Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fluoride in tap water

Options
12930323435103

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Treora wrote: »
    The real issue here is the ethical question which hangs over the addition of any non-essential substances to public water supplies which, at the end of the day, is exactly what water fluoridation has now become – and represents an altogether more reasonable argument for stopping it.

    Craig Connolly is a Chemistry Postgraduate Researcher at University College Dublin.

    No problem with that approach - which just leaves the question as to whether water fluoridation has a net benefit overall - which studies have shown to be the case.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    bozd wrote: »
    There are so many pages in this thread that didnt read many - but only last week my brother said about systematic dosing of population with floride has mass calming effect. saw research 2008 by German researchers - Gov are trying to zombize us!

    Wow i am convinced


    Any evidence to go along with that?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Wow i am convinced


    Any evidence to go along with that?


    Just a quick google

    https://www.google.ie/search?q=fluoride+numbing&oq=fluoride+numbing&aqs=chrome..69i57.16217j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

    It was also referred to earlier in this thread


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »

    Or, to save time; No - there's no evidence to support this theory.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    alastair wrote: »
    Or, to save time; No - there's no evidence to support this theory.


    Still an interesting theory though


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    More on the Numbing effects

    Interesting read
    Harold Hodge, the Nuclear Connection, and Our Brains

    Harold Hodge’s career is worth investigating. He was the leading scientist who created the data showing fluoride's harmlessness in the doses they planned to administer to the nation’s water supplies. In the late 1990s, Joel Griffiths and Christopher Bryson unearthed documents regarding Hodge’s involvement in acts that are crimes against humanity. To better understand the situation, this essay will need to revisit chemistry, fluorine and the atom bomb.

    Du Pont invented Freon early in the 20th century. During World War II and America’s secret pursuit of the atom bomb, there were many technical hurdles to overcome. A major problem was obtaining the material to do the job. In nature, uranium exists in two basic isotopes. An isotope is a version of an element. What makes one isotope different from another is its number of neutrons. In nature, Uranium is found as Uranium 238 (U-238) and U -235. U-238 is by far the most abundant isotope, comprising more than 99% of all uranium. U-235 is less than one percent of naturally occurring uranium, but it is the isotope needed to make a bomb. The difference between U-235 and U-238 is three neutrons. Those three fewer neutrons make U-235 less stable (undergoing radioactive decay into more stable elements) than U-238. U-235’s half-life (the time it takes for half of it to decay) is 700 million years, but that is short compared to U-238’s 4.5 billion years. It is short enough to lump it together and create a nuclear chain reaction. That chain reaction is the required event for making nuclear weapons and nuclear energy possible.

    How does one separate U-235 from U-238? The answer was simple and the key to making nuclear weapons. Du Pont was the acknowledged master of refrigeration, and using fluorine to make a refrigerant was their specialty. The secret to separating the uranium isotopes was somehow turning uranium into a gas, and uranium hexafluoride was born, which is one uranium atom bonded to six fluorine atoms. It is the only known uranium compound that is a gas at near environmental temperatures (its boiling point is 134° F). It is called “Hex” in the industry. From this essay’s chemistry lesson addendum, it should be obvious why that compound had such a low boiling point. Hex is uranium gas, or one could call it radioactive Freon.

    Here is how they separated it. The Hex of U-235 is slightly lighter than Hex of U-238 because of those three neutrons. What Manhattan Project personnel did was send Hex through a mile-long tunnel filled with screens. As the Hex made its way to the end of the tunnel, the Hex, U-235 rose in comparison to the Hex, U-238, because it was slightly lighter. A membrane then filtered it out. It was an ingenious solution. They accumulated the U-235 an atom at a time. The work of tens of thousands of people was directed at getting a lump of U-235 that I could hold in my hand. That was the active ingredient in the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

    Du Pont produced the fluorine for the Hex. They were making vast amounts of it. During 1944 there was an accident at du Pont, and a cloud of deadly hydrogen fluoride was released into the air. When added to water, hydrogen fluoride becomes hydrofluoric acid, one of the most dangerous acids known.[39] There were probably numerous releases.[40] The fluoride clouds sailed away to farms downwind. Crops withered, and people and animals became violently ill. The affected farmers in Gloucester and Salem counties, famous for their high quality produce, sued the federal government after the war. They were stifled in their lawsuits against du Pont and the Manhattan Project, largely because all the data regarding the damage done was kept secret in the interest of “national security.” The farmers eventually gave up and settled their suits for a few hundred dollars per farm. Recently declassified documents show Harold Hodge’s active role in the government’s damage control effort. In a secret Manhattan Project memo dated March 1, 1946, Hodge, who was the Manhattan Project’s chief toxicologist for fluorine studies, wrote to the Manhattan Project's medical division chief, Colonel Stafford Warren. Hodge expressed his concern regarding the toxicity of fluorine and the New Jersey incident. Hodge outlined four major areas of concern:



    "1. A question of injury of the peach crop in 1944.

    "2. A report of extraordinary fluoride content of vegetables grown in this area.

    "3. A report of abnormally high fluoride content in the blood of human individuals residing in this area.

    "4. A report raising the question of serious poisoning of horses and cattle in this area."



    Shortly after the farmers sued, the federal government mobilized tremendous resources to counteract the farmers' efforts. Secret meetings were held in Washington DC, attended by everybody from the FDA to the Bureau of Standards to the Justice Department. Why were they meeting? In a recently declassified memo from Colonel Cooper Rhodes of the Manhattan Project, those government agencies were “making scientific investigations to obtain evidence which may be used to protect the interest of the Government at the trial of the suits brought by owners of peach orchards in ... New Jersey.” If the farmers prevailed in court, America’s entire nuclear program could have been threatened.

    Hodge also wrote to his boss, "Would there be any use in making attempts to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents of Salem and Gloucester counties through lectures on F toxicology and perhaps the usefulness of F in tooth health?" “F” stood for fluoride, and was the name of the top-secret program begun during those days to study the harmful effects of fluoride. “Project F” was performed at the University of Rochester. The University of Rochester is already infamous for other “research” it was performing at the same time for the Manhattan Project: they secretly injected people with plutonium without their knowledge, in the first of many guinea pig experiments performed on U.S. citizens to test chemicals and radiation. Over a thirty-year period, the U.S. government administered everything from plutonium to LSD to unwitting “subjects.” Those are only the experiments that have been made public.[41] God only knows what other experiments will remain hidden.

    Studying the decision-making process that led to dropping the atom bombs, the CIA’s hiring of Nazis, the U.S. military shenanigans, and the activities of the alphabet soup U.S. “security” organizations regularly elicits amazement at how much information is still being kept secret, documents that are more than fifty years old. A researcher discovering a newly declassified document can discover other classified documents. The first document seen can be revealing, but what can be more intriguing are other documents referred to by the original document. When the researcher tries finding the referred document, he/she can find it still classified.

    Apologists for the secrecy, such as UFO debunker Phil Klass, say that there are legitimate national security reasons for keeping 100% of the information secret that the National Security Agency has on UFOs, for instance.[42] Ex-CIA agent Ralph McGehee, whose bitter experience makes it clear that the government nearly never has a legitimate “security” reason for keeping anything classified, refutes the opinions of establishment apologists. McGehee is far from alone. In a recent interview, ex-CIA operative Mark Phillips stated that the 1947 National Security Act had nothing to do with protecting national security. Phillips stated that everybody who worked under it knew that its true purpose was to “cover crimes. It was not to cover secrets.”[43] Secrecy and deception (lies of omission and commission) are the handmaidens of self-serving activities, as a cover for dark deeds or in keeping the grip on power and wealth for a select few.

    Griffiths and Bryson’s work regarding the fifty-year-old fluoridation research ran into the “national security” obstacle.[44] Hodge was involved with promoting fluoride before the New Jersey accident in 1944. In 1943, Hodge chaired the committee that decided the feasibility of fluoridating the water supply of Newburgh, New York, one of two American cities first targeted for artificial fluoridation. The committee was eventually composed of other Manhattan Project people, such as Henry Barnett and John Fertig. The Manhattan Project affiliations of Hodge, Barnett, and Fertig were kept secret. The wolves were looking after the interests of the sheep. Trendley Dean himself was opposed to the Newburgh test, fearing fluoride’s toxicity. Manhattan Project personnel, led by Hodge, covered up Dean’s opposition.[45] The man in charge of the Newburgh fluoridation project was David Ast; another fluoridation legend who attended the secret Manhattan Project meetings regarding the New Jersey accident, according to recently declassified documents.

    The situation was so skewed that the Program F scientists published a 1948 paper that ran in the Journal of the American Dental Association, describing the health effects on humans. Griffiths and Bryson obtained the original report, now declassified, and found that the Atomic Energy Commission censored the harmful health effects that were documented. The censorship was so severe it was funny, in a sick way. Griffiths and Bryson wrote:



    “This was a study of the dental and physical health of workers in a factory producing fluoride for the A-bomb program, conducted by a team of dentists from the Manhattan Project. The secret version reports that most of the men had no teeth left. The published version reports only that the men had fewer cavities. The secret version says the men had to wear rubber boots because the fluoride fumes disintegrated the nails in their shoes. The published version does not mention this. The secret version says the fluoride may have acted similarly on the men's teeth, contributing to their toothlessness. The published version omits this statement. The published version concludes that ‘the men were unusually healthy, judged from both a medical and dental point of view.’"



    Animals avoided the facility where the hydrogen fluoride was used. All microorganisms were killed, so food left in the facility would never decay. The hydrogen fluoride etched the facility’s windows and the workers' glasses, so they needed to be continually replaced. The workers also developed lesions and a type of “sunburn” from working there. Nearby elementary schools had their windows etched from hydrogen fluoride releases.

    Hodge was dead when Griffiths and Bryson discovered the damning declassified documents, but Ast was still alive and was named in the documents as active in the nuclear establishment's damage-control efforts. Ast oversaw the Newburgh New York fluoridation experiment. Griffiths and Bryson confronted Ast with the declassified documents' revelations. Ast pulled a Ronald Reagan, claiming no recollection of those activities.

    There were major studies performed by the government on fluorine during those World War II days and shortly thereafter. With the exception of the recently declassified version of the report published in JADA in 1948, the others are still classified, despite significant efforts by Griffiths and Bryson to get them declassified using the Freedom of Information Act. One entire area of study still classified is that regarding the effects of fluorine on the central nervous system. Recently declassified memos show that on April 29, 1944, Colonel Warren approved a Central Nervous System (CNS) research proposal. Hodge wrote the proposal. The memo accompanying the proposal said:



    "Clinical evidence suggests that (uranium hexafluoride) may have a rather marked central nervous system effect with mental confusion, drowsiness and lassitude as the conspicuous features. It seems most likely that the F [code for fluoride] component rather than the T [code for uranium] is the causative factor."[46]



    The proposal remains classified, as do the research results. Another declassified document dated six months after the proposal orders the research stopped. That sent my head spinning. Right-wingers have been saying for more than fifty years that fluoridation was a plot to numb American brains so they could be easily herded. I had heard for years that fluoride administered to a bull made it docile and easy to handle. I have read repeatedly that both the Nazis and Soviets used it in their prison camps to keep the prisoners’ brains numbed, to make them docile. In his right wing classic Murder by Injection, Eustace Mullins made the case that Alzheimer’s disease is largely caused by the ubiquity of aluminum and fluorine in the nation’s food and water supply. There is increasing evidence for that opinion.[47] Mullins mentioned the Soviet studies from 1940 showing how fluorine in the water supply was helpful in running their Gulag system, with brain-numbed prisoners, attested to by others.[48]

    In the appendix of Murder by Injection Mullins presents a frightening fluoridation story. At the end of World War II, as the United States was scrambling to snatch up as many Nazi scientists as possible and keep them from the Soviet Union's clutches, American industrialists were sent to Europe to perform many duties, including mopping up German Industries. One prominent scientist sent over was Charles Eliot Perkins. His job was to help take over the I.G. Farben chemical plants. I.G. Farben was the most infamous and largest of the German cartels. Farben ran the rubber factory at Auschwitz that was staffed by concentration camp labor. Farben also made the Zyklon-B gas used in the gas chambers.

    In a letter Perkins wrote on October 2, 1954 to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Perkins made the startling statement that a German chemist, who was a prominent Nazi, told him that the German General Staff had approved a comprehensive population control plan to use on subject populations. It amounted to mind control, and an essential plan element was to “medicate” the water supplies, mainly with sodium fluoride. Perkins wrote,



    “However, I want to make this very definite and very positive - the real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children’s teeth…The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty.” Perkins said that putting fluoride in the water supply eventually numbs the brain, making people easily manipulated. Perkins stated “…any person who drinks fluoridated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically.”[49]



    One friend remarked, when he heard the history of fluoridation, that at least the Soviet Union and Nazis used it or intended to use it on prisoners. In the United States it is used on the general population.

    The above revelations open a Pandora’s box regarding the mental effects of fluorinated drugs and chemicals. Freons have psychoactive effects, and is the tip of the iceberg regarding fluorinated drugs and chemicals. The Germans were leaders in such research. During World War II the Germans invented the first nerve gas, Soman. It is a fluorinated chemical. In 1939, the scientists at Farben invented Sarin, the most deadly nerve gas next to VX. Sarin is an acronym of the initials of the Farben scientists who developed it. Sarin was going to replace Zyklon B in the gas chambers, but the war ended before mass production could begin. Sarin is also a fluorinated chemical, a close cousin of Soman, and the EPA recently published a chemical profile on Sarin, after Gulf War Syndrome veterans (who think that Sarin may be responsible for their disease) pressured the government, showing that the fluorine atom was its active ingredient.[50]

    Rohypnol, the notorious drug used in date rapes, is fluorinated Valium, making it more than twenty times as potent as normal Valium. Prozac is another fluorinated drug. In all, there are hundreds of fluorinated drugs, and many have profound mental effects, including memory loss. The primary effect of psychoactive drugs is inhibiting enzyme production, which the fluorine ion is well known to do. In light of other facts surrounding fluoridation, this begins treading frightening territory. Fluoridation promoters and others often laugh off such situations as the workings of hopelessly paranoid minds. In light of declassified memos regarding U.S. CNS experiments of fifty years ago (at nearly the same time the Nazis and Soviets were doing similar kinds of experiments), and the studies that are performed across the world on fluoridation and intelligence, I am not laughing. Recently two studies in China showed a drop in IQ of children exposed to fluoride in the water supply of between 5 and 19 points.[51]

    In other unsettling revelations, documents have surfaced which revealed that when the Newburgh New York fluoridation trials were run, testing fluoride’s mental effects on the subject children was planned, and tissue samples were secretly tested at the University of Rochester. The results of those tests have yet to be made public.

    In Mullins’ book he chalks up the fluoridation push as a mind-control ploy by the “Rockefeller Syndicate.” Mullins says that the Rockefellers paid Ewing’s astronomical salary at ALCOA in order to set up his tenure at the Federal Security Agency. The Rockefeller name has come up repeatedly in the area of social control in my studies. John Taylor Gatto is a two-time New York City Teacher of the Year. Gatto taught for twenty-six years in inner city New York. Gatto is an anomaly in teaching. He is widely recognized as one of the best teachers America has to offer, but he is highly critical of our educational system. In 1992, he wrote Dumbing us Down, a monograph he published after retiring from the New York City school system. Dumbing us Down is a devastating critique of America’s compulsory school system, and how it beats the humanity out of children and “dumbs us down.”

    Gatto has become an education activist since he retired from the New York City school system. In Dumbing us Down is the speech he gave when he accepted the 1990 Teacher of the Year award, winning the award for the second consecutive year. Gatto identified two men, Sears and Harper, as primary designers of our modern schools, which he states are “instruments of scientific management of a mass population.”[52] Sears and Harper were from the University of Chicago, an institution that John Rockefeller rebuilt at the turn of the century. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie also took over American medicine a century ago, leading to the knives and drugs paradigm that dominates Western medicine today.

    It is easy to become lost in bureaucratic and statistical tangles, losing sight of the bigger picture. Our nation was pursuing the most destructive technology of all time, and the first practical application of it was dropping bombs on women and children, then publicly lie about who it was dropped on and why.[53]

    Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, a toxicologist at Children’s Hospital in Boston, who also worked in neuropathology at Harvard Medical School, recently performed research into fluoride and the intelligence of rats. In 1982 she was asked to perform the research as part of her studies on the toxicity of therapeutic agents used in treating leukemia and other diseases. Mullenix was invited to work at the Forsyth Dental Center, arguably the world’s leading dental research institute. Five years later, her research was underway.

    Mullenix found a significant diminishment of rat intelligence when they were subjected to fluoride in their water supply. During Mullenix’s research, she was surprised that there were virtually no published studies regarding fluorine and its effects on the human brain.

    Some interesting news was the help she had. Brought in as a consultant on Mullenix’s research was Harold Hodge. He was quite old in the early 1990s. During Hodge’s consulting of Mullenix’s work, he never mentioned the CNS studies that he proposed fifty years earlier. He almost certainly oversaw the 1940s research himself. When shown the newly declassified memos that clearly spell out Hodge’s active role in CNS research on fluorine, Mullenix said she was “flabbergasted.” Mullenix eventually came to see Hodge as a “monster” who actually steered her research toward studying fluoride effects on the central nervous system, probably to see what the results would really be, as the CNS experiments from the 1940s apparently were prematurely terminated. Mullenix today feels that Hodge and one of his University of Rochester pals used her “like a little puppet.”[54] When Mullenix tried interesting the NIDR in the declassified memos, she was rudely treated like a “crackpot.” The NIDR is evidently part of the U.S. government’s damage control effort on fluoride’s harmful effects.

    When Mullenix read the declassified study on fluorine and the dental health of Manhattan Project workers and compared it to the originally published version, she said, “This makes me ashamed to be a scientist.” Mullenix wonders if all other studies done on fluoridation safety were done like that one. Only the federal government knows for sure, in its secret archives.[55]

    Mullenix is one more casualty of the fluoride wars. She had nothing to do with the fluoride issue originally, but became involved as part of her work, when steered into it by Hodge. All she “knew” about fluoride when she started was that it was supposedly good for teeth. She did not initiate her research, but was doing it because she was asked. Her research results were published in Neurotoxicology and Teratology (Vol.17, No. 2, pp.169-177, 1995), the leading scientific journal in the field. Before that paper was published she presented her findings at the NIDR in Maryland, a division of the National Institute of Health (NIH). When she arrived at the NIDR, in her words, "I had no idea what I was getting into. I walked into the main corridors there and all over the walls was 'The Miracle of Fluoride'. That was my first real kick-in-the-pants as to what was actually going on." She said the display ridiculed people who were against fluoridation. "I thought, 'Oh great!' Here's the main NIH hospital talking about the 'Miracle of Fluoride' and I'm giving a seminar to the NIDR telling them that fluoride is neurotoxic!"[56] After her presentation she met with toothpaste representatives who asked her if she was saying that their products lowered the IQs of children, and Mullenix responded with, “Basically, yes.” That marked the end of her career.

    When she excitedly announced to her employers that her paper on the intelligence of rats was being published, three days later she was fired. Her employers asked her which journal was going to publish her work. By that time, she realized that they wanted to block its publication, so she did not tell them. Subsequently, funding has dried up for that kind of research, although immediately after Mullenix was fired, Colgate gave a $250,000 grant to Forsyth (for a job well done?). The unique equipment Mullenix developed to test rat intelligence was mysteriously destroyed before she could recover it.

    Dr. Mullenix was then given an unfunded research position at Children's Hospital in Boston, but with no equipment or money. Mullenix said, "The people at Children's Hospital, for heaven's sake, came right out and said they were scared because they knew how important the fluoride issue was…Even at Forsyth they told me I was endangering funds for the institution if I published that information."[57]

    Mullenix has since applied to the NIH for a research grant to further her research, and was turned down. The NIH told her that fluoride had no central nervous system effects, period. How the NIH concluded that, when virtually the only published research shows deleterious effects, is curious indeed. The work Mullenix did, as well as other recent studies, has shown that the fluoride ion is particularly damaging to the brain's hippocampal region, which is its learning center.[58]

    Mullenix’s fate is common, and this web site documents many instances of scientists and others arriving at the “wrong” answers, and having their careers destroyed. Other scientists who had their careers ruined for coming up with the “wrong” answer regarding fluoridation include Dr. Allan S. Gray of British Columbia and Dr. John Colquhon of Auckland, New Zealand.

    In light of Hodge’s secret work for the Manhattan Project, and the secret memos and secret studies that are the tip of the iceberg, every pro-fluoridation effort that uses Hodge’s name is tainted. It was with interest that I read Fluoride and Dental Caries. It is a relatively recent book on the subject, published in 1986. The book is a compendium on fluoridation, drawing on various experts in the field. Hodge co-wrote a chapter on fluoride toxicity, and also wrote a chapter dealing with objections to fluoridation. Reading that book was another enlightening process, when I recovered from my anger. The book gives the appearance of looking at fluoridation from many aspects, but appearance is the operative word. Hodge’s work is suspect, to put it mildly, and I looked there first.

    Hodge’s co-author on the toxicology chapter was another fluoridation luminary: Frank Smith from the University of Rochester. Smith co-authored many works with Hodge and was active in producing/massaging data to protect industry and government from liability claims.[59] It is instructive to see the blind spots in their work, and what they were obviously hiding. When Smith and Hodge stated that “No substantive evidence of ill health has ever been offered in children or adults as a result of consuming drinking water containing optimal concentrations of fluoride,”[60] they were voicing the nuclear establishment’s damage control opinion, because there is substantial evidence of harm, but they chose to ignore it. When they wrote, “Since the Danish experience (in the 1930s) crippling fluorosis in an industrial setting has never been seen in the United States or Europe,”[61] a grain of salt needs to be taken with that statement. With just one declassified study, out of many that exist and are still secret, definite harm occurred, although by playing semantics games they were not “crippled,” merely toothless, although the long-term effects are unknown, which may be in another classified study. People becoming violently ill from du Pont’s fluoride cloud are invisible victims, at least to the public, when Hodge and Smith wrote their masterpiece of disinformation. The worst air pollution disaster in U.S. history happened in October 1948 in Donora, Pennsylvania, when an air inversion layer formed over the town for four days, and fluoride emissions from U.S. Steel’s zinc and steel facilities killed twenty people and seriously injured hundreds more. If the inversion layer had lasted one more day, a thousand people may have died. U.S. Steel and the PHS conspired to cover-up the disaster, with records missing to this day.[62]

    Throughout Fluoride and Dental Caries there were instances of “looking” at objections to fluoridation, and the appearance of carefully considering them was undertaken. The close relationship between ALCOA, the other fluoride polluters and the early fluoridation researchers is nowhere mentioned, although it is well documented and is consistently one of the biggest issues raised by fluoridation's opponents. A table on the “anti-science” arguments against fluoridation was produced on page 130, in a chapter titled “Legal, Social and Economics Aspects of Fluoridation,” that even mentioned the “Communist conspiracy” aspect of fluoridation. Nowhere was mentioned the obvious economic incentives of fluoride polluters to manage the fluoridation issue, and the well-documented instances of them funding and influencing the fluoridation research, even when it is merely the smoking gun of conflict of interest. The authors of that chapter, including the book’s editor, used the words “pseudoscientist” and “quack” to describe fluoridation opponents and their “anti-science.” In the chapter purporting to look at the broad spectrum of issues regarding fluoridation, the ALCOA and fluoride polluter issue was spectacularly absent.

    In Fluoride and Dental Caries, one area caught my interest. In Hodge’s chapter on fluoridation objections, he presented experimental evidence by chemists that showed the fluorine ion benign to human chemistry. The research was used to discredit John Yiamouyiannis, who uses the very same research to show how the fluorine ion wreaks havoc in the body. Hodge interpreted the original research, qualifying and minimizing the conclusions, and then he presented the experimental work of pro-fluoridation pal Armstrong. Hodge concluded that the research showed that the fluorine ion was relatively harmless by itself. It was the first time that I had seen Yiamouyiannis' science challenged, beyond his cancer statistic analyses with Dean Burk. With knowing Hodge’s extreme and formerly secret bias, I cannot trust his writing, particularly regarding the fluoride ion and human harm, but it was interesting reading. When anybody is proven a systematic liar, how can anything they say be believed? How can fact and fiction be separated? The only way I know is to entirely reject their work and become my own expert.

    Here are some quotes regarding the biological damage the fluorine ion does to human health, the kind not found in pro-fluoridation propaganda such as Fluoride and Dental Caries.



    "Fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, probably because of their capacity to modify the metabolism of cells by changing the permeability of the cell membrane and by inhibiting certain enzyme systems. The exact mechanism of such actions is obscure." - Journal of the American Medical Association, Sept 18, 1943. (before the propaganda steamroller really got going in 1947)

    "The fluoride ion exerts its toxic effect by inhibiting the action of many enzyme systems." - Hugo Theorell, M.D., Nobel Prize winner for his research in the field of enzyme chemistry.

    "We ought to go slowly. Everybody knows that fluorine and fluorides are very poisonous substances and we use them in enzyme chemistry to poison enzymes, those vital agents in the body. That is the reason things are poisoned; because enzymes are poisoned, and that is why animals and plants die." - James B. Sumner, Director of Enzyme Chemistry, Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, Cornell University, and a Nobel Prize winner for his work in the field of enzyme chemistry.

    "The data indicated that drinking water with as little as 1 PPM shortened the life span of mice an average of nine per cent. This was true whether death was due to cancer or non-cancerous diseases. The only notice proponents of fluoridation gave to this work was to discredit it as much as possible. ... In experiments where the drug was added directly to suspensions of cancer tissue before inoculation into eggs or mice, sodium fluoride stimulated the growth of cancer tissue in concentrations of one part in more than 20 million. Scientists at Cambridge University (British Medical Journal, Oct 26, 1963) discovered that concentrations of sodium fluoride as low as one part in ten million inhibited the growth of a culture of human tissue. ... the growing weight of scientific evidence that water-borne fluorides, even at 1 PPM, have toxic possibilities must finally be recognized." - Alfred Taylor, Ph.D., Clayton Foundation, Biochemical Institute, University of Texas, Austin Texas, 1965.

    "The terrifying conclusion of the studies was that fluorine greatly induced a cancer tumor’s growth. If doctors and the public can be made aware of this catastrophe, fluoridation shall end quickly. It will someday be recognized as the most lethal and stupid "Health Program" ever conceived by the mind of man, witch doctors and blood-letters not excepted."

    "In 1969 the country of Sweden intended to fluoridate their water supply due to the strong advice of Professor Yngve Ericsson, a Swedish dentist who was also the senior representative on the World Health Organization's Expert Committee on Fluoridation. However, it was then found that Professor Ericsson coincidentally was the holder of two highly-profitable patents on fluoride toothpaste!" - Alfred Taylor, June 13, 1970 the Gothenburg Post (Sweden); August 5, 1970 the News Register (Sweden); and May 1, 1970 Norsk Folkehelselag (Norway).

    "In 1978, the West German Association of Water and Gas Experts rejected fluoridation for legal reasons, and because ‘the so-called optimal fluoride concentration of 1mg/liter is close to the dose at which long-term damage to the human body is to be expected.’" - Chemical and Engineering News, August 1, 1988.



    The tremendous blind spots regarding fluoride polluters, diet and caries, the severe biases regarding the harm done by fluorides, and Hodge’s secret mission on behalf of the nuclear establishment rendered Fluoride and Dental Caries virtually worthless, except as an instructive exercise in propaganda. With the now-known nuclear industry’s active though secret management of the fluoridation issue, books such as Fluoride and Dental Caries are examples of “pseudoscience” in the strongest sense.

    The situation of industry and government corrupting science is far from confined to the fluoridation issue. Today, ethyl alcohol, the substance that every drunkard knows well, is added to American gasoline to increase its octane rating. It works great. It was also used eighty years ago. In the 1920s, ethyl alcohol was replaced by tetraethyl lead as an octane booster. Why? As it turns out, nobody could patent ethyl alcohol and make monopoly profits from putting it into gasoline. Therefore, General Motors, Standard Oil and du Pont conspired to make a new, patentable chemical, and tetraethyl lead was introduced into American gas tanks. Although Ben Franklin remarked on lead’s well-known toxic qualities hundreds of years ago, and even ancient Romans and Greeks wrote of its toxic properties, industrially-funded scientists in the 20th century labored mightily to make lead appear safe to ingest, even though they knew how deadly tetraethyl lead really was. It is unknown just how many people became sick and died from the effects of lead being spewed into the air during the era of tetraethyl lead, but it is not inconsiderable. In 1985, the EPA estimated 5,000 lead-related heart disease deaths per year, prior to the tetraethyl lead phase out. The lead content of American bloodstreams has fallen precipitously since tetraethyl lead was outlawed.

    The most notorious of the industrial laboratories that produced the lead “research” was Kettering Laboratories.[63] For generations, Kettering and its industrial sponsors controlled all lead research. The “Kettering” of Kettering Laboratories was Charles Kettering, the inventor and General Motors executive. Kettering Laboratories is not the only “medical” foundation that he helped bankroll. The Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, the world’s leading cancer research institute, is named after Kettering and his buddy, General Motors CEO Alfred Sloan, another noted “philanthropist.” Kettering Laboratories was also instrumental in making aluminum appear benign. McClure had high praise for Edward Largent and Kettering Laboratories in his Water Fluoridation: The Search and the Victory. Largent and Kettering were involved in covering-up the harmful effects of fluoride, and Largent secretly worked for the federal government, possibly on the Manhattan Project.[64] Christopher Bryson unearthed original research that Kettering performed in the 1950s, which showed that inhaling airborne fluorides caused an emphysema-like condition, something that countless Americans downwind from fluoride facilities have suffered from. Kettering buried the research results because they came up with the “wrong” answer, but did not have “national security” to cover their tracks, so Bryson discovered it in his research.[65]

    On a lighter note, here is a cartoon that sums up fluoridation, although it was a general-purpose cartoon dealing with similar corporate malfeasance. Replace the words “toxic sludge” with fluoride, and this cartoon sums up the story of fluoridation. Tom Tomorrow is the funniest political cartoonist I have ever seen, and might be the best. The below cartoon was so inspired that a book was named after it.[66]

    Click on image to enlarge

    Anne-Lise Gotzsche’s The Fluoride Question, Panacea or Poison? is an excellent survey of fluoridation. She was a medical journalist in London who investigated fluoridation for years. She has a sensible attitude, taking both the pro and anti-fluoridation people to task when needed. The book is an easy read and covers the main issues surrounding fluoridation, although written before the more pernicious conflicts of interest of fluoridation’s proponents were discovered. As with anybody who looks into fluoridation and is not on the payroll of a bureaucracy or corporation that promotes fluoride, Gotzsche demonstrated how shamelessly political the fluoridation effort was. Science was trampled in the rush to fluoridate. Many scientists went so far overboard that they became evangelists instead of scientists. Some began making up the science as they went along, such as the infamous Frederick Stare. Stare made up a new concept that he called “mineral nutrient fluoride,” a pro-fluoridation idea so unfounded that even the PHS shot it down.[67] Fluoridation pioneer Basil Bibby even recommended adding lead fluoride to the water supplies in 1945. Gotzsche discussed that whatever the propaganda about helping teeth, dentists’ business goes up in fluoridated areas, not down. By 1970, Newburgh, New York and Grand Rapids, Michigan, the recipients of the first trial fluoridation experiments, had twice the dentists per capita as the national average.[68]

    Gotzsche said that calling groups engaged in the huge international push to fluoridate water the “dental mafia” was “naïve,” but felt that those thinking that way could perhaps be forgiven, given the facts. Her book was published in 1975. In light of Harold Hodge’s connections, “mafia” may not be far from the mark.

    Conclusion

    After looking into the fluoridation issue long and hard, here are my conclusions.

    Preventing tooth decay in children is the only rationale ever put forth by fluoridation’s proponents. Tooth decay is unequivocally caused by processed food, and particularly by refined sugar. I have never seen anybody refute that who did not work for the sugar and food processing industries, and fluoridation’s supporters always seem to ignore that issue.

    Instead of proposing that we eliminate most processed food from our diet as a way to eliminate tooth decay and the vast majority of American health problems, an industrial waste was added to the water supply as a “preventive.”

    All data regarding the benefit of fluoridating the water supply is suspect. Many important variables were not accounted for, such as increasing dental hygiene in the West, other elements present in the water, the fluoride content that is already in food, the extreme variability as to what constitutes a cavity and so forth. Most of fluoridation’s proponents worked for or were affiliated with the Public Health Service, which was dominated by agents of fluoride-polluter ALCOA during the years that the seminal research and political action was carried out. Other private foundations that performed original and influential fluoride research, such as the Kettering Laboratory at the University of Cincinnati, also turn out to have been bankrolled by fluoride polluters. No doubt, many conflicts of interest are still hidden. The recent revelations of Harold Hodge’s relationship with the nuclear establishment, and their motivation to prove fluoride safe, cast grave doubts on the reliability of all pro-fluoridation research results published after 1942, which includes all studies regarding the results of artificial fluoridation. The ALCOA/Mellon-connection casts a shadow across much of the pro-fluoridation research performed before 1942. Water fluoridation induces dental fluorosis in many, if not most, people subject to it. The first stage hardens the enamel, coinciding with making it more brittle. Then the slow disintegration of the teeth ensues.

    The data regarding the harm fluorine does to teeth and human biology is unequivocal, denied by nobody in the debate. What the proponents argue is that a substance well known to cause adverse health effects at two PPM, is not only safe but good for people at one PPM. In health science history there may be no instance with such a small window of health promotion/health destruction for a "health" additive. Even one of fluoridation's greatest proponents, Harold Hodge, stated that a margin of 100-fold should be the minimum-sized window for beneficial/toxic food additives when he was not being a fluoridation propagandist. There is a great deal of suppressed evidence of the harm that 1 PPM fluoridated water causes, and even harm at concentrations of far less than 1 PPM.

    Scientists and doctors who have either witnessed the adverse health effects of artificial fluoridation or campaigned against it have been silenced. Often they are simply ignored or denied access to the mainstream media to make their cases, which is common for anybody who challenges mainstream dogma. There is also a clear pattern of active attack, such as what happened to John Yiamouyiannis, Phyllis Mullenix, William Marcus and many others. Scientific and medical inquisitions are standard behavior where wealth and power are affected.

    In light of recent studies on fluoridation and intelligence, nobody can easily dismiss the opinion of right wing activists that fluoridation is part of a mind control program. With recently declassified documents showing the United States performing extensive research on fluoride and the central nervous system, research that is still classified fifty years later, anybody who drinks fluoridated water or uses fluoridated toothpaste has every reason to be alarmed. In finishing this summary, and seeing how the nuclear establishment and large industries have managed the “science” of fluorine, we may not be able to trust any radiation research that the nuclear establishment has produced on its effect on humans, something that John Gofman has written extensively about. In disturbing instances, the same organizations that managed the “fluoride problem” also managed the “radiation problem.”

    The good news is that there have been some significant victories. For one thing, the vast majority (95%) of humanity does not drink artificially fluoridated water. The largest populations subject to compulsory fluoridation are England and its former colonies, such as Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. U.S. citizens consume nearly half of the world’s fluoridated water. Europe’s population is less than two percent fluoridated, and many places have stopped fluoridating their water supplies, while others have successfully resisted having fluoride added to their water, including American and Canadian cities. EPA scientists spoke out against fluoridation in the late 1990s. There are many sources of fluoridation information on the Internet. I am one of many people writing about fluoridation. There are many scientists and others waging political action today to end the insanity of fluoridation, and they need all the help they can get. We all will determine whether we keep drinking poison every day. It is up to all of us.



    In ending this essay, it comes down to common sense. Tooth decay is primarily caused by our diet, and changing our diet is the only effective solution. Adding a well-known poison to the water supply to “prevent” tooth decay is not only insane, but also suicidal. It also has “coincidentally” been a windfall for fluorine polluters, both corporate and governmental. Instead of having to bear the huge costs of disposing of their highly toxic fluoride waste, large corporations now can sell it to water suppliers and toothpaste manufacturers! Fluoridation may also be part of a mind control program. The history of fluoridation is a horror story. Most people subject to fluoridation have no idea of its dark history, demonstrating how effective our propaganda and indoctrination systems are. Walk into an average grocery store and try finding toothpaste that does not have fluoride in it (I have been queried repeatedly on this issue; Americans can find non-fluoridated toothpaste in health food stores…for now).

    Many people discussed why Orwell’s dark prophecies were wrong, and why 1984 did not happen. The irony is that it appears as if we are living in Orwell’s world today. The fluoride situation is just one of many that this web site presents. Evidence of Orwell's prescience is that people do not think they live in that kind of world. The most effective propaganda and indoctrination system is one where its victims do not think they are being propagandized and indoctrinated. The United States has the most effective and subtle propaganda systems that the world has ever seen, by far.


    source:

    http://www.ahealedplanet.net/fluoride.htm


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »
    More on the Numbing effects

    Interesting read

    source:

    http://www.ahealedplanet.net/fluoride.htm

    Honestly? Another dollop of the same debunked myths associated with water fluoridation. The author of this particular tract checks most of the boxes for tinfoil attire - UFO fancier, free energy expert, cures for cancer, one-world government etc, etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Anyone who thinks that fluoride is used to control the minds of the masses has obviously no idea of how chemistry actually works.

    But then again, why let something like science get in the way of a good yarn?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    alastair wrote: »
    Honestly? Another dollop of the same debunked myths associated with water fluoridation. The author of this particular tract checks most of the boxes for tinfoil attire - UFO fancier, free energy expert, cures for cancer, one-world government etc, etc.


    Ahhh I expected more then this rhetorical response ,

    That post convinced me you didn't even read it ... thanks

    But when we are on it
    "We ought to go slowly. Everybody knows that fluorine and fluorides are very poisonous substances and we use them in enzyme chemistry to poison enzymes, those vital agents in the body. That is the reason things are poisoned; because enzymes are poisoned, and that is why animals and plants die." - James B. Sumner, Director of Enzyme Chemistry, Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, Cornell University, and a Nobel Prize winner for his work in the field of enzyme chemistry.

    Where is he debunked for example


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    But then again, why let something like science get in the way of a good yarn?

    Yawning ... typical behavior of a dumbed down person :D ....


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »
    Ahhh I expected more then this rhetorical response ,

    That post convinced me you didn't even read it ... thanks

    He's an associate of Dennis Lee - you might be okay with parroting the delusions of a scammer, but I certainly am not prepared to ignore the credentials of your source.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u9qxiOc0s4


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »
    Ahhh I expected more then this rhetorical response ,

    That post convinced me you didn't even read it ... thanks

    But when we are on it



    Where is he debunked for example

    Fluoride is a toxin in far higher doses than apply in water fluoridation. Water itself is a toxin in sufficiently high doses. You do drink water, yes?


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »
    Yawning ... typical behavior of a dumbed down person :D ....

    Better than a head-on-the-sand propounder of con-artist's musings.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    alastair wrote: »
    Fluoride is a toxin in far higher does than apply in water fluoridation. Water itself is a toxin in sufficiently high doses. You do drink water, yes?

    So that is a NO on your debunking claim regarding the Myths in the link i posted ? ... why am i not surprised


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »
    So that is a NO on your debunking claim regarding the Myths in the link i posted ? ... why am i not surprised

    Every claim in that conman's tract has been debunked over and over.
    The World Health Organization report, Fluorides and Human Health states, "No evidence has yet been provided that fluoride ingested at 1 ppm in the drinking water affects intermediary metabolism of food stuffs, vitamin utilization or either hormonal or enzymatic activity


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    weisses wrote: »
    Yawning ... typical behavior of a dumbed down person :D ....

    Did you know that yawning was created by the elite to make the masses tired?

    Every wondered why it's so CONTAGIOUS..

    SIGN MY PETITION TO STAMP OUT YAWNING.

    etc. etc. :pac:

    Science, facts and evidence? Who needs them when you've got links?

    Links are the new proof.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    Did you know that yawning was created by the elite to make the masses tired?

    Every wondered why it's so CONTAGIOUS..

    SIGN MY PETITION TO STAMP OUT YAWNING.

    etc. etc. :pac:

    Science, facts and evidence? Who needs them when you've got links?

    Links are the new proof.

    Meanwhile you provided neither ... Not even a proper contribution to this thread


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    alastair wrote: »
    Every claim in that conman's tract has been debunked over and over.

    I gave you one simple example ...

    Where was the statement of James B. Sumner debunked ??

    The guy below doesn't agree
    "There is plenty of evidence to indicate that fluorine in the amount of 1 ppm or slightly more interferes with enzyme systems and these enzyme systems are involved in the growth of bones, in the functioning of nerve tissue and so forth. It is clear that fluoridation is a calculated risk." (Dr. Robert S. Harris, (Ph.D.), Director of Nutritional Biochemistry Laboratories, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.)


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »
    I gave you one simple example ...

    Where was the statement of James B. Sumner debunked ??

    The guy below doesn't agree

    I've already posted the relevent debunking of the 'enzyme' nonsense related to water fluoridation:
    The World Health Organization report, Fluorides and Human Health states, "No evidence has yet been provided that fluoride ingested at 1 ppm in the drinking water affects intermediary metabolism of food stuffs, vitamin utilization or either hormonal or enzymatic activity

    http://www.quackwatch.com/03HealthPromotion/fluoride.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Probably the most comprehensive recent synopsis of scientific fact relating to the pros and cons of water fluoridation - undertaken by the Australian government:
    http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/eh41_1.pdf

    Their short summary of findings:
    http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/eh41_statement_efficacy_safety_fluoride.pdf


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    weisses wrote: »
    Meanwhile you provided neither ... Not even a proper contribution to this thread

    I think my anti-yawning campaign has as much basis in science as the 'fluoride is controlling our minds' campaign.

    In fact I see evidence of yawning being contagious every day. EVERY day. I see this with my own eyes.

    Who are you to state that I am incorrect when I see it WITH MY OWN EYES???








    See how easy it is to do this? :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    alastair wrote: »
    I've already posted the relevent debunking of the 'enzyme' nonsense related to water fluoridation:



    http://www.quackwatch.com/03HealthPromotion/fluoride.html

    Where are they debunking the enzyme statement in your link ... preferably with the relevant "debunking research"


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    I think my anti-yawning campaign has as much basis in science as the 'fluoride is controlling our minds' campaign.

    In fact I see evidence of yawning being contagious every day. EVERY day. I see this with my own eyes.

    Who are you to state that I am incorrect when I see it WITH MY OWN EYES???


    See how easy it is to do this? :)

    If it is that easy

    Open a new thread describing your anti yawning campaign and the conspiracy behind it

    meanwhile you are still adding nothing relevant to this thread


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    weisses wrote: »
    If it is that easy

    Open a new thread describing your anti yawning campaign and the conspiracy behind it

    meanwhile you are still adding nothing relevant to this thread

    You've missed the point though. Perhaps, and I don't get accused of this often, I was being too subtle?


    My point is, just making something up doesn't prove anything.

    And the 'proof' you've linked to is just that, people making things up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    weisses wrote: »
    Where are they debunking the enzyme statement in your link ... preferably with the relevant "debunking research"

    The link is separate from the quoted WHO finding on water fluoridation's impact on enzyme activity - there isn't any. That would be a fairly straightforward debunk of that theory.

    Read the Australian report for a comprehensive review of the real science relating to fluoridation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    I think my anti-yawning campaign has as much basis in science as the 'fluoride is controlling our minds' campaign.

    In fact I see evidence of yawning being contagious every day. EVERY day. I see this with my own eyes.

    Who are you to state that I am incorrect when I see it WITH MY OWN EYES???


    See how easy it is to do this? :)

    If it is that easy then ...

    Open a new thread describing your anti yawning campaign and the conspiracy behind it

    meanwhile you are still adding nothing relevant to this thread


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Glitch in the matrix above.

    Perhaps the anti-fluoride campaign is actually run by bots!


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    You've missed the point though. Perhaps, and I don't get accused of this often, I was being too subtle?


    My point is, just making something up doesn't prove anything.

    And the 'proof' you've linked to is just that, people making things up.

    That's why its called the Conspiracy Theory forum

    I present information regarding the theory.

    Even people (scientists) who are pro fluoride say that further research is needed, If it was 100% save i don't see why you would do that.

    And you cannot state as fact its all made up .. You can believe its all made up


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    weisses wrote: »
    That's why its called the Conspiracy Theory forum

    I present information regarding the theory.

    And I point out that the information is incorrect.
    Even people (scientists) who are pro fluoride say that further research is needed, If it was 100% save i don't see why you would do that.

    Yup some do say that. More research is probably needed because the research that has been done hasn't shown anything that shows it to be harmful in the dosage that it's in water and definitely not anything that shows it to be some sort of 'population placater' despite the countless wild claims to the contrary.
    And you cannot state as fact its all made up .. You can believe its all made up

    So far the weight of evidence leans towards the claims that fluoride is being put in the water to make the general population docile being very very made up.

    It's the theory that the people with knowledge of how chemistry works would believe. People who tend to believe the opposite tend not to understand even the basics of chemistry.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,448 ✭✭✭weisses


    alastair wrote: »
    The link is separate from the quoted WHO finding on water fluoridation's impact on enzyme activity - there isn't any. That would be a fairly straightforward debunk of that theory.

    Yet other respectable people are saying the opposite

    alastair wrote: »
    Read the Australian report for a comprehensive review of the real science relating to fluoridation.

    To bad research pre 2000 was excluded


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement