Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

1.0K
• (edited ) (+10/-0)
Pineal Gland Discussion

Tl;Dr This is a discussion thread. If you don't want to read a lot it's probably not for you, but thank you for stopping by.

Pineal Gland General

Have you not heard of the pineal Gland? Do you not even Joe Rogan (dailystormer.name)?

The argument goes that the Pineal Gland is the part of the body that interfaces with the psychic or spiritual planes -- essentially the third eye or Ajna chakra in modern terms. However, most of our Pineal Glands are unnecessarily calcified, due to flouride exposure in our youth. If we could only decalcify that Pineal, we would be able to be more psychic and more spiritually connected. Some people recommend taking iodine to do just that or to counteract iodine deficiency related to fluoride intake. (pic8.co)

Skeptics assert the above is pseudoscientific, new age bullshit. And they apparently can get quite huffy about if on Q&A sites like Quora. 1 (quora.com) 2 (quora.com)

I can summarize their argument as the following: Flouride doesn't calcify. There is no evidence the Pineal Gland is supposed to perform any spiritual interfacing function, nor is there any evidence that flouride calcifies it and stops this function.

The skeptics arguments strike me as somewhat suspicious because of their tone (adopting a high academic lexicon to appear more intelligent and attempting to shame rather than simply correct the perceived inaccuracies , which I've often seen paired with other dubious viewpoints such as racial universalism, Holocaust trutherism, brexit remain camp, gender wage gap, etc.) and also because their dismissal of flouride as a calcifying agent seems like an overreach and possibly a unicorn truth that ignores the complex interaction of chemicals in the human body.

To wit, my dentist says we flouridate water because dietary flouride causes better calcification of the teeth (only in young people whose bodies are still developing; doesn't do anything for adults really). Whether flouride calcifies the teeth directly or through interactions with other calcifying agents shouldn't matter. The introduction of it to the developing human body eventually leads to calcification of the teeth, according to my dentist. I did not ask the dentist about the Pineal Gland because I assume they would have no opinion to offer.

Yet the skeptics of Pineal Gland calcification do raise an important question: If Pineal Gland calcification is a reality, what is the evidence for it?

Further: What is the evidence for the Pineal Gland's spiritual component or interactions? Is decalcification even possible and if so, through what means?

I'm going to be casually looking into this a little more tonight. Will post answers I find in comments. In the meantime it'd be cool if anyone who knows a little about it would weigh in.

Tl;Dr This is a discussion thread. If you don't want to read a lot it's probably not for you, but thank you for stopping by. #Pineal Gland General Have you not heard of the pineal Gland? Do you not even [Joe Rogan](https://dailystormer.name/joe-rogan-calls-in-sneaky-orthodox-jew-gives-him-two-hour-lecture-on-psychedelic-drugs/)? The argument goes that the Pineal Gland is the part of the body that interfaces with the psychic or spiritual planes -- essentially the third eye or Ajna chakra in modern terms. However, most of our Pineal Glands are unnecessarily calcified, due to flouride exposure in our youth. If we could only decalcify that Pineal, we would be able to be more psychic and more spiritually connected. Some people recommend taking iodine to do just that [or to counteract iodine deficiency related to fluoride intake.](https://pic8.co/sh/zfhhDk.png) Skeptics assert the above is pseudoscientific, new age bullshit. And they apparently can get quite huffy about if on Q&A sites like Quora. [1](https://www.quora.com/Is-it-actually-possible-to-decalcify-the-pineal-gland/answer/Mark-Abrahams-PhD-LMHC) [2](https://www.quora.com/Does-liquid-iodine-really-help-to-decalcify-the-pineal-gland-after-years-of-drinking-water-with-fluoride-in-it/answer/Gerry-Uswak) I can summarize their argument as the following: Flouride doesn't calcify. There is no evidence the Pineal Gland is supposed to perform any spiritual interfacing function, nor is there any evidence that flouride calcifies it and stops this function. The skeptics arguments strike me as somewhat suspicious because of their tone (adopting a high academic lexicon to appear more intelligent and attempting to shame rather than simply correct the perceived inaccuracies , which I've often seen paired with other dubious viewpoints such as racial universalism, Holocaust trutherism, brexit remain camp, gender wage gap, etc.) and also because their dismissal of flouride as a calcifying agent seems like an overreach and possibly a unicorn truth that ignores the complex interaction of chemicals in the human body. To wit, my dentist says we flouridate water because dietary flouride causes better calcification of the teeth (only in young people whose bodies are still developing; doesn't do anything for adults really). Whether flouride calcifies the teeth directly or through interactions with other calcifying agents shouldn't matter. The introduction of it to the developing human body eventually leads to calcification of the teeth, according to my dentist. I did not ask the dentist about the Pineal Gland because I assume they would have no opinion to offer. Yet the skeptics of Pineal Gland calcification do raise an important question: If Pineal Gland calcification is a reality, what is the evidence for it? Further: What is the evidence for the Pineal Gland's spiritual component or interactions? Is decalcification even possible and if so, through what means? I'm going to be casually looking into this a little more tonight. Will post answers I find in comments. In the meantime it'd be cool if anyone who knows a little about it would weigh in.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (25).
[–] • 2 pts

I've heard that dietary flouride interacts with the body differently than topical.

Topical I believe is good for restoring tooth enamel in adults, which is why you get a shot or foam or varnish treatment when you go to the dentist. But the reason we flouridate water is apparently because developing children get much stronger teeth from dietary flouride. Why we push this on everyone instead of encouraging supplementation for children is beyond me, but this is my understand of different applications of flouride.

[–] • 1 pt

I havent seen fluoride treatment from dentists in forever now, having gone to three different ones in the last 20 years. And would refuse it. Its not even easy or cheap to get filters that filter out fluoride from water. If you swish it in your mouth your absorbing it and no way you aint swallowing some. This shit is outlawed in most country's.

I admit to being a bit of a conspiracy theory dude. But fluoride is a drug for the masses.

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

My take on it is that topical fluoride treatments are on the better side of cost/benefit, since they are done fairly infrequently and do strengthen teeth, while fluoride in the water is completely unnecessary (since it confers no benefit on adults) and probably more harmful than the spot treatments because of the prolonged and constant exposure. I'm not an expert on this, but that's my uninformed opinion.

edit: I'm not saying topical fluoride does no harm. It probably does some. But even cold medicine does harm in some measure. It's just a cost/benefit thing.

[–] • 1 pt

I came across this in my readings: http://fluoridealert.org/content/top_ten/

No. 3 in the list is fluoride dental treatments

Granted, this site is 100% anti-fluoride

3) Do NOT Get Fluoride Gel Treatments at the Dentist
Although dental researchers have stated on numerous occasions that fluoride gel treatment should ONLY be used for patients at highest risk of cavities, many dentists continue to apply fluoride gels irrespective of the patient’s cavity risk. The fluoride gel procedure requires the patient to clamp down on a tray for 4 minutes and uses an extremely concentrated, acidic fluoride gel (12,300 ppm). Because of the fluoride gel’s high acidity, the saliva glands produce a large amount of saliva during the treatment, which makes it extremely difficult (both for children and adults) to avoid swallowing the gel.

Even when dentists use precautionary measures such as suction devices, children and adults still ingest significant quantities of the paste, which can cause incredibly high spikes of fluoride in the blood (for up to 15 hours). These fluoride levels place patients, particularly children, at risk for stomach pain, nausea and vomiting, and places a person at risk for short-term kidney damage, harm to the reproductive system, and impairment to glucose metabolism. The next time your dentist asks you whether you want a fluoride gel treatment, say NO.