Search results

oh FFS - here we go. the problem is with institutionalised medical research being used as a basis for seeting the record, then something else being used entirely. read what you posted and quoted - go on. ACTUALLY READ IT - especially the bit you bolded. "often use" "2002" "UK Medical Research...

that's the US public water supply - NOT what was initially proposed here and what the outcry was about. unless we're getting US water pumped here? i can't believe you just put up a wiki link to try to prove i don't know what i'm talking...

i'm sure it's got nothing to do witht he fact the kid never brushes their teeth. toothpaste has more flouride in it per gram than tap water and would have a more direct effect on someone's teeth considering the time and effort toothpaste is exposed to teeth, rather than water idly sloshing...

hahaha love this one. the flouride conspiracy theory is actually buried in partial truth. there was no need for flouride in drinking water - never has been, really, especialy since the advent of toothpaste. however, sodium flouride which is the ACTUAL fluoride type used in drinking...

*cue fuelsaver device* your car background is always evident to another car enthusiast.