CureZone   Log On   Join
Re: Scientific Studies haven't proved jack
  Views: 2,378
Published: 12 years ago
This is a reply to # 1,056,169

Re: Scientific Studies haven't proved jack

LOL. Did you actually read any of the details? They are comical and inconclusive.

--"The researchers did not single out which of the minerals contributed to the effect"

Didn't figure it out?

---"there is evidence of less heart disease in hard water areas than in soft water areas, although not all studies find this link"

Not all studies found this link? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

---"They found for every unit increase in water hardness, there was a 1% decrease in the risk of having a further attack

1%??? WOW! This is powerful evidence.

--"It is not implausible that water hardness might affect disease rates, since it relates to the levels of trace elements that may be important for nutrition. However, the contribution of drinking water to the total intake of these elements is usually low - Professor Jeremy Pearson, British Heart Foundation"

Implausible? Doesn't sound like he's 100% sure does it? The nutritional contribution of drinking water is low? Gee, whoda thunk? Water is not a mineral drink supplement.

--"They suggest higher fluoride levels were protective, with every one milligram of fluoride per litre of household drinking water was associated with a 3% decrease in the risk of a heart attack."

Higher fluoride levels are protective? You mean like the same poison they justify putting in toothpaste and some public water supplies for cavities? Well sure it prevents cavities, but it also causes fluoridosis and host of other significant health maladies. And only a 3% advantage? You better give me better efficacy than that if you're going to feed me a known carcinogen.

--"But Professor Jeremy Pearson, Associate Medical Director at the British Heart Foundation, told BBC News Online: "There have been several studies going back more than 35 years examining the relationship between incidence of coronary heart disease and hardness of local water supplies, with inconsistent results."

Inconsistent results!!!!!!!! These studies are utter chaff when you start dissecting them. Good for headlines but once again lacking substance or conclusion.


Printer-friendly version of this page Email this message to a friend
Alert Moderators
Report Spam or bad message  Alert Moderators on This GOOD Message

This Forum message belongs to a larger discussion thread. See the complete thread below. You can reply to this message!


Donate to CureZone

CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with

Contact Us - Advertise - Stats

Copyright 1999 - 2019

0.780 sec, (1)