is fluoridated. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, if your child under the age of 6 months is exclusively consuming infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water, there may be an increased chance of dental fluorosis. Consult your child’s health care provider for more information.”
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2012/HB1416.html
People should be able to choose whether they want fluoride or not, and get it if they so choose..not put in everyone’s water supply.
Another reason it should be optional, not put in water supply is..fluoride suppresses thyroid function..
http://rense.com/general57/FLUR.HTM
Highly damaging to the thyroid gland
This was the basis of the research in the 1930s of May, Litzka, Gorlitzer von Mundy, who used fluoride preparations to treat over-active thyroid illness. Their patients either drank fluoridated water, swallowed fluoride pills or were bathed in fluoridated bath water; and their thyroid function was as a result, greatly depressed. The use in 1937 of fluorotyrosine for this purpose showed how effective this treatment was; but the effectiveness was difficult to predict and many patients suffered total thyroid loss. So it was given a new role and received a new name, Pardinon. It was marketed not for over-active thyroid disease but as a pesticide. (Note the manufacturer of fluorotyrosine was IG Farben who also made sarin, a gas used in World War II).
This bit of history illustrates the fact that fluorides are dangerous in general and in particular highly damaging to the thyroid gland, a matter to which I shall return shortly. While it is unlikely that it will be disputed that fluorides are toxic – let us be reminded that they are Schedule 2 Poisons under the Poisons Act 1972, the matter in dispute is the level of toxicity attributable to given amounts; in today’s context the degree of damage caused by given concentrations in the water supply. While admitting its toxicity, proponents rely on the fact that it is diluted and therefore, it is claimed, unlikely to have deleterious effects.
They could not be more mistaken
While I’m a believer in fluoridation of the water (if not necessarily what I feel are excessive fluoridation treatments for kids in the dentist’s office), I’ll admit that seeing the potential toxicity of excessive doses being brushed off as being a bit odd given how often we lambaste the vitamin folks for taking excessive doses of “safe” vitamins. Yes, it would take a very large dose for bad effects to happen, but when you have fluoridated toothpaste, fluoridated drinking water, and addition fluoride treatments at the dentist’s office, aren’t you adding it from a lot of sources that aren’t being tracked?
Incidentally, as per my earlier comment about what I felt to be scaremongering among the water filter companies, is there any contraindication or drinking tap water during pregnancy or was that something that they added to boost sales?
The references to fluoride adversely affecting thyroid function are rather old (none later than 1940), and he gets the chemistry wrong. Sure, fluorine is a halogen and so bears superficial resemblance to iodine which is also a halogen, but chlorine is much more like iodine than fluorine is, and chloride is present at 10,000 times higher levels than fluoride (in blood) and 100,000 times higher levels than iodine.
What greatly affects thyroid function is perchlorate. Perchlorate is a natural component of “organic” fertilizers such as Chilean nitrate (natural sodium nitrate from the deserts of Chile) which was imported and used at high levels before synthetic ammonia was used instead. There were no techniques to measure perchlorate at the levels that are important in the 1940′s.
As far as endocrine disruption goes, the most sensitive time is when the tissues that use signaling molecules that are mimicked by the endocrine disruptor are forming, either during differentiation in utero, or when those tissues become active during puberty. Such individuals are at least a couple orders of magnitude to endocrine disruption effects than are adults. Endocrine disruption effects that occur during puberty may not show up until much later, when people try to reproduce.
Anyone whose knowledge of fluoride comes from the 1930s should not be listened to. Though research conducted 80 years ago is not necessarily wrong, it certainly has been developed far beyond what was known at that point. More recent work on whole populations have uncovered no consistent signal of harm at the levels found in the water, which has been shown to prevent tooth decay. Science is not about picking the research you like and ignoring what you don’t.
And any information you get from a website that also promotes the conspiracy theories of chemtrails, et al. should be looked at skeptically
(A lot more) recent research (2012), about fluoride and thyroid function is available through a simple PubMed search. This study of individuals in India who are exposed to excessive amounts of fluoride…shows no difference in thyroid function tests…versus control study subjects not exposed to excessive amounts of fluoride…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22509122
“….METHODS:
The study group included 65 subjects with dental fluorosis from endemic fluorosis populations. An additional control group was comprised of 10 subjects without dental fluorosis. The drinking water fluoride levels of the study populations were analyzed. Serum free FT3, FT4, and TSH levels of both groups were assessed.
RESULTS:
All subjects with dental fluorosis had serum levels of thyroid hormones (FT3, FT4, and TSH) within the normal range, with the exception of 1 individual, who had elevated levels of TSH. Statistical significance was found when FT3 and TSH values were compared with different Dean’s index groups by a 1-way ANOVA test: FT3 (F = 3.4572; P=.0377) and TSH (F = 3.2649 and P=.0449).
CONCLUSIONS:
Findings of this study did not show any significant alterations in the levels of the thyroid hormones FT3, FT4, and TSH in subjects with dental fluorosis. Our observations suggest that thyroid hormone levels were not altered in subjects with dental fluorosis. Hence, future studies of this kind, along with more detailed investigations are needed.”
windriven:
Not that far from Ft. Hood, where the thunder claps are actually artillery fire way off in the distance. My dad rented a house in the boonies where kids came by asking if we had seen their missing cow, and the bus ride to school was long and boring. And because I wanted to get out of high school a year early I had take an actual class instead of driver’s ed: so yes, it was hell.
daedalus2u: In the U.S. perchlorate is manufactured for use as a rocket fuel accelerant:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080204090923.htm
Sorry, wrong link. This is the correct link for the perchlorate study:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081013105309.htm
Gosh, dental fluorosis. The horrors. Because the symptoms of fluorosis are incredibly durable discoloured teeth. This is where a comprehensive review is helpful – the CDC itself notes that fluorosis consists of visible changes to the enamel surface of the tooth. So again, poor people without insurance should have to disproportionately suffer the cost of fillings and dental work (when you make $500 per week, paying $50 to fill a cavity is not an insignificant cost) because some rich people might have discoloured teeth (the reason they give when trying to pretend they are scientific) and have contamination fears (the real reason – their poor, precious fluids!!!!).
Duggan, because of the increased amount of fluoride in tootpastes and other sources, many communities are taking the evidence-based decision to lower or eliminate fluoride from drinking water. Others have done this for years because their drinking water supply (often from wells or aquifers) is already heavily fluoridated from natural sources. This is where the idea of fluoridation came from – dentists in certain communities noticed that patients had discoloured teeth that rarely got cavities. The reason was fluoride. An evidence-based decision incorporates real risks and benefits, not research from the 30s that has been quote-mined or misrepresentations of actual research to support a foregone conclusion.
@Always Curious
I lived in Portland for 13 years and got mighty sick of taking my kids in for fluoride treatments, giving them little pills, and such–none of which is as easy or effective as having it in the water supply. My grandchildren live across the Columbia in Vancouver, WA where the water has been treated forever and I wish the paranoids in Portland would have a look across the river to see that nothing horrible has happened to the people there and that they spend a lot less time at the dentist.
I can’t speak to the other parts of the water situation in Portland that you mention, but I never used anything but tap water when I lived there and wasn’t aware of any problems with the water–not to say there aren’t any, but I’m pretty sure it is basically safe for consumption.
———
@Fellow Cheeseheads
Who knew we were so numerous right here at SBM? I’m a transplant who never thought I would stop moaning about the Midwest, but I’ve come to love this part of the world. Maybe we should start a local SBM support group?
For you chemistry majors…an interesting report (2004), from the International Journal of Occupational & Environmental Health.
http://198.246.98.21/fluoridation/pdf/pollick.pdf
Oh no! the rich vs. poor cry! (I’m still waiting for my bank account to be filled Lil..btw..remember? WWJD?) How about freedom to choose, rather than rich vs. poor? This is about freedom …it’s about people being forced to take something they do not want…and you’ve managed to pull the rich vs. poor scheme to force others to get what you or whatever study YOU say we should listen to and what they should get? Fact is, it shouldn’t matter what one study says to another study..it’s still a form of tyranny to force everyone’s water supply to be contaminated against THEIR so choosing. And, it’s actually something I don’t want in my water, against your so choosing for me, WLU.
I think we should take a look at WWJD … according to what we’ve been told anyway…bail out rich corporations, (it would be “unpatriotic” not to, Pelosi wrote the bill, and she should know afterall) $75.00 hour union wages and benefits (and votes), clunkers for new cars (for those who could afford one) 4 Trillion $ spending a year and people somehow still living in the streets, starving and without jobs…and of course, we need fluoride in our water against our will…hmmm and so tell us how do you all know exactly WWJD because it seems maybe signals are a little off
The question here is:
Is there a consensus statement of experts on fluoridation and is that consensus based on evidence?
All the rest is just confirmation bias and cherry picking.
No..BJ..it’s about Freedom..the ‘consensus’ according to conventionals is not too great..according to the effects of meds that your ‘consensus’ says.
So get your own water supply. It’s not the role of government to serve your peronal whims.
Narad..it’s the role of the government to respect Individual rights..and whims…and we’re a Republic.
@ Narad: I’m collecting Rusty’s all-time *hits*
“lillady..asthma is helped by vitamins..C, omegas..in my own experience having got off of 2 inhalers and 2 meds including steroids :/…most childhood diseases are vitamin deficiency…causing low immunity.”
“For medicinal purposes, no I’m not familiar with how contraceptives will work for it, and we all pay for doctor visits don’t we…in any case that would be an exception to the rule, and could easily be done through doctor and insurance company I’m sure, not to make it a blanket Demand by all for “unintended pregnancies”… and, going to a catholic university, expecting them to go against their own belief and policy for her (who chose to go there) or anyone else is ‘attacking’ the freedom of one’s religious belief..actually.”
“Won’t you all love the watchful eye of socialism when it takes full root, making sure you spend every penny you get on approved items only? let’s see..drugs are good, contraceptives (of course), mercury filled lightbulbs…chemical filled foods,..what a life:)”
“ok..I’ll go now, going shopping…what can I buy..is there a socialist approved list out? because, I don’t want to spend my $ on vitamins and organic food..so I can pay for your chemical drugs and bank accounts.”
“mouse, honestly, I question the FDA’s need also..they’re passing meds untested, unproven, anyway!..as demonstrated with the constant horrendous results and lawsuits that follow. They’ve allowed gmos/ges in our foods without our knowledge or testing/proof that they’re ‘harmless’…we’re on our own apparently anyway.”
Rusty, didn’t you state that you were going to relocate to another country if President Obama was reelected?
Here’s some advice for you before you emigrate…
1. Find a country that doesn’t have a national health care program in place.
2. Check out the political system in your new country (make certain that it is NOT fascist/communist/socialist controlled).
3. Check out the local water to make certain there is no natural fluoride or fluoride added to the water supply.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr2bSL5VQgM&feature=related
@lilady: I admire your courage for revisiting the things that rustichealthy has posted in this blog. I’m just waiting for the moment she makes a reference to Nazism or Socialism.
@ Francois Luong: According to Rusty’s *source*, “Another reason it should be optional, not put in water supply is..fluoride suppresses thyroid function..”
WARNING: BRAIN ROTTING MAY OCCUR
http://rense.com/
I would like to point out the tyranny of the government forcing me to drink plain tap water rather than Evian, my preferred choice of re-hydration. It is despicable that such a lowly class of H20 is being forced upon me. This brings me to my second point. The government also needs to eradicate squirrels. They are nothing but freeloaders – stealing nuts for free while I have to purchase organic lightly salted for $15.99 a tin. It’s absolutely disgraceful that they are able to get away with this!
Btw..WLU..do the ‘poor’ have a choice in getting fluoridated contamination? ..or do they simply get what you say they should? It’s interesting how you all ‘think’ you can speak for everyone…ok, actually..it’s embarrassing..the insinuation that anyone poor is without a mind or capability to do for themselves..but you know.
mho and cervantes –
If you find lead in your water, get the lead plumbing removed. You steps are wise to take while waiting to have them removed but there is no reasonable way to insure you won’t ingest lead. Take a Shower? Lead. Drink, lead. Over time it’s a problem.
If you own your house you’re going to have hard time selling it, if you are renting, you may have rights regarding the landlord removing it.
Everyone should get there water tested.
Cities may not have a historically great track record regarding paper trails of what pipe they put where 70+ years ago.
Lead was used in some meters, and has flexible joints in side homes.
It’s not common, most water systems in the US are pretty good. Tap water is largely fine. I’m not scaring anyone away from that, just be wise, especially if you live in a neighbors and home built prior to 1980.
Rustichealth.
“Fact is, it shouldn’t matter what one study says to another study..it’s still a form of tyranny to force everyone’s water supply to be contaminated against THEIR so choosing. ”
A) It does matter becasue using lies as a scare tactic means the citizenry won’t make informed decision.
B) It’s not contamination. Learn why.
C) It is not a form a Tyranny
D) It’s a public health issue. Bad teeth can lead to a myriad of other health issues.
E) The don’t drink the water.
F) Do you complain about the other chemicals in the water they ‘Force’ you to drink? the Chlorine? Ammonia?
And I’d like to point out that I am *forced* to buy expensive non-iodized salt, because of the interference of *Big Pharma*, *Big Gubmint* and the FDA….
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=100.155&SearchTerm=table%20salt
@Geekoid
and I’m tired of hearing from conventionals and what they say is ‘good’ for us, (or non-contaminating), considering the results of the medicines they endorse, and the horrendous results they’ve caused year after year. So pardon me while I don’t trust too much of the ‘studies’ you claim to be so accurate on fluoride either.
I have a water filter to filter them out Geekoid… I couldn’t drink tap water..however, I’m ‘poor’ and can’t afford a fluoride filter right now, (I’m still waiting for Lil’s WWJD to fill my bank account
And, bad teeth is a lack of nutrients..Vitamin C..as in scurvy ..not a lack of fluoride.
When I was a child, we had pretty little fluoride tablets which clearly contained (based on taste) a good amount of sugar. The bottle was left on the kitchen bench and my brother and I would consume them in numbers much greater than the daily recommendation of 1.
To this day the only fillings I have are due to an excess depth between the buccal and lingual cusps of my molars. In hindsight I feel rather dubious of the need for this procedure. Never had tooth decay requiring a filling. My brother has no fillings at all. OK, so we both brushed daily with fluoride toothpaste which obviously had a positive effect.
I know this study is an N of 2 (ie: anecdote) but neither my brother or I suffered and harmful effect from excess fluoride consumption.
I have a study (n=3) which is anecdotal. I and my two older siblings were born before fluoridation of our local water supply and before fluoride containing toothpaste was first marketed under the Crest brand name. We all had many cavities (filled with “amalgam” fillings)…and we never had mercury “toxicity”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_in_the_United_States
All of our children (eleven) have few or no caries; when my son died eight years ago he had no cavities and my daughter had her first small cavity at age 39.
Ok, so, you choose to get fluoride, and you can have it easily in your toothepaste..all of them have it just about, enough with your cry cry cry for the “poor” WLU ..and I have the right to choose to clean my teeth with baking soda …actually very inexpensive and very effective too..haven’t had a cavity in years…not since use of inhalers and steroids which caused the problems I had
I’m sure you think the poor deserve what they get. After all, since you are so responsible for your health, why can’t they be? Yes, the sick and the poor deserve what they get, of course, everyone is completely responsible for their own health, and all health is completely controllable. That is the delusion that you suffer from and project on to others. Because it means you never have to lift a finger to help them. Good for you. Go take some vitamins, ignore real science, make up your own, and I’m sure it’ll work out for the best. For everyone else.
No WLU, I’m sure you can’t speak for everyone, as so many on the left seem to think they can..like Gov being the mediator of WWJD and tell us all WWJD…you’re delusional actually. Stop forcing your contaminated agenda on us all,..is what I’m saying. And, stop being delusional too while you’re at it.
And quite abrasive. But nobody much cares what you do to your teeth. You are the one with the sophomoric libertarianism, so, again, if you don’t like the municipal water supply, quit whining about TYRANNY! and supply your own.
Narad..but, what about the ‘poor’? who can’t afford to buy their own water?
@ Narad:
I’m still waiting for Rusty to announce her departure to another country…as she *promised* weeks ago…if President Obama was reelected.
Rusty, no good libertarian cares about the poor. The poor are only responsible for their fate, just like you are.
So when are moving to Mexico? Don’t bother with socialistic countries like Canada or Australia. Though you might like Belize, they do speak English there. All you have to do is catch water from the rain, and just make sure nothing grows in it.
Chris..I care for the contamination of the water with fluoride for the poor..who can’t afford to buy their own uncontaminated water. I also care for real jobs for the poor, something 16 Trillion $ spending in last 4 years couldn’t seem to get to.
lilady, I’m still waiting for my bank account to be filled by you WWJD’rs so I can then leave
Spare me the diversionary tactic. Your dopey posturing is yours alone.
I wonder if Rusty is concerned about the deadly chemical dihydrogen monoxide, which can cause hypokalemia at doses far below the rates found in city reservoirs.
I find it amusing that there is tremendous concern over fluoride in the water, when the only side effect cited to date appears to be…fluorosis. Horrible, horrible, scarcely noticeable flurosis…which was the main reason dentists noticed fluoride’s benefits in the first place. Yes, be terrified if your children have fluorosis because it’ll hurt like the dickens when they bite.
and Chris..speaking for me now? No good liberal is able to not speak for others…no matter how many times they’re told they can’t and don’t
Dihydrogen monoxide? Oh, it has been the bane of my existence since I saw the Penn & Teller doc about it. I can’t believe there are no governmental regulations against it!
To say nothing about dioxygen.
Or sodium chloride, which has been contaminating our sea waters.
That deadly deadly chemical dihydrogen monoxide can also cause hyponatremia. Why hasn’t *Big Gubmint* cracked down on the companies that sell dihydrogen monoxide?
I can’t believe they that they allow the highly explosive sodium to contaminate our waters, let alone the astonishingly corrosive chlorine. It’s a shocking lack of oversight and enforcement. The wealthy should invest heavily in filters to clean their water supply of these deadly components. The poor, of course, deserve to suffer whatever happens to them because they are too lazy to work hard enough to be able to afford such invaluable filtration technology.
CHLORINE is routinely used to KILL things! And our OCEANS are now FULL of the stuff!!! Nazi-inspired chemical warfare, obviously. The horror!!!!1!!1!!eleventy-one!!1!
Well..this is cool..you ARE concerned with chemicals in drinking water afterall… I believe a regular filter will take out most of those chems..however, you need an expensive one to take out fluoride.
While this was an amusing comprehension failure on your part, I’m still waiting for reconciliation of the TYRANNY! argument with the reliance upon a socialist municipal water supply. Were there not enough ellipses in the instructions that came with your shovel?
@rustichealthy: Who wouldn’t be concerned about dihydrogen monoxide? We’re also concerned about the chemicals in the air, like that pesky dioxygen, which can cause hyperoxia. We’re also concerned with chemicals in our bodies, like desoxyribonucleic acid, which can cause multiple cancers or Hutchinson’s chorea, or acetylcholine, which can cause muscular tremors. Why wouldn’t you think we are concerned with chemicals?
@rustichealthy: And I forgot the dangers of ascorbic acid, which can cause haemochomatosis and kidney stones. Never forget ascorbic acid, I say.
I’m also concerned about vehicle-based pollution. For instance, did you know that a significant number of vehicles are contaminated with hydrous ferric oxide, which causes discolouration, and can also spread to the buildings the vehicles are stored in, requiring a very labour-intensive process to first remove it from the structure then apply protective surface coatings? It is transmitted through the air and the slightest humidity can have catastrophic effects. I can’t believe the government will put fluoride in the water but refuses to ensure our vehicles are free of ferric oxide.
Francois, which is why I stress taking supplements as close to whole foods as one can. I’ve always taken Vit. C with rosehips and bioflavanoids..not ascorbic acid..and never had a kidney stone. You’re right, our bodies are made to have as close to whole healthy foods as possible, which is why I try to have substances that are the least toxic as I can.
I continue to be astounded and dumb-founded with Rusty’s total lack of understanding on all things of basic science.
I’m less concerned with Deoxyribonucleic Acid than I am with the oxygenated Ribonucleic Acid, which not only contributes to cancers, but are also very prominent in many pathogenic viruses
The Dave…thus far I’ve warded off viruses of all kinds with vitamins and supplements I’ve taken daily..some being cancer fighting also..like Vit. C…there are natural anti-virals though also, like garlic, myrrh, peppermint and echincea.
“thus far I’ve warded off viruses of all kinds with vitamins and supplements I’ve taken daily” You have documented exposure to specific viruses like HIV and HBV? If so, try exposing yourself any of these: Ebola, Marburg, Lassa, Machupo, Nipah, or hantavirus. Then report to us how you warded them off.
@cervantes
“All substances are poisons: there is none which is not a poison. The right dose differentiates a poison and a remedy.” Paracelsus (1493-1541).
^That was when everything was really organic, long before mad scientists figured out ways from the 1800′s, (especially from 1930′s) on.
weing..ok, all kinds of cold and flu viruses thus far
“I’ve warded off viruses of all kinds with vitamins and supplements I’ve taken daily”
Elsewhere she specified cold viruses. I have “warded off” cold viruses for longer than Rustic has WITHOUT vitamins, supplements, or organic food. She relies on anecdotal evidence, but when presented with my contradictory anecdotal evidence, she just ignored it.
She doesn’t want an exchange of ideas, she just wants to promote her opinions. Her mind is closed.
Just a nitpick. It would be nice to differentiate between types of U.S. drinking water…(as in city water that is regulated) and well water. Clearly the emphasis is on fluoridation, so it’s understandable that it didn’t happen in the article, but just something to keep in mind. In our area well water is pretty common, not fluoridated (unless the fluoride is there naturally, but I don’t think we have that here) and it’s up to the homeowner to discern the quality and safety of the water.
Like I said, I know it’s a nitpick, but to someone who’s relayed on well water in several homes…well I felt left out.
I ward off viruses by shouting out lyrics to Violent Femmes songs whenever I’m around people. It works – really, you all should try it.
If you try it for a year and it doesn’t work, well then I’ll believe that it doesn’t work….for you.
hehe
mousethatroared, you must have missed my musings about Central Texas well water earlier on… sulfur does wonders for teenage skin.
Rusty continues to prove (s)he has no basic comprehension skills. I mention a specific chemical found in viruses and Rusty goes off on some tangent about warding off viruses with vitamins.
Rusty: if you cannot answer our questions directly and completely, then I think it high time you ride off into the sunset and let the adults talk.
Please answer, based on your own understanding. (if you don’t know about one of them, don’t look it up, just say so):
How do you feel about the following chemicals that have all been mentioned by myself and other commenters:
dihydrogen monoxide
dioxygen
deoxyribonucleic acid
ribonucleic acid
acetylchloine
sodium chloride
ascorbic acid
hydrous ferric oxide
Chris – yeah, I did, sorry. I only really read the article and a few of the later comments. I don’t have time these days to keep up with the all the comments.
The Dave, how do I feel about them? Basically, my belief is, the more organic, natural food, water..without man-added substances the better. Sorry, no I’m not a chemist to have feelings for any one of those, except ascorbic acid, which I think is not the best source of Vitamin C imo…as I believe vitamins the closer to their natural form the better they are for processing and use in our bodies. I understand preventing bacteria and other things is the reason chlorine is added, but the closer to nature water and food is, the better, without any other additives and chemicals..which is why I have a water filter..however, it doesn’t take out fluoride, and being forced on others is rather strange to me…if fluoride is good for teeth, it can be found in most all toothpastes commercially today. Not sure why that’s a difficulty for anyone. Sorry, I don’t ‘buy’ the poor/rich bologna either
Dr. Harriet, I did answer you..my posts are held for ‘moderation’ however
# rustichealthyon 09 Nov 2012 at 6:36 pm
Dr. Harriet..I did try your plan, and I got colds 3 or 4 times a year, asthma, bronchitis, flu. The difference I believe is, I am susceptible to them, and so I see the benefits of my plan working in that area. Not every one is the same…I understand..but, I was trying to give an example of vitamins working, and more specifically, not just ascorbic acid in low dose…that it seems the ‘studies’ usually go on.
So, again, quit whining about the TYRANNY of municipal water fluoridation, get off your faux libertarian ass, and dig a well.
@ Narad:
“which is why I have a water filter..however, it doesn’t take out fluoride, and being forced on others is rather strange to me…if fluoride is good for teeth, it can be found in most all toothpastes commercially today. Not sure why that’s a difficulty for anyone. Sorry, I don’t ‘buy’ the poor/rich bologna either”
From Rusty’s web page…
http://gethealthybehappy.yolasite.com/i-drink-water-now.php
“And, just an added note, get a water filter. There is one to filter out fluoride too, which I will be getting as well, activated charcoal cannot remove fluoride..
Fluoride can result in hyperactivity and/or lethargy, arthritis, lowered thyroid function, lowered IQ, dementia, disrupted immune system, genetic damage, cell death, cancers, deactivated essential
enzymes and lower life span!”
Get off your lazy faux libertarian arse and either dig your own well or buy that water filter that filters out fluoride, Rusty.
Narad..if I forced my vitamins on you..in your food/water and we made it a law..you must have Vitamins in your water/food everyday..what would you consider that? just wondering?
@rustichealthy: Either you have ADD, you can’t read, or you are deflecting to hide your complete ignorance. Either way, you have not addressed Dave’s questions at all.
First of all, if you are not getting your Vitamin C from ascorbic acid, I don’t even know if you are getting Vitamin C at all, since ascorbic acid IS the chemical name for Vitamin C. Similarly, dihydrogen monoxide is just (pure) water, dioxygen just oxygen. DeoxyriboNucleic Acid is DNA, RiboNucleic Acid is RNA, both of which are the building blocks of all life on Earth. Good luck having a life without those. Acetylcholine is a neurotransmitter, responsible, among other things, for the contraction of rough red muscle cells. Without this neurotransmitter, your nervous system cannot tell a muscle to contract. Sodium Chloride is table salt. Hydrous ferric oxide is rust.
I’m not a doctor or a scientist. I have a BA in English Literature (with three hours short of a BA in Philosophy and six hours short of a Master of Fine Arts), and yet, I have managed to identify all of the chemicals listed by the participants of this thread without resorting to any online help.
You, on the other hand, have demonstrated again and again your ignorance and your basic lack of critical thinking.
@rustichealthy,
This is a science-based blog. We arrive at provisional conclusions based on the best available scientific evidence.
You keep telling us about your beliefs and your personal experiences.
Do you have any understanding of why we cannot accept your beliefs and anecdotes?
Are you interested in trying to understand how your experiences and beliefs might lead you to false conclusions? Are you interested in learning how your thinking is flawed? If you are, we have much to teach you.
If you are not, please go away. You are wasting your time here: you don’t understand what we’re saying, and you have no chance of changing our minds unless you can come up with compelling scientific evidence. Your repeated comments here are only exposing you to ridicule. It’s embarrassing to watch.
@rustichealthy: Also screw you for proposing Vitamin C as a cure for cancer. I have nothing but contempt for people like you.
Francois, if you ate only ascorbic acid, you’d be imbalanced adversely because it’s not in it’s correct natural state as it is meant to be taken along with other nutrients/fiber/juice and anything else food is comprised of..so therefore, taking it in a more natural surrounding would be the beneficial and preferred method imo..and apparently why ascorbic acid does not work or show the same benefits I’ve experienced, as your studies say… I don’t think it takes a PHD to figure that out either
rustichealthy, you’re position is laughable. You know that water in some parts of the world naturally contains fluoride? And that food grown or cooked with fluoridated water will also contain fluoride? Further, you realize the VAST MAJORITY of the water on the planet is undrinkable (will make you seriously ill) without treatment by “unnatural” processes? And you realize that it’s through the same scientific inquiry that we can do all of these things in the first place? You blithely admit you’re not a chemist, yet you think that your (baseless) beliefs are worth anything in a discussion about chemical processes?!?
Write to the FDA, and complain about the amount of fluoride in the food & water. Demand they enforce labeling for it like they do for sodium & calcium. While you’re at it, also ask them to add manganese (damaging to cognitive & developmental processes), lithium (similar to previous list) and hydrogen (explosive). If they won’t listen, start a campaign on the industry side–they can advertise a new line of fluoride-free foods akin to their line of organic (the two will probably be exclusive though). I can almost hear their consternation from here and it’ll keep you busy for a while.
Lest we forget this comment from Rusty, that she posted on October 16th on this post by Dr. Gorski:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/health-insurance-and-mortality/
“My personal ‘healthcare’ is vitamins vs. vaccine, less carcinogens and more vitamins to curve cancer rates. I choose to have catastrophic because I don’t run to the doctor’s for every sniffle. But, now my premiums went up 5 times since Obamacare passed, and I’m being forced to pay for others and for something I don’t even want or believe in for myself. The whole idea is immoral bordering fascist state. It’s at a point perhaps to seriously consider leaving, sorry to say if it’s not repealed. I love America…or what it was meant to be. This socialist system is failing in Greece..failing in other countries, no matter how rose colored it’s presented no country is able to sustain it for long without forced intervention and control of how much who gets what. Those on the left, would YOU like GWB deciding what healthcare you get? No? Then you understand why those on the right wouldn’t want BO to decide what healthcare we get. And 2400 pages is deciding what healthcare we get. You’re giving your life over to whoever is in control. This isn’t freedom any longer, it’s tyranny if it’s allowed to continue.”
This was Rusty’s opening “shot”. She then went on to post her rants about her opposition to care for the uninsured and underinsured, her unintentional hilarious post and confusion about the Nazi/Communist/Socialist plot to take her money, her vicious attacks on other posters here, and other selfish libertarian rants.
Okay Rusty when are you relocating to another country…now that President Obama won…and now that your home State went “blue” for the President? (America’s gain is another country’s loss)
It’s very simple: Taking fluoride out of water supplies is FREEDOM. Putting it in is TYRANNY. I’m entirely sympathetic, as I am in a patriotic rage over the OPPRESSION that is failure to be supplied carbonated water with a hint of citrus from the tap, which is clearly SOCIALIST in nature. In fact, the collectivists go so far as to leave the water in “pools” during “purification,” guaranteeing that the water will be FLAT. Weep, Iron Eyes Cody, weep for me.
“weing..ok, all kinds of cold and flu viruses thus far”
This is a science based web site. Are you saying you have documentation of being inoculated with specific cold and flu viruses for which you had documented no prior immunity and that your regimen of vitamins prevented the illnesses caused by the said viruses? If yes, produce the documentation. If not, then your assertions are not worth anything to us and have no place in science.
As a humble non-scientist with a head full of anecdata I have to say I don’t see a lot of people dropping dead or born with three eyes from the fluoride. My parents’ entire generation was raised on tap-water mixed with formula and I don’t see a lot of people scarred for life, dead or debilitatingly ill because they didn’t get breast milk. Everyone I know has probably consumed water from lead soldered pipes in their old houses, yet I know of no child who has had lead poisoning from it. What I do see is people living longer than they have ever lived in the past and dying of diseases for which the probability goes up with age: diseases that we may have been spared in the past not because the world is so much more full of toxins today but because the parasites and microbes probably got you way before the cancer and Alzheimer’s did in the past ( although the amount of cancer in some communal burials of Egyptian mummies is really quite shocking.) So the conclusion I have to take away from this is that no one really gets is that the probability of something really catastrophic occurring because of lead soldered pipes, formula, BPA Etc, etc. is really quite miniscule. So stop worrying about all the invisible things that have a very small chance of killing you, hurting you or lowering the IQ of your baby, and enjoy the fact that you are probably going to live longer than your ancestors could have imagined possible.
@ rokojulady: Elevated blood lead levels in children is still a problem…
http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/#data
Up thread, I discussed ways in which a parent can protect a child from lead that leaches out from old lead water pipes or copper water pipes with lead solder joints, by opening up the cold water tap for a period of time, as well as using only cold water to start boiling water that is used for cooking purposes.
Most of the elevated lead blood levels, I’ve ever heard of are caused by inhalation of lead paint “dust” during renovations in an older home or by children ingesting chips of paint that contain lead. Lead paint is NOT a problem if it has been painted over and is NOT peeling.
My personal experience is ascorbic acid did not work as well (with my asthma attacks) as one with bioflavanoids and rosehips. That’s how I concluded it may not be the best form to take and why the studies don’t show it’s effectiveness. It seems one needs more mgs. when it is in ascorbic acid alone in that case. That’s how I know it’s not as effective, and my belief that the closer to the way it’s presented in nature the more beneficial. The only ‘opinions’ the studies I’ve found on pubmed come to are “insufficient”, or “inconclusive” evidence actually, (not conclusively saying it Doesn’t work) which, personally, I’m glad I didn’t wait another 30 or 40 years for them to perhaps come to the correct conclusion… finally … sigh…
See you all another time. 
RH:
Then you are:
1. Not taking any Vitamin C
2. Not reading the comments.
3. Have failed Google U.
4. Have a severe learning disability.
5. Have a mind that is welded shut from any actual information.
Because ascorbic acid is Vitamin C! You were told this before. Try actually clicking on the following link and reading it:
http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/vitamin-c-000339.htm
Personally I prefer to get my Vitamin C from fruits and veggies, which contain ascorbic acid, not pills.
To be fair, I think what Rustichealth means by “ascorbic acid” is the purified ascorbic acid in a vitamin C pill as opposed to vitamin C mixed with other stuff in a “natural” source, as in rose hips. She hasn’t provided any evidence that one is superior to the other, but we all generally accept the idea that it’s better to get vitamins from our food rather than from a pill.
Thank you Dr. Hall..for a little while I thought I was on another planet trying to explain what I thought was obvious…but, I did find this site..
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/vitaminc/ascorbic-acid-is-not-vitamin-c/
… natural vs. synthetic. Let’s start with Vitamin C. Most sources equate vitamin C with ascorbic acid, as though they were the same thing. They’re not. Ascorbic acid is an isolate, a fraction, a distillate of naturally occurring vitamin C. In addition to ascorbic acid, vitamin C must include rutin, bioflavonoids, Factor K, Factor J, Factor P, Tyrosinase, Ascorbinogen, and other components as shown in the figure below:
ascorbinogen
bioflavonoids
rutin
tyrosinase
Factor J
Factor K
Factor P
In addition, mineral co-factors must be available in proper amounts.
If any of these parts are missing, there is no vitamin C, no vitamin activity. When some of them are present, the body will draw on its own stores to make up the differences, so that the whole vitamin may be present. Only then will vitamin activity take place, provided that all other conditions and co-factors are present. Ascorbic acid is described merely as the “antioxidant wrapper” portion of vitamin C; ascorbic acid protects the functional parts of the vitamin from rapid oxidation or breakdown…
And, that’s what I experienced, a better result from bioflavanoids and rosehips with Vitamin C…(ascorbic acid)..not solely ascorbic acid. whew! I’ll put this on my site..with a new compelling comment perhaps!
have a good one..
However, I won’t ‘trouble’ you all anymore today
So you are a saleswoman for the patent meds. Check out
http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/lee.html
As Harriet pointed out. “we all generally accept the idea that it’s better to get vitamins from our food rather than from a pill.”
@rustichealthy,
The link you provided is laughable. It expresses the opinions of a crank, and those opinions are not substantiated by any scientific evidence. It’s so bad that it “isn’t even wrong.”
Ascorbic acid is not “a fraction” of naturally occurring vitamin C. It IS vitamin C. The fact that we are better off getting vitamins from food than from pills does NOT mean the pills don’t contain the “whole” vitamin. And it doesn’t mean rose hips are better than more common dietary sources of ascorbic acid.
Of the Comic Sans MLM variety.
I stopped reading the moment I read “You will know more than 95% of doctors.” I know more about American, French and German literature than 95% of doctors. Vitamins? Those 95% of doctors WILL know more than I do, due to having spent 25 years in school to become medical doctors and to their continuous education.
By the way, do you even understand the articles you are linking to (even though they are ludicrous) or are you just copying and pasting them wholesale on your website? This, by the way, constitutes copyright infringement. Oh, wait, you probably don’t subscribe to the idea of copyright protection, since this is enforced by the federal government and international treaties.
Dr Hall wrote, “And it doesn’t mean rose hips are better than more common dietary sources of ascorbic acid.”
Ah, Doc, but rose hips are ever so cool, so alternative! Unlike oranges or lemons, which are common plonky vitamin sources for common plonky people and are, worst of all, cheap. Rose hips = conspicuous consumption.
They are also a great topic for conversation when waiting in the supermarket checkout queue. I mean, one looks like such an expert to the ladies in front and behind … without actually having to know anything. One also looks rather well off, without having to actually state what one earns.
No-one, as far as I know, has examined the importance of social and financial snobbery in the upsurge in taking of supplements, or the usage of strange diets and peculiar treatments like enemas. Might be interesting?
A report by a watchdog group has concluded that prescribed medicines are “one of the most significant perils to human health resulting from human activity.” The group based their conclusion on their analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration’s database of serious adverse events.
The report was published on 31 May in QuarterWatch, a publication of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, a non-profit organisation dedicated to “medication error prevention and safe medication use” based in Horsham, Pennsylvania.1 It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing “serious, disabling, or fatal injuries,” including 128 000 deaths.
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 48% of the …
I can hear the ‘excuse’ now…”it’s the Dose of the Poison”…yes..that kills 128,000 each year!
ok…see you all 
” if they didn’t work, people wouldn’t buy them.”
Bull honky. Case in point: For how long was the practice of blood-letting used? Many, many years. But it killed more patients than it helped (ie “didn’t work”) and yet they still continued to use it. There’s a name for the logical phallacy you use in your argument, I just can’t think of it right now.
Dave…except vitamins haven’t killed anyone..but conventional meds have…so you telling me what ‘works’ is “bull honky”
actually..year after year…averaging over 100,000 a year..killed from taking, relying on, conventional meds..(millions more adversely affected) not just one..I’d call that a “pandemic” and yet totally dismissed by conventional meds!, so, I’m sorry, but, it’s pretty funny to hear from conventionals the ‘danger’ and/or ineffectiveness of supplements, when I believe it’s the people who buy them to decide that.
Not killing someone is your evidence that something “works”?! That’s utterly ridiculous. Besides, a simple google search for “vitamin overdose death” provides plenty of hits describing just that:
https://www.google.com/search?q=vitamin+overdose+death&aq=0&oq=vitamin+overdose+mortality&sugexp=chrome,mod=15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Argumentum ad populum.
Thank you Scott.
Let me point out wikipedia in particular:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_poisoning
“Generally, toxic levels of vitamins are achieved through high supplement intake and not from dietary sources”
“In the United States, overdose exposure to all formulations of “vitamins” was reported by 62,562 individuals in 2004, leading to 53 “major” life-threatening outcomes and 3 deaths(2 from Vitamins – D and E; 1 from polyvitaminic type formula, with iron and no fluoride).”
Sure sounds super-safe to supplement to me…
Rusty, lets look at this another way:
you swear by vitamin supplementation because it “works for you” and because rx meds (sometimes) kill people. How do you reconcile that with the fact that rx meds “work for” many, many, many people and vitamin supplementation does, in fact, kill people as well. It would appear that negates your justification of vits over rx.
This article is very comical. I don’t know if you have done any research on the subject of fluoride or if this is just your opinion, but you are sadly mistaken. Especially the part where it is beneficial for children, good for the teeth, and restores enamel. First off, once enamel is gone, there is no way of getting it back. Second of all, have you ever read the back of a tube of toothpaste? You are supposed to contact poison control if you happen to ingest any toothpaste.
Fluoride is a toxic by-product from manufacturers of glass, aluminum, and others, and is too costly to dispose of properly. The only reason it is in our water, is because they contribute too much money to the economy, and disposal of this toxin properly wouldn’t bring in as much profit, and was therefore labelled as “safe”. Hitler said it best, “Tell a lie long enough and loud enough and the masses will come to believe it”.
I am not sure if you have already had too much fluoride exposure or not, but you need to get this out of your water ASAP! You need a water filter system with a fluoride filter for removal. or a reverse osmosis system, something. This has been banned in all the leading societies like Germany, Britian, Japan, Sweden, as they know how bad this is. You can go on believing this misconception, but I have a reverse osmosis system, and do not consume lies fed to me when a little research will actually astound you.
No, ‘not killing’ is not evidence if something works, my own experience is evidence to what works for me…and many others who choose to buy their own supplements. What is evident to me is, the so-called revered ‘clinical trials’ conventional meds tout about as the only proof something works are bogus and void. We may as well simply rely upon our own judgement afterall with what we ‘trust’ our health on…thus my website
@rustichealthy: Your website? The same website that infringes on the copyrights of several quacks?
AdamM:
Welcome to the discussion. Please be aware we will demand references for your claims.
For example, I claim that you are either misguided or lying and that your claims are false. As evidence, I present:
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4058
and
http://www.fluoridedebate.com/question40.html
please, enlighten us.
“my own experience is evidence … ‘clinical trials’ …are bogus and void.”
That says it all. Rustichealthy has offered a good example of what SBM is fighting.
She is impervious to reason. What possible answer is there to someone who insists that black is white?
“What is evident to me is, the so-called revered ‘clinical trials’ conventional meds tout about as the only proof something works are bogus and void. We may as well simply rely upon our own judgement afterall with what we ‘trust’ our health on…thus my website”
So, no basis in science. Just old wives tales by self-styled experts who want to practice medicine without a license.
And here is a map of countries where community water is fluoridated:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fichier:Fluoridated-water-extent-world.svg&page=1
What’s that in pink? Sweden? Britain? France? In your defence, AdamM, Japan and Germany have less than 1% of their population having access to fluoridated water. But they have not banned them.
@AdamM
Here is a white paper from the Institute for Science in Medicine, a think tank of scientists and doctors. It is supported by 49 references. http://www.scienceinmedicine.org/policy/papers/AntiFluoridationist.pdf
This is not “opinion” but a reasoned treatise by people who have done extensive research on the subject.
If you want to accuse them of being wrong, you will be expected to present a better reasoned argument with more credible references.
Francois no it doesn’t, it’s not in a published book that I’m getting money for, or claiming the information to be my own..genius.:)
weing..”no basis in science”…not apparently if it’s so darned mistaken at the expense of millions of lives already…I would say. Perhaps it’s not as ‘science’ as you think?
Dr. Hall..my track record of ‘placebos’ working very well for myself is 100% better than ‘evidence based medicine’ thus far!
link: http://gethealthybehappy.yolasite.com/comments-and-new-findings/my-placebos-work
@rustichealthy: Well, you obviously need some education in copyright law. You cannot copy or reproduce wholesale a text without permission of the author, even under the fair use doctrine. It doesn’t matter if you do not profit from it or that you credit the author. You didn’t get the author’s permission. As such, it’s still copyright infringement.
“weing..”no basis in science”…not apparently if it’s so darned mistaken at the expense of millions of lives already…I would say. Perhaps it’s not as ‘science’ as you think?”
I have no idea what that word salad means. You are trying to practice medicine without a license even though you obviously know squat about health, disease, or science in general. Does that make you feel important or something?
weing..”no basis in science”…meaning, what conventionals consider “science” seems to be incompetence (worse than placebos) considering the medical ‘science’ used to distribute/prescribe medications that produce such terrible outcomes..(as in 128,000 deaths each year not counting the millions of other bad side effects they’ve caused also). So, what exactly is “quackery” now? I’m not prescribing medicine without a license… I’m not ‘practicing’ anything except my freedom of speech.
@rustichealthy,
“my track record of ‘placebos’ working very well for myself is 100% better than ‘evidence based medicine’ thus far!”
You don’t have a track record. You have anecdotes that are no better than other people’s anecdotes for different health practices. And no more credible than the centuries of anecdotes that supported balancing the humors with bloodletting.
And your improvements might not be due to placebo effects. There are other possible explanations like the natural course of events without treatment, or unrecognized other factors that led to improvement.
Shockingly, no one here recognizes what troll behaviour is. If you don’t feed them, they go away.
That’s because you don’t know what the word means, something like your grasp of the word ‘socialist’. (Your copyright violation, on the other hand, is straightforwardly communist.)
Francois.. you’re wrong …Fair Use and Fair Dealing in U.S….Copyright does not prohibit all copying or replication. In the United States, the fair use doctrine, codified by the Copyright Act of 1976 as 17 U.S.C. Section 107, permits some copying and distribution without permission of the copyright holder or payment to same. The statute does not clearly define fair use, but instead gives four non-exclusive factors to consider in a fair use analysis. Those factors are:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
what amount and proportion of the whole work was taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.[30]
I think it’s very nice of the drugstore to keep so many people alive.
Dr. Hall asks “What possible answer is there to someone who insists that black is white?”
You may reply that it could profit them mightily to study the character of Katherine in Shakespeare’s “The Taming of the Shrew” and to learn from it instead of being the subject of easy parody, such as:
Science it is not, when I say it is not,
And the experience changes even as my mind:
What I will have it named, so that it is,
And so it shall be so for Rusty.
“my track record of ‘placebos’ working very well for myself is 100% better than ‘evidence based medicine’ thus far!”
That’s because you aren’t ill. Next time you reference a medical paper, try and understand it. Ask someone what it means if you don’t. If anyone tells you to take coumadin for a cold, tell them to take a hike. If you have a DVT, or experiencing pulmonary embolism, or atrial fibrillation, then you’ll have to make a choice, either to take the coumadin or your placebos.
Dr. Hall.well my anecdotes work for me..asthma, arthritis and allergies didn’t go when I was on meds..but did go when I started vitamins and other natural remedies. Vitamins are not ‘bloodletting’ or snake oil.
Narad….that’s because you don’t know what freedom of speech is..I can call it whatever I choose..but, if conventionals say it’s not a ‘pandemic’..it’s not a ‘pandemic’ then…the 100,000 dead or suffering were science experiments then.
“Shockingly, no one here recognizes what troll behaviour is. If you don’t feed them, they go away.”
I recognize it. But you can’t leave the garbage they post unchallenged. Especially here. Those who don’t know better may think it’s legit.
No, you’re supposed to call Poison Control if you ingest “more than used for brushing.” And Poison Control, in its turn, will likely enquire as to whether you somehow managed to keep down enough toothpaste to have an acute toxic effect, which is something like 6 mg/kg of fluoride, also known as “a lot of freaking toothpaste.”
weing..I’m hoping to avert any of those big things like heart attack and stroke by prevention for a long while. I’ve noticed other things improving and turning around thus far, nails, hair, skin, eyes..in addition to the asthma and arthritis and allergies I have..improving..so, I hope I’m on the right track. Of course I don’t know everything..just what’s happening right now. I am glad some technology is out there…that doesn’t mean it’s all good, is what I’m trying to say.
I’m not ‘against’ technology. Vitamins are here because of technology…so is the study of them, and other nutrients..fish oil, herbs, etc. Technology can be great…if used in a ‘no harm’ manner, but that usually consists of the substances used…what conventionals actually do call the ‘poison’
and, that’s where we part ways. It’s not only what I’ve been ‘told’ that works..it’s what I know works from experience, and without the dangers and side-effects. And, amazingly, most often when someone else actually tries them too.. they then find out it works..vitamins, organic food, less toxic intake. That’s all we’re saying. That’s all I’m saying. To be coupled with 14th century ‘bloodletting’, and 18th century ‘snake oil’..and other quackery is disconcerting..especially coming from conventional meds, knowing what awful other things happen because of pharmaceuticals. Sure, they don’t kill everyone right off…that wouldn’t work. Anyway, good night.
@rustichealthy: Not only are you arguing against people who have years of practice in healthcare practices, you are also going someone who has years of experience dealing with copyright law. You should also learn to read. In the text you have copied and pasted, the “amount and proportion” of a text are mentioned. But hey, if you think you are right, go ahead and publish an entire short story by Jorge Luis Borges or a poem by Louis Zukofsky. I’ll be amused when María Kodama’s and Paul Zukofsky’s lawyers send you a cease-and-desist letter. Or better yet, try to copy and paste one of my publications on your website. I will gladly contact your host to ask them to take down your website over copyright infringement.
Francois..I was just going to shut down ..then I read your post ..I think you should reread what it says. I do understand it. If it meant what you say..it would have said…
“.Copyright …. Prohibits ALL.. copying or replication. In the United States, the fair use doctrine, codified by the Copyright Act of 1976 as 17 U.S.C. Section 107, permits NO copying and distribution Without Permission of the copyright holder or payment to same. …(That’s your interpretation apparently:)
but..it Doesn’t! ..it says….
Copyright Does NOT prohibit ALL copying or replication. In the United States, the fair use doctrine, codified by the Copyright Act of 1976 as 17 U.S.C. Section 107, permits SOME copying and distribution WITHOUT permission of the copyright holder or payment to same.
Sorry ..where’s your site? let me decide if I choose to copy it … or not
I’d almost swear you were trying to Scaremonger me Francois! lol
So, Rusty, you’re a communist. You think you can take that which is others’ if you feel like it, with the flimsy basis of not understanding the law being all you have. Not only communist, but lacking the simple manners to be bothered to even request permission in the first place.
Does that about sum it up?
@rustichealthy: Unlike you, I don’t self-publish. You’ll have to find me at your local bookstore. And obviously, you don’t understand the fair use doctrine.
Narad, copying a few sentences to use as reference and giving the writer the credit is not taking anything..it’s what’s permitted…if you understand the law. I’m not a communist…that’s funny.
Francois..I understand the law… and.. copying a few sentences (Not the whole book) to use as reference and giving the writer the credit is not taking anything..it’s what’s permitted, if You understand the law. That’s what I’ve done. Now stop trying to Scaremonger me.
As well as you understand science? Then we’ve got nothing to worry about.
@WLU: In rustichealthy’s defense (*cough), “copying a few sentence (…) and giving the writer credit” does fall under the fair use doctrine.
As François pointed out, yes, that’s fair use. And you don’t need to school me on the subject, as I worked at a rather well known press for quite a while. Frankly, your sites are such a hodgepodge that I didn’t go hunting for long for extended liftings. I’m more curious about your strange political philosophy, as it were, in which you object to “socialism” but cry “tyranny” over not having the municipal water supply tailored to your personal desires and, now, fall back on the law to justify your takings. It seems as though it’s “socialism” when you don’t get precisely what you want and “freedom” when you do get what you want (emphasis here on the “free”). These are diametrically opposed positions.
Narad, most of the homepage is links and references with some intro sentences…the chapters are mostly my own writing but with some paragraphs with links as references (Chapters 5 & 7 & 12 mostly), and the comments are my own, some with exerpts
I don’t think it’s that difficult to understand my political view. Gov. is meant to protect the individual rights as in the Constitution. Purposely putting something in the water that many have a problem with is infringement of individual rights.
and, basically..First and Second Amendments are pretty clear..Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (as in Fluke’s demands of a catholic college)..or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for redress of grievances..(as the Tea Party did).
It’s when laws and govs (city, state or federal) overstep their boundary that there’s a problem.
like forcing others to pay for others healthcare now, but, not only paying..it will be spelling out exactly what ‘healthcare’ is..and who knows what that may be.
Taking and spending other people’s money, on bailouts, pay offs, buying votes, pork spending, a whole lot of things..I totally object to..both sides have done it..but, the bulk has been mostly on the left..especially last 4-6 years. Taxes are as ‘rattling chains on men’s necks’..Thomas Jefferson said.
I don’t see how offering family planning coverage prevents you from practicing Catholicism (I was raised Catholic) or any other religion. As an individual, you are offered a choice. If you decide not to use what’s offered to you on religious grounds, fine. If you decide that your health trumps your religious upbringing, then you can elect for whatever procedure is available to you. Georgetown University, as an employer in the United States, cannot force its dogma on its employees (who might not all be Catholics). That is called religious discrimination.
By enforcing the family planning sections of the ACA, the federal government is not prohibiting the free exercise of any religion. It’s making sure employers (here, religious institutions) are not discriminating their employees on religious grounds.
Francois, I believe the university objects to paying for contraceptives, against their catholic belief. You can package it with ‘family planning’..but sheesh…when does one take responsibility of their OWN family planning? buy your OWN contraceptives. Fluke is a student there. She could easily go to another university. Why would one choose to go to a catholic university in the first place if you don’t like their beliefs. Next it will be, what they’re allowed to say in the pulpit? because you don’t want anyone ‘offended’, I can see that coming down next…that’s denying the freedom of religion also…you can’t preach against ‘abortion’ perhaps? or any other disagreement one feels ‘offended’ by according to government rule. It’s dangerous precedence..which it seems the left have no problem crossing over to time and again.
No, it’s not. The problem is that it’s internally inconsistent as described above, and you don’t grasp this, apparently among many other things. Babbling about the First and Second Amendments is so far from the mark that I suppose you probably are impervious to actual thought.
Narad..Translation: my thoughts are not ‘consistent’ with what you say they should be ‘consistent’ with, or what the state says they should be consistent with..in this case..fluoride in water or ‘family planning’ and what we all should be charitable in allowing you to take our money to pay for whether we like it or not. Is that it? Or why don’t you specify what you’re talking about. And, I’m not “TAKING” anything..I’m using what is allowed just as the Ops do on this site all the time…excerpts?
What does one have to do with the other? anyway…one is copyrighting law..the others are infringement of basic rights and freedom.
You mean your other utterances? Yah, I suppose I’m suggesting that synchronizing these categories might help. What you fail to grasp is that fair use itself is a diminution of the interests of the author (for both practical interests and those of the common weal; the former has a libertarian technological objection). On the other hand, your petulant fluoridation complaint turns this on its head while ignoring the common basis for the item you like and the one that you don’t. Your analysis goes no further than “yum” and “ick.” Not only do you have no understanding of the “basic rights and freedoms” that you are ululating in the general direction of, it’s apparent that you’ve never even tried.
@rustichealthy: Georgetown University is an employer receiving public funding (e.g.: Pell Grants, Direct Loans, …). As such, it is obligated to follow federal law regarding religious discrimination. I am an atheist. I don’t like the idea of religion or of divinity. By your train of thought, I should be entitled not to hire a religious person, as it goes against my lack of religious belief.
Secondly, Fluke went to grad school at Georgetown University (specifically law school), so no, she didn’t have the choice to go to another university. This is something I don’t expect you to understand, since you didn’t attend university in the first place. This is not a 4-year undergraduate degree we’re talking here. People choose specific grad schools for very specific reasons and at that level, it is usually very difficult to transfer to another graduate program, even if they are in the same fields. I chose my grad school because I wanted to study with one specific person. I don’t know why Sandra Fluke chose Georgetown University. Most likely because it’s the best law school for one legal specialization.
Of course, I wouldn’t expect you to understand the pursuit of knowledge.
Narad…(( What you fail to grasp is that fair use itself is a diminution of the interests of the author)) No..it is not..it’s a sane understanding imo…otherwise no one could communicate anything without getting it copywritten and someone saying something that might possibly reflect it and it would be insanity. Using an excerpt is not taking anything from the author..(giving them the credit) actually…it helps the author..it’s free advertising! actually. The law states and easily understood..you can’t copy the Whole Book..but a paragraph is not TAKING away anything, and you the user are not gaining anything other than the use…seriously? comparing that to forcing fluoride on us, or paying for somone’s sex life is ludicrous to begin with..but, maybe I shouldn’t expect you to understand the difference actually. This is why liberals shouldn’t be in government
It does come down to this ridiculous argument with a liberal…hardly any kind of sense at all. (“If I can’t tell you how to run your whole life you must be an anarchist!!”) See? the mental case. You like fluoride, buy fluoride toothpaste..you want sex..buy your own condoms. They Don’t Compare to quoting someone’s book.
Francois..actually, in a free country, you should be able to hire/not hire anyone you want..it’s your money..it’s your business. Unfortunately, this money from gov buying the Right to Impose is why no $ should be going to/coming from Gov to anyone..it’s the basis of tyranny now. Great!
and, well what I do understand is she should/could buy her own contraceptives. I hope she, in such a high level of pursuit of knowledge and learning, is not that incompetent, that’s scary.
And, since, everyone’s so interested in my education, you’re right, I’m not that knowledgeable of higher level as I have some college..and dropped out having my two sons, who I decided were more important to me, (actually more than the joy of my life) and having to work, not able to do all three, not blaming anyone else, and not expecting anything else..it’s my life and responsibility, and choice. I still have some wherewithal to think and do for myself, and try to understand and defend freedom in a small way as I can though! and other things, like what really works for health
and still for the life of me, can’t fathom a 25 year old single, having nothing else to do but go to school can’t take care of her own seemingly active sex life 
I’m sorry..it’s beyond me. And, I’m sure you all will now tell me how I don’t understand the time and attention and hard work and ..what ever. 
And, before I hear the gloating of your education…I’ll remind you I had a better grasp of a copyright law in a very short time it seems than you all seem to have…sorry
Don’t weep for me..weep for yourselves
@ Narad:
“Not only do you have no understanding of the “basic rights and freedoms” that you are ululating in the general direction of, it’s apparent that you’ve never even tried.”
The neighborhood is shot now that those Moroccans have moved in next door…
http://www.theonion.com/articles/my-moroccan-neighbors-wont-stop-their-damn-ululati,10761/
You may have convinced yourself of that, but then again you have also convinced yourself that your grasp of science and medicine is better than anyone else here. All you revealed over the past several months of repetitive bleating is your complete failure to understand either.
Saying you are knowledgeable about something, thinking you are knowledgeable about something and actually being knowledgeable are all different things. I would be intrigued to see what an actual copyright lawyer would say.
Also, weeping is not the action I take in response to your ignorant posts – it is closer to disgust.
Question is, if Fluke does get covered, will she be able to go to the drug store and obtain the contraceptives by herself? at the precise right time, or will she need assistance with that too. Maybe the gas for her car (and insurance of course) will need coverage assistance also? to get there and back..3000, that’s a lot of trips.. Maybe she’ll need assistance with how to use them, maybe a class should be paid for by taxpayer grants for that also…to be fair..not only for her as she says..all educated women …in Georgetown University..prestigious up scale law school… and everywhere! Like I said, I figured out the Fair Use in the copyright law..I don’t want to gloat too much..I was going to try to stretch it out to a few minutes, but it actually took only a second…hmmm
And (according to liberal governing) because you presume a few (one or two?) not sure if that many can actually have children not knowing how to buy toothpaste?..but, parents can’t go to the store and buy toothpaste with fluoride, therefore Everyone should be forced to have it in their water to drink…because it’s ‘only fair’..is that the rationale?
Will the government take over distributing food to everyone (a basic right too..isn’t it?)..(and the food the government determines everyone should have…gmos it seems most likely) assuming a few can’t do that for themselves too…what else can we expect the government to do…in the name of ‘fairness’ ..will there be anyone left in this country who’ll be able to think for themselves at all? I wonder (why don’t you move then Rustic?) ok I’ll go with my lowly educated self
see you all
“Also, weeping is not the action I take in response to your ignorant posts – it is closer to disgust.”
and face palms. Many, many face palms. Which, I guess could cause weeping, but only from the pain inflicted, not for any emotions towards Rusty
“will there be anyone left in this country who’ll be able to think for themselves at all? ”
Oh no, she figured it out. I told you the use of chemtrails to control everyone’s minds was too obvious. “contrails”?! noone would believe that cover story. I guess we’ll have to report to Big Pharma and the NWO to move to Phase III…
Copyright for all writings published after 1989 March 1 already vests in the author by default, with no further action required, including notice.
Again, you seem to only apply this standard when it is to your liking. In any event, “saying something that might possibly reflect” a work has no bearing on anything.
Yes, it is. It is the appropriation of the fruit of one’s labor, which one has a propery interest in.
Aside from the fact that this is the excuse used by many a music pirate, one might further note that what you are doing is deciding that you get to do the taking and you get to decide the value of the compensation, which is yet again completely incompatible with any sort of coherent libertarianism.
and,
WLU.. I was referring to weeping for my ‘lowly education’ in comparison to yours. I’m sure your feelings aren’t that in other things..that’s not what one feels when one is faced with the challenge of their presumed ‘incompetence beliefs and claims for all’ led politics and policies so I see. Anger, and yes, disgust… at the deprivation of satisfaction that not everyone buys into the idea that you can/do actually have the right to think/do/demand for/from everyone else claiming/assuming ‘incompetence’ as the motive/rationale, is more like it…(disgust actually is a good indicator that I’m right in that case:)
The Dave..simply denying or making a presumptive claim it can’t be so, or it doesn’t/can’t happen, doesn’t prove anything either, …I actually know that
Ok..Narad..take it up with what the OPs do on this board also http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/scaremongering-to-sell-water-filters/ i.e. taking out excerpts, without specific permission. I’m not able to get through apparently.
Health insurance is about providing access to medications and treatments to many people such that everyone pays a bit so nobody goes bankrupt. It’s a basic way of spreading out risk that reduces costs overall. Health insurance has nothing to do with transportation, nobody is asking the health insurance to cover gas or mileage. Your comment is an example of a non sequiter, reductio ad absurdum and a slipper slope – it assumes that granting this coverage automatically means covering a lot of other costs, ignoring the fact that these decisions are made on a rational basis. Another indication that you are unwilling to examine opinions other than your own rationally or fairly and instead resort to charicatures.
The fluoride levels added to drinking water ensure an entire population benefits from an effective, low-cost treatment that has no adverse effects (because again fluoride is added and removed rationally based on a target level of 1 ppm). Your claim of a nanny state is again a charicature, not reality. Fluoride is added because it protects and hardens teeth and has never been linked to adverse effects at 1 ppm. You have no evidence to the contrary, merely assertions based on erroneous assumptions.
The US government does not distribute food to everybody, but does have programs to prevent starvation and malnutrition. People who can afford to buy adequate food (or even the starving who do not want to use the program) are not forced to consume this food. Thankfully, this is one of the many ways a conscientious, morally-aware state can support the health of its citizens. Please provide any example of the US government forcing people to consume food.
Genetically modified organisms are used because they increase crop yields and provide other benefits such as providing adequate vitamin A in deficient groups, and there is no good evidence that they are associated with adverse effects. Again, GMO crops are studied before being released, and if adverse effects are noted then the rational decision is made to implement (or not) the crop. The system is not perfect, but it is based on study rather than rhetoric. Pretending GMO crops are just produced for the evulz without a rational motive is disingenuous or a failure to understand the issues (as well as another application of the naturalistic fallacy, and ignoring the fact that the changes made to GMO crops actually happen in nature).
Scientists do think for themselves, and are at the forefront of developing, criticizing and implementing technological and medical solutions to life’s myraid problems. Economist and other expert scholars are involved in developing, criticizing and improving government policies. Your arguments, in addition to being charicatures of the genuine complexities involved, appear to be appeals to ignorance and appeals to personal incredulity – if you can’t understand the rational behind a scientific or political decision (or if you personally disagree with it) your knee-jerk response is to reject it without making any effort to better understand the issue. It’s the Sarah Palin approach to science and politics.
@rustichealthy: The initial statements Narad and I made regarding your website were made by mistake, due to your poor wording that induced us to think you were copying and pasting wholesale writing by other people. You have not demonstrated a better grasp of the Fair Use Doctrine or of Copyright Law than any of us here, as demonstrated by the following:
Not everything can be protected under copyright. Copyright only applies to creative, intellectual, and artistic work. It doesn’t apply to things that are merely communicative, like sentences or speech. So whatever rustichealthy writes wouldn’t be protected by copyright, since it doesn’t fall under any of those three categories.
Now, I am very amused that you should use the Fair Use Doctrine to try to protect yourself, since this is something that is considered by the Federal Government. I can’t really say ‘enforced’ here, since, even if you invoked the Fair Use Doctrine, I still have the right to send you a cease-and-desist letter and to sue you for copyright infringement, if I, as copyright holder, do not agree with where my citations appear. Such as rustichealthy’s website, for example.
@rustichealthy:
I think the citation used by the authors of this site are more likely to be defended as fair use than anything that you could do on your website. The citations are coherent with the aims of SBM.org.
And, it’s not the same..libertarian doesn’t mean no laws at all. There are some laws, and thus far, that’s the copyright law…thus far that law says it’s not infringing on the writer’s rights if one uses an excerpt from their book/writing without specific permission. It’s not actually the full property, and it’s not the Whole song, record as in music pirating. (even I know the difference in that:) And, forcefeeding all people some thing a few say they believe is necessary..against the will of those who don’t want it/believe it..is a WHOLE other issue. If you can’t see that yet..I can’t help you with it either.
Moreover, the authors of this site aren’t advancing a scatterbrained political position that is inconsistent with fair use in the first place.
((Health insurance is about providing access to medications and treatments to many people such that everyone pays a bit so nobody goes bankrupt. ))
I’m still waiting for my bank account to be filled..so I can get to keep it, if I should one day get ill, so I don’t go bankrupt, and not have to use it! but get to keep my home/car/job…speaking of which..I still have a mortgage to be paid that I’d like you WWJD’rs to pay for also, and a new car too.. Lil? while we’re at it
Francois.. ((I think the citation used by the authors of this site are more likely to be defended as fair use than anything that you could do on your website. The citations are coherent with the aims of SBM.org.))
you have your opinion on it..and I have mine.
WLU…((The fluoride levels added to drinking water ensure an entire population benefits from an effective, low-cost treatment that has no adverse effects (because again fluoride is added and removed rationally based on a target level of 1 ppm). Your claim of a nanny state is again a charicature, not reality. Fluoride is added because it protects and hardens teeth and has never been linked to adverse effects at 1 ppm. You have no evidence to the contrary, merely assertions based on erroneous assumptions.))
Whether I have evidence of anything or not is not the issue, forcing upon all something you happen to believe but I don’t happen to believe is “harmless” is an opinion..and I don’t have to prove to you my opinion, I just don’t like yours forced on me.
“The Dave..simply denying or making a presumptive claim it can’t be so, or it doesn’t/can’t happen, doesn’t prove anything either, …I actually know that”
I’m not seeing how this applies to anything I have said, unless you’re now stating you believe in such absurdities as chemtrails and the NWO
Genetically modified organisms are used because they increase crop yields and provide other benefits such as providing adequate vitamin A in deficient groups, and there is no good evidence that they are associated with adverse effects. Again, GMO crops are studied before being released, and if adverse effects are noted then the rational decision is made to implement (or not) the crop. The system is not perfect, but it is based on study rather than rhetoric. Pretending GMO crops are just produced for the evulz without a rational motive is disingenuous or a failure to understand the issues (as well as another application of the naturalistic fallacy, and ignoring the fact that the changes made to GMO crops actually happen in nature).
As The Dave (I think) says…”bull honky”
http://www.cornucopia.org/2012/07/obesity-corn-gmos/
http://www.purezing.com/living/toxins/living_toxins_gmofoods.html
http://www.invigorate360.com/reviews/top-10-dangers-of-genetically-modified-food/
http://www.saynotogmos.org/uoct03a.htm
http://enhs.umn.edu/current/5103/gm/harmful.html
http://www.relfe.com/GMOs.html
“Whether I have evidence of anything or not is not the issue, forcing upon all something you happen to believe but I don’t happen to believe is “harmless” is an opinion..and I don’t have to prove to you my opinion, I just don’t like yours forced on me.”
fluoridated water is not a matter of opinion or belief. it is a matter of what the scientific research has repeatedly shown.
You can believe flouride is dangerous all you want, it doesn’t make it so. We don’t “believe” its safe, the scientific evidence has shown that it is safe. The only reliable “dangers” of flouridosis is brown teeth. The horrors!!!!!!1!!!!
“you have your opinion on it..and I have mine.”
And yours are consistently contrary to the best scientific evidence the world can provide. Most sane people would recognize that fact and alter their opinion to be more inline with reality, but you continue to refuse to do so and expect us in this community should give your opinions some credence. Not gonna happen.
The Dave…what conventional ‘scientific research’ has determined ‘harmless’, as in all the meds handed out to people unawares…pardon me…but, I’m not sure how you all can think you can claim/rely upon anything your ‘scientific research’ says…
http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e3989
A report by a watchdog group has concluded that prescribed medicines are “one of the most significant perils to human health resulting from human activity.” The group based their conclusion on their analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration’s database of serious adverse events.
The report was published on 31 May in QuarterWatch, a publication of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, a non-profit organisation dedicated to “medication error prevention and safe medication use” based in Horsham, Pennsylvania.1 It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing “serious, disabling, or fatal injuries,” including 128 000 deaths.
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 48% of the …
and…
….dental fluorosis is not “just cosmetic.” It can also be an indication that other tissues, such as your bones and internal organs, including your brain, has been overexposed to fluoride as well.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/04/24/fluoride-warnings-on-water-bills.aspx?e_cid=20120424_DNL_art_1
pardon me…but, I’m not sure how you all can think you can claim/rely upon anything your ‘scientific research’ says…and we’re saying, stop dictating it upon us too. You want fluoride..you get fluoride..you trust your ‘research’, you do so, but don’t use it to force your opinion/belief on us.
Your pride at completely lacking evidence isn’t surprising, but should be a reason to bar you from participating in public discussions or any sort of decision making process. Even prescientific times had some form of rational decision-making, albeit unsystematic and flawed by preconceptions. FSM forbid you ever achieve any sort of political power because it would return us to a time lifespans were 50% shorter, most deaths were due to preventable infectious disease and starvation a regular occurrence.
Quite frankly, you should not have a say in public health decisions because your unfounded opinions have singificant negative consequences. The fact that you fail to appreciate the importance of evidence in decision making underscores the importance of expert guidance in public health. If you are the alternative, we’d be facing endemic polio and life-long paralysis of thousands of people. Big Pharma would be happy though, they could start making iron lungs again. Or perhaps you’d prefer children simply die of polio? It is, after all, more natural.
Actually Dave, not really – most water treatment plants remove fluoride from water supplies if it is present at levels sufficient to cause fluorosis.
Ok so that’s the problem we have come to. For many years conventional meds have done their thing, given out their beliefs, their findings, their medicines..and, some lived their lives as they chose..their organic food, their vitamins, their healthcare, their remedies. Now, it’s come to a point that seems, the conventionals now wish to dictate to those of us who lived our lives as we so chose (in a free country that is), now demanding we take/pay for conventional healthcare, conventional water treatment, and conventional gmo foods too. “Houston,… we have a problem.”
@rustichealthy:
I don’t have an opinion regarding copyright law. I have years of experience, requesting permission from authors and publishers to reproduce a segment of their texts.
And, “thus far,” the state indisputably has a compelling interest in public health.
It says no such thing. Fair use is a legislatively sanctioned limitation of one’s copyright in the interest of the common weal. It came after copyright, which, in U.S. constitutional terms, exists “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
You apparently fail to grasp the reason for the example, which was your attempt to play the very foolish “free advertising!” card.
No, it is not a “WHOLE other issue.” They are different, but not for reasons that are likely to penetrate your cranium. For the purposes of this exchange, the take-home point is that fair use is more socialist in nature than than is the provision of municipal water in accordance with the rational exercise of the states’ police power. You have no choice in the former case. Nobody is going to come around and make you drink the water.
In case you haven’t noticed, I’m not seeking your “help.”
Oh rustichealthy? You keep using a lot of periods in random parts of your sentence-like typings. Apparently your opinion is that they are ellipses, which is the plural of ellipsis. You could not be more wrong.
In writing, an ellipsis is the omission of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues and indicated by a set of dots indicating such an omission.
So what words have you been -omitting- when all you write is already superfluous?
Or is it your opinion that all the cutesy periods indicate some kind of pause in your cognitive process? If so there is no evidence of any cognition in the first place so how could it be halted?
Writing is about communicating information to other people. All you’ve communicated thus far is that you are ignorant, stubborn and impervious to reason or facts and give in tedious length what you lack in depth. I find that the fault with many writers is that you can’t understand what they’re saying. The trouble with you is that I can.
“You keep using a lot of periods in random parts of your sentence-like typings. Apparently your opinion is that they are ellipses, which is the plural of ellipsis. You could not be more wrong.”
That has been bugging me for quite sometime as well
I figured it was some sort of typographic chain to keep the smileys from floating away. The inability to use quotation marks, however, is absolutely maddening.
“I figured it was some sort of typographic chain to keep the smileys from floating away.”
Brilliant!
The substantial purpose of a state is to negotiate between individual and collective rights. A successful state (at least in my opinion) is one that achieves the greatest good for the most people rather than for one person (i.e. North Korea and other despotisms), one family (monarchies) or nobody (anarchy). One of the thing the state does is provide, at a relatively low cost, collective goods – like roads. In some cases, the collective good requires over-riding the objections of the individual. For instance, say someone wants to shoot you in the head and take your stuff – one of the tasks of the the state is to ensure you don’t have to deal with this kind of thing. Individually having to deal with threats of violence (dealt with via police), getting products to market (roads), ensuring people meet their side of contract obligations (the court system) and personal health (public health, vaccination, fluoridation) wastes tremendous time and realistically is impossible (we can’t all individually develop our own vaccines). Governments potentiate tremendous advances in a lot of areas by providing public goods. Pretending you are in any way able to meet those needs, or even are aware of most of them, is absurd.
THIS is what bothers you about rustie’s posts?!?!?!?
@William: Don’t forget education.
(( For instance, say someone wants to shoot you in the head and take your stuff – one of the tasks of the the state is to ensure you don’t have to deal with this kind of thing))
Actually, it’s my responsibility to protect myself and my family as best I can, not being a dope thinking ‘the state’ will be there for me every minute of every day.
(( In some cases, the collective good requires over-riding the objections of the individual.))
Where is that in the Constitution?
(( ensuring people meet their side of contract obligations ))
Imaginary contracts? because I don’t remember signing any contract between me and “the state”. Especially not to get a dose of fluoridation or vaccination. Can you show me that contract? or is this another conventional scheme to once again enforce your toxic meds on everyone.
RH:
The funny thing is that folks who hate fluoride will often endorse consuming colloidal silver. A product that turns your skin blue. It is an amusing bit of hypocrisy.
What’s amazing to me is, I’ve found a way to deal with asthma, allergies, and arthritis very very effectively, without any meds and toxic side effects, yet years and years of studies, and research, and billions of dollars, and conventional meds have not! See, you wonder why I don’t have ‘faith’ in your prestigious education! you guys, anyway, see you all.
Oh hey, Don’t make fun of RH’s punctuation. I enjoy being a punctuation anarchist…rules are made to be broken and all that!
It’s a happy anarchist army.
What have the Romans ever done for us? Other than sanitation, the aqueducts, public order…….
I’m just going to stop reading RH’s comments, since she doesn’t seem to understand the basic principles of civilization, grammar, history, science, the English language, or anything resembling knowledge. And I feel we’ve read everything she has to offer rhetorically (it starts with an accusation of socialism, then “Sandra Fluke is a slut,” even if the topic at hand is fluoridated water, then accusation of tyranny, followed by mention of Nazism). It was amusing the first three times, but at this point, it’s just too cruel to make fun of someone with such limited cognitive capacities.
“What’s amazing to me is, I’ve found a way to deal with asthma, allergies, and arthritis very very effectively..”
What’s amazing is that your asthma and allergies have remitted and you attribute that to your vitamins. Reminds of the turkey who is so convinced that the farmer is his benefactor who protects him and brings him food everyday. Everyday his experience tells him so. That is, until the day before Thanksgiving.
I think it has something to do with promotion of “the general welfare.” Perhaps you’ve heard of this part.
Narad.. that’s ‘cute’…but, perhaps it should be explained that ‘general welfare’ is not a Welfare State. A Welfare State is more the interpretation of the communist manifesto, where the State monitors, enforces, ‘ensures’ what kind of toothpaste you use (by imposing fluoride on all whether you want it or not) ‘for the general welfare’ “the State” will determine what ‘healthcare’ you get …what kind of light bulb you use, what kind of car you drive, what kind of house you live in, how much one should be paid …ummm wait..those are being determined now I understand.
Francois, and you have that ‘freedom’ to do so..cool isn’t it…freedom.
weing.. I’m not sure how my getting healthier means I’m getting sicker. One on Craigs List (maybe you? or one other here?) tried to tell me, my ‘almost colds’ were actually at the end of the cold, and I had them all along, I just didn’t know I had them in the last 4 years! It gets a little looney these ‘explanations’
FL – I continue to believe that the issue is not a limit of cognitive abilities. I know many people who are not very knowledgable and of average or below intelligence, yet they are not just open to learning, but curious about many things and are willing to change their minds if you give them new information. On the other hand I know people who are very knowledgable and intelligent, but can not seem to let go of a favored theory in spite of the evidence.
I’m always curious what’s going on. In my mind what it come down to is this, ‘Do you want to know things or do you want to learn things?’ Sometime we are unwilling to take the risk of letting go of what we “know”. But learning is like the monkey bars, you have to be willing to let go and swing precariously by one hand to make progress.
But, sure, when someone is hanging there with both hands clutched on those monkey bars and their eyes shut – shouting “I won’t let go.” it’s unlikely that shouting back or cajoling or trying to pry their fingers from the bars will make any difference. Doesn’t mean that the temptation to do just that will not be overwhelming sometimes.
Know what a blood fued is? Independent police forces act to end such cycles of violence. Incidentally, does one of your family members stay awake to guard the rest of you during your sleep? Or do you booby-trap your house? How very tribal.
Also, your argument means that anybody who can hit you hard enough to knock you out deserves to take your stuff. Also, do you use money? Do you print it yourself? Do you drive on roads? Do you have an internet connection run by a company that is publicly traded? Do you have the time, energy and expertise to ensure that the water you drink is clean of real pollutants that are genuinely deadly (i.e. not fluoride)? Can you manufacture your own pharmaceuticals to treat infectious disease? All your precious, useless vitamins – do you produce them yourself from crops grown yourself? Do you barter to acquire them? The state has a role in all of these things – providing safety restraints and expertise in some cases, and providing public goods in others.
So we can add to the list of things you fundamentally don’t understand – economics.
It’s a general statement about the role of the state, not the US specifically. Since I don’t live in the US, I don’t give a crap about the Constitution. But I don’t think the Constitution gives people the right to endanger others if it makes their lives easier. Would you prefer a world where a guy in a monster truck is free to drive over you if he gets to work five minutes faster? And in such a world, who manufactures said monster truck? Where do they acquire the capital to do so?
Try googling “social contract”. First link should explain the concept, though I doubt you’ll be able to understand it. Vaccination and fluoridation are public goods with proven benefits that overwhelm the few, minor harms associated with them (i.e. localized inflammation and brown teeth). But feel free to pay for fillings and die of polio if you’d prefer.
As many people have pointed out to you – you don’t understand the process to produce those years of studies, and you don’t understand the cognitive biases that lead you to attribute your “cures” to magical vitamins. Also, you don’t know what a social contract is, nor do you understand basic economics, and you make no effort to learn it. Frankly, you’re lucky you live in the US. If you lived in a country I ruled, you wouldn’t be allowed to vote (or operate any combination of the five simple machines).
Moebius – Monty Python. Ha!
WLU, you not living in America explains a little more now…that explains you’re assumption of a ‘social contract’…what you ascribe to is socialism, which is actually what 49% voted for this election here, 49% voted against it…but I know where it’s going.
And, actually, I got cavities from the inhalers I was prescribed. I’m sure dentists are happy when no one gets cavities anymore! (but, wouldn’t that put them out of business?) hmmmm
There are many other reasons for cavities, but teeth turning brown, is absolutely an indication it will affect other and all areas of the body too. It’s not for the greater good..it’s for the good of the chemical co’s…and dentists..and doctors… perhaps?… hmmmm 
WLU I do understand what works though, I experience it myself.
News flash – the idea of a social contract has nothing to do with socialism. Nor do Obama’s policies.
Literally the only way you can avoid political structure is by complete isolation. Even with just two people, power and influence, the realities of governance, begin to influence decision making. The smallest unit we think of as a society (a tribe) will still have a chief and decision-making process, and chiefs who want to stay chiefs expend considerable resources maintaining their social influence so they are protected from, and protected by, violence and threats of violence. As usual, you don’t know what you are talking about – but you try tp paper over your ignorance by projecting what you think is the solution to a problem you don’t even understand.
One of the issues about modern dentistry is that there are fewer and fewer major problems because people take care of their teeth better. Dentists have begun offering services like teeth whitening to try and increase incomes. Overall, market forces in your capitalist society will kick in and reduce the number of new dentists. A well-governed country would include central incentives to anticipate and encourage this practice, so fewer dentists go bankrupt – a problem for individual dentists, their employees, their creditors, and society as a whole. A classic common good that can only be addressed by the state because there are no individual incentives and no other body with comparable information and foresight needs.
It’s amazing how little you know about the society you presume to criticize and parasitically live in.
Rusty, since strong, convincing arguments with good evidence seems to go right past you, perhaps Yahoo! Answers is more up your ally. This right here explains that the idea of social contract is right in the Constitution, (therefore has nothing to do with socialism, unless of course our founding fathers were socialists):
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080913181130AAsWvw2
Sorry, I know I said I wouldn’t reply to rustichealthy, but her line equating the social contract with socialism is just too laughable. RH, do you realize that your oh-so-cherished Constitution IS a social contract? That the notion of social contract predates socialism by about a hundred years? Have you heard of the Enlightenment? (because your notion of government seems pretty stuck in the Neanderthal age) Have you heard of guys like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, or Jean-Jacques Rousseau ? Because you might want to. Those are the people who inspired your Saintly Founding Fathers when they wrote the Constitution.
Now, I could go into a close reading of the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the United States Constitution (oh, that wouldn’t that be funny, a Frenchman lecturing an American on the Constitution) and point exactly where the Social Contract is mention explicitly (no postmodern tricks, I swear!), but I have other things to do.
Just waiting for RusticHealthy to call Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and the other Founding Fathers socialists.
RH’s view seems to be “the government should make everyone else do exactly what I want, but let me do whatever I want.” Depressingly common, especially in Tea Party circles. (A nice illustration of just how reality-averse that movement is.)
The Dave..49% of the country agree with me also…this allegation of lack of intelligence simply because one does not hold to your socialist propensities and points of view is typical of most socialists actually. That’s the usual first attack, along with strings of other insults..that we ‘just don’t understand’ your argument..that we ‘just don’t have the intellect’ to do so, we’re greedy, racist, “insensitive” bleah… ‘mouth breathers’, hootenanny bearfoot and pregnant idiots…quite frankly tiring. I don’t see your point of view, because I like freedom better. That doesn’t mean anarchy. I have more than enough government rules/laws/edicts with town, city, county, state governments. This is not enough for liberal socialists. What you want is to micromanage and dictate from the Federal level to all States more and More and MORE..because no government is too much or too big, and no issue is too tiny for you to dictate/micromanage us all over. You’ll have the UN governing us all worldwide the first chance you get, I am absolutely certain of it…unfortunately, you’ll keep denying it all until it happens.
Veruca Galt, as it were.
I can honestly hear WLU’s thoughts now..”What’s wrong with the UN governing us??”
“weing.. I’m not sure how my getting healthier means I’m getting sicker.”
Huh? Where did you get that? I tried to tell you there was no relation. Get back to me in 90 years and tell my how your organics and vitamins have kept you getting healthier. Then we can document how you are now healthier than you were 90 years ago.
Oic weing..sorry, well in that case, I choose to live healthy and happier in the meantime!
And just when I didn’t think RH could become any more clueless or arrogant, now EVERY SINGLE PERSON who happened to make the same choice (out of two possibilities) COMPLETELY agrees with EVERYTHING RH says, no matter how loony.
Crank magnetism, anyone?
More accurately, you can’t understand, and certainly can’t refute, anything I’ve said. In addition, you can’t tolerate the cognitive dissonance that this causes you, so you’ve decided to ignore my posts rather than be forced to admit you are wrong.
Which is fine, my comments aren’t aimed at you – they’re for anybody who might think your posts have a germ of a point. They don’t, as I and other commentors have demonstrated repeatedly.
WLU apparently you didn’t understand what I just wrote…
(((I don’t see your point of view, because I like freedom better. That doesn’t mean anarchy. I have more than enough government rules/laws/edicts with town, city, county, state governments. This is not enough for liberal socialists. What you want is to micromanage and dictate from the Federal level to all States more and More and MORE..because no government is too much or too big, and no issue is too tiny for you to dictate/micromanage us all over. You’ll have the UN governing us all worldwide the first chance you get, I am absolutely certain of it…unfortunately, you’ll keep denying it all until it happens.)))
Did you call me a parasite? wow
Rusty
Once again you prove your total lack of comprehension. I have never once said I am a liberal or even agree with every political ideology expressed here. I am, in fact a moderate republican, as mentioned on another thread, that also agrees that smaller government is better, to a point. But this blog isn’t about politics. Its about science, which you continue and unceasingly demonstrate you have no basic knowledge of, and refuse to even learn basic principles. My last point was merely to point out that you don’t even understand the concept of social contract, and your views do not hold up to the majority opinion. Its people like you that give the GOP a bad name. But you’ll probably ignore everything I have said and either label me an ebil RINO or maybe even liberal in conservative’s clothing.
Sorry The Dave again, I meant to say “et al” to all..but,
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I think I’ve stated this elsewhere also, “general Welfare” is not a Welfare State, Blessings of Liberty does not mean one has the “liberty” to take every and anyone else’s money, property to whatever extent they so decide..as in 16 trillion alone in last 4 years…as the liberal socialists squandered already…
but, that’s great..glad you’re not a liberal socialist.
Politics are incorporated here..especially now, with Political leaders now determining our healthcare..and what is ‘science’ I am supposing…so now it’s related..in particular in this thread where the politicians are deciding to put their belief of science and health in our water …against the will of many..perhaps even with the ignorance of most.
@rustichealthy: You “choose to live healthy and happier (sic).” Really? Because it seems to me, from the frequency of your interventions, that you have a pathological need for attention.
@Dave: I think RH has already labeled you a socialist. But hey, you’re in good company. She also called Bismarck and Thomas Hobbes socialists.
wow – the UN gambit. well…a little bit of crazy Michigan Militia propaganda just makes me feel at home.
Oh boy. Turns out that there is no effective treatment for tinnitus but I just discovered something.
Reading RH…including the ….odd…punctuation….makes….my….tinnitus much, much worse.
You appear to have not read or not understood my posts. I advocate for state interventions based on a rational assessment of risks and benefits, costs and savings – not one based on rhetoric and ignorance. The United Nations advocate laudable goals of peace, tolerance, education and health. Happily would I live under a system that espouses those goals (and as a bonus, they are forced to achieve their goals through negotiation rather than war, a stance the United States notably has not been pursuing these days; even Obama, whom I greatly prefer over Bush, is undertaking a foolish, harmful and counterproductive action of drone strikes).
It’s always bizarre to me that the application of well-studied health interventions are somehow equated to jackbooted thugs knocking down doors and takin’ yer freedumbs. Vaccination not only has medical exemptions, religious exemptions and in many states, plain ol’ “I don’t feel like it” exemptions, it’s not mandatory in the first place. Only if you want to attend public schools. Yes, that’s exactly like living under a socialist dictatorship.
You’re right, parasitic isn’t the correct term – I should have said “hypocritical and ignorant”. My apologies. Though if you refuse vaccination for irrational and nonmedical reasons, then parasitic is again on the table.
You might want to check into the actual history of the word ‘hootenanny’, as it has long been owned the The Menacing Socialist Songsters.
Raise your hand if you think of Mel Gibson screaming “freedom” in Braveheart whenever you see rustichealthy invoke the same!
@ Francois Luong:
“Raise your hand if you think of Mel Gibson screaming “freedom” in Braveheart whenever you see rustichealthy invoke the same!”
(Raises both hands)
BTW, for some reason my daughter recommended that movie as a “must see”. Forty-Five minutes into Braveheart, I contemplated getting into my car to confront her and slapping her silly.
Yes, the Braveheart reference applies, especially as rusty’s quack disclaimer on her website begins “This website is provided for entertainment and information only….” She’s an entertainer so any movie references are definitely germane.
And if one reads her site for even five minutes then one experiences that same desire lilady did, that being to go slap someone silly.
Although for movie references rustic healthy reminds me a bit of Harry Potter’s Dolores Umbridge, narad’s coining her as Veruca Galt wins the prize for originality in combining Roald Dahl and Rand in one swell foop.
I’m more inclined to think of the bogus Burke quote at the end of “Tears of the Sun.”
FL “pathological need for attention”…I thought it was giving/sharing ideas and debate.
@ Scott: And just when I didn’t think RH could become any more clueless or arrogant, now EVERY SINGLE PERSON who happened to make the same choice (out of two possibilities) COMPLETELY agrees with EVERYTHING RH says, no matter how loony.
Not in all things, the biggest issue in this campaign (being healthcare) and against what “the state” from the Feds will be determining what healthcare is for everyone (2400 pages plus (to be filled in later), according to their ‘interpretation’ of it, and forced to pay for it and for everyone, whether we want it, like it, need it or not. Leaving actually the poor and middleclass (like myself) little ability to actually get ahead because it will cost much much more than they tried to put it off as..as if the $ will come off a tree somewhere…I do think the left actually believes that though.
This blog is about science-based medicine. Debates are based on rhetoric. You don’t understand science, you don’t understand why it is a superior form of learning, you don’t understand why your personal experiences are invalid for general recommendations, and you refuse to learn. So you’re on the wrong site.
I don’t like to make fun of typos, since my posts are so wrought.
But, if I had a band, I think I would call it Bearfoot Hootenanny…must learn to play a musical instrument now.
I understand what your beliefs have caused: toxins in our food, air, water, and bodies. Someone else said “No Debate”!
and it was the King of England who was rattled too whenever he heard “freedom”…I am sure
“Our”? Awfully socialist of you.
Narad…actually, it’s how ‘republican’ I am, taking into the consideration the Individual rights to them (food, water, air without toxins, own determination what one’s healthcare is), and as in this and recent issues, food (without gmos) water (without fluoride)
I’m not a socialist..it may be difficult to understand the difference, but I’ll try again…
Democracy: 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for supper: “socialists” … i.e. we “socialists” determine what’s good for all (whether all like it or not). In that day when Ben Franklin said that, he was referring to the King of England determining what was good for all (whether all liked it or not).
Republic: one well armed lamb who says “No, you don’t”
Republic, “It’s a Republic, for as long as you can keep it”… I’m wondering if this is about as long as we could keep it (i.e. freedom!
as Ben Franklin warned. 
and, teeth turning brown, that alone should be a flaming red flag that something’s wrong with it, in my ignorant uneducated opinion
Who said anything about being rattled when hearing “freedom”? Correct me if I’m wrong, but that kind of sounds like a strawman argument.
Can you name the specific “toxins” that have been introduced into the food, air, water, and bodies?
Not only that, it’s a really bad one. (Not that I expect Rusty to have bothered to figure out what the argument between Burke and Paine was about in the first place.)
The Dave…
Obesogens, DDT, toxaphene, dieldrin, aldrin Organophosphates Diazinon, glyphosate, malathion
Carbamates Carbofuran, aldicarb, carbaryl Pyrethroids Fenpropanthrin, deltamethrin, cypermethrin
estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, trenbolone acetate, melengestrol acetate and zeranol, a commercial form of zearalenone, a Fusarium fungal toxin benzene and toluene, and endocrine-disrupting compounds such as the phthalate DEHP Dioxins hormone-replacement therapy and oral contraceptives can make their way from people’s bodies into municipal wastewater systems. These chemicals are not fully removed during water treatment processes, and end up in household tap water and water used to irrigate lawns and gardens, toluene, methylene chloride, trichloroethylene and formaldehyde. 1,3-butadiene Vinyl chloride Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Benzene Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Triazine Herbicides: Atrazine Heptachlor Dieldrin and Aldrin chlordane, malathion and 2,4-D 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxypropionic acid (2,4,5-TP) dieldrin and captan Phytoestrogens Vinyl Chloride Styrene rBGH/rBST Zeranol Phthalates Bisphenol A (BPA) Mercury Ethylene Oxide Phthalates Diethylstilbestrol Oral Contraceptives Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) Ionizing RadiationPolycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
Sunscreen
Many sunscreens contain chemicals that exert significant estrogenic activity, as measured by the increase in proliferation rates of human breast cancer cells in vitro. Studies show these chemicals are accumulating in wildlife and humans.
Aluminum
Aluminum is found in some underarm antiperspirants. Like cadmium, aluminum is a metal that mimics estrogen and can also cause direct damage to DNA. Studies have not shown a direct causal link to breast cancer risk, but breast tissue has been shown to concentrate aluminum in the same area where the highest proportion of breast cancers are originally diagnosed.
Lead
Lead may be a contaminant in over 650 cosmetic products, including sunscreens, foundation, nail colors, lipsticks and whitening toothpaste. Lead is a proven neurotoxin, linked to learning, language and behavioral problems. It has also been linked to miscarriage, reduced fertility in men and women, and delays in puberty onset in girls.
Placental Extract
Placental extract is derived from human or animal placentas and is used in hair conditioners, shampoos and other grooming aids, particularly those marketed to women of color. The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has identified progesterone, the major hormonal contaminant in placental extracts, as a reasonably anticipated carcinogen.
http://www.breastcancerfund.org/clear-science/chemicals-linked-to-breast-cancer/cosmetics/
Suspected endocrine disrupting chemicals are found in insecticides, herbicides, fumigants, and fungicides that are used in agriculture as well as in the home. Other endocrine disruptors are found in industrial chemicals such as detergents, resins, plasticizers, and monomers in many plastics. Exposure to these chemicals occurs through direct contact in the workplace or at home, or through ingestion of contaminated water, food, or air. Studies have found that some of these chemicals do leach out of plastics, such as the PVC plastics used to make IV bags. When these plastics, or other materials, are burned (as well as in their production) many unwanted byproducts that are endocrine disruptors or suspected endocrine disruptors are released into the air or water.
Most endocrine disrupting chemicals are fat-soluble. This means that they do not get rapidly flushed out of the body, but rather are stored in fat. These chemicals bioaccumulate up the food chain. (An individual higher up on a food chain must consume many individuals of a lower level in order to obtain sufficient energy. In doing this, an organism not only acquires the energy it needs to live, but it also ingests and accumulates the sum of the chemicals stored in its food.) This means that very low levels of a chemical in the air, water, or soil result in higher levels in plant life, still higher levels in herbivores, and even higher levels in carnivores. An individual will accumulate more of these chemicals throughout his/her lifetime. The major routes of removing these chemicals involve transfer from mother to child, through the placenta and in breast milk.
http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/bendrep.asp
And just an FYI..Thomas Jefferson is probably my favorite President…
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)
The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.
The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.
No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.
To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.
I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. (Back then!)
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.
http://jpetrie.myweb.uga.edu/TJ.html
Sorry WLU..looks like TJ referred politicians and gov workers as parasites
more from Thomas Jefferson…
In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.
What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.
The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.
When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality.
Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty…. And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.
Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.
It is strangely absurd to suppose that a million of human beings, collected together, are not under the same moral laws which bind each of them separately.
Liberty is the great parent of science and of virtue; and a nation will be great in both in proportion as it is free.
He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
That last one is like..talk about foresight..genius..:)
NRDC: About as legit as the EWG. But tell me, Rusty, how do you feel about Global Warming? http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/
Also, I thought you were for small government (ie less laws) Wouldn’t the NRDC also be considered socialist since they push for laws for things that everyone might not believe in?
“NRDC’s legislative team is dedicated to protecting and building upon America’s framework of environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act. Keep up to date with latest legislation affecting environmental issues through our biweekly Legislative Watch bulletin, which tracks all environmental bills moving through Congress.”
Breast Cancer Fund:
“The Breast Cancer Fund works to connect the dots between breast cancer and exposures to chemicals and radiation in our everyday environments.” (read: even if no dots are there, we will find them anyway, so give us money)
How about instead of using biased, fund-raising activist groups for your information, try getting some real research from legitimate, peer-reviewed journals
@Rustichealthy,
Nice list. Now make a similar list of all the natural toxins found in our foods. Here’s a start:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2404325
Research by Ames showed “About 99.9 percent of the chemicals humans ingest are natural. The amounts of synthetic pesticide residues in plant food are insignificant compared to the amount of natural pesticides produced by plants themselves. Of all dietary pesticides that humans eat, 99.99 percent are natural: they are chemicals produced by plants to defend themselves against fungi, insects, and other animal predators.
We have estimated that on average Americans ingest roughly 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides and their breakdown products. Americans eat about 1,500 mg of natural pesticides per person per day, which is about 10,000 times more than the 0.09 mg they consume of synthetic pesticide residues.” http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/06/06/synthetic-v-natural-pesticides/
But are they carcinogens when ingested naturally in food and water..there are natural organic pesticides, fungicides and herbisides, some very ingestible actually, I used baking soda as a fungicide on my aloe plant and it worked perfectly..it’s amazing. There are a lot of organic organisms, but, not the same as manmade synthetic chemicals, not processed the same.
@rustichealthy: Oh, the GMO argument. Now, tell me, do you eat strawberries, broccoli, apples or tomatoes? Because anyway you cut it, those three are all GMOs, the product of centuries of genetic manipulations. As are cows and dogs. Well, people don’t eat the latter in the United States. There are many others, of course.
Speaking of broccoli, did you know they contain trace amounts of Selenium? How about bananas? Do you eat bananas? Well, those contain trace amounts of the radioactive isotope of Potassium. Water? Not safe either. Even the cleanest source from the pre-Industrial Age contains trace amounts of Deuterium and Tritium. As a matter of fact, my bones probably contain a detectable amount of Tritium. But this was caused by living underneath the Chernobyl radioactive cloud.
Sorry I’m late, I was busy reading up on the schedule 2 poisons list (UK)–nice scare tactic btw. The point of the list is simply to say that some compounds (including nicotine, ammonia, strong acids, strong bases, and pesticides) should not be generally available to the public. Naturally it includes a long list of exceptions to allow people to have omgdangerpoisonous (mundane) things like batteries, adhesives, cigarettes, fertilizers and fluorescent lights. Surprise, surprise, exceptions also exist for fluoride products too.
http://www.solihull.gov.uk/Attachments/PoisonBooklet1.pdf
Still waiting for for the discussion to come back around to food: it makes no sense to worry over fluoride in your water while everything that you eat might also contain fluoride anyways.
Francois, GMO is not breeding different type apples with apples, or dogs with dogs, or cats with cats.. GMOs are taking genes from fish and interjecting them in corn or some such…Not the same. , even I know that
Well..for some reason, I see the difference between traces of substances naturally in water as different from industrial, medical, agricultural overkill of 1000′s more chemicals. I’m not sure how I can explain that
And, I would say anything in compact concentrated form…let’s say to field workers, yes, I can see as a problem. Something should be done about that. I am sure if technology would focus more on safe natural environmental and body friendly ways of doing things there would be less dangerous effects, instead of on more poisonous synthetics and chemicals it would be much less a problem for us and the environment.
The Dave..this has all to do with regulating chemical industries and their influence and power with government “parasites” lol (for myself anyway), unfortunately, some take it too far also. There could/should easily be a very sane balance actually.
Taking money out of Government parasite’s hands, would probably be the best way to do it..so they’d be less in a position to be influenced to be a government parasite in the first place, and be less ‘generous’ with the people’s own industrious labor and money who actually worked for and own it, that they so freely print more and more of and give out for votes in return. Actually, they need to be more monitored on their ‘investments’ and conflicts of interest…if anything. There were a few concerns with the “bailouts”, that the gov parasites made for instance.
“GMOs are taking genes from fish and interjecting them in corn or some such”
That is a Pythonesque linguistic question: what on earth would fish genes have to say to corn?
@rustichealthy:
Do you mean what the OSHA and the EPA are already doing? Or do they not count because they are federal agencies?
As for your comment regarding GMOs, once again, you are proving that you know nothing about genetics. What is the difference between selecting phenotype A (e.g.: a sweeter breed of strawberry) to crossbreed it with phenotype B (a more resilient but duller-tasting strawberry) to obtain phenotype A+B, and using plasmids or retroviruses to implant gene C into genotype D? None, except that method 2 is probably more efficient and more targeted, and that we might object to the selection of genes to be expressed by the target organism.
Mind you, I am rather skeptical about the benefits of implanting an antibiotic-expressing gene into corn, but the entire opposition to GMOs strikes me as idiotic and ill-informed. Its definition of GMOs (in CA Proposition 37) is also too broad, in a way that would require strawberries, apples, broccoli, and tomatoes to lose their organic labeling (even if they were cultivated in such ways) and to be automatically be labeled GMOs.
Francois..I don’t mean them coming to MY home to see how many mercury filled lightbulbs I have or don’t have..they’re barking up the wrong tree it seems to me. I don’t see one whit done about all the toxicity, chemicals, medicines, food additives, gmos, ge’s, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics..things like that..in industry (where they get paid to perhaps not to find).
Rusty, “they” don’t give a rat’s ass about you. You have advanced nothing whatever to suggest that you could even survive without “them.” You are here whining about not getting the light bulbs that you want. Can you fabricate a light bulb? Can you so much as tin a wire? I didn’t think so. You are merely an extremely whiny instantiation of everything that you rail against. In the Hobbesian paradise that you nominally espouse, you would likely carry value less than that of a light bulb.
@rustichealthy:
I guess the FDA didn’t ban the use of bisphenol-A (BPA) in baby bottles last July. This, of course, is only one example.
To further Narad’s point, if even Soviet Russia didn’t care about what kind of lightbulb you used, what makes you think a socialist United States would care? It’s probably more likely you would encounter the scorn of your neighbors or relatives for not using CFL or LED lightbulbs.
I would also like to mention that your constant attempts to cry wolf/socialism/tyranny cheapens the experiences of those who have actually lived under authoritarian regimes. I once knew a famous Polish poet who lived during the Communist era of Poland (before moving to France, then the United States in the 1980s). He was more afraid the authorities would decide that his reading and writing were considered subversive than he was of they discovering he didn’t use the proper lightbulbs or drive the proper car. His reading included Hegel, Bergson and Husserl (he was a philosophy student).
Francois, if someone lives in a 4 X 6 jail cell all his life, then told he can come out now!..into a 10 X 14 cell!..of course he’ll think he’s got “freedom”! When you live in freedom all your life, and you keep hearing “well, you’ll have to “do as we say now” and live in this 10 X 14 cell. And, ..we’ll decide what kind of food you eat (gmos) (like it or not), and kind of water you drink (fluoridated) (like it or not), and (chemical) medicine you take (like it or not)….because we see things different (not better) than you do..there’s a difference Narad seems to be one of “them” claiming ” You have advanced nothing whatever to suggest that you could even survive without “them.” … my not knowing how to produce my own light bulb? means what exactly? in this? so therefore I shouldn’t have freedom? to choose what food, water, medicine I take…is that it? Narad, just curious, what country are you from? maybe you don’t know what’s going on here, or the difference..that may or may not help..as some in America are actually that far gone anyway…judging by the results of the last election.
Yes..BPAs in baby bottles…that’s a ‘start’…like pushing a 2 ton truck one inch when you have to push it a 1000 miles.
it’s a start
“Do you mean what the OSHA and the EPA are already doing? Or do they not count because they are federal agencies?”
Or what OSHA and the EPA are underfunded to do, because folks like RusticHealthy believe that less government regulation is always double plus good.
How one can be concerned with the amount of pollutants in the environment AND be so adamently opposed to government intervention is a mystery to me. RusticHealthy worries about the mercury exposure from light bulbs. I worry about the mercury exposure from fish, which as a woman, I must limit eating. Does she have any idea what mercury levels would be in fish without government regulations?
And as to an incandescent light ban, another myth that RusticHealthy has bought into.
http://www.frumforum.com/there-is-no-light-bulb-ban/
And the regulations that demands ALL lights (and appliances) be more energy efficient is meant to reduce our overall use of electricity, which will reduce our use of coal power, which will reduce coal emissions and help to reduce mercury and other pollutants in our environment.
Maybe we need a little more Thomas Jefferson here…
Most bad government has grown out of too much government.
Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.
The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.
A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.
Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?
A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.
The right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others.
An elective despotism was not the government we fought for.
History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.
The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.
None of which suggests you have a basic human right to customized municipal water delivered to your kitchen.
mouse..I believe that’s what you all want..your choice of customized dental treatment in everyone’s water ..and to me..this applies:
which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement (i.e. healthcare and dental treatment).
“.this has all to do with regulating chemical industries and their influence and power with government “parasites” lol (for myself anyway), unfortunately, some take it too far also. There could/should easily be a very sane balance actually.”
Still not answering the question as asked, but you make a very blatantly contradictory point. you say government bad, government evil, government is corrupt and wants to control every aspect of our life, but then at the say time you want private industry to be “regulated”. Who does the regulating? The government. You can’t have it both ways.
The Dave..it’s actually one of the government’s jobs ..(a wise government anyway)..”A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another” as Also in pouring toxic waste and poison into our food, water, air that is dangerous and injurious to Everyone. That’s the job they should have done all along..ensuring no dangerous medicines, foods, and chemicals in water, that are unleashed by chemical corporations, turning the other way rather. You can have it ‘both ways’ when what they’re doing is what they’re supposed to be doing…and yet not micromanaging each of our lives with healthcare now (a huge takeover of our lives).
And, just to add, I am totally for solar and clean energy.. not having government in any way take anyone else’s money to pay for their supporters and their companies (some which have gone bankrupt anyway!?..hmmm). I have solar panels myself..for emergency in particular..it’s great! Just keep gov and tax dollars out of it and watch how it goes…everyone wants affordable clean energy, just not how it’s being done now, and nothing is affordable actually..especially healthcare because of how gov is handling anything. All those huge corporations could and should be investing their own dollars in clean energy…they’d be amazed at all the things they could come up with, and what the public would be more than happy to buy.
”A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another”. And to do that they need to, have have, listened to the best scientific evidence available to them, not the ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed (notice “ill”-informed, not “un”-informed, you think you are informed, but your information is incorrect). Science says the risk-benefit ratio of fluoridated water is tipped in favor of fluoridation. ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed says that it is dangerous. Which side should a “wise and frugal government” side with? And btw, “restrain men from injuring one another” doesn’t only apply to physical injuries. Monetary injuries apply as well, so perhaps a “wise and frugal government” should take a larger role in regulating/removing costly, ineffective devices and pills from the market to prevent Big AltMed/Supp/Herba from injuring the pocket books of the average citizen/consumer. But heaven forbid it do that, because that would be taking away peoples freedom. So which is it: the freedom to scam your fellow man, or the evil government restraining scammers from monetarily injuring their fellow man?
And to do that they need to, have have, listened to the best scientific evidence available to them, (only according to your opinion)…
not the ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed (notice “ill”-informed, not “un”-informed, you think you are informed, but your information is incorrect) (That’s your opinion, I believe quite the opposite).
Science says the risk-benefit ratio of fluoridated water is tipped in favor of fluoridation. (Your science says that…not mine)
ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed says that it is dangerous. (Freedom of the people to decide what they determine is dangerous or not…not what your science and opinion says..cut the b.s. about ‘fearmongering”..if there is anything to fear is people like you demanding what we all should fear or trust) You’re what everyone should fear, those who actually do believe they can/do think for everyone else.
My science says turning teeth brown means it’s going through the system and effecting everything else. Your science says you don’t care. Your science tips in the favor of chemical companies needing to dispose their chemicals somewhere and have the taxpayer pay for it.
And btw, “restrain men from injuring one another” doesn’t only apply to physical injuries.
Yes, it does.
Monetary injuries apply as well, (No..they’re covered in a Court of Law..certainly not by the Gov or the pols in D.C.)so perhaps a “wise and frugal government” should take a larger role in regulating/removing costly, ineffective devices and pills from the market to prevent Big AltMed/Supp/Herba from injuring the pocket books of the average citizen/consumer.
No, it should spend their time answering to us what they’re doing with other people’s money not what others choose to do with their own in their own Freedom.
Monetary injuries is the spending the fat cats spent in D.C. at their whim. According to you and half the country now, the “Gov” can decide anything it wants for any reason whatsoever, depending on how much money they get in their pockets to side with.
But heaven forbid it do that, because that would be taking away peoples freedom. That’s the BEST thing I got from your diatribe.
So which is it: the freedom to scam your fellow man, or the evil government restraining scammers from monetarily injuring their fellow man?
Freedom to Not be scammed by the D.C. fat cats, and to be left alone. Scamming is left for a Court of Law..not by you or any of you ignorant idiots to determine for anyone else. That’s what we have Courts for.
(The hugest scam is 16 Trillion dollars of croney spending in 4 years, I see you don’t care about that).
In a Free country that is, that have MILLIONS of people with different views the Gov has No Right to determine anything of anyone’s healthcare.
The Gov should be the last to monitor what people choose to spend their own money on for themselves and should in fact start answering to us what they’ve done with Our money not the other way around ..not what others choose to do in their own Freedom. The hubris of conventionals knows no bounds apparently. You’re so far out there and full of it..I doubt you even know you’re not a mod republican..or you know you lied..or you just lie to yourself.
It’s Not the same. You can Choose to have whatever healthcare you want, as long as Your healthcare is not infringing on My healthcare and Rights…see? now you’re tyrannizing my freedom, threatening to take away my free will and choice. ..(like a 2400 page takeover) or causing toxins in my food, air and water out to poison Everyone actually is Infringing on Everyone’s rights. Why you would argue for it, actually demand it! makes me wonder what it has done already to your mind..or perhaps your pocketbook if you gain from it in someway actually, how much do you make in it or stand to lose? I wonder… I can understand the threat in that case, since it’s No business of yours what I or anyone choose to spend their $ on.
The Dave…apparently you haven’t a clue what Freedom is, even when it’s spelled out right before your eyes. I wonder now what you do have a clue of. None of your arguments make sense, are actually damned dangerous in a Free country that is.
A ferociously anti-government republican who is also incredibly paranoid about toxins in the food, water and air. That’s HILARIOUS. So, in this ideal world of little to no government, who is protecting us from collective action problems like pollution? Should the industry police itself? That’s a great idea, industry never takes short cuts, pollutes ground water or dumps waste.
Moron.
No..WLU..the industry should be policed by the Gov, should I repeat it again? That’s what needs “policing”. Not what people choose to spend their money on, or what healthcare/dental treatment the Gov or YOU say we all should get. What is your position in U.N. WLU…just wondering.
Let’s just say that I’m a 15-minute stroll from a semipermanent Secret Service encampment.
Rusty, photovoltaic technology as we know it is a direct result of a government-implemented monopoly.
This should be good.
Spurious.
Letter to Mazzei of 1796 April 24, misquoted and out of context: “In place of that noble love of liberty and republican government which carried us triumphantly thro’ the war, an Anglican, monarchical and aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over us the substance as they have already done the forms of the British government. The main body of our citizens however remain true to their republican principles, the whole landed interest is with them [hand-interlined to "is republican"], and so is a great mass of talents. Against us are the Executive, the Judiciary, two out of three branches of the legislature, all the officers of the government, all who want to be officers, all timid men who prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty.”
Really spurious.
I’ll finish this in a bit, but I think it’s obvious where it’s going.
Slightly misquoted, but close enough. First inaugural address. I doubt that Rusty has read the next paragraph: “[I]t is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear … the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor…; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics….”
Same inaugural address, out of order. Still inexplicable, as it’s part of a defense of federalism and republicanism over monarchy, and Rusty has already established terminal assurt over the former two.
Same thing, with a sloppily suggestive paraphrasing. This is the version proffered by the “Natural Law Party,” in case anybody is wondering precisely where Rusty’s script is sourced. The actual quote is from A Summary View of the Rights of British America, which has bugger all to do with any of Rusty’s complaints. One might also note that “chief Magistrate” is not exactly a perjorative.
Um, OK. “Opinion on the Constitutionality of the Residence Bill.” Bizarrely out of context: “A consequence of this is, that the houses may by a joint resolution remove themselves from place to place; because it is a part of their right of self-government: but that as the right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others, the two houses cannot, by a joint resolution of their majorities only, remove the executive, and judiciary from place to place.”
Wrapping up this exercise in how not to remedy a hangover,
Notes on the State of Virginia. An argument for checks and balances. Rusty is, of course, dissatisfied with this very system.
Letter to Norvell, 1807 June 14. Of no discernible relevance to anything on its face, but a useful reminder that history certainly informs us about how Rusty’s plan for the universe works out in practice. “To your request of my opinion of the manner in which a newspaper should be conducted so as to be most useful, I should answer, ‘by restraining it to true facts and sound principles only.’” Oops.
Letter to Carrington, 1788 May 27. “The 1st. amendment proposed by Massachusets will in some degree answer this end, but not so well. It will do too much in some instances and too little in others. It will cripple the federal government in some cases where it ought to be free, and not restrain it in some others where restraint would be right.” I’m afraid that Jefferson’s tentative optimism regarding Little Rhody (“What do you do about a problem like Maria?”) probably wouldn’t extend to Little Rhusty.
to Quill: One variety of strawberries has been developed with a gene from the Arctic Flounder to produce berries that are resistant to cold; freezing weather can destroy a strawberry crop, and this could prevent that. (http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/05/health/personal-health-gene-altered-foods-a-case-against-panic.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm)
I’ve been reading rustichealthy’s posts and wondering where she goes off the rails, as this thread has done (Wasn’t it about water filters?) She talks about her science and “your” science as if there were two different kinds. If only we could get through to her that the truth is external to our belief systems, which often lead us astray, and science is the best method we have to find it… but that appears to be a forlorn hope. Especially now that her defensive fortress is firmly established. What we need are standards of discourse, preferably eliminating use of logical fallacies and pretending they are reasons for belief. I don’t hold out any hope for her realizing this and subjecting her beliefs to rational inquiry, or even agreeing on what constitutes rational inquiry. I find myself wishing she would take a course in logic and realize that all the rants in the world don’t amount to one iota of evidence.
If personal anecdotes amount to evidence, and whatever you took just before you felt better constitutes a cure, then it is just as easy to say that Vitamin C causes colds, arthritis and asthma. It’s just as likely that something that makes you feel better could cause me extreme harm, and if so, she could be hurting as many people as she “helps” on her website. It gives me no comfort to say that unless she dies suddenly, eventually the futility of her methods could be revealed in all their horror. Of course, the real die-hards will say that without their supplements, it would’ve been even worse, and thus armed with their logical fallacy of shifting the goalposts, will remain forever impervious to rationality, logic, and facts. Even more sad, she could inflict this on her children, should they develop a medically-curable condition, but she refuses to allow it. If she’s unlucky enough, they could die and prosecution for child abuse could result. It’s unlikely, though, and she may be able to retain her delusions for a lifetime.
Reading her posts has been interesting, but overall it makes me very sad that there are people out there who cannot change their minds, and are unable to learn anything outside their own self-constructed paradigm. The level of hatred and paranoia in those posts are seriously destructive of social well-being. I can only hope that she conducts her life away from this website in a more collegial manner, especially to those with different beliefs. Overall, I really feel sorry for her, and for the corner she’s painted herself into, and I am sorry as well for the unpleasant level of discourse which really detracts from the overall high standards upheld here.
Thank you, Narad, for the history lesson, and for looking up all those references.
I think it still is, but the entire edifice apparently “has” to be reconstructed from scratch, and it will bounce off of Rusty’s fivehead anyway, and so on and so forth.
cloudskimmer… She talks about her science and “your” science as if there were two different kinds.
There are all kinds of science studies, the problem is conventionals have accepted Only Theirs and in Their Opinion what Everyone should Heed to, and now want to Force Their Substances (i.e. Fluoride) on Everyone too…I read a dentist is against fluoride treatment in water ..is he and anyone else who disagrees with you ignorant, closed, unscientific? or do they have other information you don’t like, and you want to silence actually. You can accept whatever ‘science’ you wish (and stop thinking it’s the only kind)…just don’t Force your substances on anyone from it. I’m not sure how difficult that can be to understand. I’m not Forcing Vit. C on you ..i.e. putting it in your food, water..see? the difference? I can only afford buying it for myself for that matter…just don’t try to stop me or anyone else in your stupid closed idiocy, (or hinder my Freedom of Speech…that’s another good thing about America..though I can see that in grave danger..according to your post too) and, once again, turning teeth Brown does mean it goes throughout the body and affect everything else..as it’s going through the Blood
http://www.consumerhealth.org/articles/display.cfm?ID=19990303222823
see,you have Your science, and I have mine.
“Freedom of Speech is dangerous only to those who wish to silence it.”
Did someone say that already? if not…you can put that down as one of mine 
“She talks about her science and “your” science as if there were two different kinds.”
There is science and there are old wives tales. They are different. She just calls the latter her science.
Your ignorance is blindingly painful to read. We have never said we are trying to take away anyone’s freedom of speech. We have simply requested that you stop ranting and raving in this forum concerning things you know nothing about. We have attempted, time and time again, to show you the error of your thought processes, and yet you are either unwilling, or unable to understand and learn what we are saying. Instead, you dodge direct questions, change the subject, make wild allegations against all of us, etc.
Imagine what would happen if one of the atheists in this conversation were to go to a Catholic blog/forum and start making rambling, semi-incoherent, wildly inaccurate statements about the Catholic Church (its organization, its doctrine, etc.) Now imagine that atheist responded and continued on as incessantly as you have on this thread. Do you really think the other commenters would put up with it for very long, or would they (like we have to you) request that he either listen to what they are saying and understand where he has incorrect information, or stop commenting and leave the discussion. Would that also be trying to take away someone’s freedom of speech?
(perhaps for clarification, lets specify that the crux of the hypothetical atheist’s argument is that he thinks that the Pope sacrifices babies, or some other nonsense, and the believers on the comment thread repeatedly try to explain that the Pope, does not, in fact, sacrifice babies, but the hypothetical atheist still clings to his unfounded belief. In that situation, should the Catholics continue to put up with his nonsense, or should they “take away his freedom of speech” and request that he stops commenting and leave. Notice how in neither your case nor the hypothetical atheist’s case have either been blocked and banned from the forum, the members simply ask that they stop talking about things they nothing about).
“you have your science, and I have mine”, Rusty says.
That sounds like my mother sending me an e-mail including the line “Logic doesn’t matter.”
The Dave..I understood very well, and was addressing cloudskimmer in his/her post, and what he/she was getting at.
Not you regarding ‘freedom of speech’, but what freedom is, period.
And, I gave a link reference to http://www.consumerhealth.org/articles/display.cfm?ID=19990303222823
Dr. Yiamouyiannis who received his Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Rhode Island and served his post-doctoral fellowship at the Western Reserve University School of Medicine. He then became editor at Chemical Abstracts Service, the world’s largest chemical information center, where he first became aware of the health damaging effects of fluoride. He is the former science director of the National Health Federation; he is the executive director of Health Action and president of the Safe Water Foundation. He is a world-leading authority on the biological effects of fluoride and is responsible for ending the use of fluoride in many areas of the United States and abroad.
and what his findings were on Fluoride. If you don’t think he’s qualified then that’s your opinion, not mine.
Copied from Amalthea because I just skip over RH’s screeds:
“you have your science, and I have mine”, Rusty says.
It sounds like stuff I used to say when I was six to eight years old. Fortunately I have actually learned much more since then.
John Yiamouyiannis
“He is a world-leading authority on the biological effects of fluoride and is responsible for ending the use of fluoride in many areas of the United States and abroad.”
He’s been dead for the past 12 years. Used alternative treatments for colorectal cancer.
((Though “public health officials” regarded him as a terrorist))…well wow that’s interesting, ..does it mean, anyone who disagrees with the ‘state’s ideas are, and what they tell us is “health” and “science”, is a ‘terrorist’? or just one who speaks their ideas..contrary to the ‘state’s teaching/idea of what health and science is?
and does that mean that the ‘state’, whoever’s in control that is, can now declare anyone a ‘terrorist’ who is against their idea, teaching, of what they want the public to know and believe. I would have thought that died out after WWII, in the free world anyway. interesting WLU coming from you particularly.
You fail to understand the distinction between freedom and liberty. Worse, you don’t even seem to have bothered to try to understand why it exists in the first place.
I should say “You or the State”, especially the State
Rusty:
If you did in fact understand me well, I would be interested in hearing your opinion of the hypothetical situation I presented as an example. What should the Catholics’ response be to my hypothetical atheist? Or do you refuse to look introspectively and challenge your preconceived notions and biases? How would they have reacted differently than we have?
Perhaps your time would be better spent marching up and down in front of the Post Office wearing a sandwich board in protest, if this is the level of your ideation.
Dave, I understand the catholics response would be “what are you doing here if you don’t like our beliefs”? And, I wouldn’t even be here if it were simply that…you have your beliefs, and I have mine. (You have your science, and I have mine) The difference here is…you ARE forcing your beliefs (science) on us all by putting fluoride in water. and, I’m addressing it, as one who is ‘disgusted’ at anyone being forced upon something unawares and unwanted. No one is forcing the atheist to be a catholic, or the catholics to be athiest, however, fluoride IS being forced on those unawares, and unwanted. I am not here (like the atheist) telling you you should believe what I believe..I am here to tell you to stop forcing on us all what you believe (regarding fluorides in water).
The difference is, science is not a belief. Science is a method of utilizing experimentation and mathematical techniques to gather information.
You are the one in this debate utilizing a belief system. You believe fluoride is unsafe, yet you fail to show any solid reasoning to back up that claim. When commenters here explain to you why your reasoning is unsound, you just ignore them and keep hopping to the next argument.
You can’t say that Dave has his science and you have yours. There’s things that have been shown utilizing the scientific method, and things that haven’t.
Honestly, I think people would at least respect you around here if you were humble enough to just say “Yes, I know the overwhelming body of collected knowledge in the past years has shown fluoride to be perfectly safe and beneficial. Yes, I understand I have no evidence to support my claim that it is somehow bad, however I still don’t like it.”
At least then you would be admitting you’re just following a personal belief system instead of trying to make up claims about fluoride that just aren’t true.
@rustichealthy:
This claim is so ridiculous I am at loss for words. You have beliefs. We don’t. Well, we do, but they’re not related to science. And we’re not forcing anyone to accept science. The vast majority of commenters here, with the exception of cranks like you, see the value of science in and as itself. Nor are we putting fluoride in anyone’s water (unless someone here has any sway in public policy).
So yes, RH, “what are you doing here if you don’t like science as it is done and should be done”?
and..one last thing..cloudskimmer: ((but overall it makes me very sad that there are people out there who cannot change their minds, and are unable to learn anything outside their own self-constructed paradigm))
o, please..”don’t weep for me”…weep for yourself
The level of hatred and paranoia in those posts are seriously destructive of social well-being. (what on earth are you talking about ‘social well-being?..I Don’t Want Fluoride Forced on me in My Water..does that hurt your *feelings*?
((I can only hope that she conducts her life away from this website in a more collegial manner, especially to those with different beliefs))??. (see my post to Dave) and know the difference between ‘belief’ and respect of it..and being tyrannized actually by Your Belief that we all should have fluoride in water because you say so.
(( Overall, I really feel sorry for her, and for the corner she’s painted herself into, and I am sorry as well for the unpleasant level of discourse which really detracts from the overall high standards upheld here))….
like when one wished my ovaries were cut out of me?, or I should be turned into compost, or without end called a ‘moron’, as WLU just did? or “greedy”, because I don’t want to fill someone else’s bank account and pay for their healthcare? *insensitive* to a rich girls sex life…etc etc etc? lol you haven’t been paying attention apparently..anyway..ending this (I think) good nite.
and, Chris Repetsky..
What have the Romans ever done for us?
slaves, gladiators and feeding lions
Rusty announces that “I am here to tell you to stop forcing on us all what you believe” but then says “I do know you all need to learn that..sooner rather than later.”
Aha! Tyranny! You’re forcing your undaunted fallacious opinions on us no matter what we choose to think or believe. You claim to know what everyone else needs to know, which is the self-made wisdom of your own opinions.
Naturalistic tyrant!
Country commissar!
Baking soda bully!
Vitamin-D-ictator!
Organic oppressor!
And other such accusations as can be dredged from a brandy-deficient brain.
Rusty: “I understand the catholics response would be “what are you doing here if you don’t like our beliefs”?”
FL: “So yes, RH, “what are you doing here if you don’t like science as it is done and should be done”?”
Check and Mate!
WLU,
My point exactly!
Other than crucifixition……
Moebius, my sincere apologies! I knew I had read it recently, I knew I had read it on this board but I didn’t know I’d read it on this post!
It does speak to the tendentious repetition, but what do you expect when all you’re reading is the sound of empty thoughts echoing in an empty chamber.
Bearfoot Doctor [sic] springs to mind, but she probably wouldn’t get it.
Or if she did would consider it a title of great honor as it brings one in accord with the dirt in natural contrast to all those “conventionals” who insist on wearing shoes especially while going to the library.
Tyranny: noun, plural tyr·an·nies. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.
The inclusion of fluoride is not arbitrary, as we have solid scientific evidence that it is a beneficial move in terms of public health. If it was a random chemical we were dumping into water without testing, or one that had severe side effects or a terrible cost/benefit ratio, then your point would stand. But in this case, it does not.
The other commenters here can correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the decision to fluoridate a water supply usually an issue that one’s community can vote on? If so, that further strengthens my point. You might not agree with the popular vote, but it stands. And in this case, stands with the backing of solid scientific reasoning.
Tyranny: noun, plural tyr·an·nies. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.
The inclusion of fluoride is not arbitrary, as we have solid scientific evidence that it is a beneficial move in terms of public health. If it was a random chemical we were dumping into water without testing, or one that had severe side effects or a terrible cost/benefit ratio, then your point would stand. But in this case, it does not.
The other commenters here can correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the decision to fluoridate a water supply usually an issue that one’s community can vote on? If so, that further strengthens my point, seeing as how that “authority” is not unrestrained. You might not agree with the popular vote, but it stands. And in this case, stands with the backing of solid scientific reasoning.
Well, yes, but it’s not always direct. In Paudano v. City of New York, one of the prongs came down to the ability of the city to grant plenary power to the Board of Health, so one would have to start at the top.
^ Eesh, “Paduano.”
Thanks for the link! Learned something today.