MAHA report

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

That's kind of a stupid thing to ask. With every war--and now just with military recruitments--they have found potential soldiers who have to be rejected--at one time because of effects of chronic nutritional deficiencies, nowadays obesity, plus they don't like recruits who have any history of being prescribed ADHD drugs or other psychiatric medications. Population health comes under the "general welfare" responsibilities of Congress in the Constitution. BTW the uniformed Public Health Service dates back to 1889.

[Anonymous]

^actually goes back to 1798

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, how does MAHA fit in?

Bwhahaha. You know what's toxic? The fruit that's needed to produce the cashew nut. They have to heavily process it in order to remove toxins that are lethal to humans. Even the seeds of fruits like apples to peaches are toxic.

And hexanes? Big whoop, those evaporate off. The video useless. The point is that the MAHA report spends inordinate amounts of time discussing how chemicals and toxins in the environment from our drinking water to the air we breathe are cumulatively making our children sicker. Fine, great!

So how does MAGA square away the findings of the MAHA report while concomitantly gutting the EPA and trying to to jam through deregulation (thank you Vought!) that will make it far easier for industries to pollute our country that is apparently making our children sicker, per the MAHA report. This administration makes zero sense.

Tell you what, can RFK and Vought go into the octagon and duke it out in an MMA match to see which message wins? Deregulation that pollutes the country more with all of the chemicals the MAHA report hates, or more regulations that the MAHA report wants to protect our kids from all of the environmental chemicals.

EPA stopped caring about anything but climate change and became disposable.

The prioir administration was working to address PFAs which are the biggest elephant in the room, and the current administration blatantly rolled that back. You, yes you, I'm talking to you - you are drinking water with PFAs today, every day, your kids are, your grandkids will, and it's making us all sick in multiple ways. The Trump administration is making this worse and they don't care. Seed oils are a distraction from the giant elephant in the room. And you fell for it. But keep drinking your PFA, your fridge filter probably doesn't adequately remove them.

Not one of you cared about PFAs before January 20th when you suddenly became experts. You talked about climate change all the time though.

Show me the threads where you talked about it before the election. Show me the offices at EPA dedicated to the issue. How do they compare to climate change?

Your precious fluoride and infinity vaxes are going away and you're just trying to latch on to anything to distract people. The second anyone starts to do something about plastics you'll just "what about" something else anyway.

BS...there are offices at the federal and state level that are/were dealing with PFAs. Just because YOU hadn't heard of it doesn't mean it wasn't and isn't a concern. It is lie how Trump uses a new word and says "no one ever heard of it" - BS and stop with the gaslighting.

+1

Also "precious fluoride?" Do MAHAs ever mention the 700% increase in young children needing IV antibiotics for dental decay related infections in Calgary after they got rid of fluoride? No? Hm.

You need to drink fluoride to have healthy teeth? There is no other way you can get enough of it on your tooth enamel? Like mouthwash or a toothpaste? Fluoride in drinking water doesn’t give a choice to people who want to avoid it. removing it doesn’t take away the choice of others to have fluoride in their dental care.

The existing studies on fluoride use levels well above existing levels in the US and even then show a negligible impact.

When there is actual research showing existing levels in the US are more harmful than the risk of not fluoridating the water, get back to us.

So you would trade 3-5 IQ points to save yourself the trouble of applying fluoride directly to your teeth?

Have existing studies shown that current levels of fluoride impact IQ levels?

Nope.

To be fair, there are probably studies that RFK is basing his opinion on, but they are the same quackery that got us a measles epidemic.

There are not, not at current max levels in US drinking water. But perhaps he used AI to fake some.

It os worth noting that the typical assumption is that a group who stands to make tons of money from removal of fluoride - dentists - are majority opposed to removal of fluoride. Future dental bills gonna skyrocket (along with dental insurance premiums)

Keep in mind that the max level was 1.3ppm while almost everyone posting here was growing up. The studies show a 3-5 point drop at the 1.5ppm level. No one has really studied anything under 1.5 yet, but someone will eventually. The loss will probably be linear with our current max showing a 1-3 point drop.

Utah just banned fluoride, so we'll get to see how things go there. Also, the vast majority of the world doesn't fluoridate their water, and many of those places have better teeth than us. Then again, those places don't consume anywhere near the amount of sugar we do....

Meaning we're adding one poison to our water to counteract the other poison in our water. So why not just remove both, save money and be healthier? That's what you're fighting against for some reason...

You think a one point change in mean IQ is detectable? IQ is heavily dependent on socioeconomic factors and has been increasing for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

It is sorta in the US Constitution, that pesky document that guides the values of our country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, how does MAHA fit in?

Bwhahaha. You know what's toxic? The fruit that's needed to produce the cashew nut. They have to heavily process it in order to remove toxins that are lethal to humans. Even the seeds of fruits like apples to peaches are toxic.

And hexanes? Big whoop, those evaporate off. The video useless. The point is that the MAHA report spends inordinate amounts of time discussing how chemicals and toxins in the environment from our drinking water to the air we breathe are cumulatively making our children sicker. Fine, great!

So how does MAGA square away the findings of the MAHA report while concomitantly gutting the EPA and trying to to jam through deregulation (thank you Vought!) that will make it far easier for industries to pollute our country that is apparently making our children sicker, per the MAHA report. This administration makes zero sense.

Tell you what, can RFK and Vought go into the octagon and duke it out in an MMA match to see which message wins? Deregulation that pollutes the country more with all of the chemicals the MAHA report hates, or more regulations that the MAHA report wants to protect our kids from all of the environmental chemicals.

EPA stopped caring about anything but climate change and became disposable.

The prioir administration was working to address PFAs which are the biggest elephant in the room, and the current administration blatantly rolled that back. You, yes you, I'm talking to you - you are drinking water with PFAs today, every day, your kids are, your grandkids will, and it's making us all sick in multiple ways. The Trump administration is making this worse and they don't care. Seed oils are a distraction from the giant elephant in the room. And you fell for it. But keep drinking your PFA, your fridge filter probably doesn't adequately remove them.

Not one of you cared about PFAs before January 20th when you suddenly became experts. You talked about climate change all the time though.

Show me the threads where you talked about it before the election. Show me the offices at EPA dedicated to the issue. How do they compare to climate change?

Your precious fluoride and infinity vaxes are going away and you're just trying to latch on to anything to distract people. The second anyone starts to do something about plastics you'll just "what about" something else anyway.

BS...there are offices at the federal and state level that are/were dealing with PFAs. Just because YOU hadn't heard of it doesn't mean it wasn't and isn't a concern. It is lie how Trump uses a new word and says "no one ever heard of it" - BS and stop with the gaslighting.

+1

Also "precious fluoride?" Do MAHAs ever mention the 700% increase in young children needing IV antibiotics for dental decay related infections in Calgary after they got rid of fluoride? No? Hm.

You need to drink fluoride to have healthy teeth? There is no other way you can get enough of it on your tooth enamel? Like mouthwash or a toothpaste? Fluoride in drinking water doesn’t give a choice to people who want to avoid it. removing it doesn’t take away the choice of others to have fluoride in their dental care.

The existing studies on fluoride use levels well above existing levels in the US and even then show a negligible impact.

When there is actual research showing existing levels in the US are more harmful than the risk of not fluoridating the water, get back to us.

So you would trade 3-5 IQ points to save yourself the trouble of applying fluoride directly to your teeth?

Have existing studies shown that current levels of fluoride impact IQ levels?

Nope.

To be fair, there are probably studies that RFK is basing his opinion on, but they are the same quackery that got us a measles epidemic.

There are not, not at current max levels in US drinking water. But perhaps he used AI to fake some.

It os worth noting that the typical assumption is that a group who stands to make tons of money from removal of fluoride - dentists - are majority opposed to removal of fluoride. Future dental bills gonna skyrocket (along with dental insurance premiums)

Keep in mind that the max level was 1.3ppm while almost everyone posting here was growing up. The studies show a 3-5 point drop at the 1.5ppm level. No one has really studied anything under 1.5 yet, but someone will eventually. The loss will probably be linear with our current max showing a 1-3 point drop.

Utah just banned fluoride, so we'll get to see how things go there. Also, the vast majority of the world doesn't fluoridate their water, and many of those places have better teeth than us. Then again, those places don't consume anywhere near the amount of sugar we do....

Meaning we're adding one poison to our water to counteract the other poison in our water. So why not just remove both, save money and be healthier? That's what you're fighting against for some reason...

You think a one point change in mean IQ is detectable? IQ is heavily dependent on socioeconomic factors and has been increasing for decades.

We do not need to see what happens in Utah. We saw what happened in TExas, Dallas specifically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

It is sorta in the US Constitution, that pesky document that guides the values of our country.

And it's sorta important to have a healthy population and also to prevent and prepare for possible pandemics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

It is sorta in the US Constitution, that pesky document that guides the values of our country.

I mean, I am for EPA and safe drinking water and other ways the government can help us with environmental factors. But how does the constitution specifically point to government hand in personal health?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

It is sorta in the US Constitution, that pesky document that guides the values of our country.

I mean, I am for EPA and safe drinking water and other ways the government can help us with environmental factors. But how does the constitution specifically point to government hand in personal health?

What does the preamble to the Constitution say are the purposes of the government that it is establishing? "To establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. "Promote the general welfare" can absolutely be read to include public health.

Actually, I'm not sure how you can say that a government IS promoting the general welfare of its citizens if it does nothing for public health or the environment, or works actively to harm both of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, how does MAHA fit in?

Bwhahaha. You know what's toxic? The fruit that's needed to produce the cashew nut. They have to heavily process it in order to remove toxins that are lethal to humans. Even the seeds of fruits like apples to peaches are toxic.

And hexanes? Big whoop, those evaporate off. The video useless. The point is that the MAHA report spends inordinate amounts of time discussing how chemicals and toxins in the environment from our drinking water to the air we breathe are cumulatively making our children sicker. Fine, great!

So how does MAGA square away the findings of the MAHA report while concomitantly gutting the EPA and trying to to jam through deregulation (thank you Vought!) that will make it far easier for industries to pollute our country that is apparently making our children sicker, per the MAHA report. This administration makes zero sense.

Tell you what, can RFK and Vought go into the octagon and duke it out in an MMA match to see which message wins? Deregulation that pollutes the country more with all of the chemicals the MAHA report hates, or more regulations that the MAHA report wants to protect our kids from all of the environmental chemicals.

EPA stopped caring about anything but climate change and became disposable.

The prioir administration was working to address PFAs which are the biggest elephant in the room, and the current administration blatantly rolled that back. You, yes you, I'm talking to you - you are drinking water with PFAs today, every day, your kids are, your grandkids will, and it's making us all sick in multiple ways. The Trump administration is making this worse and they don't care. Seed oils are a distraction from the giant elephant in the room. And you fell for it. But keep drinking your PFA, your fridge filter probably doesn't adequately remove them.

Not one of you cared about PFAs before January 20th when you suddenly became experts. You talked about climate change all the time though.

Show me the threads where you talked about it before the election. Show me the offices at EPA dedicated to the issue. How do they compare to climate change?

Your precious fluoride and infinity vaxes are going away and you're just trying to latch on to anything to distract people. The second anyone starts to do something about plastics you'll just "what about" something else anyway.

BS...there are offices at the federal and state level that are/were dealing with PFAs. Just because YOU hadn't heard of it doesn't mean it wasn't and isn't a concern. It is lie how Trump uses a new word and says "no one ever heard of it" - BS and stop with the gaslighting.

+1

Also "precious fluoride?" Do MAHAs ever mention the 700% increase in young children needing IV antibiotics for dental decay related infections in Calgary after they got rid of fluoride? No? Hm.

You need to drink fluoride to have healthy teeth? There is no other way you can get enough of it on your tooth enamel? Like mouthwash or a toothpaste? Fluoride in drinking water doesn’t give a choice to people who want to avoid it. removing it doesn’t take away the choice of others to have fluoride in their dental care.

The existing studies on fluoride use levels well above existing levels in the US and even then show a negligible impact.

When there is actual research showing existing levels in the US are more harmful than the risk of not fluoridating the water, get back to us.

So you would trade 3-5 IQ points to save yourself the trouble of applying fluoride directly to your teeth?

Have existing studies shown that current levels of fluoride impact IQ levels?

Nope.

To be fair, there are probably studies that RFK is basing his opinion on, but they are the same quackery that got us a measles epidemic.

There are not, not at current max levels in US drinking water. But perhaps he used AI to fake some.

It os worth noting that the typical assumption is that a group who stands to make tons of money from removal of fluoride - dentists - are majority opposed to removal of fluoride. Future dental bills gonna skyrocket (along with dental insurance premiums)

Keep in mind that the max level was 1.3ppm while almost everyone posting here was growing up. The studies show a 3-5 point drop at the 1.5ppm level. No one has really studied anything under 1.5 yet, but someone will eventually. The loss will probably be linear with our current max showing a 1-3 point drop.

Utah just banned fluoride, so we'll get to see how things go there. Also, the vast majority of the world doesn't fluoridate their water, and many of those places have better teeth than us. Then again, those places don't consume anywhere near the amount of sugar we do....

Meaning we're adding one poison to our water to counteract the other poison in our water. So why not just remove both, save money and be healthier? That's what you're fighting against for some reason...

You think a one point change in mean IQ is detectable? IQ is heavily dependent on socioeconomic factors and has been increasing for decades.

You're still arguing that IQ loss is an acceptable price to keep people from having to use a topical treatment?

You do realize many countries have better tooth health than we do without fluoridation right? Denmark is generally regarded as having the best tooth health in the world, and no one there fluoridates the water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

It is sorta in the US Constitution, that pesky document that guides the values of our country.

I mean, I am for EPA and safe drinking water and other ways the government can help us with environmental factors. But how does the constitution specifically point to government hand in personal health?

google "general welfare clause"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

It is sorta in the US Constitution, that pesky document that guides the values of our country.

I mean, I am for EPA and safe drinking water and other ways the government can help us with environmental factors. But how does the constitution specifically point to government hand in personal health?

"

I don't need to Google that. It's about defending the nation. It's defense and taxes. That is quite a stretch


google "general welfare clause I'm dying 😆😆😆

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole MAHA concept is idiotic. Why is it the government’s business whether people are healthy or not?

It is sorta in the US Constitution, that pesky document that guides the values of our country.

I mean, I am for EPA and safe drinking water and other ways the government can help us with environmental factors. But how does the constitution specifically point to government hand in personal health?

"

I don't need to Google that. It's about defending the nation. It's defense and taxes. That is quite a stretch


google "general welfare clause I'm dying 😆😆😆

No, “provide for the common defense” is about defending the nation. Why would they include two different phrases with the same meaning?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.notus.org/health-science/make-america-healthy-again-report-citation-errors

The Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” report misinterprets some studies and cites others that don’t exist, according to the listed authors.

“Formatting issues” as if the margins were too wide or something

[Anonymous]

DP.

You do all realize this whole MAHA schtick is aligned with MAGA, right?

How can you defend any of this? Seriously, HOW?!?!