Author Topic: Water Consumption  (Read 10076 times)

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #40 on: October 25, 2010, 10:21:30 PM »
No one is saying that fluoride is an inert substance that isn't harmful in mass quantities.  However, EVERYTHING in mass quantities can and will kill you, including things that we NEED on a daily basis including vitamins, minerals, salts and even water.

The fact that something can kill you does not make it an evil toxin.  It is only a toxin when you consume enough of it that your body can't handle - that's called the toxicity level.  When one consumes enough within within a certain period of time (substance comes in faster than it leaves) then problems are caused -- this is called toxicity.  Based on the data above, toxicity is extremely difficult to reach with drinking water concentrations that are even ridiculously high (5 ppm).  There seem to be negative effects at 1-4 ppm, but the data is inconclusive.  If you believe that 1-4 ppm is a problem, then get your water tested.  If you aren't concerned, I don't think you need to worry about it because it won't kill you (since a lethal dose is very high for fluoride).

I agree with you that it is a form of mass medication that is arguably unnecessary.  It may even be worthwhile to campaign to eliminate reduce fluoride in drinking water.  I can assure you, though, that this form of hysteria is not how you generate a movement to make such a change.


Offline Artisticflow87

  • Guenons
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #41 on: October 25, 2010, 10:41:22 PM »
No one is saying that fluoride is an inert substance that isn't harmful in mass quantities.  However, EVERYTHING in mass quantities can and will kill you, including things that we NEED on a daily basis including vitamins, minerals, salts and even water.

The fact that something can kill you does not make it an evil toxin.  It is only a toxin when you consume enough of it that your body can't handle - that's called the toxicity level.  When one consumes enough within within a certain period of time (substance comes in faster than it leaves) then problems are caused -- this is called toxicity.  Based on the data above, toxicity is extremely difficult to reach with drinking water concentrations that are even ridiculously high (5 ppm).  There seem to be negative effects at 1-4 ppm, but the data is inconclusive.  If you believe that 1-4 ppm is a problem, then get your water tested.  If you aren't concerned, I don't think you need to worry about it because it won't kill you (since a lethal dose is very high for fluoride).

I agree with you that it is a form of mass medication that is arguably unnecessary.  It may even be worthwhile to campaign to eliminate reduce fluoride in drinking water.  I can assure you, though, that this form of hysteria is not how you generate a movement to make such a change.



Hysteria lol call it what you want, it makes no difference. And stop twisting what I was saying, I never said its going to out right kill you, thats the 2nd time ive had to say that.Fluorides affects are cumulative, thats a fact. They build up, and after XX years of consuming the unknown amounts of fluoride you receive every day in your tap water, and food sources, you will have degenerative fluoride damage regardless if you dont personally notice it. There are numerous things Ive posted that is of concern by many credible sources that it does do to the body, it doesnt matter if my information is ignored as I am not here to generate a movement of this nature on a parkour forum, I didnt care to go this far into this conversation anyways. The movement is already out there, and those people know that fluoride is just one component being used in this nwo agenda thats taking place, which falls among many points I deliberately left out of this conversation. At least you are against forced medication and agree that is what this is. Bottom line here as of today, tap water is not ok to drink in my opinion, and I wouldnt even give it to my dog, but its ok that you disagree because no one cares what anyone else does anyways, and so far you have freedom of choice still so drink what you want and be happy with your decision. Have a good night, im done here...
« Last Edit: October 25, 2010, 10:46:46 PM by Artisticflow87 »

Offline Sparklefish

  • EAF!
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1323
  • Karma: +147/-16
    • View Profile
    • San Francisco Parkour
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #42 on: October 25, 2010, 11:05:06 PM »
He never said you were arguing that fluoride=death, he was pointing out that many substances are beneficial in small amounts and toxic at high doses.

You've gotten louder, and angrier, and called people names, but you still haven't produced a peer-reviewed source on the subject.  I find it ironic that initially you said that the question of water intake wasn't one of quantity, but quality, however when you were asked for a different quality of source, you responded first with quantity, then insults.

This isn't a place to debate the New World Order drugging everyone with fluoride.  You're certainly welcome to say things like "I don't believe tap water is safe because there isn't a lot of research about the long-term cumulative effects of daily micro-exposure to pollutants, contaminants and fluoridation."  However, please don't start calling people "smart guy" and rattling off page after page of vitriol because they disagree with your opinion, then insinuate that we're the closed minded ones.

We're not saying your wrong, we're saying you haven't proved you're right.

The point about long-term microexposures is valid, and persuasive to me, because that hasn't been studied on a large scale, nor has it been proven safe in a human population.  Fluoridation is almost certainly unnecessary and could be harmful, but please save the New World Order stuff for other websites.

Offline Artisticflow87

  • Guenons
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #43 on: October 26, 2010, 01:29:18 AM »
He never said you were arguing that fluoride=death, he was pointing out that many substances are beneficial in small amounts and toxic at high doses.

You've gotten louder, and angrier, and called people names, but you still haven't produced a peer-reviewed source on the subject.  I find it ironic that initially you said that the question of water intake wasn't one of quantity, but quality, however when you were asked for a different quality of source, you responded first with quantity, then insults.

This isn't a place to debate the New World Order drugging everyone with fluoride.  You're certainly welcome to say things like "I don't believe tap water is safe because there isn't a lot of research about the long-term cumulative effects of daily micro-exposure to pollutants, contaminants and fluoridation."  However, please don't start calling people "smart guy" and rattling off page after page of vitriol because they disagree with your opinion, then insinuate that we're the closed minded ones.

We're not saying your wrong, we're saying you haven't proved you're right.

The point about long-term microexposures is valid, and persuasive to me, because that hasn't been studied on a large scale, nor has it been proven safe in a human population.  Fluoridation is almost certainly unnecessary and could be harmful, but please save the New World Order stuff for other websites.

I misread what he said about fluoride/death excuse me.
Also i never said anything about the question of water intake being about quantity/quality.
And give me a break, saying smart guy hardly results as a insult, and about me not proving im right, i guess i am wrong to disagree with the comment that tap water is not bad, this entire convo was derived from that, and a debate between his point of view that you dont need to filter water, and my point of view that you do.

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #44 on: October 26, 2010, 06:48:40 AM »
My point of view is not that you don't need to filter tap water.

My point of view is that you never proved that one needs to filter tap water.

There are plenty of other movements to be riled up on that actually have proof behind them.  The food in the public education system being markedly unhealthy is well proven and there is little effort going to fix food in public education.  Since I am behind this movement, I support Jamie Oliver and donate money to Salad Bars in Schools.  It is very easy to get my support, and create an influential community, when there is proof.

Get some proof and I am sure that you will generate a movement.  Get your degree in biochemisty, then get an MD/PhD and dedicate your life to researching the effects of fluoride.  Then you can have some peer reviewed data that may be worthwhile enough for a movement.

The proof shall set you free.

Offline Patrick Witbrod

  • Administrator
  • Mangabey
  • *****
  • Posts: 424
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #45 on: October 26, 2010, 06:51:03 AM »
You're allowed to put forth your opinion that Tap water is bad. No one is arguing that. I find some of the evidence compelling on both sides. Also Saying "Smart guy" and "dense" may not be big insults but you did mean to insult our intelligence with sarcastic remarks. Also you convince that getting water tested might be a good idea. He just wanted independent peer reviewed sources that seems like a logical thing. No reason to get angry (not all "credible" scientific studies are done by the government.) But please calm down really. You have made some points. And If you have shown me at least one thing. Not a lot of research has been done. On the good or bad.    

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #46 on: October 26, 2010, 06:54:45 AM »
If you go back and re-read my posts, you will see I am actually trying to make a case for you, btw.  I just can't do it because the proof isnt out there.

Offline Artisticflow87

  • Guenons
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #47 on: October 26, 2010, 07:33:40 AM »
Quote from: Chris Salvato
My point of view is that you never proved that one needs to filter tap water.

In your world, I suppose not... As far as I see it the majority of what I posted should be enough reason for the average person who doesnt care to sit and read a bunch of documents to avoid it, especially due to fluoride,which has no benefits for you, its not a nutrient... I guess I dont need the kind of "proof" that you guys do to make my own decision on how I feel about something. Im not trying to change your mind anymore, your opinion is yours. Ill just repost these sites below, those websites have a lot of different fluoride related research, credible or not credible, whose to decide? I really dont care, you can look at all the information I have provided in this thread or not, im sorry if nothing i posted is up to your standards of compelling evidence against fluoride, but I still stand by everything I have said...

Quote-
"This whole thing is politics. You're not talking science at all."
- Dr. Robert Carton, President of EPA Headquarters Union, November 25, 2005

Quote-
"There are more than 40,000 studies published in medical and biochemical journals, many of which attest to the dangers of exposure to fluorides from all sources, including water fluoridation. The adverse effects are numerous - they include cancers, thyroid dysfunction, skin disorders, kidney and brain damage, and more." Jane Jones, National Pure Water Association

http://campaignfortruth.com/Eclub/010202/fluoridation.htm

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/index.html

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/kidney/

Fluoride more acutely toxic than lead?
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/accidents/f-lead.html
« Last Edit: October 26, 2010, 09:54:28 AM by Artisticflow87 »

Offline Chris [.5gibbon] Stevenson!

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Karma: +72/-36
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #48 on: October 27, 2010, 10:09:15 AM »
oh my god guys! i just found out there is protein in my milk... too much protein can cause your kidneys to fail. 
"Be like water making its way through cracks.  Do not be assertive,  but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it." - Bruce Lee

"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #49 on: October 27, 2010, 11:43:44 AM »
"This whole thing is politics. You're not talking science at all."
- Dr. Robert Carton, President of EPA Headquarters Union, November 25, 2005

Show me the science.  That is all I am asking.

"There are more than 40,000 studies published in medical and biochemical journals, many of which attest to the dangers of exposure to fluorides from all sources, including water fluoridation. The adverse effects are numerous - they include cancers, thyroid dysfunction, skin disorders, kidney and brain damage, and more." Jane Jones, National Pure Water Association

Show me at least one of the 40,000 studies that corroborates this quote.

Fluoride more acutely toxic than lead?
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/accidents/f-lead.html

Water is more acutely toxic than lead if you consume enough of it.
oh my god guys! i just found out there is protein in my milk... too much protein can cause your kidneys to fail. 

If you use more science-sounding jargon I am sure that you could create a cult following behind this if you want.

Offline Sparklefish

  • EAF!
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1323
  • Karma: +147/-16
    • View Profile
    • San Francisco Parkour
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #50 on: October 27, 2010, 01:51:49 PM »
If you use more science-sounding jargon I am sure that you could create a cult following behind this if you want.

That's exactly what one of the Kellogg brothers did!

Offline Leland

  • Patas
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Be stronger then you were yesterday.
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #51 on: October 27, 2010, 02:03:01 PM »
Isn't there already people saying milk is really bad?

Offline Patrick Witbrod

  • Administrator
  • Mangabey
  • *****
  • Posts: 424
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #52 on: October 27, 2010, 02:13:12 PM »
They also thought that the original gram crackers and Kellog's corn flakes would stop a bad male habit.....(If you know what I mean) because it would keep them occupied. True story. How does this relate because with pseudo science you can prove anything which is why I would just like proof from a university or scientific study or something similar. Until the research was done people were buying the whole grahm cracker thing.

Offline Artisticflow87

  • Guenons
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #53 on: October 28, 2010, 11:01:59 AM »
Show me the science.  That is all I am asking.

Show me at least one of the 40,000 studies that corroborates this quote.


When you keep saying show me proof, or show me the science, it really makes me think you either didnt spend time in the links I posted, or maybe your immediately assuming they all are 100% wrong in every claim made, and that those peoples claims are not based on any real evidence or science, and if thats what you think, I dont know what makes you think theres no science backing anything posted...  Also considering that the internet is literally loaded with dissenting information against fluoride from all over the world in any search engine you want to look in, I dont see why you guys feel this isnt a big deal to be happily drinking it every day, especially if your smart enough to know not to eat High fructose Corn syrup Chris.. But I guess it does come down to what you've already said, that your not too concerned, because If any of the many research points, articles, and videos, ive brought up did concern any of you, you wouldnt wait for me to provide for you and you'd look further into this yourself, and perhaps on your own you would've came across how EPA scientist stand together objecting against water fluoridation, which has zero benefits anyways, and on your own you'd research who, and why numerous people from different areas are against it... I also presented the question asking why is it being done, which no one chose to give an opinion on... But I dont care what your opinions are anymore, and in conclusion, I really wasnt trying to spend this much time on this topic. Regardless of whatever you want to believe about fluoride, I find it funny that I am being mocked against the disagreement that tap water needs to be filtered which to me is redundant enough. And even worse, you arent considering that I only pointed out 1 reason of why people should filter their tap water. We didnt even get into chlorine, heavy metals, led, or pharmaceuticals drugs in the tap etc, and as I said already, even if I was less than 50% right about all the claims made just against fluoride, its still enough reason to say tap water is bad for you, which goes against the original argument... So no disrespect to you, I wasnt trying to make this convo turn into this, but whatever you want to drink, that's your business, I wont lose any sleep over it. The original poster of this thread has already stated that he drinks filtered water anyways, so Ive said all Im going to say...
« Last Edit: October 28, 2010, 11:21:47 AM by Artisticflow87 »

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #54 on: October 28, 2010, 11:21:14 AM »
TL; DR

Maybe if you used line breaks I would have.

Either way, i Have LOOKED for the supposed 40,000 studies, even though I care so little about this topic and I found nothing that was conclusive (including papers published by the EPA).  People saying something is bad does NOT make it bad.

Offline Artisticflow87

  • Guenons
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #55 on: October 28, 2010, 11:35:09 AM »
TL; DR

Maybe if you used line breaks I would have.

Either way, i Have LOOKED for the supposed 40,000 studies, even though I care so little about this topic and I found nothing that was conclusive (including papers published by the EPA).  People saying something is bad does NOT make it bad.

Absolutely, it is true that people saying something is bad does not make it bad, but at this point in the conversation, i dont find it that relevant, other than another attempt to discredit... As far as conclusive, I disagree with what you consider conclusive. To be even simpler, conclusive for me is, I had water analyst done on my home proving to me the dangers of my tap water, thus got reverse osmosis filtration on my home water supply. I have been drinking this filtered water for the past couple years. When I drink tap water now I get a bad headache, this also goes for most of my friends who have been avoiding tap water for a long time as well... Enough evidence for me. In conclusion, I think people should filter their tap water and that its bad for you... You think that there is no reason to filter tap water and that its not bad for you. That is all there is to it, uh nice talking to you at least you continued to respond, and maybe you will get your water tested since you at least agreed with that much. Id be interested to hear the results if you came back here with them... 
« Last Edit: October 28, 2010, 11:43:00 AM by Artisticflow87 »

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #56 on: October 28, 2010, 11:42:50 AM »
it has nothing to do with "conclusive to me"....

the papers, written by the scientists, say "this data is inconclusive and more research needs to be done."

It seems like you are falling victim to the same sins as the people you are listening to - you are villainizing me because you can't prove your point.

You say you got your tap water tested?  For what?  a high Fluoride PPM count?  a high concentration of heavy metals?  For all I know, you could have misinterpreted those results...or you think a fluoride concentration of 1 PPM is dangerous...whereas the data only marginally agrees with you.

If you, by now, do not see the flaw in your logic and presentation, then I fear that nothing will get through to you.

Offline Artisticflow87

  • Guenons
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #57 on: October 28, 2010, 11:57:25 AM »

You say you got your tap water tested?  For what?  a high Fluoride PPM count?  a high concentration of heavy metals?  For all I know, you could have misinterpreted those results...or you think a fluoride concentration of 1 PPM is dangerous...whereas the data only marginally agrees with you.

If you, by now, do not see the flaw in your logic and presentation, then I fear that nothing will get through to you.

It is conclusive (from numerous various sources) that fluoride is bad for you, and has no benefits (especially not by ingestion), even in that sugarcoated article you posted. But no one here even knows the amount of that plus the many other known said bad things that they are drinking from their tap, that IS what is inconclusive about this. In that one article you linked talking about fluoriode & ppm (which lets assume that information is even right) how can anyone know what, or the amount of what, is actually coming out of their faucet? Do you? So that in itself voids your whole argument that tap water is not bad for you since you dont even know whats coming out of yours, and you certainly cant speak for everyone in this thread/planet. As far as my water results, which tested for various things in amounts that no one should want to consume, there is nothing I misinterpreted, nor did the water analyst specialist, who was not related to the company I bought the water filtration unit from. If I had the results from two years ago to post, I wouldve, even though that'd be irrelevant also since my house is not someone elses, so I didnt go into it. And as far as your last sentence that I quoted, for you to say that, guess ill say I feel that way for you. Theres no need for further discussion, you made your conclusion I made mines..

« Last Edit: October 28, 2010, 12:13:18 PM by Artisticflow87 »

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #58 on: October 28, 2010, 12:21:17 PM »
My article wasn't sugar coated... I don't see HOW it is sugar coated when it is a fact that has been experienced through experimental procedure.

You are a conspiracy theorist and now everything I see you post will be tainted with that fact.  It is unfortunate.  For example, I saw in another thread that you say that drinking soda is bad for you.  This is something with which I agree, but I shudder to think WHY you think soda is bad for you.  I assume it is just as fearful and conspiracy based as your reason why tap water is bad for you.  This worries me, since you and people like you are the loudest voices who are heard most often.

Excuse my diatribe, but it is discussions such as this that make me wholly worry about our future as a nation and a people.  I can only hope that our next generation is slightly less conspiracy driven and FOX news and CNN and all local news stations silently fizzle out because everyone is too intelligent to watch them.  That is a pipe dream, of course, because people love to be in fear as much as they love to have fun..

Offline Artisticflow87

  • Guenons
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Water Consumption
« Reply #59 on: October 28, 2010, 12:32:58 PM »
My article wasn't sugar coated... I don't see HOW it is sugar coated when it is a fact that has been experienced through experimental procedure.
Thats your opinion, just like me saying its sugarcoated is my opinion.. I say that because you dont know if those results are accurate or farbed anymore than I do.Anything can be b.s , you even said this yourself
"If you use more science-sounding jargon I am sure that you could create a cult following behind this if you want."
So is there some magic firewall that only makes that statement true for what I post? Either way, thats all irrelevant too because i didnt even try to say the article was wrong, I even said lets assume its right, so stop trying to invalidate anything I said there...


Quote
You are a conspiracy theorist and now everything I see you post will be tainted with that fact.  It is unfortunate.  For example, I saw in another thread that you say that drinking soda is bad for you.  This is something with which I agree, but I shudder to think WHY you think soda is bad for you.  I assume it is just as fearful and conspiracy based as your reason why tap water is bad for you.  This worries me, since you and people like you are the loudest voices who are heard most often.

Now your trying to insult me personally,and take the discrediting to another level saying people like you, but dont worry im not offended though. I really dont care what you think; At all... I said soda is bad for you because it is... Theres loads of evidence behind that, and even you said on your own not to eat high fructose corn syrup, which that and aspartame, is what all sodas just so happen to have in them... But wait HFCS is in most processed food also, So does that make you a conspiracy theorist too? lol And instead of wildly generalizing, you should understand that there is a difference of researching something that happens to be a conspiracy, and a conspiracy theorist, and I have nothing against it either way knowing that all of human history has been full of massive conspiracies. So even if someone did conspiracy research, that doesnt and shouldnt invalidate them of truth or degrade their image in comparison to a person who didnt research conspiracy,(actually itd make them more versed in whatever conspiracy subject they were researching) and it doesnt make them inferior just because someone saw fit to label them with that title. Sometimes theres a such thing as conspiracy fact...

Quote
Excuse my diatribe, but it is discussions such as this that make me wholly worry about our future as a nation and a people.  I can only hope that our next generation is slightly less conspiracy driven and FOX news and CNN and all local news stations silently fizzle out because everyone is too intelligent to watch them.  That is a pipe dream, of course, because people love to be in fear as much as they love to have fun..

I dont even watch tv, and I hate the news, but thats irrelevant, you are just rambling off the topic now because you dont even want to agree with the conclusion of this discussion which is what I said in my last two posts, which is you cannot claim that tap water is not bad for you, and speak for everyone when you have not even had your own water tested, that was the whole basis of this argument...
« Last Edit: October 28, 2010, 12:56:49 PM by Artisticflow87 »