Dubstepforum.com

look at this one, quoting only icke and alex jones, where the fuck was my head?!
i'm sure your meta-mega-uber-analysis wouldn't even touch such publications. cherry picked too!

1. Maurer JY, Cheng MC, Boysen BG, Anderson RL. Two-year carcinogenicity study of sodium fluoride in rats. Journal, National Cancer Institute 82 111811261990.
2. Hoover RN, Devesa S, Cantor K, Fraurneni JF Jr. Time trends for bone and joint cancers and osteosarcomas in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program, National Cancer Institute. In: Review of Fluoride: Benefits and Risks, Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Fluoride of the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs. US Public Health Service, 1991 pp F 1 -177.
3. Mahoney MC, Nasca PC, Burnett WS, Mehus JM. Bone cancer incidence rates in New York State: Time trends and fluoridated drinking water. American Journal of Public Health 81475479 1990.
4. Cohn PD. A brief report on the association of drinking water fluoridation and the incidence of osteosarcoma among young males. New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton NJ November 8 1992.
5. Hildebolt CF, Elvin-Lewis H, Molnar S et al. Caries prevalences among geochemical regions of Missouri. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 78 79-92 1989.
6. Yiamouyiannis J A. Water fluoridation and tooth decay results from the 1986- 1987 national survey of US schoolchildren. Fluoride 23 55-67 1990
7. Brunelle JA, Carlos JP. Recent trends in dental caries in US children and the effect of water fluoridation. Journal of Dental research 69 (Special Issue) 7237281990.

Alien, I said earlier I was working so I couldn't go through each of your links, which I didn't I looked at a few but I'm checking a few more out now.......

http://www.fluoride-journal.com/98-31-2/312103.htm

After a bit of research you'll see that his journal was highly opinionated (obviously not what a journal should be), and actually contained no new findings; just perveying existing ones in a way he deemed necessary.

I've found a refute to his paper by Ernest Newbrun, D.M.D., Ph.D. and Herschel Horowitz, D.D.S., M.P.H. you can see it here if you want: http://www.dentalwatch.org/fl/newbrun.html

I also couldn't find any information about John Colquhoun, he doesn't seem to have a degree anyway. I could be wrong there, but couldn't seem to find anything. I'd have thought if he was a doctor it would have said so in his paper???

------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1262 ... dinalpos=1

This is about female mice?

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1250 ... t=Abstract

I won't lie to you, this goes way over my head. All I can relate to is this:

a significant decrease in the B(max) value for the high-affinity of epibatidine binding site were observed in PC12 cells subjected to high levels of fluoride concentration

Seeing as Fluoride is highly toxic, it's not really very suprising it has detramental effects in 'high levels of concentration'. I don't think water would have such a concentration.

--------------------------------------------------------

http://www.fluorideresearch.org/393/fil ... 73-178.pdf

This one seems to have given 4 groups of rats different levels of chemicals. A control group, a low iodine, a hi fluoride, and a high fluoride and low iodine.

The results clearly show that the high fluoride group weren't significantly different to the control group. The only majorly different group was the High Fluoride and Low Iodine group.

The difference they're detecting is cell apopotis. I'm not sure what that means, and have no idea how Iodine factors into what we're discussing.

And again it has no mention of being specific to the topic we're discussing. So we have no idea if the amounts of fluoride they're using are in any way comparible to our debate.

It seems to conclude that if water had a very high fluoride concentration and the water was very low in Iodine, then there could be detramental effects to cell apoptosis.

---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2428 ... t=Abstract

Again, this one is beyond my comprehension. Where did you find this? It does seem to be about guineau pigs though.

----------------------------------------------------------

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/pin ... -1997.html

This article was written by someone studying to be a doctor of philosophy, and it only appears to be exerpts. But anyhoooo......

Oh, and it's from 'flouridealert.org'

Have you read this one? It kind of ends as being inconclusive and needing further research, on humans particularly. She also clearly states she wants no association with anti-fluoridationists. (sorry if that's not a word )

-----------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1127 ... t=Abstract

This states just that the penial gland accumulates fluoride at a higher level than bone, and doesn't comment as to what it means. Do you know how to see the full paper, this seems to be like a summary?

------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/bon ... k1971.html

Now this looks like an example for a bad study. It's of one woman, and he even says her diet changed alot during the study. Which in my opinion (I respect that I'm not a doctor though), means the fluoride levels he was reading were innaccurate.

It seems like this is definitely someone that wanted this result. Oh, and look where it's from.

I noticed the author also avoided using his full name and any qualifications.

Also, the organization that 'H.A Cook' claims to be from (Scientific Committee for the Study of Fluoridation Hazards) doesn't appear to exist. And seems never to have existed.

Definitely something weird going on here. The name has never been registered on Companies House either.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Right, that's all your links If you don't mind I need to eat my dinner and watch Horizon now.

Big up!

DRTY, i'm sorry for your work, but this thread expired, jokes' over, kaput

missed that part with you being at work

have a good one and next time pay attention at least at the posts if you can't afford the links!

alien pimp wrote:DRTY, i'm sorry for your work, but this thread expired, jokes' over, kaput

What a surprise.

reading all 12 pages has entertained me for a while, bigup AP for what i can only assume is really effective trolling, and bigup magma and dfrnt for coming with the sensible answers!

ghst wrote:reading all 12 pages has entertained me for a while, bigup AP for what i can only assume is really effective trolling

/me shoots himself in the face

dubfan wrote: i think it's important to zoom out and see the bigger picture.

dubfan coming in with the wisdom...
he's like the new parson

64hz wrote:

dubfan wrote: i think it's important to zoom out and see the bigger picture.

dubfan coming in the wisdom...
he's like the new parson

sometimes i love the bots, bumping random threads with the most random phrases sounding like a delirious teenage emo

addicted to cola lol
stop drinking it - its filth, make you fat, fuck your teeth.