Blog: July 2008 ArchivesThe Fluoride Issue Here are more good sources for information on the fluoride controversy: Why Scientists Oppose Fluoridation. Below is a great article to read. Google it and go to this pdf. A lot of hidden information here about the history of fluoridation. [PDF] NEXUS: Fluoride & Manhattan Project
http://www.fluoridealert.org/fluoride-facts.htm The
above link has basic information about the controversy and why 97% of
European cities have banned the use of fluoride in drinking water. This
clip is a real eye-opener!!! Dr, Mullenix designed programs which
proved that Fluoride lowers cognitive functions and damages our nervous
systems. She was fired from her job!
Mullenix is also 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. All she "knew" about fluoride when she started was that it was supposedly good for your teeth. She was not excited about performing the 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 National Institute of Dental Research (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 that the display ridiculed the people 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!"[48] After her presentation to the NIDR, she met with toothpaste representatives who asked her if she was saying that their products lowered the IQs of children, and Mullenix responded, "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. Right after she was fired, her former 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, though 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."[49] 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 about the only published research shows deleterious effects, is curious indeed. The work Mullenix did, as well as other recent studies[50], has shown that the fluoride ion is particularly damaging to the brain's hippocampal region, which is its learning center. Mullenix' fate is common, and my work 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 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 he wrote a chapter dealing with objections to fluoridation. Reading that book was another enlightening process, when I got over my anger. The book gives the appearance of looking at fluoridation from many aspects, but appearance is the operative word. Hodge's work we already know 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. With that professional pedigree and affiliation with Hodge, it is nearly certain that Smith was also deeply involved with the Manhattan Project. I take it for granted that with that background, I can trust nothing they write. It is instructive to see the blind spots in their work, and what they are 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,"[51] they are voicing the nuclear establishment's damage control opinion, because there is substantial evidence of harm, but they chose to ignore it. When they say, "Since the Danish experience (in the 1930s) crippling fluorosis in an industrial setting has never been seen in the United States or Europe,"[52] take a grain of salt with that statement. With just one declassified study, out of many that exist and are still secret, definite harm occurred, though by playing semantics games we could say they were not "crippled," just toothless, though the long-term effects are unknown, which might be in another classified study. People getting violently ill from du Pont's fluoride cloud is another invisible event, 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.[53] Throughout Fluoride and Dental Caries, there were instances of "looking" at objections to fluoridation, and the appearance of looking at 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 even 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, trotted out 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 a group of 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. That part was interesting, because it is the first time that I have 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, can you believe anything they say? How do you separate fact from fiction in those cases? The only way I know is to entirely reject their work and become your own expert. Here are some quotes regarding the biological damage the fluorine ion does to human health, the kind you will not find in pro-fluoridation propaganda like Fluoride and Dental Caries. Yiamouyiannis' contentions are herein supported.
"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.
All in all, 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 very active though secret management of the fluoridation issue, books like 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 big 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. Even though even 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 got sick and died from the effects of lead being spewed into the air during the era of tetraethyl lead, but it is certainly 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.[54] For generations, Kettering and its industrial sponsors controlled all the 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 leading cancer research institute in the world, is named after Kettering and his buddy, General Motors CEO Alfred Sloan, another noted "philanthropist." Kettering Laboratories also was instrumental in making aluminum appear to be a benign substance, and Kettering's efforts on the fluoridation issue are well known. http://home1.gte.net/res0k62m/fluoride.htm#conclusion Many aware commentators have fallen silent and bloggers have retired from the This commentator brings us the important information that it is not yet too http://yannone.blogspot.com/ Can you be talked into handcuffing yourself?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.If the Fourth Amendment is important to you, then make sure you know what those 54 words mean. There are only 15 nouns and a handful of common verbs--nothing you haven't heard before. One thing you hardly ever hear, though, is this: Congress can't change the Constitution. Not even if the president signs the bill. Not even if the radio talk show hosts, TV news anchors, and weekend TV news commentators pretend otherwise. The Constitution describes clearly the processes for amending the Constitution. The processes are found in Article 5, outlined here. If these procedures are not followed, then the Constitution remains unchanged. Here's another thing you hardly ever hear: "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution, are null and void." Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 5, U.S. (Cranch) 137, 174,176 Restated with greater detail: "[a]n unconstitutional act is not a law; ... it imposes no duties; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 442 (1886).Now when you watch this "most important video you watch in your lifetime," you'll know when to laugh your ass off. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6885277369482418431&q=Terror
Continue reading FLASH: IT'S NOT TOO LATE--Why We Can Still Stop the Takeover of America.
For an excellent and concise article on how our supposed land of the free, home of the brave etc. has become land of the fee and home of the warmonger please read this great article :http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/war-and-inflation.htm It is our money system that has made it so and that is why you will never read an open and easy to understand discussion of it in the Main Stream Media. They can't talk about it because it is what enables the machine to go forward. Ron Paul has been unique among mainstream politicians in that he has talked about the role of our banking system and the Federal Reserve in the times we are trying to live through. Here is what the author says:
|
