Is it possible for water (say, well water) to naturally contain floride? My significant other says its impossible, that floride (or at least the type add to water to strengthen teeth) does not exist in a natural state. Any chemists in the family?
Yes, it’s possible. It comes from the naturally occurring mineral (redundant I know) fluorapatite. Fluorapatite is:
Ca5(PO4)3F
Some communities don’t even have to add it to their water supplies.
Here’s the little I know about fluoride in water. A long time ago, there were areas in Texas and in Colorado where the residents had green teeth. I recall growing up in the 1960s in East Texas, there were some kids I came across with this condition. Some people called it “Texas Teeth”. A dentist in Colorado noticed that these people had extraordinarily low occurences of caries (cavities), and set out to study why. What he found was that their water contained natural fluoride, and he began experiments to determine how much fluoride could be added to water to reduce caries, but not cause the teeth to discolor. He found out that a concentration of 1 ppm was optimal, and this is the same concentration that communities now put into their water supplies.
In the 1950s, fluoridation of public water supplies was opposed by the conspiracy kooks who thought that the commies were trying to reduce our kids’ mental capacity by putting a known poison (which fluoride is) into our water supply. Cooler heads, realizing that the dose makes the poison, prevailed. By the way, we also put another known poison, chlorine, into our water supply. Fluoridation is still opposed by certain fringe groups, but nowadays it’s from the other end of the political spectrum, the anti-chemical nuts.
Speaking as a failed chemistry major and all-around wacko, I’d like to point out that due to its high reactivity, fluorine could be an excellent component in a binary or trinary chemical weapon.
A binary chemical weapon consists of two inert chemicals which become deadly when combined. They are safe to transport and can be used to “prime” an intended victim while waiting for the right time to strike.
If I were, say, a leader of an international communist conspiracy, I’d consider having my imperialist running-dog supporters attempt to get one part of a binary chemical widely dispersed throughout my opponent’s population. One great way to do that would be to have that chemical inserted into the water supply for “health reasons.” I’d back it up with legislative enforcement.
Then, when the time is right, I would flash my gleaming steel dentalwork and disperse the second part of the binary chemical as widely as possible throughout the United States. There would be no danger to the peace-loving citizens of my nation or nations, because we don’t fluoridate our water. Boom! Quick as that, America is crippled, without the use of dirty nuclear weapons and hopefully without a clear culprit (or a button) at which the survivors can point a finger. Yesssss.
The dialectic demands such a weapon, Mr. Birch. See what you can do to make such a possibility look laughably ridiculous.
Water containes a trace of just about anything because there is little new water, its all recycled.
General Jack D. Ripper:
Wouldn’t it be MUCH easier to use the chloride ion in a binary or trinary chemical weapon? The way I see it, there are tons of benefits to using the chloride ion rather than the floride ion. Here are a few:
-
The chloride ion is naturally available in your body in MUCH larger quantities than is the floride ion.
-
Using the chloride ion does not involve risky ventures such as inviting many unnecessary people in on your conspiracy.
-
The chloride ion is more available to react in your body, as it is flowing in the blood, and is available in every cell. The floride ion spends a little time in your blood, and then gets incorporated into your bones, where it would be less available to react.
-
Using the chloride ion does not involve cooking up, and then selling “fake” reasons that it is good for you.
Some things that the floride ion and the chloride ion have in common: -
They are BOTH very reactive.
-
BOTH ions are components of many compounds that are very toxic.
-
If you are a bit more devious, you could, rather than creating a very toxic substance that would kill people quickly, create a carcinogen that would kill everyone slowly.
Heh heh. The talk about fringe groups kind of amuses me - my college town, Santa Cruz, California (world capital of liberal fringe groups!) voted a couple years ago to not have flouride in the water. No chemicals in our water! No, sirree!
You’re dead right, Steve-o. The fluoride trick must just be a backup plan. As far as a slow-working carcinogen, they’ve got Phillip Morris covering that end.
FWIW, most of the studies that seem to support fluoridated water are funded by folks with a vested interest in a use for fluoride. I’m too lazy to look it up right now, but fluoride, IIRC, is a by-product in some other very lucrative chemical process. The chemical folks (Dow? Monsanto? I don’t recall, to be honest) needed some way to get rid of this toxic material, and seemed to hit a home run with the idea of reducing cavities.
To be sure, one of the best ways to appear to be a crackpot is to argue against fluoridated water, the propaganda being that subtle and convincing, but I wonder about it…
My town’s water supply is naturally fluorinated. It cames from a large artesian basin where the predominant rock of the district is limestone and exposed pieces of gneiss.