Water in Mexico

[joncon]

Here's a link, Mexico waterbottled water San Carlos Sonora area Sea of Cortez... also will probable be more than you may want to know about water in general in the USA.
jc

http://www.vivasancarlos.com/water/sancarloswater.doc

[hellosailor]

"I don’t see how the Surgeon General, CDC or AMA etc. could have a vested interest,"
Its easy, Gord. They're all doctors or politicians, and "professional courtesy" extends for many years in and out of service.

Explain, if you will, why the US medical establishment (including medicare/medicaid) reimburses doctors and hospitals up to some $800 for a hospital infusion of vitamin B12 (given as an IV procedure), when supposedly all of Canada and the EU simple pays $20 for a bottle of pills or liquid to be taken orally by the patient.

In the US, all of those parties would tell you that taking B12 by mouth simply doesn't work, you must use an infusion. Outside the US....Gee, the laws of physics change? No, the medical establishments simply refuse to "wink wink nod nod" and allow the hugely profitable procedure when a bottle of pills will do just as well.

Is everyone here corrupt? Of course not, we always have the poor, some of them are simply too honest to get ahead. The rest, are equally corrupt but inept at conning the rest. (Who me, a cynic?!)

The Surgeon General and CDC are part of our political system, don't doubt it. The AMA has long been criticized as being one of hte oldest unions on earth (barbers, who were the early doctors, and prostitutes generally considered the oldest) and regularly takes heavy criticism for political stands that run contrary to "good medical practice". They're a trade guild looking out for their members, no more no less.

And an insult to honest barbers, whores, and thieves the world over!

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

"I don’t see how the Surgeon General, CDC or AMA etc. could have a vested interest,"
Its easy, Gord. They're all doctors or politicians, and "professional courtesy" extends for many years in and out of service ...
... The Surgeon General and CDC are part of our political system, don't doubt it. The AMA has long been criticized as being one of hte oldest unions on earth (barbers, who were the early doctors, and prostitutes generally considered the oldest) and regularly takes heavy criticism for political stands that run contrary to "good medical practice". They're a trade guild looking out for their members, no more no less....

So, the highly powerful & profitable fluoridation industry has "gotten to" these corrupt establishment institutions?

[hellosailor]

I didn't say THAT, Gord. Only that these folks are not as far above suspicion as Caeser's wife. So to speak.

How much research on the long term effects of fluoridation was done before the process became common? Long term, as in fifty-year baseline studies with control groups, looking at Alzheimers, arthritis, ADD....?

Teeth are a good thing to have, but the SCIENCE behind many of our societal decisions is often sadly lacking. People would rather spend their money on bottled water. Hmmmmmm.....

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

I didn't say THAT, Gord. Only that these folks are not as far above suspicion as Caeser's wife. So to speak.
How much research on the long term effects of fluoridation was done …

That’s not saying much for the public health & medical establishment; given that Caesar divorced his wife Pompeia, over a matter of UNFOUNDED suspicion ("Ceasar’s wife ought not even to be under suspicion."). The NIH / CDC / AMA’s integrity fAll below that of Pompeia’s?

MANY studies have been carried out on water fluoridation, most (but NOT ALL) generally* positive in their conclusions.

* There are exceptions ( The National Kidney Foundation has withdrawn its support of water fluoridation)

Unfortunately, the resistance to fluoridation of public water supplies (& vaccinations), is generally based upon philosophical resistance to compulsory mass medication, which takes away an individual's right to choose – not science (tho’ science is often cited). Hence the objection is philosophically bases (biased), not scientifically (evidence) based.

I don’t want this to become a debate about the merits/dangers of public water fluoridation (I really don't care).

My main point was to indicate that advertising & the proclamations of interest groups is not information – it’s propaganda. We should, as far as we are able, seek more disinterested sources of information.

In the end, who one chooses to believe is a matter of choice – a choice that often defines one’s standards, and biases.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by Delezynski

<snip>

So, THANKS for all of the posts, I have considered them all!

Uh . . . one more thought, Greg . . .

You know, it does sound better than canned water.

TaoJones