Keith Tanner wrote:
It's all got to do with water rights. You don't own the water that lands on your property, it's supposed to make its way into the rivers and streams. Water from Colorado is split up and shared with a large variety of stakeholders - many of which are in California watering their lawns. On the Front Range (the east side of the Divide) I think most of it goes to Denver and to agriculture.
Water politics are fairly intense around here. I knew I'd made it as a Colorado landowner when I got my water rights...
As someone who was involved in a project in CA looking at water usage and rights, watering lawns is a very tiny percentage. Well, unless you count golf courses, which are absurdly wasteful. The vast majority is all the agriculture in the central valley. If the farms need the water, we can make the rivers flow backwards (literally; not joking). They are also the worst culprits of water pollution around here too.
So, much of the water you don't have rights to ends up going to food that probably feeds you.
Not being able to put out water buckets is kind of B.S. though.
Fair enough. But it's still more fun to blame all those green lawns in Palm Springs.
Javelin wrote:
In reply to dculberson:
Real, actual, peer-reviewed science says otherwise on the fluoride debate. 
Nope. Not true. The majority of "real actual science" does not point to any harm in ingesting fluoride. And my only point is that there are far more important things to worry about than that, things that are more immediate risks that I bet you do less to mitigate.
It's like the guy I know that won't touch diet soda but has a huge gut and goes days on only 4 hours sleep. He's not going to die from a microgram of methanol in his system, he's going to keel over of a heart attack. Driving your kid around in your Javelin is several orders of magnitude more dangerous than fluoride in their water but I would never begrudge you that.
I just wanted to post how ridiculous this thread is. It is ALSO hilarious of how I called it in that other rally thread you started, considering you are from Oregon. As they freely admit down there, lots of weird people in that state 
Keith Tanner wrote:
In Colorado, you're not allowed to capture the rain off your roof. True story. It belongs to California.
Obviously, I am no help here.
Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown.
HiTempguy wrote:
I just wanted to post how ridiculous this thread is. It is ALSO hilarious of how I called it in that other rally thread you started, considering you are from Oregon. As they freely admit down there, lots of weird people in that state
Your ignorance is showing. Might want to look into that. He's actually living in Washington and I believe originally from Florida. Perhaps you should stop using such a large paint brush to color your painting of the Pacific Northwest and pay attention to the details a little closer?
As I said earlier, I'm sensitive to the crap and I didn't want it in my water. Luckily I'm not the only one in Portland OREGON who thinks so. I also dislike the way the Water Bureau has been run here in Portland, so I automatically distrust anything coming from that Bureau as they'll use it as an excuse to up our rates again. Unfortunately it doesn't seem that Javelin has a choice up there in WASHINGTON. So now he feels the need to solve the issue for himself and his family.
dculberson wrote:
Javelin wrote:
In reply to dculberson:
Real, actual, peer-reviewed science says otherwise on the fluoride debate.
Nope. Not true. The majority of "real actual science" does not point to any harm in ingesting fluoride. And my only point is that there are far more important things to worry about than that, things that are more immediate risks that I bet you do less to mitigate.
Seeing as he referenced not having any benefit vs doing harm as far as the study goes (I'm assuming the hard water bogusness was not related to the study he was referencing), you may want to brush up on reading comprehension before taking him to task.
That said, there are few things funnier than the fouridated water conspiracy nuts. But those guys are unrelated to javelin as far as I can tell from this thread.
In reply to dculberson:
Fair points, (though I would like you to post links to any peer-reviewed studies that show no harm and/or good benefits of ingesting fluoride) but what other things should I be worrying about?
(And for the record, baby Jav has never actually ridden in the Javelin. We just sit in the driver's seat and make the engine rev.)
In reply to HiTempguy:
I'm from Florida. I live in Washington.
In reply to turboswede:
Well said! And you are correct, we did not get a say. Our town put out advisories on switching sources (from the Cowlitz River to an aquifer that exists underneath our industrial area and has been tapped for 40+ years for industrial uses including paper making), but not on the actual addition of the fluoride/bromine/chlorine plant.
Javelin wrote:
In reply to HiTempguy:
I'm from Florida. I live in Washington.
Which makes you "from" Washington. Nobody said weird can't travel (or in this case, make it back to the homeland).
As for your desire for "sources" and "peer reviewed articles" (I feel the charts incoming picture is warranted at this point in time, but instead of posting it I will just mention it), you show us yours. You're the one going against the grain of a majority of places in North America (and the biggest factor being COST in the ones that don't).
And finally, as others mentioned, if fluoride is your largest concern in life for your kid after 10's of MILLIONS have been drinking it all their lives... I don't really know what to say. Maybe worry more about the kids education and future? All that time spent studying could probably be put towards his college fund in parttime work, considering how ridiculous the price of college is down there (now THAT is something I could get behind protesting about/fighting for).
stuart in mn wrote:
Without the chlorine you'd have to worry about e. coli and all kinds of other fun stuff, so it's a matter of which one is less bad for you.
But e.coli is all natural while chorine is a chemical, therefore the e.coli water is the best thing out there because nature wants to be nice to you and chemicals are evil.
In reply to HiTempguy:
Kiddo had a college fund before she was born
The fluoride thing came about because we toured our new local water plant, which really showed us how much chemicals are added to our water (bromine and chlorine as well), which is a cause for concern.
And once I started doing research:
and found the sources for worldwide data, I became skeptical of why it was needed at all.
Fluoridation advocates have long claimed that the safety of fluoridation is beyond scientific debate.[6] However, according to the well-known toxicologist, Dr. John Doull, who chaired the National Academy of Science’s review on fluoride, the safety of fluoridation remains “unsettled” and “we have much less information than we should, considering how long it has been going on.”[7] In 2006, Doull’s committee at the NAS published an exhaustive 500-page review of fluoride’s toxicity.[8] The report concludes that fluoride is an “endocrine disruptor” and can affect many things in the body, including the bones, the brain, the thyroid gland, the pineal gland, and even blood sugar levels.[9]
Far from giving fluoride a clean bill of health, the NAS called upon scientists to investigate if current fluoride exposures in the United States are contributing to chronic health problems, like bone disorders, thyroid disease, low intelligence, dementia, and diabetes, particularly in people who are most vulnerable to fluoride’s effects.[10] These recommendations highlight that—despite 60 years of fluoridation—many of the basic studies necessary for determining the program’s safety have yet to be conducted.
And if I do choose for my child to get fluorine for tooth decay, it should be topical, even according to the CDC.
keethrax wrote:
dculberson wrote:
Javelin wrote:
In reply to dculberson:
Real, actual, peer-reviewed science says otherwise on the fluoride debate.
Nope. Not true. The majority of "real actual science" does not point to any harm in ingesting fluoride. And my only point is that there are far more important things to worry about than that, things that are more immediate risks that I bet you do less to mitigate.
Seeing as he referenced not having any benefit vs doing harm as far as the study goes (I'm assuming the hard water bogusness was not related to the study he was referencing), you may want to brush up on reading comprehension before taking him to task.
That said, there are few things funnier than the fouridated water conspiracy nuts. But those guys are unrelated to javelin as far as I can tell from this thread.
Actually you might want work on your reading comprehension. He is worried about a substance so obviously he's worried about harm from it. If there's no harm then why worry about it? Reasonable people - and I'm including in this Javelin because he is a reasonable person - do not worry about filtering out inert non-harmful substances.
And yes, Javelin is worried about actual health effects from fluoride and not the mind control aspects. Thank goodness. ;-)
@Javelin: I'm not as authoritative as Dr. Doull. Fluoridation has its controversies and it's up to you to determine if avoiding it is worth the effort. To your initial question, a reverse osmosis system is probably the most cost effective option. Sorry for helping threadjack your post.
In reply to dculberson:
Eh, it's okay. Forums pretty much exist just for tangents and threadjacks.
As for the no harm / why worry? I do look at it like I don't want to be ingesting something, even if it doesn't hurt per say. Would you dump a "fuel system cleaner" in your car every tank if it didn't hurt but also didn't help?
Anyways, yes, the reverse osmosis does seem like the best option, especially since it can help with the other stuff (bromine, chlorine, etc). Funnily enough, I worked on a giant reverse osmosis machine on the cutter I was stationed on in the USCG.
When i drink water, it touches my teeth. Topical?
bgkast
Reader
6/4/13 9:27 a.m.
In reply to Javelin:
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse a fellow Washingtonian of being a portlander.
yamaha
UberDork
6/4/13 10:12 a.m.
In reply to Swank Force One:
Not in the medical sense, but nice try bubba.
I'm not going to jump into this thread. No good can come from it.
But I will dip my little toe in: I find it interesting that so many will rabidly defend government-mandated programs like fluoridation and innoculation in the name of the public good. Proven benefit or not, it still represents the seizing of freedoms from a portion of the citizenry.
Also, I have yet to hear convincing proof of the causes of a virtual epidemic of modern-day afflictions, such as Alzheimers, autism, allergies, and diabetes. Okay, we know we get diabetes from being fat, lazy, and eating crappy food. But I believe that we should be aware of the huge variety of toxic substances that are mandated and/or marketed to us.
1988RedT2 wrote:
I'm not going to jump into this thread. No good can come from it.
But I will dip my little toe in: I find it interesting that so many will rabidly defend government-mandated programs like fluoridation and innoculation in the name of the public good. Proven benefit or not, it still represents the seizing of freedoms from a portion of the citizenry.
Also, I have yet to hear convincing proof of the causes of a virtual epidemic of modern-day afflictions, such as Alzheimers, autism, allergies, and diabetes. Okay, we know we get diabetes from being fat, lazy, and eating crappy food. But I believe that we should be aware of the huge variety of toxic substances that are mandated and/or marketed to us.
IMHO
It's always a good idea to research what your and your family are ingesting. Our society has a long history of feeding us "harmless" things that we found out later were toxic.
Kudos to Javelin for looking out for his family's best interests---- regardless of what the "common knowledge" is.
mtn
UltimaDork
6/4/13 11:31 a.m.
1988RedT2 wrote:
Okay, we know we get diabetes from being fat, lazy, and eating crappy food.
Went to the movies on Sunday and got a large Pibb since it was only 50 cents more than a medium. Fun story, they sell diabetes in buckets now!
In reply to Joe Gearin:
Thank you!!!
Anybody remember when they told us Radium would cure everything?
1988RedT2 wrote:
Also, I have yet to hear convincing proof of the causes of a virtual epidemic of modern-day afflictions, such as Alzheimers, autism, allergies, and diabetes. Okay, we know we get diabetes from being fat, lazy, and eating crappy food. But I believe that we should be aware of the huge variety of toxic substances that are mandated and/or marketed to us.
Honestly, half of those are "caused" by having more diagnoses and more medical care and living longer. Alzheimers, most people didn't live long enough to get 50+ years ago. Autism, people would've just said you were "tetched" or weird. Allergies you would have just sniffled. Diabetes, okay, that's because we eat too damn much crappy food.
