Fluoride, In most water but ignored

[Croyzen]

When reading books like "Water" and reviewing "Bru n Water" it seems fluoride either gets completely ignored or gets maybe one sentence to the effect of "supports healthy teeth" (amusing). **Added** fluoride is in virtually all water supplies and there are tons of studies on water fluoridation and its possible negative impacts on health. There is also plenty of evidence to support that fluoridation has no benefits on teeth. Suppose I wanted to make an organic beer, would fluoridated water be acceptable? Do pro brewers use fluoridated water? How does fluoride content vary from source to source? What options does the brewer have to remove fluoride from the water? Pros? Cons? Not a peep out there. Chlorine gets all the attention because of how it can ruin the outcome of the beer, but what about the fact that fluoride is added to virtually all water supplies. Why totally ignore or gloss over such a fact yet discuss virtually every other compound that may be in the brewing water. Am I missing something? Thanks!

 

[DavidJP]

Its probably down to comparative levels. How much actual fluoride is in your water. Ours is 0.8ppm fluoride which i have severe doubts you would be able to taste so then it comes down to supposed health effects of such a level. I know there's a debate about adding fluoride to water, I happen to think its probably on balance a good thing but I realise others don't think like that. If your worried about it use RO to build your water up.

 

[Croyzen]

I'm not really trying to so much start the debate on fluoride but rather point out that it's dumped in virtually all water supplies and there are some valid questions a brewer may have about it. Sure it may not effect mash pH, etc but it's in the water. I own the book "Water" and I know that a page or two discussing the above questions would have hit home for a lot of brewers more so than pages and pages on how pro brewers use the water they clean stuff with.

I realize I can RO fluoride out, but do others? It's (sodium fluoride) not naturally occurring in the water AND it's purposely added to it. You'd think something like that would get a page or two in a book about brewing water.

Beer is one of those things that's made without the use of a lot of additives, junk, etc. Some brewers may have the goal of keeping things pure. For instance, if I'm following purity laws and use fluoridated water does that qualify?

When I bought the water book this was one of the first things I looked for, answers to these questions.

 

[Beernik]

As brewers we generally worry about: TDS, Alkalinity, pH, bicarbonate, and sulfate because they all affect flavor.

I would expect that fluoride gets little attention in brewing books because it has little (if any) impact on flavor.

Generally, you are looking at 0.5ppm to 1ppm fluoride in tap water. TDS, Alkalinity, bicarbonate, and sulfate can run into the hundreds of ppm in tap water.

Residual chlorine is 4ppm. But the reason chloramine gets a lot of attention is because it is much more chemically stable than chlorine gas. Also, water systems like switching to chloramine because of worker safety.

The only brewery I've talked water with ROed all their water. Which means if any flouride is still in their water, it's only a fraction of what was delivered to them.

 

[Croyzen]

Historically brewers did not use artificially fluoridated brewing water. There are people out there that won't touch tap water for drinking because if it. (I drink the tap water occasionally and brew with it occasionally. This thread is to bring this issue up and the questions that revolve around it.) In my opinion just because something does not effect the beer flavor doesn't mean the brewer shouldn't have the knowledge to decide how to handle something deliberately added to the brewing water.

This .5 to 1ppm of fluoride, is this from the city report which I have heard is notoriously unreliable or is it from the Ward labs water report everyone gets?

 

[BrewKnurd]

I'm not really trying to so much start the debate on fluoride but rather point out that it's dumped in virtually all water supplies and there are some valid questions a brewer may have about it. Sure it may not effect mash pH, etc but it's in the water. I own the book "Water" and I know that a page or two discussing the above questions would have hit home for a lot of brewers more so than pages and pages on how pro brewers use the water they clean stuff with.

Well, it would have hit home for you, that's for sure.

I realize I can RO fluoride out, but do others? It's not naturally occurring in the water AND it's purposely added to it. You'd think something like that would get a page or two in a book about brewing water.

I would guess most who RO their water are doing it for reasons other than fluoride.

I'm really not sure why you think this should get more than a quick mention in brewing books. If there are no known impacts on brewing results, and the only concern is whether the brewer doesn't like fluoride, then its entirely a personal preference issue.

Beer is one of those things that's made without the use of a lot of additives, junk, etc. Some brewers may have the goal of keeping things pure. For instance, if I'm following purity laws and use fluoridated water does that qualify?

Since you're not legally bound to any purity laws, all that matters is your interpretation of the laws. If you feel that fluoride violates purity laws and you don't want to do that, then us something that doesn't have fluoride. Which means you are limited to distilled, or something you get out of a stream (although that's going to have all kinds of "non water" stuff in it). Trying to follow the "nothing but grain, water, hops and yeast" thing down to the ppm range is going to be a challenge.

 

[snowtires]

No fluoride in the water where I live

 

[Croyzen]

I guess I'll just accept that if water has been altered but has no impact on brewing flavor that water experts don't waste time on such things. The logic here is that if something impacts beer flavor and brewing performance, discuss it, otherwise, ignore it as this should only be a concern if the brewer decides it's an issue. The brewer should seek knowledge elsewhere and decide if this matters to him/her.

I found this site where this guy tests the fluoride content of various commercial beers using a meter;

http://ffbeers.com/

There are two organic beers there. One from Germany @ .3ppm and one @ .6ppm. So maybe I answered that question! There is no way (actually I have no way of knowing) that one @ .6ppm is naturally occurring and I believe @ .3ppm that's probably been added too. (I don't know this.)

These are just questions about fluoride. I get flamed about it a lot! I drink a lot of carbon filtered tap water so if there is a problem with it I suppose I'm in trouble

 

[Yooper]

Historically brewers did not use fluoridated brewing water. There are people out there that won't touch tap water for drinking because if it. (I drink the tap water occasionally and brew with it occasionally. This thread is to bring this issue up and the questions that revolve around it.) In my opinion just because something does not effect the beer flavor doesn't mean the brewer shouldn't have the knowledge to decide how to handle something deliberately added to the brewing water.

This .5 to 1ppm of fluoride, is this from the city report which I have heard is notoriously unreliable or is it from the Ward labs water report everyone gets?

Sometimes fluoride is in the water supply naturally. Our city doesn't add fluoride but there is still a very tiny bit naturally.

 

[Croyzen]

I was not clear in my use of "fluoride." I'm referring to added fluoride to the water supply and not naturally occurring. According to those who think fluoride is an issue, one (added fluoride) is more toxic than the other. (naturally occurring) I edited my posts above.

From the fluoride debate... take it for what it is I suppose...

"The claim that fluoridation is one of 'nature's experiments' is not valid because the salts put into the water supply, sodium fluoride or silicofluorides, are industrial products never found in natural water or in organisms. They are, furthermore, notoriously toxic, sufficiently so to be used as rat poison or insecticide. Calcium fluoride, on the other hand, which is the form commonly found in natural waters, is not toxic enough for such uses."

 

[Beernik]

This .5 to 1ppm of fluoride, is this from the city report which I have heard is notoriously unreliable or is it from the Ward labs water report everyone gets?

EPA's maximum allowable level is 4ppm. Their secondary maximum standard for it is 2ppm.

US Department of Health recommends 0.7ppm.

Your county health department probably has a recommended concentration.

 

[MarathonMurse]

"...They are, furthermore, notoriously toxic, sufficiently so to be used as rat poison..."

So is Coumadin (warfarin sodium), something hundreds of thousands of people would die without.

 

[chocotaco]

Precious bodily fluids!

 

[BrewKnurd]

I was not clear in my use of "fluoride." I'm referring to added fluoride to the water supply and not naturally occurring. According to those who think fluoride is an issue, one (added fluoride) is more toxic than the other. (naturally occurring) I edited my posts above.

From the fluoride debate... take it for what it is I suppose...

"The claim that fluoridation is one of 'nature's experiments' is not valid because the salts put into the water supply, sodium fluoride or silicofluorides, are industrial products never found in natural water or in organisms. They are, furthermore, notoriously toxic, sufficiently so to be used as rat poison or insecticide. Calcium fluoride, on the other hand, which is the form commonly found in natural waters, is not toxic enough for such uses."

This quote doesn't make much sense to me. At all. The way solubility of ionic compounds work is that the compound dissociates into its individual ions. A fluoride ion that was originally bound to a sodium is absolutely identical in solution to a fluoride ion that was initially bound to a calcium (if you get it to dissolve in the first place, which I only mention because the solubility of calcium fluoride is apparently quite low). Viewed another way, "natural water" with calcium fluoride would be just as toxic as soon as you added any table salt as water with sodium fluoride.

Once it's in solution, fluoride is fluoride. If you want to provide some evidence that the cation that comes along with it, go for it, but the idea that the fluoride itself is more or less dangerous based on the compound it came from doesn't make sense.

 

[Croyzen]

It doesn't make sense? I'm no expert but there's been published data on it for years. Here's an example;

http://www.fluoridationfacts.com/science/papers/aspects_of_toxicity.htm

Is this all false information? Conspiracy theory? If you have something to refute that by all means post it. I suppose fluoride threads just die in the home brew world because it's inert in its affect on beer. However there are some home brewers and pro brewers that believe artificially fluoridated water should not be in the beer. As an example;

http://www.katu.com/news/business/B...d-fluoridation-effort-168267066.html?mobile=y

Perhaps water fluoridation simply is not understood by those who study brewing water? The impact on the beer is minimal i suppose so educating the brewer about his options with fluoridated water becomes more of a social/moral/personal issue.

 

[Beernik]

I wasn't going to be the first to bring it up, but you asked. In the 18 years I've been in the water and wastewater treatment business, almost everyone I've met that is anti-floridation falls into one of two catagories: 1) they have or know someone who is floride sensitive, or 2) they believe (insert villian) is engaging in (insert conspiracy).

The webpage has links to fluoride victims. I hardly view that as objective science. It also lists documents complied by the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments that are supposed to be fluoride related but are actually plutonium experiments.

I don't see anything to change my opinion that the fluoridation facts website is just another "(insert villain) engaging in (insert conspiracy)".

 

[snowtires]

Ill go one further. That website is the worst excuse for a scientific writeup I have ever seen.
Water can be boiled down to get concentrated fluoride to put in peoples food to poison them? Is that for real?
My water has chlorine, iron, calcium, magnesium etc. All of which are poison in some concentration I'm sure. Wowsers

 

[Croyzen]

I wasn't going to be the first to bring it up, but you asked. In the 18 years I've been in the water and wastewater treatment business, almost everyone I've met that is anti-floridation falls into one of two catagories: 1) they have or know someone who is floride sensitive, or 2) they believe (insert villian) is engaging in (insert conspiracy).

The webpage has links to fluoride victims. I hardly view that as objective science. It also lists documents complied by the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments that are supposed to be fluoride related but are actually plutonium experiments.

I don't see anything to change my opinion that the fluoridation facts website is just another "(insert villain) engaging in (insert conspiracy)".

I'm neither of those. In fact, as stated in the thread I drink fluoridated water. That same study and others can be found elsewhere without links. The bottom line is the study is based off proven research. No less legitimate than any of the research done here on brewing water. You can choose not to like it. I can choose not to believe the optimum mash pH range is close to 5.4. That doesn't make it less so. You asked for the difference between sodium fluoride and calcium fluoride in water and I gave it to you. If you don't like that particular website, find another one. I simply read the study which I've seen elsewhere. See no conspiracy in it. I guess when the science can't be broken up, one must look for another way to dismiss it. Rather than say anyone anti fluoride believes in villains, pony up some counter evidence to the anti-fluoride claims, perhaps based on your own research? Since you work in the waste water business I'm sure you are an expert on public water fluoridation, much more than myself.

 

[BrewKnurd]

It doesn't make sense? I'm no expert but there's been published data on it for years. Here's an example;

http://www.fluoridationfacts.com/science/papers/aspects_of_toxicity.htm

Is this all false information? Conspiracy theory?

That page states that the compound themselves, in their pure form, have differing levels of toxicity. I never disputed that, because I don't know and honestly don't care. Without getting into concentration levels, taking about whether something is toxic is worthless. Yeast produce hydrogen sulfide, which is quite lethal, yet we don't die. Why, because concentration matters.

I disputed the idea that the fluoride ion itself is any different depending on where it came from. It's not. That's just not the way it works when ionic components dissolve in water.

 

[peterj]

I'm doubting the "easy for anyone to obtain" part of this statement, however is it factually inaccurate? Rather than say, anything concentrated enough is a poison or if I drink enough water at a frat boy hazing, I can die, let's just look at that statement, which is certainly designed to support the author's point of view to some extent. Is it wrong? Why? Is there any other substance in public water that this same process above applies?

Yes, pretty much every ion in water including (as you already dismissed) water itself. To name a few substances you can get from water that can poison you in a high dose: calcium chloride, calcium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, sodium chloride (table salt), chlorine (though you can't concentrate that by boiling). Dosage absolutely matters. It's the difference between medicine/nutrient and poison. You can't just say that because one molecule/ion is found in one thing that's unhealthy, then anything else with that in it no matter the concentration is also unhealthy. Carbon is in all of the food we eat, but it's also in dog crap. That doesn't mean all food is the same as dog crap.

 

[Yooper]

Knock it off!

This is one of those cases where "if you can't say something helpful, then shut up" applies. There is no need to be insulting, and take this thread off-topic.

Regardless of the debate of the health risks or benefits of fluoride, the question is about the water and not people's opinions of the OPs beliefs.

 

[snowtires]

Sorry, got off topic.

An organic beer, if I were making an organic beer then I would probably use natural spring water or something that doesn't have man added chemicals like fluoride or chlorine. Because whether fluoride is good or bad unless its natural in the spring water its not really organic even tho the ions are the same. I have not thought too much about it, our water is screened and chlorinated and comes out the tap. It is also true that people worry about many small things like a brass spigot or aluminum pots which may possibly not even be as bad as fluoride, I don't know. But I am starting to figure out why its not discussed very often.