Go down
Posts : 1219
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2018-01-06
Location : France
View user profile


on Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:11 pm
Again , one of lady J s topics..

Maybe she can fill it up
Posts : 1219
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2018-01-06
Location : France
View user profile

Re: Fluoride

on Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:48 pm

[size=33]Free E-Book: The Fluoride Deception, by Christopher Bryson[/size]
Posted on July 19, 2011


4 Votes

[url= .pdf][/url]Title:  The Fluoride Deception
Author:  Christopher Bryson, with a foreword by Dr. Theo Colborn
Date:  2004
[url= .pdf]PDF[/url] 
“The Fluoride Deception” Videos: 
PART 1  –  PART 2  –  PART 3 
From the Introduction:  Warning:  Keep out of reach of children under 6 years of age.  If you accidentally swallow more than used for burshing, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Center right away.
NEXT TIME YOU confront yourself in the bathroom mirror, mouth full of foam, take another look at that toothpaste tube.  Most of us associate fluoride with the humdrum issue of better teeth and the promised fewer visits to the dentist.  yet the story of how fluoride was added to our toothpaste and drinking water is an extraordinary, almost fantastic tale.  The plot includes some of the most spectacular events in human affairs–the explosion of the Hiroshima atomic bomb, for example.  Many of the principal characters are larger than life, such as the “father of public relations” Edward L. Bernays, Sigmund Freud’s nephew, who was until now more famous for his scheme to persuede women to smoke cigarettes.  And the twists and turns of the fluoride story are propelled by nothing less than the often grim requirements of accumulating power in the industrial era–the same raw power that is at the beating heart of the American Century.
Fluoride lies at the elemental core of some of the greatest fortunes that the world has ever seen, the almost unimaginable wealth of the Mellons of Pittsburgh and the DuPonts of Delaware.  And no wonder the warning on the toothpaste tube is so dramatic.  The same potent chemical that is used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, to prepare Sarin nerve gas, and to wrestle molten steel and aluminum from the earth’s ore is what we give to our children first thing in the morning and the last thing at night, flavored with peppermint, strawberry, or bubble gum.
Fluoride is so muscular a chemical that is has become a lifeblood of modern industry, pumped hotly each day through innumerable factories, refineries, and mills.  Fluoride is used to produce high-octane gasoline; to smelt such key metals as aluminum, steel, and beryllium; to enrich uranium; to make computer circuit boards, pesticides, ski wax, refrigerant gases, Teflon plastic, carpets, waterproof clothing, etched glass, bricks and ceramics, and numerous drugs, such as Prozac and Cipro…..




Dr. Robert Kooser, resident physician at St. Francis hospital said the roach powder — sodium fluoride — is “a terrible poison.”  –  “It destroys the blood cells,” he said. 
“…Last year I said in this column that sodium fluoride is a good roach powder because it is almost harmless for man.  Manufacturers wrote me protesting.  All sodium fluoride should be labeled “Poison” on the can.  Agreed!  But naturally one must assume that everybody will realize that if sodium fluoride will kill roaches, enough of it will kill a man.” 
“The report was based on a study by Dr. Virgil D. Cheyne, of Indianapolis, who experimented for a year with 27 children treated with the solution, comparing observations with a control group of 19 whose teeth were untreated.  The research, he said, showed the untreated group developed about twice as many new decay areas.  …Since fluoride is highly toxic, extreme care was necessary in applying the solution as well as preventing the patient from swalling any of the water used to rinse the teeth after the treatment…”
DEC 04, 1942:  Physicians Report First U.S. Case of Bone Hardening:  Fluorine in Water Causes Death of Young Soldier  –  The Evening Independent 
APR 02, 1943:  Fluorides may Be an Answer to Tooth Decay, Report Says  –  The Milwaukee Journal 
APR 14, 1944:  Whole City to Test Dental Decay Salts  –  The Pittsburgh Press 
APR 16, 1944:  Long Test Planned by City to Block Decay in Teeth  –  The Milwaukee Journal 
JAN 20, 1945:  Fluorine Gaining Favor As a Tooth Decay Preventative  –  The Norwalk Hour 
JUN 21, 1946:  Dental Decay Control Sought:  Fluorine Tests Made On School Children  –  Toledo Blade 
DEC 17, 1947:  State Will Provide “Paint” For Teeth:  Michigan to Check Decay In Children’s Mouths  –  The Windsor Daily Star 
JAN 23, 1947:  Dental Work Is At Record High:  Number of Dentists Increasing In U.S.  –  Kentucky New Era 
OCT 25, 1947:  Health Official Lauds Lewiston Water Program  –  Lewiston Morning Tribune 
MAY 4, 1948:  Sodium Fluoride Now Available To All Dentists:  Saves Decay of Teeth  –  The Newberry Observer 
JUN 22, 1948:  Fluoride Doesn’t Work In Paste, Dentist Says  –  Youngstown Vindicator 
Dr. H. B. Millhoff, director of the Ohio department of health’s division of dental hygiene…said…that tooth pastes and mouth washes containing sodium fluoride “have been thoroughly studied and have been found to be absolutely worthless in preventing tooth decay.”
MAY 29, 1948:  Uncle Sam Will Spend $1,000,000 to Tell State of Sodium Fluoride  –  Ludington Daily News 


APR 13, 1950:  Educators Deplore Dentists’ Reaction  –  The Tuscaloosa News 
“We are 100 per cent for the sodium fluoride program to help our children prevent tooth decay…” superintendents of Tuscaloosa’s city and county schools said today.  …11 Tuscaloosa dentists…voted 6 to 5 against approving the program.
JAN 06, 1951:  Things Told by The Tattler  –  The Day 
Some questions also arose whether fluorides might not be present, in the natural state in some sources of water supply, in such quantities that the use of the water might be dangerous, for these substances in a stronger solution than normally used in artificial “doctoring” of water, are definitely poisonous.  …opponents, including Dr. Manning, insist that the effect of the fluorides is cumulative–that the chemical taken into the human body works slowly, that the quantity deposited in the bony structure of the body in time may reach dangerous proportions, and that it may conceivably be years before adverse effects are noted.  Dr. Manning has contended…the serious results might not show up until years later, probably in the form of rheumatic complaints.  …This, says Dr. Manning, is mass medication of populations with a vengeance, without permission and in such form that the individual has no alternative…but to take the medication.
JAN 19, 1951:  Do We Need Medicine In Drinking Water?  –  The Deseret News 
JUN 28, 1951:  Fluoridation of Water Discussed  –  Lodi News-Sentinel 
Stating his opposition to the project was Albert McDonald, 420-1/2 N. Church street, whose avocation is chemistry.  He submitted figures from a study made by the University of New Mexico which showed that fluorine has a damaging effect on the system.  “I can’t see how an inorganic substance can build tooth structure.  Fluoride must be taken into the system naturally, through plants and other sources,” he stated.
SEP 16, 1951:  Magazine Gets Praise For Edit  –  Tri Cities Herald 
It seems that the drug interests are not satisfied with their already enormous profits through the regular “public health” channels but are finding the food market to be an additional source of gain.  As one writer quipped “They are now not only seeking to pollute the water mains of every community in the nation in order to sell more fluorides.  They want everything that grows, moves or breathes on the earth to be immersed in or sprayed or injected with something created in a test tube.”
SEP 27, 1951:  Dental, Health Groups Endorse Fluoridation  –  St. Petersburg Times 
Arguments against fluoridation of public water supplies are the same ones that were raised against putting chlorine in water to purify it–that it would be dangerous and produce harmful effects.  The same arguments were used against use of iodine in table salt in the goiter belt and against vaccinations to prevent smallpox. 
SEP 03, 1951:  Pros and Cons of Plan to Fluoridate City’s Water Supply Are Many  –  Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 
Dr. Hurme urged further consideration of the effect of fluorine on people with diseased kidneys and other disorders, particularly in the middle-aged and eldery groups.  (Arguments against fluoridation included the following:)  The fluoride intake might be dangerously high for adults who drink large amounts of water because of occupations, disease or diet requirements; Direct application is more economical and less dangerous because it can be controlled completely; (continued on following day) fluorine in water will benefit only teeth that are being formed…[but] nothing at all for adult teeth. 
JAN 23, 1952:  Charge State Wards Are Subjects of Fluoride Tests Draws Fire  –  Meriden Record 
Charges that the State Department of Health has been “conducting experiments on defenseless children, state wards and orphans” by putting fluorides in their drinking water drew fire today at a public hearing at the State Capitol.  …Dr. Paul Manning…said the use of fluorides in drinking water violates human rights and cited the legal principles set forth by the international tribunal at the Nuremberg war crimes trials on the subject of medical experimentation on human beings.  Miss Van De Vere objected to fluoridation on the grounds that it would be harmful to elderly persons and that it was still in the experimental stage.  Several others voiced similar opinions.
MAR 05, 1952:  Fluoridizing Delay To Be Requested  –  Lodi News-Sentinel 
Albert J. McDonald…plans to renew his objections…  Others, including McDonald, feel that fluorine not only fails to achieve an appreciable reduction but is also harmful, even in small doses, when administered over a 10-20 years period.
MAR 09, 1952:  Fluoridation Is Opposed  –  Tri City Herald 
“Do We Dare Fluoridate Drinking Water” is the title of a challenging article by Dr. H. F. Strongin, M.D., M.P.H., appearing in the March issue of Life Today.  Dr. Strongin, former public health director of North Adams, Mass., makes a powerful case against artificially fluoridated water.  …Dr. Strongin seems a little apprehensive that medical doctors may have to treat patients with illnesses caused by accumulated fluoride poisoning in their system.  …artificial fluoridation of drinking water may (or may not…) make harder teeth in young children (although it’s no good after 12 years of age), it may also produce poisoning and toxic troubles later in life much worse than decayed teeth.  …Prof. George R. Cowgill, physiology department head at Yale says, “Fluorine is stored in the skeleton, both bones and teeth, just as calcium is stored.  …The amount of fluoride stored in the bones is greater with advancing years.”  Thus the Professor, also admits fluorine is cumulative and says that what it may do to you in future years “remains to be determined.”  While it may harden the teeth it also settles and accumulates in the bones, making them brittle and easily broken in advancing years.
MAR 13, 1952:  Fluoride Rejected  –  Tri City Herald 
Fluoridation was snowed under…  It involved the issues of benefits to a minority population group, anti-medication, religious and personal rights.  Opponents contended it might be harmful to some people and that it should be tested more extensively before putting it in the water system.  Some others argued that it was a step toward state medicine.
MAR 19, 1952:  Fluoride Dangers Cited  –  The Spokesman-Review 
I attended a meeting where the question of water fluoridation was discussed.  The speaker held up a small jar on which the label showed the skull and crossbones and a very emphatic caution regarding the use of its contents.  This poison was sodium fluoride, a basis for rat poison and insecticides and so deadly that no effective antidote has yet been found.  And this same poison has been suggested to be placed in our drinking water.  …If fluoridated water would lessen tooth decay by hardening tooth structure, might it not also harden other bodily tissues like the brain or arteries?
I could go on, but I think I’ve given the general idea.  In a nutshell, for decades, fluoride was known as poison and nobody would have ever dreamt to ingest it (except when poisoning somebody or committing suicide) any more than we would spray roach killer or rat poison on our food today.  Then, the “experts” came forward and claimed that since natural fluoride seemed to prevent cavities in children, let’s use the artificial variety and throw it in our drinking water supplies!  (Prior to the fluoridation of the water supply, fluoride was considered nothing more than a poison.  In the 50s and 60s, most fluoride used to fluoridate the water supply came from the aluminum manufacturing industry.  Fluoride was/is a toxic waste product, and that which couldn’t be sold as insect and rat poison–along with a number of other uses, was generally dumped in landfills and water supplies.  The fluoridation of the water supply allowed the aluminum manufacturers to make money, rather than to have to dump their massive supply of the toxic chemical.)  Those who were opposed to the fluoridation issue, were called silly, worry-warts, crackpots, etc. — which is a common tactic used by both government and media, in order to sell an idea to the public, while discrediting all those who fight the idea.  Doctors and professors even stepped forward, but since they were in the minority, and since those who are the most “concerned” with public health supported the measure, the majority was convinced that it must be a good thing…in spite of the fact that many studies have seen been performed, which supports the opposition’s view.  –Vicki Robison

Last edited by OrgonitePlus on Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posts : 1219
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2018-01-06
Location : France
View user profile

Re: Fluoride

on Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:49 pm

Posts : 124
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2018-01-07
Location : Ireland
View user profile

Re: Fluoride

on Tue Jan 09, 2018 7:50 pm
Only running after you Sunflower with the 'filling up'.

Declan Waugh
November 10, 2017 · 

My reply to the Minister for Health regarding correspondence I sent to him on current research findings that prenatal fluoride fluoride exposure in humans results in neurotoxicity in children.
Posts : 124
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2018-01-07
Location : Ireland
View user profile

Re: Fluoride

on Tue Jan 09, 2018 7:54 pm

Christopher Land
January 7 at 11:23pm · 

"My city’s water is spiked with fluoride to reach levels of 0.7 parts per million. (In case you were wondering, Brita filters don’t get rid of fluoride.) In suc...
See More
Posts : 124
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2018-01-07
Location : Ireland
View user profile

Re: Fluoride

on Tue Jan 09, 2018 7:57 pm




[size=36]News Irish News[/size]
Tuesday 9 January 2018

[size=36]Fluoride in our water: are we brushing with danger?

[size=12]March 29 2000 12:11 AM



SPECIAL REPORT There's a growing amount of evidence linking fluoride to cancer, osteoporosis and genetic damage. Most governments in Europe...

There's a growing amount of evidence linking fluoride to cancer, osteoporosis and genetic damage. Most governments in Europe have banned it, yet Ireland continues to add tooth-preserving acid to the public water supply. Gemma O'Doherty reports
Water fluoridation was once hailed as the saviour of our children's teeth. But since it was introduced four decades ago, it has been abandoned by almost every country in Europe. Everywhere, that is, except Ireland.
As evidence emerged linking it to cancer, osteoporosis and genetic damage, government after government condemned the practice of adding tooth-preserving acid to the public water supply as dangerous and unethical.
During the '70s and '80s, Sweden, Norway and Finland banned water fluoridation because its long term health and environmental effects were insufficiently known.
In 1975, Germany rejected it as ``foreign to nature, unnecessary, inefficient, irresponsible and harmful to the environment.''
One year later, the Dutch rewrote their constitution to ensure that the practice would never be allowed in that country again.
In 1977, Denmark rejected fluoridation because ``no adequate studies had been carried out on the long-term effect on human beings.''
In 1980, the Chief of Public Health in France declared it ``too dangerous''.
More recently, in 1996, 25 out of 26 councils in Northern Ireland voted against fluoridation of their drinking water.
In the UK, 10% of drinking water is fluoridated. Recent plans to extend the programme have been postponed following new research presented to the Ministry of Health on the medical side effects.

Today, just one country in Europe continues to endorse mandatory medication of the public water supply with fluoride. In fact, Ireland is the only democracy in the world which demands it by law.
As the Government continues to promote and expand the fluoridation programme throughout the country, it insists that the practice is perfectly safe and essential to the dental health of the nation. But as well as the many countries who refute this theory, opposition is growing from local authorities at home.
In the last year, Dublin City Council and Donegal and Sligo County Councils voted to suspend water fluoridation in their regions on safety grounds. Their motions were overruled by the Department of Health.
Although the dental profession has always actively supported water fluoridation, small numbers of dentists are beginning to question the ethics of dosing drinking water with a toxin whose long-term health effects are still largely unknown.
One former advocate has spent a year investigating fluoridation. Don Mac Auley, a 32-year-old Dublin-based dentist, became concerned after a number of patients told him they were worried about the possible health risks of fluoridated water. They wanted to know why, when the rest of Europe was so strongly opposed to fluoridation, Ireland was virtually alone in endorsing it.
Like most other young dentists, Mac Auley took his lead from the academics who had trained him at college. They had taught him that fluoride was the most effective weapon against tooth decay and did not pose any risk to health. To allay his patients' fears, however, he promised to investigate the matter further.
He studied the volume of international medical literature on fluoridation and discovered there was another side to the issue of which he was not aware. Foreign research linked fluoride to hip fracture and bone disease, brain disorders and irritable bowel syndrome, conditions with a higher prevalence in this country than most others in the developed world.
Two years ago, 1,200 scientists, doctors and lawyers from the American Environmental Protection Agency stated their opposition to water fluoridation because of the body of evidence that indicated ``a causal link between it and cancer, genetic damage, neurological impairment and bone pathology.''
There was also evidence that fluoride could actually lead to tooth disfigurement through fluorosis, a mottling or staining of the teeth that occurs when too much of the chemical is present in the body. Dentists here say up to 40% of Irish people suffer from dental fluorosis, although no research has been carried out to support their claims.
In 1995, however, the American Dental Association found that up to 80% of children living in fluoridated areas in the US and Canada had the condition. When this study was published, Canadian dental authorities conceded that fluoride could lead to bone and tooth destruction and damage overall health.
Some went even further. Dr Harry Limeback, Professor of Dentistry at Toronto University and consultant to the Canadian Dental Authority, claimed that water fluoridation had actually contributed to the birth of the multi-million pound cosmetic dentistry industry. He claimed that more money was now being spent treating dental fluorosis than would be spent on dental cavities if water were not fluoridated.
Armed with this information, Mac Auley sought guidance from his professional authority, the Irish Dental Association, and requested an overall picture of fluoridation in Ireland.
``To my surprise, I never received a reply,'' he says.
``I wrote two letters outlining the worries of my patients and stating I had a moral obligation to give them answers but I heard nothing. I also wrote to the Chief Dental Officer at the Department of Health and was sent a fact sheet on Irish dental policy and the website address of the American Dental Association. This provided no information on the situation in Ireland.''
Mac Auley decided to use the Freedom of Information Act to access the information he was seeking. He requested details on the research that had been done in Ireland on the effects of fluoride on public health, a stipulation under the Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act 1960. He also asked for information on the type of fluoride used in Irish water, how much was added to the water supply and where it came from.
The Department of Health referred him to the regional health boards. He wrote to all eight, requesting the same information.
One week later on a Friday afternoon, he received a telephone call from a senior dental surgeon at a health board outside his locality. The surgeon asked him what the relevance of his questions were, whether he planned to publish the results, and most surprisingly of all, what his political affiliations were.
The health board in question has admitted these enquiries were made. They acknowledge it is a matter of regret that the situation arose and have apologised for any offence caused.
However, other influences were brought to bear on Mac Auley by health board officials in the form of further telephone calls urging him to withdraw his Freedom of Information request and conform to IDA policy.
``I was completely amazed. I couldn't believe that the details of what I thought was a confidential request had been revealed. I contacted my solicitor who advised me to persevere with my enquiries.''
Four weeks later, he received replies from a number of health boards but they were limited in scope. In one letter from the Southern Health Board, he was told to go and look in the library, if it was answers he wanted.
``I felt there was an increasing resistance from officialdom to respond to my questions, but I was determined to get to the bottom of it.''
Mac Auley decided to appeal his FOI response to the Information Commissioner. Earlier this month, after a wait of almost one year, he finally received answers to some of his questions, answers that have confirmed his fears.
The fluoridating agent used in drinking water here is hydrofluosilicic acid, a component of toxic waste imported from the fertiliser industry in Holland. Hydrofluosilicic acid is a non-biodegradable, highly corrosive substance, contaminated with a number of heavy metals including arsenic and lead.
Every year, the Irish government pays hundreds of thousands of pounds to the Dutch company that produces this acid, a substance which would otherwise cost vast sums of money to dispose of safely.
According to reports by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1997, nine per cent of all water supplies exceed the recommended levels of 1mg of fluoride per litre of water. These and all other exceedances are illegal and impermissible.
Despite all the evidence which now exists about the dangers of fluoride to health, in 35 years of fluoridation, no Irish government has ever carried out a public health survey on its effects, even though it is required to under the 1960 Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act. When asked in a recent interview as to why no such surveys had been carried out, the Minister for Health, Michael Martin said that the population of Ireland was ``too small''.
Don Mac Auley is now convinced that the Irish public is being denied the truth about water fluoridation in this country.
``I now have no doubt there is hidden agenda to reveal as little as possible about fluoridation. At Dental School, you are taught only one side of the story and if dentists don't know the full story, how can our patients be expected to. Water fluoridation is sold as the greatest preventive oral health measure ever devised but the story is biased and the indoctrination manipulative.
``In my view, many dentists continue to endorse fluoridation simply because they do not know the truth. They are not told that the fluoride used here is toxic waste contaminated with arsenic and lead. They are not told there is enough fluoride in a tube of toothpaste to kill a small child or that, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency, it is more poisonous than lead. Yet we are expected to accept that a toxic waste diluted in our drinking water is safe.''
Mac Auley has now left his former position and set up in private practice. He acts as an advisor to the Fluoride Free Water Campaign and is determined to educate his patients and colleagues about what he sees as the truth behind fluoridation.
``The whole episode has been both shocking and emotionally draining. It is amazing the lengths that proponents of fluoridation will go to protect this pollutant. If the government continues to mass medicate the Irish public without its consent, it will inevitably have to face up to the consequences. When it does, it is my belief that the bill to the taxpayer will dwarf the army deafness claims.''

Posts : 9
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2018-01-07
Location : UK
View user profile

Re: Fluoride

on Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:22 am
Sponsored content

Re: Fluoride

Back to top
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum