• N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | thegreenhand

  • Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

Why is there fluoride in SSRIs

rickolasnice said:
Re: fluoride and babies - search for it.. babies under 6 months shouldn't be given fluoridated water as it goes over the recommended amount of intake per body weight (cos babies drink more water in relation to their body mass.. or somethin like that..)
Click to expand...

Show me the evidence, don't just say "search for it" - you made the claim so the burden of proof is on you.

Re: safe dosage used to be 4ppm: Well then they discovered it's not safe at 4ppm. How long till they discover it's not safe at 1ppm? They had evidence to say fluoride was safe at 4ppm.. as you are now using evidence to say it is safe at 1ppm..
Click to expand...

This is faulty logic again. You're treading to the territory of the same kind of wingnuttery we've come to hear from asencin: "scientists have been wrong in the past so why trust anything they say now."

The point is, all current evidence points in the direction that fluoride is safe at 1 ppm. Do we know it for certain, of course not. For that matter, we might be living in the matrix and the easter bunny might be able to cure cancer... but until evidence of such things comes up it's quite safe to assume that we do not live in the matrix and the easter bunny does not actually exist.

The problem with this way of thinking is that you want static answers, something that you can call "the final truth" that is absolutely correct. Sadly, the real world just doesn't work that way... we make observations, and theories based on those observations. Then we make new observations, refining those theories. It's a constant process, never becoming "finished", new evidence being found all the time.

So, can you already see how you have a weak argument here? We can't know what kind of evidence we'll discover in the future. We might find out that broccoli causes impotence and fat elbows. Currently, there's no reason to assume that it does (that I know of...) and similarly, we might find out that fluoride makes your testicles fall out, but again, there's currently no reason to assume that it does. All we can do is make reasonable assumptions based on the current evidence.
 
dread, welcome back man.
i changed my mind on fluoride btw. i have read so much shit that it just annoyed me basicaly cuz it kept saying that in big amounts its bad but in small it is good and etc. anyway at the end that didnt help much but after talking to so many people online and real life i changed my mind on being against fluoride. to explain, most people i talked to are so fucking anti-fluoride it fucking pisses me off. like... they dont even know why they are against it ! no clue !!! they just read few pages of something that says its bad (most likely in excess) and the fuckers decided its bad and never changed their minds even if i tried to convince them (which i didnt care to do).

anyway bottom line is, im not going against fluoride anymore because it seems every fucking person i met IS AGAINST IT. in a way, it annoys me. too much following and not enough leading based on more thoughtful logical point of view case.
 
Good for you, asecin. It takes a big man to admit being wrong.
 
it takes a big man to have a change of mindset after reviewing things and experiencing it them themselves. it wasnt any of the things said on this thread that made me re-think this. it was researching and talking with people either online and real life. it really got on my nerves their obsession with fluoride being bad for you. which i never denied being detrimental (in bigger than normal doses) but the sheer ignorance of most got on my nerves. as someone else said in here, not like fluoride is the biggest problem we have to worry about.
im glad to admit change of mind about things anytime compared to many people who might see inadequacies in their logic and still go on because they feel failure on their part if they change their view openly. :D

dread didnt you get the same annoyance when you had to deal with ignorant people in your area, city ? im sure you met people whining about it too. in fact, its more rare to meet people not whining about this and accept it than do whine. :/
 
Last edited:
Well actually, I live in Finland and there is no water fluoridation here. I haven't really met any people in RL who would talk about fluoride or even know about the whole thing... seems like the average people here don't really care about the issue.
 
dread said:
Well actually, I live in Finland and there is no water fluoridation here. I haven't really met any people in RL who would talk about fluoride or even know about the whole thing... seems like the average people here don't really care about the issue.
Click to expand...


i was on vacation

anyway so arent you mad that finnish government is not as concerned like the american for the teeth of their citizens and they do not put fluoride in water ? since you support it so much, you should state your dissaprovel of finnish goverment. i mean, i thot american government was shitty but at least they care for our teeth, yours does not even care for such thing when it comes to people's health ! :|
 
here we go again then!

perhaps this will interest you.

ve55px.png
 
What were we talking about again...?

The fluorine in SSRI's is put there for one of two (or sometimes both) reasons. It either increases the drugs affinity (ability to bind to receptors) or affects the drugs elimination half life, giving it longer or shorter duration in the body.

One way of achieving these goals is to attach highly electronegative groups such as fluorine or chlorine to molecules. Forming strong bonds, that are generally not broken down during metabolism.

These atoms are not reduced to free Fl or Cl as that would lead to toxicity and the inability of a drug to be listed for sale.
 
MaDMAn Project, we understood this so far. the statements of it at least. my question is, where is it ever proven that 100% of the time either fluorine or chlorine used in drugs is not somehow, even mildly, toxic to a given human being ? i understand the way chemistry works, mostly theory yet to be put to practice, but as chemistry grows, it is still mostly theories that actually show some evidence of being able to work on occasion, specific cases, properly as intended. but! never anything involved in chemistry or life has it been shown to be a solid, true, fact ! i give it the benefit of the doubt.
 
You can never truly prove a theory, only disprove it.
This is a well accepted convention within science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top