The most popular "Things I won't work with" article is on this very substance - Sand won't save you this time, and with good reason, it's a good read. The compound itself is described as "much more difficult to handle than fluorine gas" and a stronger oxidizing agent than oxygen itself.

p.s. Oops, should've followed the link in your description first, since the article is linked there already.

>> ^marinara:

No question that the active part of the molecule is the F.
http://saturn.med.nyu.edu/files/mylab/wang/pdf/Zhou-LeuT-SSRIs-2009.pdf

"All SSRIs possess halogen atoms at specific positions, which are key determinants for the drugs’ specificity for SERT"
"The SSRI halogens all bind to exactly the same pocket within LeuT."
That said, Fluoride isn't a drug. Putting fluoride in the water to make people happy is just crazy.


Seriously, just because a chemical has some fluorine atoms, does NOT make it the same as sodium fluoride. Every study (a massive three of them) mentioned on that page is talking about sodium fluoride or aluminum fluoride. There has never been any legitimate evidence that Flouxetine has anything remotely similar to the behavior of either of those. Look for actual peer-reviewed research, not the crap you get from conspiracy sites.

Its a fluoride salt, which isn't particularly expensive but it IS corrosive. Research is ongoing in to materials that will handle it for a full 30+ year lifetime, it is certainly not a dealbreaker.
>> ^marinara:

they don't do it because you have to work w/ molten salt dissolved in fluorine.
not cheap.
Upvote for anything about aging nuclear power plants. Those plants are just going to break down before they hit 60 years old

they don't do it because you have to work w/ molten salt dissolved in fluorine.
not cheap.

Upvote for anything about aging nuclear power plants. Those plants are just going to break down before they hit 60 years old

Liquid Fluorine looks a bit like liquid Ur-ine...

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

I love it when you talk about bonding, fap fap fap.
>> ^Psychologic:
>> ^deathcow:
> If you take the recommended daily dose, it puts you at about 1.6mgs of fluoride a day.
Fluorine bound into Fluoxetine is a lot different than fluorine bound into fluoride. You can eat all the salt you want but eating elemental chlorine and elemental sodium would kill you and light you on fire. Groaningly bad that he would equate drinking fluoride to being the same as eating Fluoxetine.

Yea, people seem to think of chemistry like cooking, where a molecule is just a loose collection of ingredients.

When people talk about the health risks of "fluoride" they're usually talking about Sodium Fluoride, which is an ionic compound and splits into Na+ and F- when dissolved in water (the negatively charged fluorine ion is called "fluoride").
Excessive amounts of fluoride (well above what is generally in tap water) can lead to severe health problems. Perhaps lower amounts cause problems too, but the evidence is less clear.
Prozac contains three covalently bonded fluorine atoms which do not split off when being metabolized. Prozac has it's own health impacts, but not because it produces fluoride ions.



Sorry for leaving you in an excited state... I understand it raises the potential for sudden discharge. ;-)

I love it when you talk about bonding, fap fap fap.

>> ^Psychologic:

>> ^deathcow:
> If you take the recommended daily dose, it puts you at about 1.6mgs of fluoride a day.
Fluorine bound into Fluoxetine is a lot different than fluorine bound into fluoride. You can eat all the salt you want but eating elemental chlorine and elemental sodium would kill you and light you on fire. Groaningly bad that he would equate drinking fluoride to being the same as eating Fluoxetine.

Yea, people seem to think of chemistry like cooking, where a molecule is just a loose collection of ingredients.

When people talk about the health risks of "fluoride" they're usually talking about Sodium Fluoride, which is an ionic compound and splits into Na+ and F- when dissolved in water (the negatively charged fluorine ion is called "fluoride").
Excessive amounts of fluoride (well above what is generally in tap water) can lead to severe health problems. Perhaps lower amounts cause problems too, but the evidence is less clear.
Prozac contains three covalently bonded fluorine atoms which do not split off when being metabolized. Prozac has it's own health impacts, but not because it produces fluoride ions.

>> ^deathcow:

> If you take the recommended daily dose, it puts you at about 1.6mgs of fluoride a day.
Fluorine bound into Fluoxetine is a lot different than fluorine bound into fluoride. You can eat all the salt you want but eating elemental chlorine and elemental sodium would kill you and light you on fire. Groaningly bad that he would equate drinking fluoride to being the same as eating Fluoxetine.


Yea, people seem to think of chemistry like cooking, where a molecule is just a loose collection of ingredients.


When people talk about the health risks of "fluoride" they're usually talking about Sodium Fluoride, which is an ionic compound and splits into Na+ and F- when dissolved in water (the negatively charged fluorine ion is called "fluoride").

Excessive amounts of fluoride (well above what is generally in tap water) can lead to severe health problems. Perhaps lower amounts cause problems too, but the evidence is less clear.

Prozac contains three covalently bonded fluorine atoms which do not split off when being metabolized. Prozac has it's own health impacts, but not because it produces fluoride ions.

> If you take the recommended daily dose, it puts you at about 1.6mgs of fluoride a day.

Fluorine bound into Fluoxetine is a lot different than fluorine bound into fluoride. You can eat all the salt you want but eating elemental chlorine and elemental sodium would kill you and light you on fire. Groaningly bad that he would equate drinking fluoride to being the same as eating Fluoxetine.

Here's a study referenced off Wikipedia.
I know chlorine evaporates from water pretty quickly. Fluorine and chlorine are both halogens gases and both exist as salts in water so since studies say it doesn't build up I'm guessing something takes fluorine out of the equation like it does for chlorine. Pharmaceuticals on the other hand are complex compounds, not just salts so I think that's why they stick around. I took 2 chemistry classes in college so take that with a grain of salt ;-)

>> ^ButterflyKisses:
This article brings up a good point and raises a few more questions:
How is mass water fluoridation affecting the water table?
Not to mention that studies have shown that we now take in various levels of pharmaceuticals due to waste water recycling. Doesn't this also compound and ever more increase the amount of fluoride in the water as the water is continually recycled and fluoride is continually added? This same water is also used in products like soda pop, fruit juices, etc.
I wonder if any studies of this aspect have been done.
This is a very interesting topic in my opinion because it directly affects us all.

Animals and humans have similar evolutionary backgrounds. This outlines some of the elements in the structure of animals and humans.

Macro Elements
* Calcium (Ca)
* Phosphorous (Ph)
* Magnesium (Mg)
* Sodium (Na)
* Potassium (K)
* Chlorine (Cl)
* Sulfur (S)

Micro Elements
* Iron (Fe)
* Copper (Cu)
* Manganese (Mn)
* Iodine (I)
* Zinc (Zn)
* Selenium (Se)
* Fluorine (Fl)
* Cobolt (Co)
* Molybdenum (Mo)
* Chromium (Cr)

Other Elements (These elements are all toxic at high levels)
* Lead (Pb)
* Nickel (Ni)
* Silicon (Si)
* Vanadium (Vn)

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_role_of_metals_in_human_body

If, choggy, by fluoride you mean the reduced form of fluorin then large amounts would kill the crap out of you as it is one of the most reactive elements. For this reason there are so many different fluoride containing compounds in so many diverse forms that you cant really ask staight up if larges amounts of fluoride is bad for you. some fluoride compounds would do anything, some will keep grease from sticking to your frying pan and some will burn holes in your skin before you can say hydrofluoric acid.

so...is fluoride in the water bad or what? Fluorine is an element with chemical and physical properties that are explained qualitatively and quantitatively through a branch of science called "general chemistry". Though fluorine it's not studied much anymore, as we pretty much know it. One thing that isn't too certain (at least to me) is the affects it has on a human's body when ingested. I would assume that this could go under science as there is no "health" channel. Some of these video and talk posts I suppose could go under "lies" as well.

If, however, any of these posts can fall somewhere within the cycle of the scientific method, I contend that it should be appropriate to put in the "science" channel. Any reputable findings, reports, hypotheses or experiments should be allowed. Whether you agree with them or not, science isn't about what you agree with. That would fall into "beliefs". If you disagree based on something you know or you've seen, submit that. There, now you've just entered into a mostly-passive scientific cycle.

so qruel: there should be empirical evidence available in the submitted findings.

rembar: just because it doesn't agree with what you know, doesn't make it not an important topic for scientific discussion, but it should behoove you to submit your counter evidence.

Nobody has to name call or be offended/offensive. If that happens, you've jumped off the science wheel and into the cat box.

FLUORIDE
Quarterly Journal of the International Society for Fluoride Research

Fluoride, the official quarterly journal of the International Society for Fluoride Research (ISFR), is published for the advancement of research and dissemination of knowledge pertaining to agricultural, analytical, biochemical, biological, chemical, clinical, dental, ecological, environmental, industrial, medical, metabolic, pharmacological, synergistic, and toxicological aspects of inorganic and organic fluorides or fluorine compounds.

http://www.fluorideresearch.org/

Owned & published by the INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR FLUORIDE RESEARCH © 2007. All rights reserved.
Editor: Prof Emeritus Albert W Burgstahler. Lawrence, KS, USA. E-mail: awburg@ku.edu

Editor’s Note: When founded 40 years ago, the International Society for Fluoride Research
(ISFR) and its journal Fluoride were responding to an acute need for a more open climate for
conducting and publishing bio-medical and environmental fluoride-related research—a
climate that would be free from restrictions imposed by editorial policies of mainstream
journals bent on upholding a particular point of view about controversial issues such as the
subject of the guest editorial below. Unfortunately, this veil of forced conformity, although
beginning to be pierced, has not yet been entirely lifted, and in a number of countries it not
only continues to stifle and prevent funding of nonconforming research, but it also impedes
proper care and concern for public health and welfare that are the hallmarks of genuine and
honest science. Although the ISFR and Fluoride do not take an official position on the issue of
water fluoridation, it is in a spirit of openness to differing views that we are happy to publish
this guest editorial.


PROFESSIONALS MOBILIZE TO END WATER FLUORIDATION WORLDWIDE
http://www.fluorideresearch.org/403/files/FJ2007_v40_n3_p155-158.pdf

for those who have seen my previous posts on the subject of you fluoride, you might know that this is a subject of great interest to me. So for the new eyes that may view this video and the comments, I will be re-posting some information into this tread that bears repeating

If dose alone makes the poison, here is something to think about. Fluoride is found in almost everything. pesticides, fumigants, water, food, air.
http://www.archetype-productions.com/nfo/flouride/USDA_National_Fluoride_Database_of_Beverages_Foods_12-2005.pdf

also, the ADA recommends that babies do not get any fluoride.
http://www.archetype-productions.com/nfo/flouride/infant-fluoride-warning.pdf

Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 2005
Water Fluoridation:
a Review of Recent Research and Actions


Artificial fluoridation of drinking water by municipalities at 1 ppm of fluoride ion probably does not reduce tooth decay, except for a minor effect on deciduous teeth. Hexafluorosilicic acid and its sodium salt, which contain other toxic substances because they are not purified, certainly have no significant benefit.

Proponents of fluoridation have censored most media, ignored intelligent discussion of fluoridation, slandered most opponents of fluoridation, and overturned legal judgments against fluoridation in a manner that demonstrates their political power. Many published studies that had conclusions favoring fluoridation were later found unsupported by their raw data.

There is evidence that fluoridation increases the incidence of cancer, hip fractures, joint problems, and that by causing fluorosis it damages both teeth and bones. Other medical problems may also occur, including neurologic damage.

Antifluoridationists compromise their credibility by unwarranted assertions that many stable fluorine-containing materials are harmful.

The EPA should set the enforceable Maximum Contaminant Level at 0.4 ppm fluoride in drinking water.

The FDA should reverse its position on permitting sale of products containing fluoride that claim dental benefit without proof of safety or effectiveness.

Fluoridation of municipal water should cease.

Defluoridation of naturally fluoridated water down to 0.4 ppm of fluoride should
be mandated. Individuals should remove fluoride from their tap water if fluoridation cannot be stopped.

http://www.archetype-productions.com/nfo/flouride/Journal_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons_2005_Water_Fluoridation_review.pdf