is green tea okay?

[Vort]

9 minutes ago, Maureen said:

What you have presented doesn't change the fact that oral hygiene is a good thing, not a bad thing; it's GOOD.

No one claimed otherwise, Maureen. You are misrepresenting the arguments of others. Shame on you.

10 minutes ago, Maureen said:

Argue all you want, share your opinions all you want. It won't change the benefits of oral hygiene

No. Rather, it clarifies the benefits of oral hygiene, and points out that toothpaste per se has very little to do with those benefits.

10 minutes ago, Maureen said:

which includes brushing teeth with toothpaste.

Prove it. Your own passionate belief doesn't really mean anything.

[Maureen]

11 minutes ago, Vort said:

Please point out where I or anyone else on this thread have argued otherwise.

"I'm against hunger! I think food is GOOD! Nothing you say will convince me otherwise!"

Seriously, Maureen, try just a little bit not to be an idiot.

Seriously Vort, read what you've written. Of all the things to argue about on an LDS forum, you're arguing about how toothpaste appears to have NO POSITIVE effect AT ALL on teeth or oral hygiene. You've stated your own ideas about this without any references to back up your claims. I disagree with you, so you reply with name calling? How does that help your argument?

M.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Maureen

[Vort]

Just now, Maureen said:

you're arguing about how toothpaste appears to have NO POSITIVE effect AT ALL on teeth or oral hygiene.

Except for fluoride.

Just now, Maureen said:

You've stated your own ideas about this without any references to back up your claims.

You are the one making the positive claim, Maureen: Toothpaste aids oral hygiene. It is to you to establish that point. I maintain that it is mostly a Madison Avenue thing. Please cite relevant research (not popular articles) that substantiate your claim.

1 minute ago, Maureen said:

I disagree with you, so you reply with name calling? How does help your argument?

You made false allegations against those innocent of what you claimed. Shame on you. Name-calling was indeed out of order, but it was in response to your original offense of bearing false witness -- something you have yet to admit. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your viewpoint), your offending post is still available for all to see.

[Maureen]

9 minutes ago, Vort said:

...your offending post is still available for all to see.

Wow! Toothpaste has got your panties in a bunch? We're talking about toothpaste Vort, not something personal. We disagree. I'm in favour of toothpaste, you're not. You don't like my link, fine, don't like it. But you will not convince me that your way of thinking about TOOTHPASTE, is correct.

M.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Maureen

[Maureen]

32 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

...And then you make another leap of using this "evidence" as foundation for how tea's habit forming qualities is of the same footing as toothpaste?

I don't think I've done any such thing. Point out the post that makes you think I've done that.

M. 

[Vort]

Toothpaste does not prevent dental erosion or hypersensitivity: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180313152118.htm

Toothpaste does not help remove plaque: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jcpe.12615

Toothpaste fluoride levels, and only fluoride levels, aid in prevention of dental caries: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD007868.pub2/full

38 minutes ago, Maureen said:

Wow! Toothpaste has got your panties in a bunch? We're talking about toothpaste Vort, not something personal. We disagree.

True enough. Yet you're the one who countered a neutral, fact-based response with this false accusation:

1 hour ago, Maureen said:

I'm shocked. I was not expecting this anti-toothpaste, anti-oral hygiene view. Good luck to you and your teeth.

So who made this discussion personal, Maureen?

Oh, that's right. It was you.

38 minutes ago, Maureen said:

I'm in favour of toothpaste, you're not.

This is factually incorrect. I never said I'm not in favor of toothpaste. You should read what I write more critically.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Vort

[NeuroTypical]

Closing thread in three...

 

[Fether]

I read a book titled “The Power if Habit” a while back and they had a whole chapter on toothpaste!

Turns out in the early 1900s no one was brushing their teeth with the fluoride tooth pastes. Well how did they get people to start? A company called Pepsodent ran a marketing campaign where the basic message was “see that film on your teeth, that is gross! See when you brush with our tooth paste it burns and timgles a little? That means your teeth are getting clean! See that foam!? Foam is good and removes that gross film!”

That film Pepsodent claimed? Only something called “bio film”. A quick finger wipe can get rid of that.

the burning and tingling? All it was was citric acid with some minty flavoring.

The foam? Sinclair says “every company adds sodium laureth sulfate to make toothpaste foam more. There is no cleaning benefit but people feel better when there is a bunch of suds.” (Goes on to talk about how soap, shampoo, detergent and really every other cleaning product is made to foam a little because if it doesn’t, people won’t like it).

So why is tooth paste so popular? Marketing and habits! Nothing more. If you have ever gone and gotten a prescription tooth paste, no matter how hard you brush, no foam will appear. Why? Because it doesn’t matter and the tooth paste is literally 100% fluoride. The only ingredient that matters!

Edited August 16, 2018 by Fether

[anatess2]

 

1 hour ago, Maureen said:

I don't think I've done any such thing. Point out the post that makes you think I've done that.

M. 

Here you go:

16 hours ago, Maureen said:

18 hours ago, bytebear said:

But there are habitual products that are part of daily routine.  Those are the ones specified in the Word of Wisdom.

A product used habitually doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad thing. Toothpaste should be used as part of a daily routine. Brushing your teeth is a good habit.

M.

Coffee is a habitual product specified in the WOW.  You related it to toothpaste in this response.

 

Edited August 16, 2018 by anatess2

[Maureen]

34 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Here you go:

Coffee is a habitual product specified in the WOW.  You related it to toothpaste in this response.

No I didn't. @bytebear used the words "habitual products", seeming to convey all habitual products are against the WofW. For one thing habitual can be positive or negative. There are good habits to have. I consider toothpaste to be a habitual product. People constantly buy it because they constantly use it, due to their habit of daily oral hygiene.

M.

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, Maureen said:

No I didn't. @bytebear used the words "habitual products", seeming to convey all habitual products are against the WofW. For one thing habitual can be positive or negative. There are good habits to have. I consider toothpaste to be a habitual product. People constantly buy it because they constantly use it, due to their habit of daily oral hygiene.

M.

That's not what he wrote.  He stated that coffee or tea is not in the WOW because it came from a bean or it came from a leaf or whatever.  It is because of its mind-altering effects and it's cultural acceptance as a habitual product.  Of course that implies it is a negative habit as we are referencing the WOW.

You can argue about the habitual effect of coffee and tea in today's modern environment as "Tea Time" and "Coffee Time" were the daily routine of people in the Americas and the British that is not as much practiced in today's busy modern citizens, but to relate it to toothpaste within the context of the conversation is silly.

[Maureen]

3 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

That's not what he wrote....

That's exactly what he wrote, I even quoted him.

M.

[anatess2]

Just now, Maureen said:

That's exactly what he wrote, I even quoted him.

M.

The context is in his super long post above it.

[Maureen]

Just now, anatess2 said:

The context is in his super long post above it.

I wasn't replying to the post above it, I was replying to the post I quoted.

M.

[zil]

Meanwhile, over on the fountain pen network:

InkLover16: [posts photo of hand-written message - with pen in photo]

DipMeister: What ink is that?

PelikanB: The ink isn't for me, but you have gorgeous handwriting, @InkLover16!

InkLover16: It's Diamine Majestic Blue.  You're too kind, @PelikanB.

PaperGuy: Is that Tomoe River?

DipMeister: Fabulous ink!  Off to get a sample from Goulet!

InkLover16: Good guess, @PaperGuy - it's the 58gsm variety.

GNibster: That color is my least favorite in the whole world, but I love your pen!  Is that a Conklin?

etc.

 

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, Maureen said:

I wasn't replying to the post above it, I was replying to the post I quoted.

M.

Then you're replying to a post RIPPED from its context and that's why your toothpaste comment comes off as silly.  HIS post above it is where all that started.   So, we got 2 paths here - you can continue out of context and end up in an argument with Vort, or you follow the conversation.  There's a 3rd option... quit the conversation.  Option 3 is best if you don't want to bother with context and don't want to come out sounding silly.  But, hey, that's just my take on it.  Carry on.

[anatess2]

Just now, zil said:

Meanwhile, over on the fountain pen network:

InkLover16: [posts photo of hand-written message - with pen in photo]

DipMeister: What ink is that?

PelikanB: The ink isn't for me, but you have gorgeous handwriting, @InkLover16!

InkLover16: It's Diamine Majestic Blue.  You're too kind, @PelikanB.

PaperGuy: Is that Tomoe River?

DipMeister: Fabulous ink!  Off to get a sample from Goulet!

InkLover16: Good guess, @PaperGuy - it's the 58gsm variety.

GNibster: That color is my least favorite in the whole world, but I love your pen!  Is that a Conklin?

etc.

 

And in the fishing network:

Guy1:  Hey, are you going fishing today?

Guy 2:  No, I'm going fishing today.

Guy 1:  Oh sorry, I thought you were fishing today.

[Maureen]

11 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

...There's a 3rd option... quit the conversation....

I can't quit the conversation since you keep commenting/replying to my posts. That would be rude. 😊

BTW, all posters can reply to any post they wish to, whether you agree with it or not.

M.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Maureen
adding emoji

[bytebear]

Do I get to define my own context, or do you force your interpretation (falsely) upon my statement?

[Vort]

6 hours ago, zil said:

Meanwhile, over on the fountain pen network:

InkLover16: [posts photo of hand-written message - with pen in photo]

DipMeister: What ink is that?

PelikanB: The ink isn't for me, but you have gorgeous handwriting, @InkLover16!

InkLover16: It's Diamine Majestic Blue.  You're too kind, @PelikanB.

PaperGuy: Is that Tomoe River?

DipMeister: Fabulous ink!  Off to get a sample from Goulet!

InkLover16: Good guess, @PaperGuy - it's the 58gsm variety.

GNibster: That color is my least favorite in the whole world, but I love your pen!  Is that a Conklin?

etc.

[Sunday21]

There used to be a statement by the Lds church on Green Tea and a bunch of WOW issues.  I remember posting it. I can’t find this statement now, just the usual references to tea and coffee. So maybe, this is a ‘use your own judgement’ issue? 

[pwrfrk]

I don't see this as much of a WoW issue as others here.  I figure that if you want to drink it, I'm not stopping you.  Have at it.  Why ask if it's exempted from the WoW?  It is, if anything bragging about breaking the rules and expecting to get away with it by asking people to judge before there has been an allegation.

 

[Sunday21]

Well to be fair there is some confusion. I had a bishop tell me that green tea was fine. I have had some long term and very serious members tell me that green tea is fine. So...I can see why people would have different points of view. 

[zil]

36 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Well to be fair there is some confusion. I had a bishop tell me that green tea was fine. I have had some long term and very serious members tell me that green tea is fine. So...I can see why people would have different points of view. 

I suspect the vast majority of Mormons members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints¹ have no earthly clue what "green tea" actually means (or white tea, black tea, chai, or any other drinks made using tea leaves - or not made using tea leaves, but still called "tea").  They probably could tell you what "reading tea leaves" means, even though they've only seen it in Harry Potter movies.

¹from outside the British empire.

[Sunday21]

20 minutes ago, zil said:

Mormons members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints^1

LOL😇 Yeah! I expect there will be a lot of this! I am taking a vow of silence until the Aussies and the UK people come up with some cool lingo!