for those reading this thread, please do not be mislead by rembars assertion that there is no scientific evidence of fluoride being harmful. I only have to prove there is scientists and scientific evidence that says fluoride is harmful. I don't personally have to prove it.

one would assume that if the EPA was to look at the subject they would be studying and comparing scientific studies. So here are Excerpts from: “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards” (National Research Council, 2006)

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE BRAIN:

“On the basis of information largely derived from histological, chemical, and molecular studies, it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body by direct and indirect means.” p187

“A few epidemiologic studies of Chinese populations have reported IQ deficits in children exposed to fluoride at 2.5 to 4 mg/L in drinking water. Although the studies lacked sufficient detail for the committee to fully assess their quality and relevance to U.S. populations, the consistency of the results appears significant enough to warrant additional research on the effects of fluoride on intelligence.” p6

“histopathological changes similar to those traditionally associated with Alzheimer’s disease in people have been seen in rats chronically exposed to AlF.” p178

“Fluorides also increase the production of free radicals in the brain through several different biological pathways. These changes have a bearing on the possibility that fluorides act to increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease.” p186

“More research is needed to clarify fluoride’s biochemical effects on the brain.” p186

“The possibility has been raised by the studies conducted in China that fluoride can lower intellectual abilities. Thus, studies of populations exposed to different concentrations of fluoride in drinking water should include measurements of reasoning ability, problem solving, IQ, and short- and long-term memory.” p187

“Studies of populations exposed to different concentrations of fluoride should be undertaken to evaluate neurochemical changes that may be associated with dementia. Consideration should be given to assessing effects from chronic exposure, effects that might be delayed or occur late-in-life, and individual susceptibility.” p187

“Additional animal studies designed to evaluate reasoning are needed.” p. 187

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE ENDOCRINE SYSTEM:

“In summary, evidence of several types indicates that fluoride affects normal endocrine function or response; the effects of the fluoride-induced changes vary in degree and kind in different individuals. Fluoride is therefore an endocrine disruptor in the broad sense of altering normal endocrine function or response, although probably not in the sense of mimicking a normal hormone. The mechanisms of action remain to be worked out and appear to include both direct and indirect mechanisms, for example, direct stimulation or inhibition of hormone secretion by interference with second messenger function, indirect stimulation or inhibition of hormone secretion by effects on things such as calcium balance, and inhibition of peripheral enzymes that are necessary for activation of the normal hormone.” p223

“Some of these [endocrine] effects are associated with fluoride intake that is achievable at fluoride concentrations in drinking water of 4 mg/L or less, especially for young children or for individuals with high water intake. Many of the effects could be considered subclinical effects, meaning that they are not adverse health effects. However, recent work on borderline hormonal imbalances and endocrine-disrupting chemicals indicated that adverse health effects, or increased risks for developing adverse effects, might be associated with seemingly mild imbalances or perturbations in hormone concentrations. Further research is needed to explore these possibilities.” p7

“Further effort is necessary to characterize the direct and indirect mechanisms of fluoride’s action on the endocrine system and the factors that determine the response, if any, in a given individual.” p223

“The effects of fluoride on various aspects of endocrine function should be examined further, particularly with respect to a possible role in the development of several diseases or mental states in the United States.” p224

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE THYROID:

“several lines of information indicate an effect of fluoride exposure on thyroid function.” p197

“it is difficult to predict exactly what effects on thyroid function are likely at what concentration of fluoride exposure and under what circumstances.” p197

“Fluoride exposure in humans is associated with elevated TSH concentrations, increased goiter prevalence, and altered T4 and T3 concentrations; similar effects on T4 and T3 are reported in experimental animals..” p218

“In humans, effects on thyroid function were associated with fluoride exposures of 0.05-0.13 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was adequate and 0.01-0.03 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was inadequate.” p218

“The recent decline in iodine intake in the United States (CDC 2002d; Larsen et al. 2002) could contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals.” p218

“Intake of nutrients such as calcium and iodine often is not reported in studies of fluoride effects. The effects of fluoride on thyroid function, for instance, might depend on whether iodine intake is low, adequate, or high, or whether dietary selenium is adequate.” p222

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE PINEAL GLAND:

“The single animal study of pineal function indicates that fluoride exposure results in altered melatonin production and altered timing of sexual maturity (Table 8-1). Whether fluoride affects pineal function in humans remains to be demonstrated. The two studies of menarcheal age in humans show the possibility of earlier menarche in some individuals exposed to fluoride, but no definitive statement can be made. Recent information on the role of the pineal organ in humans suggests that any agent that affects pineal function could affect human health in a variety of ways, including effects on sexual maturation, calcium metabolism, parathyroid function, postmenopausal osteoporosis, cancer, and psychiatric disease.” p221-22

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON INSULIN SECRETION/DIABETES:

“The conclusion from the available studies is that sufficient fluoride exposure appears to bring about increases in blood glucose or impaired glucose tolerance in some individuals and to increase the severity of some types of diabetes. In general, impaired glucose metabolism appears to be associated with serum or plasma fluoride concentrations of about 0.1 mg/L or greater in both animals and humans. In addition, diabetic individuals will often have higher than normal water intake, and consequently, will have higher than normal fluoride intake for a given concentration of fluoride in drinking water. An estimated 16-20 million people in the U.S. have diabetes mellitus; therefore, any role of fluoride exposure in the development of impaired glucose metabolism or diabetes is potentially significant.” p. 217

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE IMMUNE SYSTEM:

“Nevertheless, patients who live in either an artificially fluoridated community or a community where the drinking water naturally contains fluoride at 4 mg/L have all accumulated fluoride in their skeletal systems and potentially have very high fluoride concentrations in their bones. The bone marrow is where immune cells develop and that could affect humoral immunity and the production of antibodies to foreign chemicals.” p249

“There is no question that fluoride can affect the cells involved in providing immune responses. The question is what proportion, if any, of the population consuming drinking water containing fluoride at 4.0 mg/L on a regular basis will have their immune systems compromised? Not a single epidemiologic study has investigated whether fluoride in the drinking water at 4 mg/L is associated with changes in immune function. Nor has any study examined whether a person with an immunodeficiency disease can tolerate fluoride ingestion from drinking water.” p250

“bone concentrates fluoride and the blood-borne progenitors could be exposed to exceptionally high fluoride concentrations. Thus, more research needs to be carried out before one can state that drinking water containing fluoride at 4 mg/L has no effect on the immune system.” p250

“it is important to consider subpopulations that accumulate large concentrations of fluoride in their bones (e.g., renal patients). When bone turnover occurs, the potential exists for immune system cells and stem cells to be exposed to concentrations of fluoride in the interstitial fluids of bone that are higher than would be found in serum. From an immunologic standpoint, individuals who are immunocompromised (e.g., AIDS, transplant, and bone-marrow-replacement patients) could be at greater risk of the immunologic effects of fluoride.” p 258

“Within 250 ?m of a site of resorption, it is possible to encounter progenitor cells that give rise to bone, blood, and fat. Thus, one must assume that these cells would be exposed to high concentrations of fluoride. At this time, it is not possible to predict what effect this exposure would have on the functioning of skeletal elements, hematopoiesis, and adipose formation.” p115

“It is paramount that careful biochemical studies be conducted to determine what fluoride concentrations occur in the bone and surrounding interstitial fluids from exposure to fluoride in drinking water at up to 4 mg/L, because bone marrow is the source of the progenitors that produce the immune system cells.” p 259

“In addition, studies could be conducted to determine what percentage of immunocompromised subjects have adverse reactions when exposed to fluoride in the range of 1-4 mg/L in drinking water.” p259

FLUORIDE’S INTERACTIVE/SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS (w/ IODINE, ALUMINUM, ETC):

“Intake of nutrients such as calcium and iodine often is not reported in studies of fluoride effects. The effects of fluoride on thyroid function, for instance, might depend on whether iodine intake is low, adequate, or high, or whether dietary selenium is adequate.” p222

“Better characterization of exposure to fluoride is needed in epidemiology studies investigating potential effects. Important exposure aspects of such studies would include the following: collecting data on general dietary status and dietary factors that could influence exposure or effects, such as calcium, iodine, and aluminum intakes.” p72

“Available information now indicates a role for aluminum in the interaction of fluoride on the second messenger system; thus, differences in aluminum exposure might explain some of the differences in response to fluoride exposures among individuals and populations.” p222

“With the increasing prevalence of acid rain, metal ions such as aluminum become more soluble and enter our day-to-day environment; the opportunity for bioactive forms of AlF to exist has increased in the past 100 years. Human exposure to aluminofluorides can occur when a person ingests both a fluoride source (e.g., fluoride in drinking water) and an aluminum source; sources of human exposure to aluminum include drinking water, tea, food residues, infant formula, aluminum-containing antacids or medications, deodorants, cosmetics, and glassware.” p42

“Further research should include characterization of both the exposure conditions and the physiological conditions (for fluoride and for aluminum or beryllium) under which aluminofluoride and beryllofluoride complexes can be expected to occur in humans as well as the biological effects that could result.” p42

“Another possible explanation for increased blood lead concentrations which has not been examined is the effect of fluoride intake on calcium metabolism; a review by Goyer (1995) indicates that higher blood and tissue concentrations of lead occur when the diet is low in calcium. Increased fluoride exposure appears to increase the dietary requirement for calcium (see Chapter ; in addition, the substitution of tap-water based beverages (e.g., soft drinks or reconstituted juices) for dairy products would result in both increased fluoride intake and decreased calcium intake.” p43

“[G]iven the expected presence of fluoride ion (from any fluoridation source) and silica (native to the water) in any fluoridated tap water, it would be useful to examine what happens when that tap water is used to make acidic beverages or products (commercially or in homes), especially fruit juice from concentrate, tea, and soft drinks. Although neither Urbansky (2002) nor Morris (2004) discusses such beverages, both indicate that at pH < 5, SiF6 2- would be present, so it seems reasonable to expect that some SiF6 2- would be present in acidic beverages but not in the tap water used to prepare the beverages. Consumption rates of these beverages are high for many people, and therefore the possibility of biological effects of SiF62-, as opposed to free fluoride ion, should be examined.” p44
FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM:

“A few human studies suggested that high concentrations of fluoride exposure might be associated with alterations in reproductive hormones, effects on fertility, and developmental outcomes, but design limitations make those studies insufficient for risk evaluation.” p6

“the relationship between fertility and fluoride requires additional study.” p161

FLUORIDE & DOWNS SYNDROME:

“The possible association of cytogenetic effects with fluoride exposure suggests that Down’s syndrome is a biologically plausible outcome of exposure.” p170

“A reanalysis of data on Down’s syndrome and fluoride by Takahashi (1998) suggested a possible association in children born to young mothers. A case-control study of the incidence of Down’s syndrome in young women and fluoride exposure would be useful for addressing that issue. However, it may be particularly difficult to study the incidence of Down’s syndrome today given increased fetal genetic testing and concerns with confidentiality.” 172

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE GASTROINTESTINAL SYSTEM:

“The numerous fluoridation studies in the past failed to rigorously test for changes in GI symptoms and there are no studies on drinking water containing fluoride at 4 mg/L in which GI symptoms were carefully documented.” p230

“GI effects appear to have been rarely evaluated in the fluoride supplement studies that followed the early ones in the 1950s and 1960s.” p231

“The table suggests that fluoride at 4 mg/L in the drinking water results in approximately 1% of the population experiencing GI symptoms.” p231

“Whether fluoride activates G proteins in the gut epithelium at very low doses (e.g., from fluoridated water at 4.0 mg/L) and has significant effects on the gut cell chemistry must be examined in biochemical studies.” p236

“There are a few case reports of GI upset in subjects exposed to drinking water fluoridated at 1 mg/L. Those effects were observed in only a small number of cases, which suggest hypersensitivity. However, the available data are not robust enough to determine whether that is the case.” p. 250

“Studies are needed to evaluate gastric responses to fluoride from natural sources at concentrations up to 4 mg/L and from artificial sources.” p. 258

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE LIVER:

“It is possible that a lifetime ingestion of 5-10 mg/day from drinking water containing 4 mg/L might turn out to have long-term effects on the liver, and this should be investigated in future epidemiologic studies.” p248

“The effect of low doses of fluoride on kidney and liver enzyme functions in humans needs to be carefully documented in communities exposed to different concentrations of fluoride in drinking water.” p258

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE KIDNEY:

“Human kidneys... concentrate fluoride as much as 50-fold from plasma to urine. Portions of the renal system may therefore be at higher risk of fluoride toxicity than most soft tissues.” p236

“Early water fluoridation studies did not carefully assess changes in renal function.” p236

“future studies should be directed toward determining whether kidney stone formation is the most sensitive end point on which to base the MCLG.” p247

“On the basis of studies carried out on people living in regions where there is endemic fluorosis, ingestion of fluoride at 12 mg per day would increase the risk for some people to develop adverse renal effects.” p247

“The effect of low doses of fluoride on kidney and liver enzyme functions in humans needs to be carefully documented in communities exposed to different concentrations of fluoride in drinking water.” p258

FLUORIDE & CANCER:

“Fluoride appears to have the potential to initiate or promote cancers, particularly of the bone, but the evidence to date is tentative and mixed (Tables 10-4 and 10-5). As noted above, osteosarcoma is of particular concern as a potential effect of fluoride because of (1) fluoride deposition in bone, (2) the mitogenic effect of fluoride on bone cells, (3) animal results described above, and (4) pre-1993 publication of some positive, as well as negative, epidemiologic reports on associations of fluoride exposure with osteosarcoma risk.“ p. 286

“Because fluoride stimulates osteoblast proliferation, there is a theoretical risk that it might induce a malignant change in the expanding cell population. This has raised concerns that fluoride exposure might be an independent risk factor for new osteosarcomas.” p109

“Osteosarcoma presents the greatest a priori plausibility as a potential cancer target site because of fluoride’s deposition in bone, the NTP animal study findings of borderline increased osteosarcomas in male rats, and the known mitogenic effect of fluoride on bone cells in culture (see Chapter 5). Principles of cell biology indicate that stimuli for rapid cell division increase the risks for some of the dividing cells to become malignant, either by inducing random transforming events or by unmasking malignant cells that previously were in nondividing states.” p275

“Further research on a possible effect of fluoride on bladder cancer risk should be conducted.” p288

There's actually a few small intermediary steps, to my understanding, in Rychan's otherwise neat explanation:
- Plants with more color and/or small pockets of mass that will catch rain water and accumulate sugary liquid from the plants glands or pollent are selected because they attract more insects for pollination. (Significant because it describes the creation of what will become a trapping ground later.
- Plants are selected for larger and larger liquid-holding pockets, which eventually evolve into phytotelmata.
- Insects fall into the phytotelmata, and local bacteria and parasites digest the insects, leaving basic nutrients that the plant can then absorb. (This bridges the evolutionary gap of the plant evolving the ability to trap insects at the same time as evolving the ability to digest the insect, a la blind watchmaker.)
- The plant develops small mutations (downwards-growing hairs, slippery sides) that lead to insects becoming trapped at a greater percentage. Some pitcher plants' evolutionary journeys end here.
- The intercellular methods of absorption of the digested insect nutrients are developed and eventually the plant evolves the ability to break the dead insect down into its basic amino acids through the production of proteases and phosphotases. (I haven't come across one definite mechanism for the evolution of the ability to create these enzymes, although viral transduction/transmission seems to me to be a pretty good possibility.)
- The modern day pitcher plant is born.

Carnivorous plants are a fascinating topic of biomechanics and evolutionary mechanisms. Some neat papers and links to check out:
http://www.botany.org/Carnivorous_Plants/
http://www.skepticfiles.org/evolut/meatplnt.htm
http://www.botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/p/pitche42.html

Cameron, K.M., Wurdack, K.J., and Jobson, R.W. 2002. Molecular evidence for the common origin of snap-traps among carnivorous plants. American Journal of Botany 89:1503--1509.
Evolution of the Genetic Architecture Underlying Fitness in the Pitcher- Plant Mosquito, Wyeomyia smithii
Peter Armbruster, William E. Bradshaw, Christina M. Holzapfel
Evolution, Vol. 51, No. 2 (Apr., 1997), pp. 451-458
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0014-3820(197506)29%3A2%3C296%3AEAEOTP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9

I don't think it's an evolutionists nightmare. The intermediate steps all make sense. A plant which was more likely to have insect corpses anywhere in the vicinity is more likely to get nutrients. It doesn't need to do anything special to digest them. Just the insects rotting and being attacked by bacteria nearby is a win.

Over time plants which had leaf structures which sometimes trapped the insects internally or plants which created enzymes which aided the digestion were selected for.

...if you think it is not toxic, swallow a tablespoon of toothpaste and see what happens... go check yer liver enzymes-Long list of countries have outlawed flouridation of water-also a by-product of aluminum smelting-

4 out of five dentists surveyed, yadda yadda,....official words and experts are the problem we have created for a world of clueless idiots....we used to be able to navigate the planet without all the bullshit...

ShakaUVM- i think the principle you're reaching for, the one you've almost but not quite grasped hold of, is what is referred to as natural selection. Not ID. Once you have genes that replicate, the "goal" is to have genes that replicate better.

Fortunately for us, one of the best ways for genes is to encode information about their surroundings. The better an organism fits in its surroundings, the better its chances of passing on its genes. The god, or designer you're looking for is simulacra, or information-encoding. Starting with the beginning of life, the story of this planet has been the accumulation of information- the creation of more and more specific models of the "real world". A polar bear is white because he lives in a white landscape and can hunt better, giraffes have long necks to reach tall leaves, etc etc etc.

The rate of acceleration has increased even further as one species has learned how to encode information in non-dna form- by building tools, and eventually specifically through spoken and written language, religions, etc- and finally the scientific method.

We are witnessing the end of the era of dna dominated information encoding. So far our technology has a better QUALITY of information about the universe than is encoded in the DNA of the species of the earth, but a much lower quantity. This will change dramatically in our lifetimes.

So yes, there is a "force". The force is natural, not supernatural. And it drives the processes that we think of as human endeavor, but are really just continuation of the progress that began when the first strand of RNA drove the synthesis of the first enzymes that made the first protein in the first lifeform on our planet.

This experiment proves absolutely nothing. When you eat food, it's not molds and household bacteria that break it down. There are specific acids, enzymes and chemicals in the digestive system that break down everything we eat into it's basic components. Fries, which are basically pure starch, begin being broken down as soon as they enter your mouth, where salivary amylase breaks it down into maltose and dextrin. The process continues after it leaves the stomach (salivary amylase is deactivated by the acid in the stomach). Watching food rot is no way to demonstrate how the "food is breaking down in your body".

"body language alone is like taking a pulse to test liver enzymes."

Um, how does body language analysis compare to NMR?

Another realm of common sense, that needs fewer experts and more serious practitioners.....besides, body language alone is like taking a pulse to test liver enzymes......


Remeber kids, when you here the word "expert", insert the word
"bullshit"

The toad thing is playing off the fact that there are a few toad species that secrete a hallucinogenic enzyme. Many tribal cultures are known to have used the enzymes to induce "vision quests."

The brain voice sounds like the same guy who did Grimlock in the original TF. Listen to the way he says "Me!"

"A prune-size bit of tissue tucked under the frontal lobes, it controls gut feelings and habits; it's what drives a recovering smoker to yearn for the feel and taste of cigarettes. The "reward circuitry," a network of neurons at the core of the brain, also plays a role. Nicotine boosts the brain's levels of dopamine, the "feel good" neurotransmitter. Another, as yet unknown, chemical in tobacco smoke acts like an antidepressant, blocking an enzyme that breaks down dopamine. So smokers get a double dose of the stuff—and about half end up addicted, essentially, to their own brain chemicals.

Remove the nicotine, though, and the body can't maintain the high dopamine levels on its own. In the brain of a smoker who's trying to quit, receptors start "screaming," says Dr. Norman Edelman of the American Lung Association, "crying out to be satisfied." Smokers often say a cigarette calms them, but by the time they're addicted, the nicotine rush simply halts the first symptoms of withdrawal. "The addiction is why you're nervous in the first place," says Edelman. Longtime smokers also have to end a behavior that's "entrenched in their daily lives," says Corinne Husten, head of the CDC's Office of Smoking and Health. Add in the stresses of, say, running for president, and it's all too easy to slip.

It may seem drastic to call a smoker an "addict" but, says Chris Cartter, who runs QuitNet, the world's largest quit-smoking program, "a lot of doctors view this as on par with overcoming a heroin addiction." The withdrawal isn't as ugly, but it's not pretty, either: shortly after quitting, the typical longtime smoker becomes cranky, has trouble sleeping and making decisions, and gains weight. Usually, the first weeks are the worst, but for some people the symptoms can drag on for a year or more.

That's assuming, however, that the smoker is taking the cold-turkey approach, which there's little reason to do these days. Nicotine gum, approved in 1984, is the oldest anti-smoking aid. (Obama chews it throughout the day.) It's about as effective as the newer patches, inhalers and nasal sprays, all of which placate those screaming receptors without being addictive themselves. Other options include Zyban, which is also marketed as an antidepressant, and Chantix, introduced last year, which eases withdrawal and blocks nicotine's effects."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17193908/site/newsweek/

Very awesome! It's interesting that no mention is made of transglutaminase, the enzyme that allows that goop that he had to be formed into nuggets.

Molecular Gastronomy chefs like wylie dufrense of wd-50, jose andreas of minibar, and alex and aki of Ideas in Food have used this enzyme in the production of haute cuisine. Wylie is famous for using it to create shrimp noodles. Essentially, he blends the heck out of shrimp and then adds a very specific amount of transglutaminase, which he calls meat glue. Then he extrudes the mixture into water that is kept within a fraction of a degree to the proper temperature for cooking shrimp. The result is long thin noodles that are made entirely of seasoned shrimp.

Meanwhile in colorado, aki and alex got a hold of some meat glue and had some success gluing chicken skin onto tuna. They report that it is super awesome- I just guess we have to take their words for it.

Chicken Nuggets are totally fake food. Good on the kid for figuring it out.

My respect to Jamie Oliver.

Yes, sucrose is di-saccharide, but is chemically bonded glucose and fructose. HFCS is a chemical product of a vat of some corn byproduct and enzymes to either convert glucose, or strip apart natural sucrose. But HFCS just means high fructose content and it is a liquid, so we're comparing dry sugar by weight (and it absorbs moisture) to liquid HFCS..

Wikipedia:

Common commercial grades of high fructose corn syrup include fructose contents of 42%, 55%, or 90%. The 55% grade is most commonly used in soft drinks and equivalent to caster sugar.

Unlike sucrose, HFCS consists of a mixture of glucose and fructose, which doesn't require an enzymatic step to break it down before absorption in the intestine.