|
The Roman Empire fell because of lead pipes - Is fluoride our health demise?
Learn the Truth About Fluoride in This Revealing Interview with the Award-Winning Author of "The Fluoride Deception" Dr. Mercola's Comment: As I wrote in the last newsletter issue, Christopher Bryson has written a book that is not only interesting, it is also incredibly important. The Fluoride Deception is much more than a book about the dangers of fluoride--it reveals a multi-tiered effort, or as Bryson says an abuse of power, by military and industry scientists and public health officials to shamelessly promote fluoride to the dentistry field and the American public with little regard to the implications it would have on human health. If you are not familiar with the controversy surrounding the use of fluoride in water, toothpaste and numerous other products and industries, your mouth will drop as you read this book. If you are, you will be amazed at just how far and wide the cover-up and deceit stretches. In fact, the evidence is so compelling that you will likely find yourself reading and rereading in disbelief. In the interview below you will learn the interesting story of how the book came about as well as a shocking piece of information from the book. I highly recommend The Fluoride Deception to anyone and everyone--the message it contains has the power to change policy and opinions, and will make you question the effects of not only fluoride but also of other "safe" chemicals used openly in our environment today. The following is from an e-interview that we recently
conducted with Christopher Bryson. 1. What prompted you to write "The Fluoride Deception"? I’m a reporter. I don’t know how many modern stories have the same epic reach of history and rich cast of characters as you will find in "The Fluoride Deception." I stumbled on the story in 1993. I was working in New York as a BBC radio producer and was asked to find "an American angle" on water fluoridation. Ralph Nader put me in touch with a couple of government scientists (William Hirzy at the EPA and Robert Carton at the U.S. Army) who opposed water fluoridation, and explained how the science underpinning the nation’s fluoride safety standards was fraudulent. I met the medical writer Joel Griffiths whose 1992 story in Covert Action Information Bulletin laid out the monumental scale of industrial fluoride poisoning, and explained how industry had long manipulated the public debate over water fluoridation. I just kept reporting. I interviewed the famous chemist Philip Sadtler. He told me how he had investigated in the aftermath of the most notorious air pollution disaster in U.S. history, the 1948 Halloween tragedy in Donora, Pennsylvania, in which a couple of dozen people were killed and hundreds were injured. He had measured high levels of fluoride in the blood of local citizens in the disaster aftermath. His work was dismissed at the time, but after Sadtler’s death I uncovered a secret autopsy report on one of the Donora dead, performed by Alcoa, which found similar levels of fluoride in the blood. Sadtler had been right, it seems. 2. What piece of information was most shocking to you? There were several. I uncovered a medical study that had been performed at the Kettering Laboratory at the University of Cincinnati in the late 1950s. The study was paid for by industry and was buried for almost 40 years. It was part of an effort by companies such as U.S. Steel, Alcoa and the TVA, to "provide ammunition" to a self-described Fluorine Lawyers Committee to help those industry attorneys defeat workers and farmers who alleged fluoride poisoning. But the study found that fluoride was terribly harmful to the experimental animals, damaging their lungs and lymph nodes at modest doses. A scientist who reviewed the study for me said that, if the scientists who set workplace exposure standards had seen the data, then fluoride exposure levels in factories would have been set much lower. Tens of thousands of women and men have likely been poisoned and hurt by fluoride because of this decades-long cover up. 3. Do you have any recommendations for people who want to avoid fluoride as much as possible? Contact your local politicians and tell them how you feel about this deception. Get active in your community and find out if fluoride is added to public water supplies. Fight for a referendum to get it out. Short term; buy a water filter that removes fluoride. If you are a worker in a factory, get active in your local union and find out about the chemicals that may be present in the work environment. Tell your friends about "The Fluoride Deception." 4. What goals do you hope to achieve with this book? The book was written to empower. I want readers to understand the issue, so that they can make informed judgments for themselves. 5. Is there a way a person can tell if fluoride is causing them, or has already caused them, health problems? I’m a reporter, not a doctor. The distinguished allergist Dr. George Waldbott, who first warned us in the 1950s about cigarette smoking and the dangers of allergic reaction to penicillin, found that many people are allergic to even tiny amounts of fluoride. Fluoride is a systemic poison. It attacks enzymes. Because enzymes are so important to the body, fluoride intoxication can be manifested in many ways. Dr Waldbott reported that fluoridated water caused, among other symptoms, migraine headaches, bone stiffness, and gastric distress. Those symptoms vanished when his patients stopped drinking fluoridated water. 6. Do you think that water fluoridation will one day become a thing of the past, among the ranks of using asbestos, aspartame, DDT and other chemicals that were once deemed safe? I hope so, but that ultimately depends on citizens informing themselves and taking action. 7. In "The Fluoride Deception" you mention that no proponents of fluoride would attend the major fluoridation debates in 2001. Can you give a brief explanation as to why you think this is? Fear. The emperor has no clothes. As the 2000 Nobel Prize winning scientist Arvid Carlsson states in my book: "Fluoridation violates modern pharmacological
principles." Fluoride defenders know that they will be exposed in
public discussion. Thus, the American Dental Association
has long told fluoride supporters not to encourage
debate. My book also reveals how the legendary public
relations wizard Edward L. Bernays suggested in 1960
that the New York City Health Commissioner could
suppress public debate by writing to William Paley of
CBS and David Sarnoff of NBC, suggesting that debating
water fluoridation is like "presenting two sides for
Anti-Catholicism or Anti Semitism and therefore not in
the public interest." Fluoride Fight Currently in England, a legislation is being ram-rodded through the House of Commons, to propose a national fluoridation plan to become a law of the land. Stereo typically England is the land of the dentally challenged so you’d think they would want fluoridated water since it is common knowledge that fluoride prevents cavities right? Many are fighting against this legislation, but the odds are good that this legislation will pass easily. Which means every citizen of England will (like the United States) be forced to ingest a toxin formerly used only as a rat poison, and which has been linked to Immune system alteration, Muskolo-Skeletal harm, Genetic damage, Cancer and Thyroid dysfunction. Fluoride causes the immune system to fail to distinguish between the body’s own proteins and disease, which can lead to autoimmune conditions, like asthma and Graves’ disease. Fluoride-caused enzyme toxicity damages the collagens and other substances that make up muscles, tendons, ligaments, bones, and even tooth enamel. Rheumatoid illnesses such as arthritis and osteoporosis are aggravated as a result. Fluoride’s enzyme poising effects penetrate the body’s chromosomes, causing permanent genetic changes that can lead to damage to the genitalia, and has even been linked to an increased incidence of birth defects like Down Syndrome. Because fluoride is a mutagen, it can cause the uncontrolled spread of certain types of cells, cancer among these. One report from San Francisco in the 1950 showed a 400% increase in one type of cancer during the period in which their water supply was initially fluoridated. Fluoride caused damage to the thyroid gland in multiple ways, which can play havoc on your body’s hormonal balance and ultimately lead to hypothyroidism, an increasingly common condition in most all civilized nations. As if these things aren’t bad enough, because your body can only eliminate about half of the fluoride you ingest, this toxin builds up in your system over time. This causes its negative effects to be multiplied the older you get. The best ways to protect yourself is to stop using fluoridated toothpastes and invest in a good-quality, high-volume water filter that specifically targets fluoride. Your only other option is to move somewhere the water is pure. OR................click here https://www.holisticmed.com/fluoride/ Toxic Flouridehttps://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm 50 reasons to not flouridate https://www.cyberclass.net/flouride.htm Many flouride sites. https://www.fluoridealert.org/absurdity.htm Best on why not to flouridate. https://www.fluoridation.com/ Pictures of flourosis. https://www.fluoridation.com/calgaryl.htm#Fluorosis%20Control%20Cell Medical authorities against flouridation. https://www.sonic.net/kryptox/AL/varnerlinks.htm Lab Rats dead before flouride study completed. https://www.apfn.org/apfn/sheeples.htm Affidavit of a Communist involved in the flouridation campaigns 1950's. Below is some excellent ammunition for you to use when approaching city officials. While Laura wrote it, I did edit it for accuracy. Dave Hansen Guest Commentary: Here's the return on your investment with water fluoridation Thr, Jan 8, 2004 By LAURA WARBURTON How do you know if your investment in water fluoridation will pay off? Let's examine its track record in other fluoridated communities. In Kentucky, which is 96 percent fluoridated and has been fluoridating since 1977, 28 percent of preschoolers developed cavities in 1987; that number jumped to 47 percent in 2001, according to the July/August 2003 Journal of Pediatric Dentistry. In West Virginia, largely fluoridated since 1951, only 27 percent of adults have kept their natural teeth compared to 64 percent in unfluoridated Utah, according to the Centers for Disease Control as published in the 2002 "Public Health and Aging: Retention of Natural Teeth Among Older Adults United States." This same study also shows that only 13 percent of adults in unfluoridated Hawaii have lost all of their natural teeth, as opposed to 42 percent in Kentucky and 40 percent in West Virginia, both of which have been fluoridated for more than 25 years. Never-fluoridated Vancouver, Canada, has a lower rate of dental decay than Toronto, Canada, which has been fluoridating for 36 years. This study comes from Dr. Hardy Limeback, BSc, PhD, DDS, associate professor and head of preventive dentistry in Toronto, Ontario. Dr. Limeback is Canada's leading fluoride authority and, until recently, was the country's primary promoter of fluoridation. Dr. Limeback's report is available at www.fluoridealert.org/limeback.htm. On April 9, 2003, Basel, Switzerland, halted all fluoridation. PRNewswire recently reported that after 40 years of water fluoridation, it has failed to reduce tooth decay; in fact, according to a Swiss government report, children's cavity rates there increased from 1996 to 2001. Howard Pollick, co-chairman of the California Fluoridation Task Force, a dentist, and a strong proponent of fluoridation, studied 1,230 Head Start children in five different states and found that there was no difference in cavity rates between optimally and non-fluoridated areas. "It may ... be that fluoridation of drinking water does not have a strong protective effect against early childhood caries," he said in the Winter 2003 Journal of Public Health Dentistry. In fluoridated Detroit, "black children from Detroit's poorest families have among the worst teeth of any group of children in the nation," according to a recent study by professors at the University of Michigan as published on Dec. 18, 2003, by Knight-Ridder Newspapers. It's common for Detroit children as young as 1 or 2 years old to have numerous teeth rotten to their gums, and, by age 5, for more than half to have cavities, and for 35 percent to show initial signs of dental decay, nearly twice the national average. Recent news articles from New York, Boston and Cincinnati show that tooth decay is at alarming levels despite decades of fluoridation. In a study of over 24,000 U.S. children, ages 2 to 17 years old, rural children's cavity rates are equal to those of urban children, who are more likely to drink fluoridated water. According to the summer 2003 issue of the Journal of Rural Health, researchers were surprised by fluoridation's apparent ineffectiveness: "The lack of difference in caries (cavities) prevalence between rural and urban children is puzzling. ... Children residing in rural areas are more likely than urban children to use well water, which usually has a low fluoride content." All of this really should not be surprising since the CDC admitted in its Aug. 17, 2000, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report that swallowing fluoride does not effectively prevent tooth decay, but rather topical application works best. By simply brushing your teeth regularly with fluoridated toothpaste, which has 1,000 times the fluoride concentration of fluoridated water, you receive optimum protection. Given that water fluoridation is not effective in reducing tooth decay by the claimed "up to 50 percent," this makes it a worthless investment. Proponents have never provided any scientifically valid, double-blind studies to support their claims of effectiveness. If proponents' claims are accurate, wouldn't you expect them to be able to ante up the research to support them? Understandably, proponents actively avoid scientific debates on the validity of their claims. To make this "investment" seem more attractive, proponents also projected that you would enjoy a savings of $80 for every $1 spent on water fluoridation. Your average household investment of $20, multiplied by $80 in promised savings, should net you about $1,600 savings every year. Don't you wish you lived in Holladay, where your $65 per hook-up investment will save you $5,200 per year? A good investor will note that actuarial tables for dental insurance expenses do not reflect whether an area is fluoridated or not. Thus, you will save nothing on your dental insurance premiums because of water fluoridation. No doubt, proponents will be encouraging citizens to vote to continue fluoridation based upon "not throwing away" the multimillion-dollar "investment" that has already been spent on implementation As a good investor, you know that continuing to flush down the toilet, to sprinkle onto the grass, to shower down the drain hundreds of thousands of dollars every year in continuing expenses on a worthless investment is against your better judgment. Laura Warburton is the mother of four children She
lives in Layton. You Also May
Like:
More links |
.
.. ..
. |
