|
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: misc.kids, sci.skeptic
From: p...@lifia.imag.fr (Philippe Schnoebelen)
Date: 26 Sep 90 14:21:17 GMT
Local: Wed, Sep 26 1990 9:21 am
Subject: Re: The health hazards of fluoride
In article <1...@dalek.UUCP> s...@dalek.UUCP (Seth J. Bradley) writes:
>One response to the anti-fluoridation people I've never seen refuted: [though it's easy. Witness... :-] >1. "Natural" water sources, such as uncontaminated mountain streams, This one is NATURAL fluoride. It is good for your health. >have substantial fluoride levels. >2. Water processing plants remove most of the naturally ocurring Thus destroying much of the beneficial properties of NATURAL water. >fuoride as part of the purification process. >3. Fluoridation is simply a means of replacing lost fluoride. Treatment They add ARTIFICIAL, cancer-giving, chemicals. As is well-known. >plants routinely add back lost minerals and no one objects to that >practice. You compare natural products with their poisonous industrial counterparts --Philippe :-) You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||