Reply With Quote
I don't need to read anything else. All I need is an answer to this question I have asked three times now.
aluminum manufacturing results in the same.
Please read. We can discuss afterward.
http://www.fluoride-history.de/chemicals.htm
While Deanīs and Peltonīs source of the fluoride is not mentioned in any of the history books or articles, Wisconsin dentists apparently knew well of the Aluminum Company of Americaīs interest in selling sodium fluoride, as a letter from dentist John G. Frisch to ALCOA reveals (9):
"Dear Sirs:
It is our understanding that the Aluminum Company of America is one of the largest producers of sodium fluoride. The demand for this material will soon reach astronomical proportions ... P.S.: The attached list of cities is only a starter and it will catch fire in other states very soon."
ALCOA, for its part, ran several advertisements in the Journal of the American Water Works Association (10) offering sodium fluoride for fluoridation:
"ALCOA sodium fluoride is particularly suitable for the fluoridation of water supplies. ... If your community is fluoridating its water supply -or is considering doing so- let us show you how ALCOA sodium fluoride can do the job for you" When the argument was raised that ALCOAīs sodium fluoride is a waste product of their aluminum production, the Journal of the American Dental Association was quick to publish a denial presented by ALCOAīs Chemical Sales Manager H. P. Bonebrake in 1955 (11):
I don't need to read anything else. All I need is an answer to this question I have asked three times now.
youve stated a theory about tools and rags. I dont recall stating that. You propose an unfeasible scenario, and then impose on my position. A little disingenuous in my book.
I dont feel a need to comment on your theory, other than to say its not mine.
I can admit to what I dont know and admit my own su ions. Can you?
Then what the is your theory about Toyota and fluoride?
Spell it out.
We're waiting.
Seriously, all you did was prove that Toyota would be a consumer of sodium fluoride if anything, not a producer.
Unless, of course, you are saying that Toyota collects all the used NaF off the tools and rags and sells it to SAWS to put in the water -- but you said that wasn't what you were saying.
So basically you don't know what you are talking about here and don't want to educate yourself further.
OK.
This is where you usually end up, and where you seem to be most comfortable: a position of su ious ignorance.
this is complete fail. the aluminum finishing requires a vat of the stuff. Do you think it is all consumed? Seriously.
So you are saying the rest is collected off the tools and vats and sold to SAWS to put in the water.
Make up your mind.
honestly, it would take financial records to prove any connection. You cant think that either one of us can prove/disprove causation from this set of cir stancial facts over an internet connection?
spwimm.
In case you didn't read my edit.This is where I leave you.
I'm sure you will still be in this position when I return.
wouldnt ANY NaF waste, from any source, especially from liquid source, have to be refined/processed to remove impurities and make it safe for consumption? What plant even does that? Again, it would take mre investigation, which would not likely prompt municipality cooperation.
You arent dealing with any of the smoking guns: expense, lack of effectiveness for the purpose stated, imfringement of personal liberties by mandating the dosage at a public level, chinese industry stds potentially putting our health at risk.
Way to avoid all the issues that otherwise sink skeptics who dont want to pursue the issue any further at risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist or worse.
you mofos are pushing me to write a book about this .
under a pen name
If I go get the records, I will want blowjobs.
seriously, if I do the requisite research to satisfy you skeptics, I'm sure it would be worth tens of thousands. How can you jackals expect so much for so little? I havent even gotten an offer for a blowjob yet.
what you are asking for is unnecessary to prove the point you are arguing with me. If I prove the point with other facts than you ask for that doesnt mean Ive changed the argument. try to follow when the road gets rocky here...
vs. if I change the argument, the new argument then becomes a straw man argument. We are still on the same argument of motive here.
you guys have done a fabulous job really. We'll save felatio for some other time
I'm not arguing anything.
You apparently are here trying to give a persuasive speech to the audience that flouride is bad.
Most of us here in the audience are saying your arguments for fluoride being bad are faulty for numerous reasons that have already been mentioned.
If someone else started a thread on how good fluoride is and was using your poor techniques, they would most likely be getting the same treatment.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
