An inconvenient truth...

[ElChemist]

For some forum members anyways...

The largest study ever has been conducted investigating water fluoridation. Guess what? Science was right. Again. Conspiracy theorists of the world will no doubt jump on this one and claim it was controlled by the Illuminati or something now that science has proved them wrong...

http://www.iflscience.com/health-an...ey-yet-finds-fluoridation-safe-and-effective/

Enjoy being woke.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Tau]

Conspiracy theorists of the world will no doubt jump on this one and claim it was controlled by the Illuminati

 

[MarkBowie]

That is a relief. I can go back to not thinking about it now.

 

[Personal91]

For some forum members anyways...

The largest study ever has been conducted investigating water fluoridation. Guess what? Science was right. Again. Conspiracy theorists of the world will no doubt jump on this one and claim it was controlled by the Illuminati or something now that science has proved them wrong...

http://www.iflscience.com/health-an...ey-yet-finds-fluoridation-safe-and-effective/

Enjoy being woke.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

im not even going to bite, because it was a survey - not a medical finding:nono:

 

[Covrich]

Is this just baiting for a repeat fight with the same users?

I am all for healthy debate but these are seldom healthy of late and end up being a race to the bottom as getting personal creeps in..

 

[ElChemist]

im not even going to bite, because it was a survey - not a medical finding:nono:

*facepalm*

It's not medical, it's scientific and a scientific survey is a little different to a woman standing in your local shopping arcade with a clipboard...

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[ElChemist]

Is this just baiting for a repeat fight with the same users?

I am all for healthy debate but these are seldom healthy of late and end up being a race to the bottom as getting personal creeps in..

So someone else is allowed to post absolute moronicy and I can't refute it with science? Thanks, just shows who pulls the strings around here...

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Covrich]

So someone else is allowed to post absolute moronicy and I can't refute it with science? Thanks, just shows who pulls the strings around here...

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

No I am saying be the bigger person and don't open NEW threads weeks later.

Nobody is pulling my strings I posted that of my own free will, You are baiting the argument long after it has gone, if you think he is posting stuff and you cannot seem to debate without it turning sour so I suggest you leave it.. but you want to re-engage.

Do you guys even brew beer/wine cider? or just fights?

 

[Hoppyland]

*facepalm*

It's not medical, it's scientific and a scientific survey is a little different to a woman standing in your local shopping arcade with a clipboard...

Perhaps you're correct - but not in this case, I think.

The original article has, in the title, "Largest Survey Yet......."
However, the article doesn't seem to allude to any survey at all. It say that a "report" has been issued, which substantiates a previous "study".
OK, the article says that the report represents "the most comprehensive survey of work on the subject"
I don't need to read the source material to know that it may have been a review or synthesis of previously published scientific results. Maybe even a re-analysis of previous data. But a "survey" ?? No.
It then goes on to say "the report was conducted in response to....". Well, again, what rubbish. You don't conduct a report. You might conduct an experiment, an analysis or re-analysis of data. You might even conduct a survey (although clearly not the case in this instance). You cannot conduct a report. You write it - maybe even compile or edit it.

Am I being too pedantic here? I don't think so. For any reporting of a scientific study to have any credibility in my eyes, the journalists need to, at the very least, have a basic grasp of what they're dealing with.

Would you give any credibility to a literary critic/historian if they said "
So, well Shakespeare kind of hated the Jews, like. I mean, look at Shylock. Obvious, innit?"

The source material may well be totally credible. For me, the article cited is very poor reportage indeed.

 

[ElChemist]

Am I being too pedantic here?

Yes. IFLS is a website which draws attention to scientific news articles etc.

I'd you haven't read the original report, all 81 pages of it you are definitely being a pedant.



Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[terrym]

That is a relief. I can go back to not thinking about it now.

Me too...

 

[Hoppyland]

I'd you haven't read the original report, all 81 pages of it you are definitely being a pedant.

Hmm.
Why do you think that? I was not criticising anything that might have been said in the original report.
What I was castigating was the way the original report was
portrayed in this article.
Logical or grammatical error after error. The "Chinese whispers" effect takes place here, surely.
If scientific studies are not presented in a sound, watertight way, then the public has every right to be suspicious of scientific findings. :-(

 

[GB2014]

Flourided water is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Flourided water is just the tip of the iceberg.

They have found fluoride in an iceberg :shock:

 

[dad_of_jon]

oh all right i'll bite..... :whistle:

Fluoride or not in water.

My tap water is **** and it doesn't have fluoride in it. If your in the west midlands it is added. there is a website somewhere that lets you know if your tap water is flurodated.

I object to un-necessary additions to our water and I have a mouthful of fillings! education about oral hygiene etc is the key for me, not adding flouride to cater for those too dumb to get it.

as for THE definitive source about fluoridation this is it.... :grin:

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr2bSL5VQgM[/ame]

 

[Covrich]

They have found fluoride in an iceberg :shock:

If it wasn't the Titanic would have happily smashed its way through

 

[Hoppyland]

as for THE definitive source about fluoridation this is it.... :grin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr2bSL5VQgM

Wow!! One of my top 5 ever films!
I'd remembered the bonkers USAF commander being obsessed with the purity of bodily fluids (well, you would....)
Completely forgotten that he blamed it on fluoride in water.
Is this where the bull**** first started??
I'd love to think so :lol::lol::lol:

 

[dad_of_jon]

Wow!! One of my top 5 ever films!
I'd remembered the bonkers USAF commander being obsessed with the purity of bodily fluids (well, you would....)
Completely forgotten that he blamed it on fluoride in water.
Is this where the bull**** first started??
I'd love to think so :lol::lol::lol:

I think he blamed a spell of impotence on drinking water that had fluoride in it rather than the scotch he used to knock down. :lol:

Tis a very good film :thumb:

 

[BeerCat]

Inconveniently my kids have perfect teeth and have never used fluoridated toothpaste or water.

 

[geetee]

Inconveniently my kids have perfect teeth and have never used fluoridated toothpaste or water.

Yes it is perfectly possible to manage your dental hygiene yourself without Government interference. It is also perfectly possible to avoid being obese by simply not eating vast amounts but some people want the easy way out and someone else to do all the work or pay for bariatric surgery.

Nanny state or personal responsibility, take your pick!