LaVergne says for healthy teeth, "Drink our water"

By: MrMagnesium on 1/26/13
How long is the inconvenient truth going to be kept from the public that the fluoride being dosed into the water supply is industrial grade radioactive extremely toxic chimney waste collected from phosphate fertilizer plants and aluminium smelting plants which would otherwise cost them $7000 a tonne to dispose of because it is too toxic to bury or dump into the ocean.
Fluoride contrary to popular belief is not a nutrient. Another question begs an answer. Why would Dentists push so hard to promote something which supposedly would reduce their income due to less drilling. The fact is it doesn't. Dentists make more money in fluoridated areas because teeth require less drilling but more capping because fluoride makes the teeth brittle. It is magnesium and calcium that harden teeth not fluoride. Animals with the hardest teeth have the highest Magnesium Phosphate content in the enamel. La Verne may well control the dose but who controls how much we drink. A miner, construction worker or athlete can drink 10 litres a day.
According to WHO that's toxic.

By: Beaker_the_Lab_Rat on 1/27/13
The CDC, ADA, AMA, local Health Departments, and all organizations that endorse fluoridating public water have a duty to present the toxicological studies that are required by the ANSI/NSF Standard 60 Health Effects.
No federal agency has taken responsibility for fluoridation. The EPA set up the NSF International, a private, non-profit company, and in 1988 replaced its own drinking water additives program with NSF/ANSI Standards 60 and 61, which set public health standards for all chemicals used to treat water and products coming into contact with drinking water. These federal, public and private endorsers of fluoridation are unwilling to demand the studies needed for compliance.
ACCOUNTABILITY is vital to maintaining public trust. We achieve accountability through ensuring each is dedicated to the core values of integrity and high credibility, and by adopting and enforcing policies, procedures and processes that serve our public effectively.
SAFETY is critical to a high standard of living. We protect the citizenry through quality zoning ordinances, regulatory oversight and enforcement of the law.
Very strong evidence to discontinue a well-accepted public health intervention is the ABSENCE of the toxicological studies REQUIRED by ANSI/NSF Standard 60. NSF, re-packagers and the suppliers/ manuf¬acturers are not able, or unwilling, to produce them. We need to see the original studies and all the data involved and not some review or opinion of them. Where are they? Endorsements, MSDS
sheets are not enough. Publish them or a source where everyone can see for themselves if their chemicals , medicine, or drugs are "safe and Effective".

By: mrmcavoy on 2/18/13
I think this was originally adolph hitlers idea and I don't think he was worried about disposal costs, way to be there for your people lavergne,,,