Poster's Note:
Bio-chemical Warfare.
This method includes the employment of living
organisms or chemical substances to kill or incapacitate. Although the Geneva
Convention prohibits a nationstate from using bio-chemical weapons it is not
enough to prevent against its hostile use. Developing an infectious agent and
then dispersing it in the adversary’s territory has the potential to cause a social
and economical catastrophe. The examples of anthrax released in Washington DC
in 2001 or the use of chlorine by insurgents in Iraq in 2007 increases the
requirement for biocontainment and bio-security.
The Fluoride-Induced American Holocaust Continues
Unabated
Søren
Roest Korsgaard
“Fluoridation
amounts to public murder on a grand scale.” — Dr. Dean Burk
For liberals fluoridation of water became a cause to
advance government intervention in behalf of improving dental health. After
decades of fluoridation numerous unrefuted studies have established not only
that fluoridation is damaging to teeth, but also is associated with a
wide range of health and cognitive issues ranging from cancer to ADHD and lower
IQ scores. Despite the evidence the Center for Disease Control (CDC), the
fluoride lobby and associated bought scientists continue to proclaim the
unproven benefits of fluoridation. Soren Korsgaard concludes his
report on the real evidence with the suggestion that those responsible for the
immense adverse health effects of fluoridation be brought before the
International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. This is a
very important readable scientific report.
Read it and see the total absence of concern for public health by the CDC.
— Paul Craig Roberts
Seventy-four long years have passed since the US
government decided to start community water fluoridation of a few selected
cities. Back then when fluoride was first added to water supplies, asbestos was
the preferred fireproofing material, PCBs were used as insulation and in
pesticides, and the notoriously “safe and effective” DDT was sprayed in schools
and from airplanes over large populations, killing tens of thousands of people
from cancer and other diseases. All of these chemicals have been banned, except
fluoride. Since 1945, the US fluoridation program has expanded massively and
now encompasses over 70% of all community water supplies while the majority of
the world has rejected or banned it (only 5% of the world, US included,
consumed artificially fluoridated water in 2012). Fluoride is allegedly added
to water supplies and most commercial toothpaste to strengthen teeth and hence
reduce cavities. Until recently, US water supplies contained 1.0-1.2 ppm of
fluoride i.e. around one milligram per liter of water. In 2015, the US
government lowered the recommended amount of fluoride to 0.7 ppm.
The
Food and Drug Administration classifies fluoride as a prescription drug; yet,
there is no control of the intake. Athletes, people living in warmer climates
and the elderly who cannot excrete fluoride to the same extent as younger
generations are obviously overexposed. Fluoride is, among others, also absorbed
by plants and animals making it increasingly difficult to avoid. Ethically,
fluoridation deprives people of informed consent to medication. On the other
hand, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) has proclaimed that water
fluoridation is “one of public health’s greatest success stories” and “one of
10 great public health achievements of the 20th century.” The CDC proclaims to
work “24/7 to protect America from health, safety and security threats, both
foreign and in the U.S.” The veracity of these statements by the CDC, is for
the readers to judge in the pages that follow.
While
the CDC and many other organizations praise and glorify water fluoridation on
their respective websites and at conferences, they omit a massive body of
peer-reviewed studies that correlate fluoride exposure with reduced IQ in
humans. In fact, 61 studies that included a total of 22,176 children and 245
adults have documented this link. Many of these studies examined fluoride
levels equivalent to or lower than the concentration found in most US water
supplies, and adjusted for relevant variables such as socio-economic status and
other toxins that affect IQ. These mainstream experts also omit numerous animal
studies that have thoroughly established that fluoride can produce cognitive
impairment in animals and bring about “anxiety-depression-like behaviors in
mice” (Liu et al., 2014). Here are quotations from a small sample of these
studies. Bartos and associates concluded in 2019 that “the present study
reveals that exposure to [fluoride] in early stages of rat development leads to
impairment of memory in young offspring.” Another rat study revealed that “the
learning and memory of rats in [the fluoride] group significantly decreased”
(Zheng et al., 2016). Jetti et al showed in their 2016 study that “the rats
that received fluoride water exhibited impairment in their spatial learning and
memory deficits.” In 2014, a study led by Jiang S. reached the conclusion that
“fluoride and arsenic, either alone or combined, can decrease learning and
memory ability in rats.” Chioca and coworkers concluded in their 2008 study,
which was published in the European Journal of Pharmacology, that “moderate
intoxication with sodium fluoride has potentially deleterious effects on
learning and memory.” Dozens of animal studies have shown adverse cognitive
affects in animals as well as many other issues not covered to any degree in
this article, including cancer, infertility, loss of bone strength, and genetic
damage, each topic requiring lengthy dissertations to cover. Now we will
briefly summarize the conclusions of a few selected epidemiological studies. In
2009, Sudhir and coworkers studied 1000 schoolchildren exposed to several
degrees of fluoride: <0.7 ppm, 0.7-1.2 ppm, 1.3-4.0 ppm, and >4.0 ppm.
Sudhir and his research team observed that the “number of intellectually
impaired children were gradually increased with the increase in fluoride
concentration in the drinking water” and “high fluoride environment adversely
affects the development of intelligence in children.”
Ding
and coworkers examined low fluoride levels, between 0.24 and 2.84 ppm, and how
they had affected 331 children. They showed that 1 mg of fluoride present in
urine was associated with a 0.59-point decrease in IQ. Their study, which was
published in 2011 in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, reached the conclusion
that “low levels of fluoride exposure in drinking water had negative effects on
children’s intelligence and dental health and confirmed the dose-response
relationships between urine fluoride and IQ scores as well as dental
fluorosis.” Excessive fluoride intake produces easily seen damage to tooth
enamel, called dental fluorosis. In its most severe form, the enamel begins to
erode and crumble, often giving the appearance that the teeth are “rotten,”
resulting in severe psychological problems, especially among children. Dental
fluorosis becomes especially concerning when we consider the CDC’s own study on
dental fluorosis. In the period 1999–2004, the prevalence of dental fluorosis
in adolescents, aged 12–15, was 40.6%. For children and adolescents, aged 6-19,
a total of 37% had dental fluorosis. A follow-up study by Eman Behbehani that
focused on the period 2011-2012 showed that the number of affected had
increased to 57% for those aged 6 to 19.
Contrary
to mainstream experts, fluoridation not only destroys health but also teeth and
does so irreversibly. Numerous large-scale studies have demonstrated that
populations with unfluoridated water do not have a higher incidence of cavities
than in the US and that fluoridation is ineffective. Even data collected by the
World Health Organization shows that several unfluoridated countries have
better oral health than the US, including Denmark, Germany, Netherlands,
Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, and Italy. In 1999, Dr. Mansfield gathered
urine-fluoride data in England from people living in artificially fluoridated
areas. The water-fluoride-level in these areas is equivalent to the level in
the US before 2015. Conservatively, we may assume that the urine-fluoride
levels are similar in the US; however, they are most likely higher as only a
small percentage of England is fluoridated and thus food and drinks likely
contain lower levels of fluoride than in the US. In the West Midlands, 31.3%
had between 1.7 ppm and 4 ppm of fluoride in their urine; the mean
urine-fluoride concentration was determined to be 1.46 ppm.
According
to the CDC, the number of people who “benefit” from fluoridation continues to
grow. Their data show that 74.4% of all community water supplies were
fluoridated in 2014, which translates into 211,393,167 people receiving
fluoridated water. The CDC admits on their website that they are working
diligently to ensure that nearly 80% of people on public water systems will
receive fluoridated water by 2020. By invoking the data from the aforementioned
study by Ding, it can be shown that fluoridation in the US is associated with a
loss of 181.0 million IQ points. As we shall see, this figure underestimates
the true nature of the carnage. In 2019, a major study was published in JAMA
Pediatrics, titled, “Association Between Maternal Fluoride Exposure During
Pregnancy and IQ Scores in Offspring in Canada.” This study, which had been
founded by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Science and by
the Canadian government, demonstrated that an increase of 1 mg of fluoride in
urine among pregnant women resulted in a 4.5-point decrease in IQ among boys,
and collectively for both genders, a drop of 3.66 IQ-points could be
documented.
Notwithstanding the profound criminality by successive
profluoridation US governments and ruthless lobbyists and scientists who have
been working tirelessly to ensure that the IQ holocaust continues, it gets much
worse. The US government approved and secretly installed “fluoridators” in
schools across the US in the 1960s, and possibly earlier, and continued until
the 1990s to adjust fluoride levels to 4.0 to 5.4 ppm. In 1992, over 100,000
school children were exposed to this horror. Murphy’s law dictates, “if
something can go wrong it will.” Not surprisingly dozens of fluoride accidents
have occurred, poisoning an untold number of people. One of these accidents
took place in 1972 in the Northeast Bradford Elementary School, Rome,
Pennsylvania, were students and teachers were poisoned with fluoride levels as
high as 230 ppm due to faulty equipment. Dr. Philippe Grandjean of the Harvard
School of Public Health, who has published several papers on fluoride, stated
in 2014, “fluoride seems to fit in with lead, mercury, and other poisons that
cause chemical brain drain.” In a presentation on fluoride, renowned
neurosurgeon, Dr. Russell Blaylock, asked, “If you’ve demonstrated [that
fluoridation] doesn’t reach its objective: that is reducing cavities … Why
is it still being added to the water? If it has these profound health effects,
why is it still being added to the water? … Either they’re incredibly stupid
and incompetent or criminal or they are doing it on purpose.”
Other Health Effects
While
this article has briefly looked at a few selected studies showing that fluoride
affects IQ, the problem does not end there. Fluoride causes havoc in the body.
For example, fluoridation can damage the male reproductive system (see for
example Freni et al., 1994), and studies from China, India, Mexico, and Russia
have shown that high fluoride exposure can reduce male testosterone levels (see
for example Peizhong et al., 1997). Those who live in fluoridated
areas are well advised to filter all of their water (even that which is used
for showering). Inexpensive water filters removing fluoride are easily
accessible (e.g. ZeroWater). Toothpaste without fluoride is readily available
in health stores and online.
Dr.
Dean Burk, one of the most famous and decorated cancer research scientists in
the world during the 20th century, and Dr. John Yiamouyiannis, president of the
Safe Water Foundation, compared in a 1975 epidemiological survey the cancer
mortality rate of central cities that were either fluoridated or unfluoridated.
Prior to fluoridation, the cancer death rate remained identical for both sets
of cities, but subsequent to fluoridation the cancer death rate skyrocketed in
the fluoridated cities, but not in the unfluoridated ones. In 1976, Dr. Burk
was asked: “Is this conclusive evidence that fluoride kills because of cancer?”
He replied as follows: “It is one of the most conclusive bits of scientific and
biological evidence that I have come across in my 50 years in the field of
cancer research.” He added, “[fluoridation] amounts to public murder on a grand
scale.”
The
explosive findings were a thorn in the side of the pro-fluoridation policy of
the US government, and the study was criticized, with the main contention being
that the association could be explained away by demographic changes. In 1977,
Burk and Yiamouyiannis addressed the criticism in another survey. They showed
that sex, race, and age did not explain the significant cancer death correlated
to fluoride. The cancer-fluoride survey led to three historic trials in
Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Texas in 1978-1982. Although pro-fluoridation
scientists from the National Cancer Institute, the National Academy of
Sciences, the Royal Statistical Society, and the Royal College of Physicians
attempted to dispute the evidence, three veteran trial judges in three
different States found that water fluoridation causes cancer and other ailments
in man. In each of the trials, it had been shown that the US government,
or their surrogates, had attempted to conceal laboratory studies showing that
fluoride causes cancer, and left out available and pertinent date in their
demographic adjustment of surveys linking fluoridation and human cancer (Graham
et al., 1999). These findings were never disturbed on appeal. After
the judicial findings, Dr. Burk and co-workers published more expansive
adjustments of demographic factors in epidemiological data in 1984 and 1988,
thereby showing that the evidence presented in court was too conservative.
Specifically, Burk, Graham, and Morin showed in 1988 that “artificial
fluoridation appears to cause or induce about 20-30 excess cancer deaths for
every 100,000 persons exposed per year after about 15-20 years.” Using this
data it can easily be shown that at least a million excess cancer deaths in the
United States have been caused or promoted by water fluoridation since this
measure was endorsed by the government of the United States in 1951.
Fluoride
also affects behavior. Following extensive peer-review in 1995, Mullenix and
coworkers published their study into the possible neurotoxicity of
fluoride in rats. In order to eliminate bias, Mullenix had utilized a
computer-pattern-recognition-system to detect if fluoride had an effect on
behavior. Strikingly, it was discovered that fluoride produced life-long
changes in behavior. If young rats were exposed to fluoride in their drinking
water for a few weeks of the rat’s lifetime it produced hypoactivity;
Mullenix would later say, “they became slower, ‘couch potatoes’ if you like.”
They also gave a one-time subcutaneous injection of fluoride into pregnant
rats. As the offspring of those rats grew up they became distinctly hyperactive,
indicating that fluoride affects different regions of the brain depending on
what time exposure takes place. Mullenix and her team also discovered that
“there was major accumulations of fluoride in all the regions of the brain, and
that some areas looked like there were greater accumulations than others, that
were sex-determinant.” Several other animal and epidemiological studies have
supported the conclusions drawn by Mullenix, including Jennifer Anne Luke’s PhD
dissertation from 1997, which showed that fluoride accumulates in the pineal
gland affecting melatonin production and results in accelerated onset of sexual
maturation in female gerbils. In regard to hyperactivity, a 2015 study
demonstrated that “state prevalence of artificial water fluoridation in 1992
significantly positively predicted state prevalence of ADHD in 2003, 2007 and
2011, even after controlling for socio economic status …. Each 1% increase in
artificial fluoridation prevalence in 1992 was associated with approximately
67,000 to 131,000 additional ADHD diagnoses from 2003 to 2011” (Malin et al.,
2015). Pursuant to Dr. Blaylock, the effects of fluoridation and other
environmental toxins are immense:
“We’re
seeing a society that not only has a lot more people of lower IQ, but a lot
fewer people of higher IQ. In other words: a dumbing down, a chemical dumbing
down of society. So everyone is sort of mediocre. That leaves them dependent on
government, because they can’t excel. We have these people of lower IQ who are
totally dependent. Then we have this mass of people who are going to believe
anything they are told because they can’t really think clearly—and very few
people of a very high IQ have good cognitive function who can figure this all
out. And that’s what they want.”
Successive
US government officials, academics, mainstream experts, dentists, and
journalists continue to cover-up fluoridation’s profoundly hazardous effects.
The responsible parties must be hurled before the International Criminal Court
for crimes against humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.