I'm going to find out if fluoride is harmful

>>9063026
You would need hundreds of rats to show anything. A single rat could be sick, or die of some other means that you could never test for. So, go for it, but it wont prove or show anything.

>>9063026
OP, odds are your project will fail before completion (you will give up) or you will have no idea what to do with the data you collect but anyways I wish you luck.

If you do manage to finish the project and want to share it then vixra.org is a website where you can submit and publish research papers, even if you have no academic affiliation. Obviously, do not expect people to immediately take you seriously because this is a low-tier journal, but as no other journal will take an amateur scientist this is the best opportunity you have to at least kickstart your research.

After that you can post it here, on /pol/, etc. and if you get notoriety then you can look into getting it published into an actual journal, or at least get a newspaper to write an article about your research.

Good luck.

>>9063046
this

also, why hasn't anyone ever done this before? People have been bitching about flouride for ages.

>>9063074
Thanks, anon.

>>9063026
Cut out the middle man and just livestream yourself drinking HF instead. Would definitely prove your point.

>>9063026
>Implying some spring water isn't naturally high in Fluoride

>>9063221
Some spring water is also naturally high in radiation too, what's your point?

Who cares if fluoride is harmful? All that really matters is the fact that we shouldn't be paying to dump chemicals into our water for "muh fuggin teef" when everyone already has access to fluoridated tooth paste.

>>9063182
They probably think it isn't worth the money. Research isn't cheap.

>>9063026
With a sample size of 1, you're not going to find out shit. Bring your p down, brainlet.

>>9063026
Better yet, why not get a population in fluoride and compare it to a population without fluoride? Oh wait it's already been done several times, moron.

>>9063328
>everyone already has access to fluoridated tooth paste.
that's the issue, they dont, it's not like iodized salt, which is actually ubiquitous. Tons of people don't brush their teeth, the unnecessary burden on dentists would be enormous

>>9063357
Fluoridated toothpaste costs like $6

>>9063413
and? again, it's not really the cost or access, it's the fact people don't brush their teeth (especially compared to, well, drinking water)

>>9063435
That's there own damn fault, why should I have to pay for it? If they want whiter teeth then they can just brush their fucking teeth

>>9063458
you should pay for it because it's part of the unwritten contract you signed by being born in a society. If you dont want to pay for it, that hermit who lived for like 25 years without human contact could probably give you advice how to escape civilization. You should be far more outraged at other, more irrational expenditures unless you want your teeth to look like your average Brit.

>>9063468
>paying for retards who refuse to clean their teeth is part of the social contract
Lol

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8812262
Fluoride effect at approximately normal levels for drinking water
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00220345950740080701
High dosage effect on bone density
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/089203629400070T
Even higher dosage neurotoxicity evaluation
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jor.1100100413/full
Differential effect on bone density for high vs. low dosage. Low increases bone density, high decreases.
https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/260213
Effects of fluoride on teeth decay in rats


Takes like a minute on google scholar to find this

>>9063026
Also experiment is flawed because two rats can be related yet have different a phenotype meaning that one group can be hyper or hypo sensitive to the compound and throw off the results randomly. They try to use genetically identical rats for most studies or absurdly large amounts to negate this effect. Also they can totally accuse you of animal cruelty because in order to get the data you have to kill them and examine their insides. If you don't and let them die of old age etc. then your data becomes exponentially shittier.

Doesn't fluoride exposure/harm follow a hormetic u-shaped curve?

What levels are you looking at?

>>9063479
it is. until you vote to remove it.

>>9063331
Bout as cheap as buying some rats?

>>9063739
and upkeep them, and pay scientists, and record data, and make controls, and for machines to analyze animal bodies

>>9063357
>the unnecessary burden on dentists would be enormous
I don't think enough people regularly need dental work that dentists think they have too much work and are making too much money.

Flouride is safe when consumed with water.

>>9063741
true, but just another burden on insurance and stuff, you're talking millions of cavities per year probably

>>9063771
>burden on insurance
You can count the amount of people who actually give a fuck about burdening those jews on your fingers.

>>9063026
ITT: people that have never read a scientific paper in their entire lives

>>9063468
>social contract
Is this the 1800s? No? Then gtfo with this shit

>>9064135
oh sorry, forgot, you dont pay taxes.
one day you''ll grow up and get it. Or you wont, and go crazy and leave society. Either way, better for all
>>9063792
in general, i like it when the general population's health increases. That's good for a strong society. I dont think anyone would disagree with that. And it's even more important considering the link between tooth and gum health and heart disease.

>>9063479

Notice how putting 'social' in front of words changes the meaning.

social contract
social science
social media
social justice

>>9063182
Because there's no actual evidence to suggest fluoridated water is dangerous to our health
>inb4 B-but ALEX JONES SAID

>>9063026
wow anon. I'm sure this experiment has never been done before, certainly not on much larger scales and with more rigorous methods. I will be eagerly awaiting your results