Free news

FREE blog







Gun poll








14th Amdt

19th Amdt














Fluoride: the Perfect Zionist Scam to Destroy Nations

How to save 427,384 American lives annually


One in a series "Killing Christians Through Better Medicine".

Nations which have not fluoridated their water, like China, Mexico, and Panama, have cancer mortality rates equivalent to our rate before we began to fluoridate our water.  Most of the three fold increase in our cancer mortality rate to 221 per 100,000 Americans was after fluoridation began.  Had we had a cancer mortality rate in 1996 equivalent to China's, then rather than 539,533 deaths, there would have been only 112,149 cancer deaths, saving 427,384 lives

The Dickinson Statement:

"We are told by the fanatical ideologists who are advocating the fluoridation of the water supplies in this country that their purpose is to reduce the incidence of tooth decay in children, and it is the plausibility of this excuse, plus the gullibility of the public and the cupidity of public officials that is responsible for the present spread of artificial water fluoridation in this country.

"However - and I want to make this very definite and positive - the real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children's teeth. If this were the real reason, there are many ways in which it could be done which are much easier, cheaper and far more effective. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty...

"Wen the Nazis, under Hitler, decided to go into Poland... the German General Staff and the Russian General Staff exchanged scientific and military ideas, plans and personnel and the scheme of mass control through water medication was seized upon by the Russian Communists because it fitted ideally into their plan to Communize the world...

"I say this in all earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years research into the chemistry, bio-chemistry, physiology and pathology of fluorine: any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically."

horizontal rule


Why American's are SHEEPLES: FLUORIDE



From: American Patriot Friends Network


Why American's are SHEEPLES: FLUORIDE


To Whom It May Concern:


I, Oliver Kenneth Goff was a member of the Communist Party and
the Young Communist League, from May 2, 1936 to October 9, 1939. During
this period of time, I operated under the alias of John Keats and the
number 18-B-2. My testimony before the Government is incorporated in
Volume 9 of the Un-American Activities Report for the year 1939.


While a member of the Communist Party, I attended Communist
underground training schools outside the City of New York: In the
Bues Hall, and 113 East Wells Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The East
Wells Street School operated under the name of the Eugene Debs School.
Here, under the tutoring of Eugene Dennis, M. Sparks, Morris Childs,
Jack Kling and others, we were schooled in the art of revolutionary
overthrow of the established Government.


We were trained on how to dismantle and assemble mimeograph
machines, to use for propaganda purposes during the revolution; how
to work on guide wires and fuel lines of airplanes so that they would
either burst into flames or crash to the ground because of lack of
control; how to work on ties and rails to wreck trains; and also the
art of poisoning water supplies.


We discussed quite throughly the fluoridation of water supplies
and how we were using it in Russia as a tranquilizer in the prison
camps. The leaders of our school felt that if it could be induced into
the American water supply, it would bring-about a spirit of lethargy
in the nation; where it would keep the general public docile during a
steady encroachment of Communism. We also discussed the fact that
keeping a store of deadly fluoride near the water reservoir would be
advantageous during the time of the revolution, as it would give us
opportunity to dump this poison into the water supply and either kill
off the populace or threaten them with liquidation, so that they would
surrender to obtain fresh water.


We discussed in these schools, the complete art of revolution:
the seizure of the main utilities, such as light, power, gas, and water;
but it was felt by the leadership, that if a program of fluoridating
of the water could be carried out in the nation, it would go a long way
toward the advancement of the revolution.


The above statements are true.


/s/ Oliver Kenneth Goff


) S5


OLIVER KENNETH GOFF, being first duly sworn upon his oath, deposes
and says that he has the above and foregoing instrument and knows the
contents thereof, and that the same are true of his own knowledge except
as to those matters stated on the information and belief as to those he
believes them to be true.


(SEAL)subscribed and sworn to before me this 22rd day of June A.D., 1957.


The above information was faxed to APFN on Aug. 6, 1993 from ULTRA LIFE
From FAX: 618-594-7712. This FAX included the following page:

























Fluoride & the A-Bomb Program


During the ultra-secret Manhattan Project, a report was commissioned to
assess the effect of fluoride on humans.
That report was classified "secret" for reasons of "national security".




Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 5, #3 (April-May 1998).
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia.
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381
From our web page at:


_ Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson 1997
4 West 104th Street
New York, NY 10025, USA


Some 50 years after United States authorities began adding fluoride to
public water supplies to reduce cavities in children's teeth, recently
discovered declassified government documents are shedding new light on the
roots of that still-controversial public health measure, revealing a
surprising connection between the use of fluoride and the dawning of the
nuclear age.


Today, two-thirds of US public drinking water is fluoridated. Many
municipalities still resist the practice, disbelieving the government's
assurances of safety.


Since the days of World War II when the US prevailed by building the
world's first atomic bomb, the nation's public health leaders have
maintained that low doses of fluoride are safe for people and good for
children's teeth.


That safety verdict should now be re-examined in the light of hundreds of
once-secret WWII-era documents obtained by these reporters [authors
Griffiths and Bryson], including declassified papers of the Manhattan
Project-the ultra-secret US military program that produced the atomic bomb.


Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production, according to the
documents. Massive quantities-millions of tons-were essential for the
manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons
throughout the Cold War. One of the most toxic chemicals known, fluoride
emerged as the leading chemical health hazard of the US atomic bomb
program, both for workers and for nearby communities, the documents reveal.


Other revelations include:
Ñ Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses
was generated by A-bomb program scientists who had been secretly ordered to
provide "evidence useful in litigation" against defence contractors for
fluoride injury to citizens. The first lawsuits against the American A-bomb
program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the documents
Ñ Human studies were required. Bomb program researchers played a leading
role in the design and implementation of the most extensive US study of the
health effects of fluoridating public drinking water, conducted in
Newburgh, New York, from 1945 to 1955. Then, in a classified operation
code-named "Program F", they secretly gathered and analysed blood and
tissue samples from Newburgh citizens with the cooperation of New York
State Health Department personnel.
Ñ The original, secret version (obtained by these reporters) of a study
published by Program F scientists in the August 1948 Journal of the
American Dental Association1 shows that evidence of adverse health effects
from fluoride was censored by the US Atomic Energy Commission
(AEC)-considered the most powerful of Cold War agencies-for reasons of
"national security".
Ñ The bomb program's fluoride safety studies were conducted at the
University of Rochester-site of one of the most notorious human radiation
experiments of the Cold War, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were
injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium. The fluoride studies
were conducted with the same ethical mindset, in which "national security"
was paramount.




The US Government's conflict of interest and its motive to prove fluoride
safe in the furious debate over water fluoridation since the 1950s has only
now been made clear to the general public, let alone to civilian
researchers, health professionals and journalists. The declassified
documents resonate with a growing body of scientific evidence and a chorus
of questions about the health effects of fluoride in the environment.


Human exposure to fluoride has mushroomed since World War II, due not only
to fluoridated water and toothpaste but to environmental pollution by major
industries, from aluminium to pesticides, where fluoride is a critical
industrial chemical as well as a waste by-product.


The impact can be seen literally in the smiles of our children. Large
numbers (up to 80 per cent in some cities) of young Americans now have
dental fluorosis, the first visible sign of excessive fluoride exposure
according to the US National Research Council. (The signs are whitish
flecks or spots, particularly on the front teeth, or dark spots or stripes
in more severe cases.)


Less known to the public is that fluoride also accumulates in bones. "The
teeth are windows to what's happening in the bones," explained Paul
Connett, Professor of Chemistry at St Lawrence University, New York, to
these reporters. In recent years, paediatric bone specialists have
expressed alarm about an increase in stress fractures among young people in
the US. Connett and other scientists are concerned that fluoride-linked to
bone damage in studies since the 1930s-may be a contributing factor.


The declassified documents add urgency: much of the original 'proof ' that
low-dose fluoride is safe for children's bones came from US bomb program
scientists, according to this investigation.


Now, researchers who have reviewed these declassified documents fear that
Cold War national security considerations may have prevented objective
scientific evaluation of vital public health questions concerning fluoride.


"Information was buried," concludes Dr Phyllis Mullenix, former head of
toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston and now a critic of
fluoridation. Animal studies which Mullenix and co-workers conducted at
Forsyth in the early 1990s indicated that fluoride was a powerful central
nervous system (CNS) toxin and might adversely affect human brain
functioning even at low doses. (New epidemiological evidence from China
adds support, showing a correlation between low-dose fluoride exposure and
diminished IQ in children.) Mullenix's results were published in 1995 in a
reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.2


During her investigation, Mullenix was astonished to discover there had
been virtually no previous US studies of fluoride's effects on the human
brain. Then, her application for a grant to continue her CNS research was
turned down by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), when an NIH
panel flatly told her that "fluoride does not have central nervous system


Declassified documents of the US atomic bomb program indicate otherwise. A
Manhattan Project memorandum of 29 April 1944 states: "Clinical evidence
suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous
system effect... It seems most likely that the F [code for fluoride]
component rather than the T [code for uranium] is the causative factor."
The memo, from a captain in the medical corps, is stamped SECRET and is
addressed to Colonel Stafford Warren, head of the Manhattan Project's
Medical Section. Colonel Warren is asked to approve a program of animal
research on CNS effects. "Since work with these compounds is essential, it
will be necessary to know in advance what mental effects may occur after
exposure... This is important not only to protect a given individual, but
also to prevent a confused workman from injuring others by improperly
performing his duties."


On the same day, Colonel Warren approved the CNS research program. This was
in 1944, at the height of World War II and the US nation's race to build
the world's first atomic bomb.


For research on fluoride's CNS effects to be approved at such a momentous
time, the supporting evidence set forth in the proposal forwarded along
with the memo must have been persuasive. The proposal, however, is missing
from the files at the US National Archives. "If you find the memos but the
document they refer to is missing, it's probably still classified," said
Charles Reeves, chief librarian at the Atlanta branch of the US National
Archives and Records Administration where the memos were found. Similarly,
no results of the Manhattan Project's fluoride CNS research could be found
in the files.


After reviewing the memos, Mullenix declared herself "flabbergasted". "How
could I be told by NIH that fluoride has no central nervous system effects,
when these documents were sitting there all the time?" She reasons that the
Manhattan Project did do fluoride CNS studies: "That kind of warning, that
fluoride workers might be a danger to the bomb program by improperly
performing their duties-I can't imagine that would be ignored." But she
suggests that the results were buried because of the difficult legal and
public relations problems they might create for the government.


The author of the 1944 CNS research proposal attached to the 29 April memo
was Dr Harold C. Hodge-at the time, chief of fluoride toxicology studies
for the University of Rochester division of the Manhattan Project.


Nearly 50 years later at the Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, Dr Mullenix
was introduced to a gently ambling elderly man, brought in to serve as a
consultant on her CNS research. This man was Harold C. Hodge. By then,
Hodge had achieved status emeritus as a world authority on fluoride safety.
"But even though he was supposed to be helping me," said Mullenix, "he
never once mentioned the CNS work he had done for the Manhattan Project."


The "black hole" in fluoride CNS research since the days of the Manhattan
Project is unacceptable to Mullenix who refuses to abandon the issue.
"There is so much fluoride exposure now, and we simply do not know what it
is doing. You can't just walk away from this."


Dr Antonio Noronha, an NIH scientific review advisor familiar with Dr
Mullenix's grant request, told us that her proposal was rejected by a
scientific peer-review group. He termed her claim of institutional bias
against fluoride CNS research "far-fetched". He then added: "We strive very
hard at NIH to make sure politics does not enter the picture." \




The documentary trail begins at the height of World War II, in 1944, when a
severe pollution incident occurred downwind of the E.I. DuPont de Nemours
Company chemical factory in Deepwater, New Jersey. The factory was then
producing millions of pounds of fluoride for the Manhattan Project whose
scientists were racing to produce the world's first atomic bomb.


The farms downwind in Gloucester and Salem counties were famous for their
high-quality produce. Their peaches went directly to the Waldorf Astoria
Hotel in New York City; their tomatoes were bought up by Campbell's Soup.


But in the summer of 1944 the farmers began reporting that their crops were
blighted: "Something is burning up the peach crops around here." They said
that poultry died after an all-night thunderstorm, and that farm workers
who ate produce they'd picked would sometimes vomit all night and into the
next day.


"I remember our horses looked sick and were too stiff to work," Mildred
Giordano, a teenager at the time, told these reporters. Some cows were so
crippled that they could not stand up; they could only graze by crawling on
their bellies.


The account was confirmed in taped interviews with Philip Sadtler (shortly
before he died), of Sadtler Laboratories of Philadelphia, one of the
nation's oldest chemical consulting firms. Sadtler had personally conducted
the initial investigation of the damage.


Although the farmers did not know it, the attention of the Manhattan
Project and the federal government was rivetted on the New Jersey incident,
according to once-secret documents obtained by these reporters.


A memo, dated 27 August 1945, from Manhattan Project chief Major-General
Leslie R. Groves to the Commanding General of Army Service Forces at the
Pentagon, concerns the investigation of crop damage at Lower Penns Neck,
New Jersey. It states: "At the request of the Secretary of War, the
Department of Agriculture has agreed to cooperate in investigating
complaints of crop damage fumes from a plant operated in
connection with the Manhattan Project."


After the war's end, Dr Harold C. Hodge, the Manhattan Project's chief of
fluoride toxicology studies, worriedly wrote in a secret memo (1 March
1946) to his boss, Colonel Stafford L. Warren, chief of the Medical
Section, about "problems associated with the question of fluoride
contamination of the atmosphere in a certain section of New Jersey".


"There seem to be four distinct (though related) problems:
"1. A question of injury of the peach crop in 1944.
"2. A report of extraordinary fluoride content of vegetables grown in this
"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."




The New Jersey farmers waited until the war was over before suing DuPont
and the Manhattan Project for fluoride damage-reportedly the first lawsuits
against the US atomic bomb program. Although seemingly trivial, the
lawsuits shook the government, the secret documents reveal.


Under the personal direction of Major-General Groves, secret meetings were
convened in Washington, with compulsory attendance by scores of scientists
and officials from the US War Department, the Manhattan Project, the Food
and Drug Administration, the Agriculture and Justice departments, the US
Army's Chemical Warfare Service and Edgewood Arsenal, the Bureau of
Standards, as well as lawyers from DuPont. Declassified memos of the
meetings reveal a secret mobilisation of the full forces of the government
to defeat the New Jersey farmers.


In a memo (2 May 1946) copied to General Groves, Manhattan Project Lt
Colonel Cooper B. Rhodes notes that these agencies "are 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".


Regarding these lawsuits, General Groves wrote to the Chairman of the
Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy in a memo of 28 February 1946,
advising that "the Department of Justice is cooperating in the defense of
these suits".


Why the national security emergency over a few lawsuits by New Jersey
farmers? In 1946 the United States began full-scale production of atomic
bombs. No other nation had yet tested a nuclear weapon, and the A-bomb was
seen as crucial for US leadership of the postwar world. The New Jersey
fluoride lawsuits were a serious roadblock to that strategy. "The specter
of endless lawsuits haunted the military," wrote Lansing Lamont in Day of
Trinity, his acclaimed book about the first atomic bomb test.3


"If the farmers won, it would open the door to further suits which might
impede the bomb program's ability to use fluoride," commented Jacqueline
Kittrell, a Tennessee public interest lawyer who examined the declassified
fluoride documents. (Kittrell specialises in nuclear-related litigation and
has represented plaintiffs in several human radiation experiment cases.)
"The reports of human injury were especially threatening because of the
potential for enormous settlements-not to mention the PR problem," she


Indeed, DuPont was particularly concerned about the "possible psychologic
reaction" to the New Jersey pollution incident, according to a secret
Manhattan Project memo of 1 March 1946. Facing a threat from the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) to embargo the region's produce because of "high
fluoride content", DuPont dispatched its lawyers to the FDA offices in
Washington, DC, where an agitated meeting ensued. According to a memo sent
next day to General Groves, DuPont's lawyer argued that "in view of the
pending suits...any action by the Food and Drug Administration...would have
a serious effect on the DuPont Company and would create a bad public
relations situation". After the meeting adjourned, Manhattan Project
Captain John Davies approached the FDA's Food Division chief and "impressed
upon Dr White the substantial interest which the Government had in claims
which might arise as a result of action which might be taken by the Food
and Drug Administration".


There was no embargo. Instead, according to General Groves' memo of 27
August 1946, new tests for fluoride in the New Jersey area were to be
conducted not by the Department of Agriculture but by the US Army's
Chemical Warfare Service (CWS)-because "work done by the Chemical Warfare
Service would carry the greatest weight as evidence if...lawsuits are
started by the complainants".


Meanwhile, the public relations problem remained unresolved: local citizens
were in a panic about fluoride. The farmers' spokesman, Willard B. Kille,
was personally invited to dine with General Groves (then known as "the man
who built the atomic bomb") at his office at the War Department on 26 March
1946. Although diagnosed by his doctor as having fluoride poisoning, Kille
departed the luncheon convinced of the government's good faith. Next day he
wrote to the general, expressing his wish that the other farmers could have
been present so that "they too could come away with the feeling that their
interests in this particular matter were being safeguarded by men of the
very highest type whose integrity they could not question".


A broader solution to the public relations problem was suggested by
Manhattan Project chief fluoride toxicologist Harold C. Hodge in a second
secret memo (1 May 1946) to Medical Section chief Colonel Warren: "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?"
Such lectures were indeed given, not only to New Jersey citizens but to the
rest of the nation throughout the Cold War.


The New Jersey farmers' lawsuits were ultimately stymied by the
government's refusal to reveal the key piece of information that would have
settled the case: how much fluoride DuPont had vented into the atmosphere
during the war. "Disclosure would be injurious to the military security of
the United States," Manhattan Project Major C. A. Taney, Jr, had written in
a memo soon after the war's end (24 September 1945).


The farmers were pacified with token financial settlements, according to
interviews with descendants still living in the area.


"All we knew is that DuPont released some chemical that burned up all the
peach trees around here," recalled Angelo Giordano whose father James was
one of the original plaintiffs. "The trees were no good after that, so we
had to give up on the peaches." Their horses and cows acted and walked
stiffly, recalled his sister Mildred. "Could any of that have been the
fluoride?" she asked. (The symptoms she detailed are cardinal signs of
fluoride toxicity, according to veterinary toxicologists.) The Giordano
family has also been plagued by bone and joint problems, Mildred added.
Recalling the settlement received by the family, Angelo Giordano told these
reporters that his father said he "got about $200".


The farmers were stonewalled in their search for information about
fluoride's effects on their health, and their complaints have long since
been forgotten. But they unknowingly left their imprint on history: their
complaints of injury to their health reverberated through the corridors of
power in Washington and triggered intensive, secret, bomb program research
on the health effects of fluoride.




A secret memo (2 May 1946) to General Groves from Manhattan Project Lt
Colonel Rhodes states: "Because of complaints that animals and humans have
been injured by hydrogen fluoride fumes in [the New Jersey] area, although
there are no pending suits involving such claims, the University of
Rochester is conducting experiments to determine the toxic effect of


Much of the proof of fluoride's alleged safety in low doses rests on the
postwar work done at the University of Rochester in anticipation of
lawsuits against the bomb program for human injury.


For the top-secret Manhattan Project to delegate fluoride safety studies to
the University of Rochester was not surprising. During WWII the US Federal
Government became involved for the first time in large-scale funding of
scientific research at government-owned labs and private colleges. Those
early spending priorities were shaped by the nation's often-secret military


The prestigious upstate New York college in particular had housed a key
wartime division of the Manhattan Project to study the health effects of
the new "special materials" such as uranium, plutonium, beryllium and
fluoride which were being used in making the atomic bomb. That work
continued after the war, with millions of dollars flowing from the
Manhattan Project and its successor organisation, the Atomic Energy
Commission (AEC). (Indeed, the bomb left an indelible imprint on all of US
science in the late 1940s and 1950s. Up to 90 per cent of all federal funds
for university research came from either the Department of Defense or the
AEC in this period, according to Noam Chomsky in his 1997 book, The Cold
War and the University.4)


The University of Rochester Medical School became a revolving door for
senior bomb-program scientists. The postwar faculty included Stafford
Warren, the top medical officer of the Manhattan Project, and Harold C.
Hodge, chief of fluoride research for the bomb program.


But this marriage of military secrecy and medical science bore deformed
offspring. The University of Rochester's classified fluoride studies,
code-named "Program F", were started during the war and continued up until
the early 1950s. They were conducted at its Atomic Energy Project (AEP), a
top-secret facility funded by the AEC and housed at Strong Memorial
Hospital. It was there that one of the most notorious human radiation
experiments of the Cold War took place, in which unsuspecting hospital
patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium.
Revelation of this experiment-in a Pulitzer Prize&endash;winning account by
Eileen Welsome-led to a 1995 US presidential investigation and a
multimillion-dollar cash settlement for victims.


Program F was not about children's teeth. It grew directly out of
litigation against the bomb program, and its main purpose was to furnish
scientific ammunition which the government and its nuclear contractors
could use to defeat lawsuits for human injury. Program F's director was
none other than Dr Harold C. Hodge- who led the Manhattan Project
investigation of alleged human injury in the New Jersey fluoride pollution


Program F's purpose is spelled out in a classified 1948 report. It reads:
"To supply evidence useful in the litigation arising from an alleged loss
of a fruit crop several years ago, a number of problems have been opened.
Since excessive blood-fluoride levels were reported in human residents of
the same area, our principal effort has been devoted to describing the
relationship of blood fluorides to toxic effects."


The litigation referred to and the claims of human injury were of course
against the bomb program and its contractors. Thus the purpose of Program F
was to obtain evidence useful in litigation against the bomb program. The
research was being conducted by the defendants.


The potential conflict of interest is clear. If lower dose ranges were
found hazardous by Program F, this might have opened the bomb program and
its contractors to public outcry and lawsuits for injury to human health.


Lawyer Jacqueline Kittrell commented further: "This and other documents
indicate that the University of Rochester's fluoride research grew out of
the New Jersey lawsuits and was performed in anticipation of lawsuits
against the bomb program for human injury. Studies undertaken for
litigation purposes by the defendants would not be considered
scientifically acceptable today because of their inherent bias to prove the
chemical safe."


Unfortunately, much of the proof of fluoride's safety rests on the work
performed by Program F scientists at the University of Rochester. During
the postwar period, that university emerged as the leading academic centre
for establishing the safety of fluoride as well as its effectiveness in
reducing tooth decay, according to Rochester Dental School spokesperson
William H. Bowen, MD. The key figure in this research, Bowen said, was Dr
Harold C. Hodge-who also became a leading national proponent of
fluoridating public drinking water.




Program F's interest in water fluoridation was not just "to counteract the
local fear of fluoride on the part of residents", as Hodge had earlier
written to Colonel Warren. The bomb program required human studies of
fluoride's effects, just as it needed human studies of plutonium's effects.
Adding fluoride to public water supplies provided one opportunity.


Bomb-program scientists played a prominent, if unpublicised, role in the
nation's first-planned water fluoridation experiment in Newburgh, New York.
The Newburgh Demonstration Project is considered the most extensive study
of the health effects of fluoridation, supplying much of the evidence that
low doses are allegedly safe for children's bones and good for their teeth.


Planning began in 1943 with the appointment of a special New York State
Health Department committee to study the advisability of adding fluoride to
Newburgh's drinking water. The chairman of the committee was, again, Dr
Harold C. Hodge, then chief of fluoride toxicity studies for the Manhattan
Project. Subsequent members of the committee included Henry L. Barnett, a
captain in the Project's Medical Section, and John W. Fertig, in 1944 with
the Office of Scientific Research and Development-the super-secret Pentagon
group which sired the Manhattan Project. Their military affiliations were
kept secret. Hodge was described as a pharmacologist, Barnett as a
paediatrician. Placed in charge of the Newburgh project was David B. Ast,
chief dental officer of the New York State Health Department. Ast had
participated in a key secret wartime conference on fluoride, held by the
Manhattan Project in January 1944, and later worked with Dr Hodge on the
Project's investigation of human injury in the New Jersey incident,
according to once-secret memos.


The committee recommended that Newburgh be fluoridated. It selected the
types of medical studies to be done, and it also "provided expert guidance"
for the duration of the experiment.


The key question to be answered was: "Are there any cumulative effects,
beneficial or otherwise, on tissues and organs other than the teeth, of
long-continued ingestion of such small concentrations?" According to the
declassified documents, this was also key information sought by the bomb
program. In fact, the program would require "long-continued" exposure of
workers and communities to fluoride throughout the Cold War.


In May 1945, Newburgh's water was fluoridated, and over the next 10 years
its residents were studied by the New York State Health Department.


In tandem, Program F conducted its own secret studies, focusing on the
amounts of fluoride Newburgh citizens retained in their blood and
tissues-information called for by the bomb program in connection with
litigation. "Possible toxic effects of fluoride were in the forefront of
consideration," the advisory committee stated. Health department personnel
cooperated, shipping blood and placenta samples to the Program F team at
the University of Rochester. The samples were collected by Dr David B.
Overton, the department's chief of paediatric studies at Newburgh.


The final report of the Newburgh Demonstration Project, published in 1956
in the Journal of the American Dental Association,5 concluded that "small
concentrations" of fluoride were safe for US citizens. The biological
proof, "based on work the University of Rochester Atomic
Energy Project", was delivered by Dr Hodge.


Today, news that scientists from the A-bomb program secretly shaped and
guided the Newburgh fluoridation experiment and studied the citizens' blood
and tissue samples is greeted with incredulity.


"I'm shocked...beyond words," said present-day Newburgh Mayor Audrey Carey,
commenting on these reporters' findings. "It reminds me of the Tuskegee
experiment that was done on syphilis patients down in Alabama."


As a child in the early 1950s, Mayor Carey was taken to the old Newburgh
firehouse on Broadway which housed the public health clinic. There, doctors
from the Newburgh fluoridation project studied her teeth, and a peculiar
fusion of two fingerbones on her left hand which she's had since birth.
(Carey said that her granddaughter has white dental-fluorosis marks on her
front teeth.)


Mayor Carey wants answers from the government about the secret history of
fluoride and the Newburgh fluoridation experiment. "I absolutely want to
pursue it," she said. "It is appalling to do any kind of experimentation
and study without people's knowledge and permission."


When contacted by these reporters, the now 95-year-old David B. Ast, former
director of the Newburgh experiment, said he was unaware that Manhattan
Project scientists were involved. "If I had known, I would have been
certainly investigating why, and what the connection was," he said. Did he
know that blood and placenta samples from Newburgh were being sent to
bomb-program researchers at the University of Rochester? "I was not aware
of it," Ast replied. Did he recall participating in the Manhattan Project's
secret wartime conference on fluoride in January 1944, or going to New
Jersey with Dr Hodge to investigate human injury in the DuPont case, as
secret memos state? He told these reporters he had no recollection of any
such events.


Bob Loeb, a spokesperson for the University of Rochester Medical Center,
confirmed that blood and tissue samples from Newburgh had been tested by
the University's Dr Hodge. On the ethics of secretly studying US citizens
to obtain information useful in litigation against the A-bomb program, he
said: "That's a question we cannot answer." He referred inquiries to the US
Department of Energy (DOE), successor to the Atomic Energy Commission.


Jayne Brady, a spokesperson for the Department of Energy in Washington
confirmed that a review of DOE files indicated that a "significant reason"
for fluoride experiments conducted at the University of Rochester after the
war was "impending litigation between the DuPont company and residents of
New Jersey areas". However, she added: "DOE has found no documents to
indicate that fluoride research was done to protect the Manhattan Project
or its contractors from lawsuits."


On Manhattan Project involvement in Newburgh, Brady stated: "Nothing that
we have suggests that the DOE or predecessor agencies-especially the
Manhattan Project-authorised fluoride experiments to be performed on
children in the 1940s."


When told that these reporters have several documents that directly tie the
AEP-the Manhattan Project's successor agency at the University of
Rochester-to the Newburgh experiment, DOE spokesperson Brady later conceded
her study was confined to "the available universe" of documents.


Two days later, Brady faxed a statement for clarification. "My search only
involved the documents that we collected as part of our human radiation
experiments project; fluoride was not part of our research effort."


"Most significantly," the statement continued, "relevant documents may be
in a classified collection at the DOE Oak Ridge National Laboratory, known
as the Records Holding Task Group. This collection consists entirely of
classified documents removed from other files for the purpose of classified
document accountability many years ago [and was] a rich source of documents
for the human radiation experiments projects."


The crucial question arising from the investigation is whether adverse
health findings from Newburgh and other bomb-program fluoride studies were
suppressed. All AEC-funded studies had to be declassified before
publication in civilian medical and dental journals. Where are the original
classified versions?


The transcript of one of the major secret scientific conferences of World
War II-on "fluoride metabolism"-is missing from the files of the US
National Archives and is "probably still classified", according to the
librarian. Participants in the January 1944 conference included key figures
who promoted the safety of fluoride and water fluoridation to the public
after the war: Harold Hodge of the Manhattan Project, David B. Ast of the
Newburgh Demonstration Project, and US Public Health Service dentist H.
Trendley Dean, popularly known as "the father of fluoridation".


A WWII Manhattan Project c lassified report (25 July 1944) on water
fluoridation is missing from the files of the University of Rochester
Atomic Energy Project, the US National Archives, and the Nuclear Repository
at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. The next four numerically
consecutive documents are also missing, while the remainder of the "M-1500
series" is present.


"Either those documents are still classified, or they've been 'disappeared'
by the government," said Clifford Honicker, Executive Director of the
American Environmental Health Studies Project in Knoxville, Tennessee,
which provided key evidence in the public exposure and prosecution of US
human radiation experiments.


Seven pages have been cut out of a 1947 Rochester bomb project notebook
entitled "DuPont Litigation". "Most unusual," commented the medical
school's chief archivist, Chris Hoolihan.


Similarly, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests lodged by these
reporters over a year ago with the DOE for hundreds of classified fluoride
reports have failed to dislodge any. "We're behind," explained Amy
Rothrock, chief FOIA officer at Oak Ridge National Laboratories.


So, has information been suppressed? These reporters made what appears to
be the first discovery of the original classified version of a fluoride
safety study by bomb program scientists. A censored version of this study
was later published in the August 1948 Journal of the American Dental
Association.6 Comparison of the secret version with the published version
indicates that the US AEC did censor damaging information on fluoride-to
the point of tragicomedy. This was a study of the dental and physical
health of workers in a factory producing fluoride for the A-bomb program;
it was conducted by a team of dentists from the Manhattan Project.


Ñ The secret version reports that most of the men had no teeth left. The
published version reports only that the men had fewer cavities.
Ñ 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.
Ñ 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 and concludes that "the men were unusually healthy,
judged from both a medical and dental point of view".


After comparing the secret and published versions of the censored study,
toxicologist Phyllis Mullenix commented: "This makes me ashamed to be a
scientist." Of other Cold War&endash;era fluoride safety studies, she
asked: "Were they all done like this?"


Asked for comment on the early links of the Manhattan Project to water
fluoridation, Dr Harold Slavkin, Director of the National Institute for
Dental Research-the US agency which today funds fluoride research-said: "I
wasn't aware of any input from the Atomic Energy Commission." Nevertheless,
he insisted that fluoride's efficacy and safety in the prevention of dental
cavities over the last 50 years is well proved. "The motivation of a
scientist is often different from the outcome," he reflected. "I do not
hold a prejudice about where the knowledge comes from."


1. Dale, Peter P., and McCauley, H. B, "Dental Conditions in Workers
Chronically Exposed to Dilute and Anhydrous Hydrofluoric Acid", Journal of
the American Dental Association, vol. 37, no. 2, August 1948, pp. 131-140.
Note that Dale and McCauley were both Manhattan Project and, later, Program
F personnel; they also authored the secret Manhattan Project paper.
2. Mullenix, Phyllis et al., "Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats",
Neurotoxicology and Teratology, vol. 17, no. 2, 1995, pp. 169-177.
3. Lamont, Lansing, Day of Trinity, Atheneum, New York City, 1965.
4. Chomsky, Noam, The Cold War and the University, New Press, New York
City, 1997 (distributed by W.W. Norton & Co. Inc., NYC).
5. Hodge, H. C., "Fluoride metabolism: its significance in water
fluoridation", in "Newburgh-Kingston caries-fluorine study: final report",
Journal of the American Dental Association, vol. 52, March 1956.
6. Dale and McCauley, ibid.


About the Authors:
Joel Griffiths is a medical writer based in New York City. He is the author
of a book on radiation hazards that included one of the first revelations
of human radiation experiments, and has contributed numerous articles to
medical journals and popular publications.
Chris Bryson, who holds a Master's degree in journalism, is an independent
reporter for BBC Radio, ABC-TV and public television in New York City, and
writes for a variety of publications.
The authors wish to thank Clifford Honicker, Executive Director of the
American Environmental Health Studies Project, Knoxville, TN, for his
indispensable archival research.


Copies of 155 pages of supporting documents, including all the declassified
papers referred to in this article, can be obtained from the following
contacts for a small fee to cover copying and postage:
Ñ Australia: Australian Fluoridation News, GPO Box 935G, Melbourne,
Victoria 3001, phone (03) 9592 5088, fax (03) 9592 4544.
Ñ New Zealand: New Zealand Pure Water Association, 278 Dickson Road,
Papamoa, Bay of Plenty, phone (07) 542 0499.
Ñ UK: National Pure Water Association of the UK, 12 Dennington Lane,
Crigglestone, Wakefield, WF4 3ET, phone 01924 254433, fax 01924 242380.
Ñ USA: Waste Not newsletter, 82 Judson Street, Canton, NY 13617, phone
(315) 379 9200, fax (315) 379 0448, e-mail .


Forward via


Since 1937, the foreign medical literature has contained hundreds of
articles on the wide variety of troubles that can be caused by fluorine.
The same is true of the veterinary literature in this country.
But none of this appears in our medical literature. The things that
fluorine can do to people are seen every day everywhere. The trouble
is to know which cases are actually caused by fluorine.


Fluoridation: The Overdosing of America - Fact or Fiction?



American Dental Association. Fluoridation Facts. Chicago
There are many reported cases of fluorosis, a mottling (dark brown/gray
staining and spotting of teeth) and crumbling of teeth due to too much
flouride placed in municipal water supplies. A warning to parents of small
children: if children eat large globs of toothpaste while brushing their
teeth, stop the habit immediately, and place small amounts of toothpaste
on a child's toothbrush. Teach the child not to swallow the toothpaste.





Chronic (long-term) exposure to fluoride at low levels has a beneficial
effect of dental cavity prevention and may also be useful for the treatment
of osteoporosis. Exposure to higher levels of fluoride through drinking
water may cause dental fluorosis or mottling, while very high exposures
through drinking water or air can result in skeletal fluorosis.


Fluoride the Aging Factor
Price information not available. You can still order this item, and we
will request approval of the price via e-mail prior to shipment.
Paperback 2nd edition (June 1986) Health Action Pr; ISBN: 0913571008



Subject: [MC] About Scientific Information!
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 23:32:07 -0700
From: "Stephen A. Tueting"


Unbelievably fabulous expose on the history and technologies involved.
The ability to transmit from one brain to another is there. See the
medical journal Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 1996,
Suppl. 45. "Continuous Wave-Form Analysis". It's another piece of
deciphering the brains EEG and translating to a different persons EEG
and then writing it to that brain.


This is a brilliant piece of literature and extremely accurate. Email list send Subscribe or UNsubscribe in Subject line:


**COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any
copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without
profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for non-profit research and
educational purposes only.






Fluoridation / Fluoride
Toxic Chemicals In Your Water
Fluoride compounds which are put in water (fluoridation), toothpaste and supplement tablets (including some vitamins) were never tested for safety before approval.


50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation


Don't Swallow Your Toothpaste


Focus: Fluoride


Shocking News About Fluoride


Fluoride - The Lunatic Drug



Fluoridation status of some countries



Fluoride is a corrosive poison





Fluoride ingestion has very little to do with dental health, it does have a lot to do with disposing of industrial waste and making people docile and subservient, it also has a lot to do with MONEY.
Clearly, the dental profession would not and HAS not put itself out of business.


Respected Medical Professionals and Scientists
are warning that water fluoridation
has dangerous long-term consequences to health.


Fluoride & the A-Bomb Program
During the ultra-secret Manhattan Project, a report was commissioned to assess the effect of fluoride on humans. That report was classified "secret" for reasons of "national security".


Fluoride: An Invisible Killer





Join The Nationwide Call for
Congressional Hearings on Fluoridation

horizontal rule


horizontal rule

Could it be possible to finally get this deadly poison out of our lives? 


Let's all get behind this push for exposure of Fluoride's negative side effects on the living.


Officer Jack McLamb, ret. 



----- Original Message -----

From: Henry Morgan

Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 9:39 PM

Subject: FW: Action Alert: 11 EPA unions request immediate moratorium and full Congressional hearing on fluoridation

Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 2:10 PM
Subject: Urgent Request From Bill Hirzy

In a message dated 8/5/2005 1:50:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, writes:

Dear Friends,

Now is the time, more than ever.  I'm attaching copies of the letters that are going to EPA Administrator Johnson and Congress.  For the first time we have 11 - that's ELEVEN - EPA unions signing on to a request for a moratorium (from Congress), pending a full hearing, and for EPA to start the process of declaring fluoride a carcinogen.

What is needed urgently is for the network(s) [that's us folks] to activate and getting people to call their 2 Senators and Representative to follow up on our unions' call  for a moratorium.

I don't think its worthwhile to bug EPA . We [the unions] need to work that internally between the unions and management. Just get to Congress.

It is VITAL that political pressure be brought to bear on Congress from constituents. When the fluoridistas get wind of our action, you can bet they will be in those Congressional offices pushing their agenda and trying to denigrate our unions' actions , and we need to have tons of people calling and writing to second the call our unions have made. Without constituent pressure, Congress will not respond in our favor without massive constituent support.  If they were to grant the moratorium on just the word of a bunch of Civil Service folks  it won't win them any votes directly. So people who live in their districts and states [that's us folks] and who are able to vote for or against them need to be the ones stepping up to the plate now.

The EPA unions have done what we can do, and for eleven to join in is really something (*emails to me that I can forward to those who signed on would be great) - now its up to the citizens [you and me] who want this nonsense stopped, to once more exert themselves and support our call to stop fluoridation until a full hearing is held.

J. William Hirzy
Chemist in Residence
Phone: 202-885-1780

Email Bill Hirzy at:

----- Original Message -----

From: Jeff Green

Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2005 12:05 PM

Subject: Action Alert: 11 EPA unions request immediate moratorium and full Congressional hearing on fluoridation

Hopefully this is a duplication of a request you have received from others. Please do not hesitate to send this on to others as well, despite further possibility of duplication. It is that important.

This is a request for your immediate action that can result in a major impact on public perceptions and support for a more transparent focus on the available science on fluoridation, and federal government intervention to stop this insanity.

For those of you have not followed the recent reports in more than 80 newspapers, including the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, some of the nation's major media have added to their coverage of NIH scientists having unreported financial links with industry, by boldly reporting the attempted cover-up of recent science showing dramatic increases in bone cancer in young males due to fluoride exposures, and the Environmental Work Group's call for an immediate investigation.

For those of you who have difficulty opening attachments, I have included the texts of the two letters from the 11 EPA Unions to Congress and EPA, and slightly modified the action alert formatted by Lynne Campbell below. I urge your immediate attention, and the support of EPA employees who have once again placed themselves on the firing line to stop this absurdity and affront to ethics in science:

___ jeff


New developments in the bone cancer/fluoridation flap (see give us an opportunity to effect change at the national level.  Read on.

A coalition of eleven EPA unions, representing "a substantial portion of the [EPA's] nation-wide work force," have written Congress and EPA on August 5, 2005 asking for the following:

1)  That Congress immediately place a moratorium on fluoridation to "remain in place" until a full Congressional hearing "on the wisdom of continuing the practice is concluded."

2)  That EPA's administrator, Stephen Johnson, "direct the Office of Water to issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking setting the maximum contaminant level goal for fluoride at zero" based on the likelihood that it is a carcinogen.  {This would effectively end the practice of water fluoridation.}

Attached are copies of the EPA unions' letters sent to Mr. Johnson and to Senator Tom Harkin. 

Now that the unions have taken such an important step, they urgently need our support.  They ask that we immediately contact our two federal senators and representative to echo their request for a moratorium and hearing (and that we ask others to do the same). 

In an email to safe water organizations, NTEU 280's Dr. Bill Hirzy writes, "It is VITAL that political pressure be brought to bear on Congress from constituents. When the fluoridistas get wind of our action, you can bet they will be in those Congressional offices pushing their agenda and trying to denigrate our unions' actions, and we need to have tons of people calling and writing to second the call our unions have made."

He continues, "The EPA unions have done what we can its up to the citizens who want this nonsense stopped to once more exert themselves and support our call to stop it until a full hearing is held." 


Here is a link to access the addresses, email and telephone contact for your Senators and Congressional Representative:


I am one of your constituents concerned about nationally publicized research linking water fluoridation to bone cancer in young males.  I understand that eleven EPA unions are calling for an immediate moratorium on fluoridation and a full Congressional hearing into this and other studies showing adverse health effects.  Because of the unavoidable exposure due to publicly fluoridated water's contribution to our dietary sources, even if a person chooses to drink bottled water, this issue is crucial to my health and the health of the nation, and I urge your support for both the moratorium and hearing.


Let us know you've written by sending us a blind copy of your email, or an email note from you letting us know who and when you called (and possibly their response).   Email us at: 

Letter from 11 EPA unions to their Agency Administrator

August 5, 2005

RE:  Bone Cancer-Fluoride Link

Hon. Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Dear Administrator Johnson:

We, the undersigned representatives of a majority (eleven) of  EPA's employee unions, are requesting that you direct the Office of Water to issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking setting the maximum contaminant level goal for fluoride at zero, in accordance with Agency policy for all likely or known human carcinogens. Our request is based on the overall weight of the evidence supporting the classification of fluoride as a human carcinogen, including new information from Harvard on the link between fluoride in drinking water and osteosarcoma in boys that was conveyed to you in a meeting with union officials on May 4, 2005.

We appreciate that the Agency anticipates a report next year from the National Research Council on the propriety of its current drinking water standards for fluoride. But it seems highly inappropriate for EPA to do nothing now that it is in possession of this science, while millions of young boys continue to be exposed unwittingly to the elevated risk of a fatal bone cancer as the Agency waits for the NRC to issue its report, then for the report to undergo peer review, and then for the Agency to undertake its own deliberations.

By issuing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking the Agency would inform the public and local health authorities about the results of the doctoral dissertation from the Harvard School of Dental Medicine by Elise Bassin without committing the Agency to a formal rulemaking until all those other steps are taken.

It is noteworthy that when industry becomes aware of important new scientific findings like this, it has (depending on the specific statute) a very brief time to notify EPA. The Agency is then expected to take timely and appropriate action based on the specifics of that notification. In the present case EPA is aware of important new, high quality evidence of potentially serious danger to young boys drinking fluoridated water, and we believe EPA has an ethical duty to send an effective warning immediately about this hazard.

It may in fact be appropriate for you to direct EPA's Office of Criminal Enforcement to investigate why Dr. Bassin's study, which was of sufficient quality for her to earn her doctoral degree, remained hidden from EPA for four years. Alternatively, you could request that the Department of Justice undertake the investigation.

As you know, the apparent cover up of the link between water fluoridation and a seven-fold increased risk of osteosarcoma in young boys, shown by the research of Dr. Bassin, is now national news. Major newspapers, including the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal have covered the story. The Environmental Working Group has petitioned the National Toxicology Program to classify fluoride as a human carcinogen based in part on Dr. Bassin's work. (We recommend EWG's petition as a succinct and authoritative overview of the total weight of peer-reviewed evidence supporting the classification of fluoride as a human carcinogen.)  EWG has also caused an investigation of the cover up to be started by Harvard and NIEHS, which funded the research.

The eyes of the nation are on the federal science establishment because of a host of scientific integrity issues.  Former EPA Assistant Administrator Lynn Goldman and Roni Neff have just published a paper in the American Journal of Public Health on the cost of delayed adoption of health-protective standards that illuminates the real public health costs of the government's failure to act on sound scientific evidence.

We believe our Agency can make an important statement about its commitment to scientific integrity and its application to public health protection by taking the precautionary action we are recommending.

We at EPA can be ahead of the curve on this important issue or behind it. We do not think the latter choice is in the best interest of the public, the Civil Service or EPA, and we fervently and respectfully hope that you will agree with us.  As a wise man once said, "The science is what the science is."

We will be happy to discuss this with you and your advisers at your convenience.


Dwight A. Welch, President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters

J. William Hirzy, Vice-President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters

/s/Steve Shapiro, President
AFGE local 3331
EPA Headquarters

/s/Paul Sacker, President
AFGE Local 3911
Region 2 Office, New York

/s/Larry Penley. President
NTEU Chapter 279
EPA Cincinnati Laboratory

/s/Nancy Barron, President
NAGE Local R5-55
Region 4 Office, Atlanta
/s/Wendell Smith, President
ESC/IFPTE Local 20
Region 9 Office, San Francisco

/s/Patrick Chan, President
NTEU Chapter 295
Region 9 Office, San Francisco

/s/Henry Burrell, President
AFGE Local 3428
Region 1 Office, Boston

/s/Alan Hollis, President
AFGE Local 3611
Region 3 Office, Philadelphia

/s/Frank Beck, President
AFGE Local 2900
Ada Laboratory

/s/Mark Coryell, President
AFGE Local 3907
Ann Arbor Laboratory

Sen. James Inhofe
Sen. Mike Enzi
Sen. Saxby Chambliss
Sen. Ted Stevens
Sen. James Jeffords
Sen. Edward Kennedy
Sen. Tom Harkin
Sen. Daniel Inouye
Rep. Joe Barton
Rep. Sherwood Boehlert
Rep. Paul Gillmor
Rep. Nathan Deal
Rep. Henry Waxman
Rep. John Dingell
Rep. Bart Gordon
Rep. Hilda Solis
Rep. Sherrod Brown

Letter from 11 EPA Unions to Senator Tom Harkin

Coalition of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Unions

August 5, 2005

RE: Bone Cancer-Fluoridation Cover-Up

Hon. Tom Harkin, Ranking Member
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry
SR-328A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-6000

Dear Senator Harkin:

Our unions represent a substantial portion of the nation-wide workforce at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and we are writing to ask for a moratorium on the national program of the U.S. Public Health Service to fluoridate all of America's public water supplies.

One us us (Dr. Hirzy, of NTEU Chapter 280) testified before the Subcommittee on Wildlife, Fisheries and Water of the Senate on June 29, 2000 on this subject on behalf of his headquarters union. At that time the union called for a moratorium based on science indicating a number of adverse health effects and out-of-control, excessive exposures to fluoride.

We now join NTEU Chapter 280 in renewing the call for a moratorium, based on startling and disturbing new information that confirms the worst fears expressed in the earlier testimony.

Work done at Harvard College's School of Dental Medicine by Dr. Elise Bassin, which has been hidden since 2001, shows that pre-adolescent boys who drink fluoridated water are at a seven-fold increased risk of osteosarcoma, an often fatal bone cancer. We ask that the moratorium take effect immediately and remain in place until a full hearing by the Congress on the wisdom of continuing the practice is concluded. The last such hearing was in 1978.

Dr. Bassin's work, done as her doctoral thesis, was completed and accepted by Harvard in partial fulfillment of the requirements for her Ph.D. in 2001. It is a landmark investigation of age-specific exposure of young people in a case-control epidemiology study of the incidence of osteosarcoma. The thesis remained sequestered until 2004, when her research adviser, Chester Douglass, inexplicably reported to the funding agency, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, that no connection was found between fluoride and osteosarcoma. This discrepancy between Chester Douglass' written report and the actual findings of the funded study is under investigation by several entities, and we believe should be looked into by the Congress as well. It appears to be yet another instance of federally funded science gone awry to protect special interests. Chester Douglass edits Colgate Company's Oral Health Report.

Chapter three of Dr. Bassin's work (enclosed) cites the impressive weight of convergent evidence for the carcinogenicity of fluoride in young boys (but not girls):  fluoride is a mitogen, increasing the rate of cell division; it has been shown to be mutagenic, damaging chromosomal structure; it accumulates primarily in bone, site of the cancer; several previous epidemiology studies have found heretofore unexplained increases in osteosarcoma in young men (but not young women); a National Toxicology Program animal study found statistically significant increases in osteosarcomas in male (but not female) rats. And she discusses why several other epidemiology studies found no association between fluoridation and osteosarcoma; principally, those studies did not consider age-specific exposures and development of the cancer.

It is simply unconscionable that her federally funded work was hidden for four years while millions of young boys continued to be exposed to increased risk of this disease, whose best outcome involves amputation. Several federal statutes express Congressional intent regarding timely warning about such risks. These include, for example, the Toxic Substances Control Act, section 8(e) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act section 6(a)(2). We believe another area for Congressional investigation is:  who knew about the results of Dr. Bassin's work besides herself and Chester Douglass?  and was any federal statute violated by keeping those results hidden for four years?

Another reason for a Congressional review of fluoridation is the recent work of Dr. Richard Maas of the Environmental Quality Institute, University of North Carolina-Ashville, which shows that use of chloramine disinfectant and silicofluoride fluoridating agents with excess ammonia increases lead concentrations in public water supplies. This may explain at least some of the increased lead levels seen in the District of Columbia's water supplies and in the blood of children drinking water fluoridated with silicofluorides. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that ninety four percent of fluoridated water systems use silicofluorides.

Dr. Hirzy is available to meet with your staff to pursue this matter, and we hope that you will find it of sufficient concern to initiate a full investigation of fluoridation, which we believe is long overdue.


Dwight A. Welch, President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters

J. William Hirzy, Vice-President
NTEU Chapter 280
EPA Headquarters

/s/Steve Shapiro, President
AFGE local 3331
EPA Headquarters

/s/Paul Sacker, President
AFGE Local 3911
Region 2 Office, New York

/s/Larry Penley. President
NTEU Chapter 279
EPA Cincinnati Laboratory

/s/Nancy Barron, President
NAGE Local R5-55
Region 4 Office, Atlanta

/s/Wendell Smith, President
ESC/IFPTE Local 20
Region 9 Office, San Francisco

/s/Patrick Chan, President
NTEU Chapter 295
Region 9 Office, San Francisco

/s/Henry Burrell, President
AFGE Local 3428
Region 1 Office, Boston

/s/Alan Hollis, President
AFGE Local 3611
Region 3 Office, Philadelphia

/s/Frank Beck, President
AFGE Local 2900
Ada Laboratory

/s/Mark Coryell, President
AFGE Local 3907
Ann Arbor laboratory

cc:  Hon. Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

horizontal rule

Fluoride Follies

by Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD
by Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD

The federal government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the American Dental Association (ADA) are holding a symposium in Chicago this week titled: "National Fluoridation Symposium 2005: Celebrating 60 Years of Water Fluoridation" (July 13–16). The CDC ranks fluoridation of community drinking water as one of the ten most significant public health achievements of the 20th century.

No speaker at this symposium will dare question the safety or efficacy of fluoride. That is now a given and has become dogma. But like in 1968 when protests against the Vietnam War were held in the Windy City outside the Democratic National Convention, this week protesters have assembled in Chicago to fight fluoridation.

Fluoridation of community drinking water began in Grand Rapids, Michigan on January 12, 1945. It was the brainchild of two people who worked for Andrew W. Mellon, founder of the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA), Drs. H. Trendley Dean and Gerald J. Cox. Mellon was US Treasury Secretary, which made him (at that time, in 1930) head of the Public Health Service (PHS). He had Dean, a researcher at the PHS, study the effects of naturally fluoridated water on teeth. Dean confirmed that fluoride causes mottling (discoloration) of teeth, and he hypothesized that it also prevents cavities. Cox, a researcher at the Mellon Institute in Pittsburgh, was urged to study the effect of fluoride on tooth-decay in rats. Determining that it had a beneficial effect, he proposed, in late 1939, that the US should fluoridate its public water supply.

Fluorine is a halogen, like chlorine and iodine. It is the smallest and most reactive element in the halogen family (elements with 7 electrons in their outer shell). Fluorine exists in nature attached to other elements as the negatively charged ion fluoride, most notably to hydrogen, calcium, sodium, aluminum, sulfur, and silicon. Sodium fluoride, a by-product of aluminum smelting, initially was used to fluoridate water. Silicofluorides (fluoride combined with silicon), wastes of phosphate fertilizer production, are now used almost exclusively for fluoridation. Fluorine is also present in compounds called organofluorines, where fluorine atoms (not fluoride anions) are tightly bound to carbon. Teflon (poly-tetra-fluoro-ethylene), Gore-Tex, and many drugs, Prozac (fluoxetine), Cipro (ciprofloxacin), and Baycol (cerivastatin) among them, are organofluorines.


Doctors and public health officials did not think sodium fluoride, used commercially as a rat and bug poison, fungicide, and wood preservative, should be put in public water. The Journal of the American Dental Association said (in 1936), "Fluoride at the 1 ppm [part per million] concentration is as toxic as arsenic and lead… There is an increasing volume of evidence of the injurious effects of fluorine, especially the chronic intoxication resulting from the ingestion of minute amounts of fluorine over long periods of time." And the Journal of the American Medical Association" noted (in its September 18, 1943 issue), "Fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, changing the permeability of the cell membrane by certain enzymes." But, as Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson reveal in "Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb," and Bryson in his book The Fluoride Deception, officials in the Manhattan Project persuaded health policy makers and medical and dental leaders, in the interests of national security, to do an about-face and join the fluoridation bandwagon.

Vast amounts of fluoride were required to build the atom bomb. Fluoride combines with uranium to form the gas uranium hexafluoride, which, when passed through a semi permeable membrane, separates bomb-grade, fissionable uranium-235 from the much more abundant and stable uranium-238. This done, fluoride is released into the environment as waste. (During the Cold War millions of tons of fluoride were used in the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons.) Also, large amounts of fluoride were generated in producing aluminum required for warplanes.

With several instances already on record of fluoride causing damage to crops, livestock, and people downwind from industrial plants, government and industry, lead by officials running the Manhattan Project, sought to put a new, friendlier face on fluoride. This would dampen public concerns over fluoride emissions and help forestall potentially crippling litigation. Instead of being seen as the poison it is, people should view fluoride as a nutrient, which gives smiling children shiny teeth, as epitomized in the jingle that calls fluoride "nature’s way to prevent tooth decay."

It worked. Early epidemiological studies showed a 50 to 70 percent reduction in dental cavities in children who drank fluoridated water. These studies, however, were poorly designed. None were blinded, so dentists examining children for caries would know which kind of water they were drinking. Data gathering methods were shoddy. By today’s evidence-based medicine standards these studies do not provide reliable evidence that fluoride does indeed prevent cavities.

Based on these studies and its promotion, municipalities across the country started adding fluoride to their water supply. Within 15 years a majority of Americans were washing their clothes, watering their vegetable gardens, bathing with, and drinking fluoridated water.

On its 60th anniversary proponents still have not proved that the hypothesis fluoride [put in public water] prevents cavities and is perfectly safe is true. The first part of the hypothesis, at least, has biological plausibility. Fluoride prevents cavities by combining with calcium in dental enamel to form fluoroapetite, which increases the resistance of teeth to acid demineralization. And fluoride inactivates bacteria that damage teeth by interfering with their enzymes. But biological plausibility alone is not sufficient to prove efficacy. Epidemiological evidence is required to do that. A debate open to well-informed opponents of fluoridation, if the CDC and ADA ever agreed to hold one, would show that existing epidemiological evidence does not prove that fluoride prevents cavities.

In evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews (meta-analyses) are considered to be the best, most "scientific" evidence. A systematic review of water fluoridation studies, published in the British Medical Journal in 2000, found, as the chair of the Advisory Group that commissioned the review puts it, "The review did not show water fluoridation to be safe. The quality of the research was too poor to establish with confidence whether or not there are potentially important adverse effects in addition to the high levels of [dental] fluorosis." He adds, "The review team was surprised that in spite of the large number of studies carried out over several decades there is a dearth of reliable evidence with which to inform policy." The case for fluoride does not stand up to careful evidence-based scrutiny.

Evidence that "fluoride [put in public water] does not prevent cavities and is not safe" (the null hypothesis) is more convincing. If a court of law held a trial on fluoride’s safety and efficacy, the anti-fluoridationists would win. The judgment in their favor would most likely be beyond a reasonable doubt, or at least on a more likely than not basis. In a courtroom the pro-fluoridationists would not be permitted to employ ad hominem attacks that focus on the character of the opposing witness instead of the evidence, and dogmatic assertions on the safety and efficacy of fluoride would be subject to cross examination.

Proponents of fluoridation will not willingly admit they are wrong. As Tolstoy puts it, "Most men can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, have proudly taught to others, and have woven thread by thread into the fabric of their lives."

There are exceptions. Two prominent leaders of the pro-fluoridation movement willingly admitted publicly (in 1997 and 2000) that they were wrong. One was the late John Colquhoun, DDS, Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, New Zealand and chair of that country’s Fluoridation Promotion Committee. He reviewed New Zealand’s dental statistics in an effort to convince skeptics that fluoridation was beneficial and found that tooth decay rates were the same in fluoridated and nonfluoridated places, which prompted him to re-examine the classic fluoridation studies. He recanted his support for it in "Why I Changed my Mind About Water Fluoridation" (Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 1997;41:29–44). The other is Dr. Hardy Limeback, PhD, DDS, Head of Preventive Dentistry at University of Toronto. His reasons are given in "Why I am Now Officially Opposed to Adding Fluoride to Drinking Water." Another former pro-fluoridationist that is fighting fluoride in Canada, and elsewhere, is Richard G. Foulkes, MD, a health care administrator and former assistant professor in the Department of Health Care and Epidemiology at the University of British Columbia.

Chlorine is added to water to kill bacteria. Chlorination (begun in 1908) has eradicated typhoid fever and cholera, two water-borne diseases that used to kill thousands of Americans each year. Chlorine is a disinfectant. Fluoride is a medication, which the state requires all people to consume because government officials believe it is good for a segment of the population. The putative benefit of this medication is for children age 5 to 12 (when enamel for their permanent teeth is being formed). This age group drinks 0.01 percent of the water people use.

This is how the CDC justifies compulsory fluoridation: "Although other fluoride-containing products are available [e.g., toothpaste], water fluoridation remains the more equitable and cost-effective method of delivering fluoride to all members of most communities, regardless of age, educational attainment, or income level." Fluoridation, therefore, addresses social inequalities and fosters social justice. It provides fluoride to poor families without their having to buy (fluoride) toothpaste and make their children brush their teeth with it. The common good takes priority over individual freedom to choose to not take this medication. This communitarian ethic increasingly governs US public health policy. One of the goals of the government’s Healthy People 2010 initiative (Objective 21-9) is to "increase the proportion of the U.S. population served by community water systems with optimally fluoridated water [the target: 75 percent]."

Murray Rothbard (in an article written in 1992) describes water fluoridation as "ALCOA-socialism," arising from "an alliance of three major forces: ideological social democrats, ambitious technocratic bureaucrats, and Big Businessmen seeking privileges from the state." It is a legacy of war, with its call for aluminum and enriched uranium, and the New Deal.

Fluoridation is an especially destructive type of socialism because fluoride is a poison. It is the 13th most common element and one of the most toxic elements in the earth’s crust. It is an insidious poison that produces serious multisystem effects on a long-term basis.

Fluoride disrupts enzymes (by altering their hydrogen bonds) and prevents them from doing their job of making proteins, collagen in particular, the structural protein for bone and teeth, ligaments, tendons, and muscles. It damages DNA repair enzymes and inhibits the enzyme acetylcholinesterase in the brain, which is involved in transmitting signals along nerve cells. All cells in the body depend on enzymes. Consequently, fluoride can have widespread deleterious effects in multiple organ systems. One researcher has uncovered 113 ailments that fluoride is said to cause.

The first visible sign of fluoride poisoning is dental fluorosis. It begins as small white specks in the enamel that then turn into spots, become confluent, and, in its most severe stage, turn brown. Dental fluorosis of varying degree affects 20 to 80 percent of children who grow up drinking fluoridated water. Moderate to severe changes, with brown mottling, occurs in 3 percent of children. Dental fluorosis is an indicator of fluoride toxicity in other parts of the body. Like in growing teeth, fluoride accumulates in the brain. One manifestation of "brain fluorosis" in children could be this: Researchers (in China) have found that children living in an area where the water has high fluoride content (4.12 ppm) have IQ scores that are 6 to 12 points lower than children living in a low fluoride district (the difference in IQ scores, at p <0.02, is statistically significant).

Fluoride has a particular affinity for calcium and thus for bone; and it poisons bones the same way it does teeth. The average American living in a fluoridated community now ingests 8 mg of fluoride a day. Unlike teeth where the enamel, once formed, remains static, 10 percent of bone tissue is broken down and replaced annually, giving fluoride an opportunity to steadily accumulate year-after-year in bones. People who consume 10–25 mg of fluoride a day over 10 to 20 years, or 2mg/day over 40 years, will develop skeletal fluorosis. The first manifestations of this disease, before there are any changes on x-ray, are joint pains and arthritic symptoms, which are indistinguishable from osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis; muscle weakness; chronic fatigue; and gastrointestinal disorders. In the next stage, osteoporosis develops and bones become more brittle and weak, making them prone to fracture. (The third and final stage, crippling fluorosis, occurs mainly in India where the natural fluoride content of the water is high.)

There is an epidemic of arthritis, osteoporosis, hip fractures, and chronic fatigue syndrome in the United States. Could fluoride be causing this epidemic? It turns out that even people who live in nonfluoridated areas consume a lot of fluoride, on average 4 mg/day. It is in toothpaste; in fruit juices, soda pop, tea, and processed foods; and, unfortunately, in California wines, whose grapes are sprayed with the pesticide cyrolite (sodium aluminum fluoride). American physicians know little or nothing about skeletal fluorosis, and the early, arthritic stages of this disease mimic other bone and joint diseases. It is a hypothesis worth testing.

Studies show that the rates of bone cancer are substantially higher in fluoridated areas, particularly in boys. Other cancers, of the head and neck, GI tract, pancreas, and lungs, have a 10 percent higher incidence. Fluoride affects the thyroid gland and causes hypothyroidism, which is also an increasingly frequent disorder in the US. Other studies show that high levels of fluoride in drinking water are associated with birth defects and early infant mortality.

Fluoride also damages the brain, both directly and indirectly. Rats given fluoridated water at a dose of 4 ppm develop symptoms resembling attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. High concentrations of fluoride accumulate in the pineal gland, which produces serotonin and melatonin. Young girls who drink fluoridated water reach puberty six months earlier than those who drink unfluoridated water, which is thought to be a result of reduced melatonin production. People with Alzheimer’s disease have high levels of aluminum in their brains. Fluoride combines with aluminum in drinking water and takes it through the blood-brain barrier into the brain. Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD, a neurosurgeon, spells out in chilling detail the danger fluoride poses to one’s brain and health in general in his book Health and Nutrition Secrets that can Save Your Life (2002).

Try to avoid fluoride, in all its guises. It is not an element the body needs or requires, even in trace amounts. There are no known naturally occurring compounds of fluorine in the human body.

Live in a nonfluoridated community. If that is not possible, drink distilled water or tap water passed through a filter that can remove fluoride (a third method using an activated alumina absorbent is not practical because of its expense). Regular activated carbon filters do not work because the diameter of a fluoride anion (0.064 nm) is smaller than the pore size of the filter. It requires a reverse osmosis filter. (Living in a fluoridated area, my family uses a table top reverse osmosis filter that we purchased online.) Distilled water has been given a bad rap by some health writers, which is not deserved (see "Blowing the Lid off Distilled Water Myths"). Distillation units are relatively inexpensive.

Fluoride is readily absorbed through the skin (and inhaled). Two-thirds of the fluoride we take into our bodies using fluoridated public water comes from bathing and wearing clothes washed in it. Drinking fluoride-free water in a fluoridated district only reduces fluoride intake by about a third.

One of the greatest public health advances in the 21st century will be removing fluoride from public water supplies. This "important public health measure" is a Potemkin Village – an impressive façade that hides undesirable facts. In this village, the US Surgeon General, the Czar, in this case, tells visiting dignitaries that "Community water fluoridation benefits everyone," and "There is no credible evidence that fluoridation is harmful." This has given fluoride a protected pollutant status for 60 years when the stark fact is that this substance is slowly poisoning us.

In addition to being contaminated with trace amounts of arsenic, beryllium, mercury, and lead, silicofluorides (hexafluorosilicic acid [H2SiF6] and its sodium salt hexafluorosilicate [Na2SiF6]) carry lead through the intestine into the body. These are the compounds that, untested, now are used to fluoridate water. Lead interferes with the neurotransmitter dopamine, which controls impulsive and violent behavior; and studies show that lead pollution is linked to higher rates of violent crime. The average violent crime rate in US counties that have lead pollution is 56 percent higher when their drinking water is fluoridated, as reported in "A Moratorium on Silicofluoride Usage will Save $$Millions (Fluoride 2005;38:1–5). School shootings occur ten times more frequently in fluoridated communities, as Jay Seavey points out in "Water Fluoridation and Crime in America (Fluoride 2005;38:11–22).

Antifluoridationists weaken their case by mistakenly putting florine-carbon organofluorines in the same category as fluoride anions, as Joel Kauffman, a chemist, points out. The fluorine in these compounds is not dangerous (Teflon heated continuously at 500° F does not release any fluoride.) Policy makers will be better able to deal with fluoridation of water alone and ban it when organic (carbon-based) fluorine compounds are removed from consideration.

The day will come when fluoridation of community drinking water will suffer the same fate as blood letting. Used for over a millennium to treat disease, it was abandoned three centuries ago.

Recommended Reading:

bullet"Water Fluoridation: a Review of Recent Research and Actions," by Joel M. Kauffman, PhD. Published last month in the peer-reviewed Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, this well-considered, succinct, up-to-date review would be Exhibit A in a trial against fluoridation. The author brought to my attention the distinction between inorganic fluoride anion and organically carbon-bound fluorine. (J Am Phys Surg 2005;10:38–44.)
bullet"Fluoridation of Water," by Bette Hileman. Published in Chemical and Engineering News in 1988, this "Special Report" by an associate editor of the journal examines the fundamental issues and specifics of fluoridation, which scientists, policy makers, and the public must confront. It shows that the fluoride controversy is much more serious than most people at the time, including scientists, realized. This seminal article gives important examples of how data on fluoride’s adverse effects are withheld from the public. (August 1, 1988 C&EN, p. 26–42, with links to the article’s four sidebars and to 39 letters published in C&EN about it, including one from Surgeon General C. Everett Koop.)
bullet"Fluoride: Commie Plot or Capitalistic Ploy," by Joel Griffiths. Originally published in Covert Action Quarterly in 1992, this article, with a photo of Capt. Jack Ripper in Dr. Strangelove saying, "Have you ever seen a commie drink a glass of water?," is another classic on the subject.
bulletFluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death? by Barry Groves (2001) This thoroughly researched and well written book refutes, one by one, answers the British Fluoridation Society told UK dentists to give to (32) questions people might ask them about Fluoride – questions like "Is fluoridated water safe?" and "Is it true that there is enough fluoride in a tube of toothpaste to kill a small child?" (The BFS answer to the toothpaste one is: "Used sensibly, fluoride toothpaste presents no risks to children.")
bullet"50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation" by Paul Connett. There are, indeed, 50 reasons. Written by the Executive Director of the organization that held the protest in Chicago.
bulletThe Fluoride Deception by Christopher Bryson (2004) A good review of this book can be found here. The author has thoroughly researched the subject and obtained previously unreleased documents on the wartime politics behind fluoridation. He pulls down its façade and lays bare this Potemkin Village.
bullet"A Bibliography of Scientific Literature on Fluoride." A good compilation of references, arranged by subject. It is 55 pages long.

July 15, 2005

Donald Miller (send him mail) is a cardiac surgeon and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington in Seattle and a member of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness and writes articles on a variety of subjects for, including bioterrorism. His web site is

Copyright © 2005

Donald Miller Archives




horizontal rule

How Fluoride Kills Human Cells

Researchers uncovering mechanisms behind fluoride's toxicity

Fluoride, the "Golden Child" of dental professionals around the world, seems to have a "dark side" that few outside a very specialized field of the scientific community are aware of. As disturbing as it may be, fluoride apparently has the ability to cause DNA damage and even "cell death" in human cells.

In a new study, researchers from the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Japan note that

"Even though fluoride toxicity is increasingly being considered to be important, very little information is available on the mechanism of action of fluoride."

You might think that most everything would be known about a chemical that is being added to our water and prescribed for our children, but regrettably this is not the case.

Researchers decided to investigate the mechanism by which fluoride's is able to kill cells by observing how it affects human leukemia cells. Cancerous cells are often used in research on toxicity because they are more active than normal cells.

They found that the fluoride induced a form of cell death known as "apoptosis" in a dose-dependent and time dependent manner.

Now, if fluoride killing cancerous cells were the "end of the story", this would be a great breakthrough in cancer treatment and would likely save many lives. Unfortunately, things are not quite so simple.

Lead researcher Dr. C.D. Anuradha, in comments to the Optimal Wellness Center, explains that "fluoride in general is harmful to any type of cell. We have seen that fluoride causes cell death in other non-cancerous cells but however the mode of death has been found to be different." Instead of causing apoptosis, in normal cells fluoride seems to kill cells through a different mechanism, known as "necrosis".

Cell Death - Murder or Suicide?

Apoptosis, also known as "programmed cell death" in a process governed by genes in which the cell dies from within upon activation by some stimulating factor. It is a useful phenomenon, which occurs often as part of the normal functioning of the human body, as it gets rid of unwanted cells. The term apoptosis is derived from the Greek word that signifies "the dropping of leaves from the trees." The falling leaves are no longer needed, just as is the case with the unwanted cells, so they are gotten rid of, and recycled back into the earth.

Necrosis, on the other hand, is an externally influenced death, which occurs through some type of local injury (as loss of blood supply, corrosion, burning, or the local lesion of a disease).

A useful analogy between apoptosis and necrosis might be to compare suicide (apoptosis) to murder (necrosis).

Is it Dangerous at Much Lower Doses?

Now many readers may ask the intelligent question of - How does this affect me? Are the much lower concentrations found in fluoridated water and toothpaste a danger to my family and me?

The answer unfortunately is that nobody knows for sure. However, Dr. Anuradha states that, although the concentrations are quite low "…still we expect some amount of damage even at lower concentrations, since at higher concentrations the results are quite clear that the difference is enormous and significant."

She notes that the issue of therapeutic fluoridation is the subject of much debate. Could this be the reason that Japan does not fluoridate ANY of its water supplies? This can't be said with certainty, but after all, doesn't it make sense to keep a potentially dangerous substance out of the water and not FORCE the entire population to consume it?

In the United States currently about 60% of the population drinks fluoridated water, although if the federal government has its way, that percentage will rise dramatically. This is especially true with states like California MANDATING the fluoridation of the public water supplies over a certain size.

How it Caused Cell-Death

Dr. Anuradha and colleagues found that fluoride caused apoptosis in the human leukemia cells by activating an enzyme called caspase-3, which has been identified as a key mediator of apoptosis of cells in humans and other mammals.

The authors note that "The results clearly suggest that fluoride causes cell death in HL-60 (human leukemia) cells by causing the activation of caspase-3 which in turn cleaves PARP leading to DNA damage and ultimately cell death."

What Type of Fluoride?

Except for readers with strong scientific backgrounds, most people don't realize that there is really no such thing as plain "fluoride". When it said that "fluoride" is added to the water, in reality it is a fluoride-compound such as sodium fluoride (NaF), which is the form used in these toxicity experiments.

While this may be the most well known and well-studied of all the fluoride compounds, it is actually very rarely used for water fluoridation. In over 90% of the fluoridated water in the US, the chemicals used are one of the silicofluorides (either fluosilicic acid or sodium silicofluoride).

However, these chemicals have been shown to act much differently from the much simpler sodium fluoride. In one study, it was shown that these chemicals enhance the cellular uptake of lead (

Being that there is evidence that silicofluorides may be even more toxic than NaF, it is quite possible that the DNA damage and cell-killing ability might be even greater in the type of fluoride used in the water supplies.

What Can I Do About it?

Whether you believe that water fluoridation is a vast conspiracy or simply that it is a possibility that fluoride is a dangerous substance that you would just rather avoid, the question remains the same - what to do about it?

The best advice would be to go to our Fluoride Links Page and get involved.



A clip from page 68 of 'The Elite Killers of Lincoln, JFK, RFK, and MLK" by
Robert Gaylon Ross Sr. ( ISBN 0-9649888-6-0:

 "There is a sinister network of subversive agents, Godless 'intellectual'
parasites, working in our country today whose ramifications grow more
extensive, more successful and more alarming each new year and whose true
objective is to demoralize, paralyze and destroy our great Republic - from
within if they can, according to their plan - for their own possession. The
tragic success they have already attained in their long siege to destroy the
moral fiber of American life is now one of their most potent footholds
towards their own ultimate victory over us."

"Fluoridation of our community water systems can well become their most
subtle weapon for our sure physical and mental deterioration."

"As a research chemist of established standing, I built within the past 22
years, 3 American chemical plants and licensed 6 of my 53 patents. Based on
my years of practical experience in the health food and chemical field, let
me warn: fluoridation of drinking water is criminal insanity, sure national
suicide. Don't do it."

1950 Soviets add fluorides to water in prison system to maintain subservience in the inmate population.

1951 The U.S. Public Health Service, with the cooperation of the American Dental Association, holds a meeting of state dental directors at which the methods for promotion of fluoridation are outlined. A concentration of 1.2 ppm was suggested, and state dental directors were instructed to lie to the public about the toxic effects of sodium fluoride. They were to deliberately misinform the public by relating the presence of "high-fluoride areas" to "less cancer and less polio" - an entire public relations campaign meant to convince the public to allow themselves to be medicated.

1952 The American Dental Association publishes an issue of its Journalinstructing its dentists not to discuss their personal opinions about fluoride.

1952 From 1952 to 1956, the cities on the "fluoridation list" began to fluoridate their water supplies. As the process of water fluoridation continued, the cancer death rate of the fluoridated cities began to far exceed the rate of the unfluoridated cities.

1952 82nd Congress, 2nd Session, Hearings of the Select Committee to Investigate Use of Chemicals in Food and Cosmetics. Dr. Miller "The US Dental Association made some examination and recommended to the farmers that fluorine not be added to the water of pregnant sows because it did something to the pigs that were unborn"

1954 A study is publishedwhich links fluorides and the development of cancer in animals. Ref: A Taylor, "Sodium Fluoride in the Drinking Water of Mice", Dental Digest, Vol 60, pp170-172.

1954 C.E.Perkins, I.G.Farben chemist, admits fluoride is to reduce resistance in people to authority.

1959 The Ontario Minister of Health, Dr. Dymond, announced that no further fluoridation would be permitted there, because "no one knows for sure what the effect is to persons given fluoride throughout a lifetime."

1959 In research conducted on the incidence of Mongolism in cities in Wisconsin, Illinois and the Dakotas published in 1959 in the official publication of the French Academy of Medicine, it was found thatas the percentage of fluorides in the water rose, there was a parallel rise in the incidence of Mongoloid births.

The age of the mothers giving birth to Mongoloid babies also declined with rising fluoride levels. It is interesting thatin the first three years of fluoridation, New Britain, Connecticut experienced a 150% rise in still births.

1961 In Great Britain, Dr. R.A.Holman of the Royal Institute of Pathology discussed fluoride poisoning in an article in the April 15, 1961 issue of the British Medical Journal. He noted that the long-term effects of sodium fluoride ingestion needed much more investigation. He said "Fluoride is a well-known inhibitor of several enzyme systems".


1963 American Academy of Sciences study shows low fluoride levels increase tumors



1963 A study is published which links fluorides and development of cancer in animals. Ref: Irwin Herskowitz and Isabel Norton "Increased Incidence of Melanotic Tumors...Following Treatment with Sodium Fluoride", Genetics, Vol 48, pp307-310.


1969 By 1969, the fluoridated cities had an average cancer death rate of 225 per 100,000 people, while non-fluoridated cities had an average cancer death rate of 195 per 100,000. The data indicates a fluoride-linked increase of cancer of 10% in only 13-17 years. These figures were checked and confirmed in 1979 by the United States National Cancer Institute.


1974 The Safe Water Drinking Act is passed. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets maximum contamination levels (MCL) for various water pollutants, including sodium fluoride. The EPA sets the fluoride contamination level at an unbelievable 1.4 ppm for "warmer climates" and up to 2.4 ppm for "colder climates". Furthermore, the American Dental Association begins pressuring the EPA to raise the MCL for fluoride in public water to 8 ppm, when it is fully known that systemic damage occurs below 1 pmm.

1977 The Congressional Subcommitee on Intergovernmental Relations convenes two (2) full Congressional Hearings on the subject of fluorides. During the hearing, it was proven that
1.     The "scientific efforts" of those promoting fluoridation were fraudulent, and

 2.     Other existing studies proved beyond a doubt that approximately 10,000 excess cancer deaths per year could be attributed to fluoridation in the United States.

1977 Congressional Hearings were held in which Dr.Yiamouyiannis and Dr. Burk were able to show that the increase in deaths were due to water fluoridation. At the conclusion of the hearings, Representative Fountain and his committee instructed the United States Public Health Service (well known by now for questionable and dangerous medical advisory practices which benefit the medical and pharmaceutical industries) to conduct animal studies to "determine whether or not fluoride causes cancer".




REPOSTS ON: 10-29-2000

Dear All,

This shocking article was written in the wake of the UK Government's REVIEW of

"Not only do we accuse the York Review of gross scientific fraud, we also
accuse them of  knowingly contributing to the unnecessary death of over
500,000 children." - Parents of Fluoride Poisoned Children.

FALSE STATEMENT: made with knowedge that it is false. ("knowingly").
MISLEADING : calculated to lead astray or lead into error.
FRAUD : Exploitation through misrepresentation of the facts or concealment
of the purposes of the exploiter.

NOTE PARTICULARLY the short Commentary at the end of this article.
Please forward it to all your media contacts.  - Thanks.   Best - Jane.


The 3-year study below was presented to all York Review members (including
advisory panel) in our  OPEN LETTER #2, and was included in FULL at the end
of other references cited, and receipt acknowleged by York.

The study was conducted under a UNICEF Aid program, and we found it in the
IDD Technical Database maintained by the University of Virginia, as
published in the Newsletter of the International Council for Control of
Iodine Deficiency Disorders (ICCIDD) (Volume 7 Number 3 August 1991).

The "normal" fluoride level here is defined as 0.34 ppm and "high" level as
0.88 ppm, levels BELOW the "optimal" intake suggested for water

Paul Wilson said at York: "...we've looked at 50 years of the best research
and we've not been able to find any association with any harm.'' (AP) This
"brilliant" York lead researcher also said he looked at all studies with
water levels up to 4ppm.

Did he, now?

When reading the paper below, the following questions arise:

Is there anything wrong with this research that is of questionable quality?
Is there something wrong with the data?
Is this not dealing with fluoride in the water?

As - according to the ICCIDD and Kiwanis - 1.6 billion people are at risk
of IDD, and 2 million children die every year of IDD, and 50 million
children suffer from brain damage due to IDD, is this NOT a concern?  A
problem affecting at least a third of the world's population, including
many developed countries?

An estimated 28 million babies are born each year at risk of mental
impairment due to insufficient iodine in their mothers' diets.

The recent findings from the biggest such study ever undertaken in the US
by Haddow et al (NEJM, 1999) showed that mere subclinical hypothyroidism in
the mother is enough to cause loss of IQ, and learning and behaviour
disorders in the child. In most cases mothers weren't diagnosed until 5
years after. Pregnant women with underactive thyroids are four times more
likely to have children with low IQs if the disorder is left untreated. The
study found that 19 percent of the children born to mothers with thyroid
deficiency had IQ scores of 85 or lower, compared with only 5 percent of
those born to mothers without such problems. The children who score in this
range may face lifelong developmental challenges. In a accompanying press
release Haddow said, "It's the kind of cutoff that tells you you're going
to have more troubles in school and more troubles in life in general."

Considering these findings, the real number of children affected by IDD
might well be many-fold higher.

The symptoms of subclinical hypothyroidism are identical to those observed
by Moolenburgh in his double-blind study which led to the banning of
fluoridation in Holland.

Hundreds of thousands of children and adults suffer the most debilitating
effect of iodine deficiency: a condition known as cretinism - something
which Goldemberg was able to produce in rats with 3mg of NaF- per day more
than 70 years ago. v. Fellenberg had reported fluoride content in the
thyroid of cretins to be 10 times higher than controls, while May (1950)
made similar observations investigating F- levels in the blood of cretins.
"The Relationship of a Low-Iodine and High-Fluoride Environment to
Subclinical Cretinism in Xinjiang"

Lin Fa-Fu, Aihaiti, Zhao Hong-Xin, Lin Jin, Jiang Ji-Yong, Maimaiti, and
Aiken. Xinjiang Institute for Endemic Disease Control and Research; Office
of Leading Group for Endemic Disease Control of Hetian Prefectural
Committee of the Communist Party of China; and County Health and Epidemic
Prevention Station, Yutian, Xinjiang.

Cretinism in iodine-deficiency areas is well known, yet the milder forms of
somatic and psychomotor maldevelopment and thyroid dysfunction caused by
iodine deficiency may be more difficult to detect. DeQuervain, in 1936,
called this milder form "semi-cretinism," while in 1980 Laggasse used the
term "cretinoidism." It was formally named "subclinical endemic cretinism"
at a symposium on subclinical cretinism held in Xinzhou, Shanxi province in

Currently, attention is being focused on these disorders in China and
abroad. The Hetian prefecture in Xinjiang has reportedly been one of the
Asian areas most severely affected by iodine deficiency disorders (IDD).
During the period 1987-1989, we made a systematic survey of subclinical
endemic cretinism in this district under a UNICEF aid Project.

Materials and Methods

General conditions and selection of affected areas - The entire region of
Xinjiang in central Eurasia is affected by iodine deficiency. The study
area, located between the southern border of Tarim basin and the northern
slope of Kunlun Mountains, is arid with sandy soil and an annual
precipitation less than 50 mm. The cultivated alluvial plain extends from
south to north with a steepening gradient. The geographical distributions
of endemic goiter and endemic fluorosis are characterized by marked
vertical zones. The inhabitants are of lower socioeconomic status, with an
annual mean income of about 200 yuan (RMB) per person.

Area with high fluoride and low iodine levels (Area A) - In the township
Xinyuan in the lower reaches of Kliya river in the county of Yutian, north
of the highway, we examined 250 schoolchildren, aged 7-14 years. The goiter
prevalence was 91% and dental fluorosis 20.80%. The average level of iodine
in drinking water was 5.21 mg/l, and that of fluoride 0.88 mg/l.

Area with low iodine level (area B) - In the townships of Langan and Jiayi
in the alluvial plain before the mountains and to the south of the highway,
we examined 256 schoolchildren, aged 7-14 years. The goiter prevalence was
82% and dental fluorosis of 16.00%. The average water iodine level was 0.96
mg/l and that of fluoride 0.34 mg/l.

Control area with iodine supplementation (Area C) - In the suburbs of
Hetian where the nationalities, habits, customs, and income were basically
similar and where iodine supplementation in the form of iodized salt or oil
has been implemented since 1982, we examined 243 schoolchildren aged 7-14

Methods of Examination

Intelligence test - We used the Combined Raven's Test for Rural China
(CRT-RC). It is culturally fair, non-linguistic, and particularly suitable
for intelligence screening in minorities. According to the scale, an IQ of
50-69 means mild mental retardation. Hearing was tested with different
frequencies by electroaudiometry with MST Audiometer (Nagashima Medical
Instruments, Co., Ltd.). Psychiatric-psychological function was tested by
the reaction time tester type XZ-I, knock tester type QJ-I and action
stability tester type WD-Z (Chengde Medical Apparatus and Instruments
Factory), with Ding Zhi-Min's normal values of psychomotilities as
references (2). Bone age was estimated from right palmar carpal
roentgenograms by the method of Li Guo-Zhen (3). Thyroid 131I uptake in 24
hours was determined using automatic scaler type 126 and GM tube. Thyroid
hormones were measured with kits provided by the Beijing Institute of
Atomic Energy.

Methods of epidemiological study - We randomly selected a class of students
in each affected area and examined for endemic goiter, endemic fluorosis,
body height, weight, and intelligence. Using random stratified sampling
method, we examined 10-12 students for hearing, the four psychomotilities,
bone age, thyroid I131 uptake and thyroid hormone. The data obtained were
analyzed by variance and multivariate stepwise regression with IBM-XT
electronic computer.

Results and Analyses

Somatic development of children aged 7-14 in iodine-deficient areas - The
values for weight/height X 100% of 295 children from the iodine-deficient
areas showed a retardation of 1 to 1.5 years compared to those of 1,632
iodine supplemented children from suburb of Urumqi (p < 0.01). In area A,
29% showed detectable bone retardation, compared with 13% in area B and 6%
in control area C.

Table 1 shows comparative data for the three areas. Both iodine deficient
areas (A and B) differed from the control area C by having lower IQ's,
higher hearing threshold, increased 131I uptake, higher TSH, and lower
urinary iodine. Area A (high fluoride, low iodine) differed from area B
(normal fluoride, low iodine) by having lower mean IQ, higher TSH, slightly
higher 131I uptake, and higher urinary iodine.
Table (here inserted by PFPC for ease of observation)

AREA C: Control: Iodine normal, Fluoride normal (presumed 0.34ppm)
AREA B: Iodine low (0.96mg; Fluoride normal (0.34ppm)
AREA A: Iodine low (5.21mg; Fluoride "high" (0.88ppm)

AREA.......C (Control).........B (0.34ppm F-)...A (0.88ppm F-)





threshold......16.....................20.....................24 (in db)



Relationships between IQ of children in iodine-deficient areas and
parameters of somatic development, psychomotility and thyroid function - The relationships of IQs
of 130 patients with complete data to 15 factors were studied by
correlation analysis and stepwise regression analysis. Factors closely
related to IQ were, in order, age, frequency of knock, weight/height X 100%
and TSH.

Abnormality rates of various parameters of feebleminded children, aged 7-14
- In children with IQ in the range of 50-69, indices of all parameters were
beyond the normal range. The abnormality rates of different parameters
were, in turn, 74% for ratio of weight/height/age, 59% for TSH, 61% for
thyroid I131 uptake, 60% for frequency of mistake, 47% for frequency of
knock, and 35% for hearing. In terms of accessory diagnostic conditions for
subclinical cretinism (4), those who met one item of the conditions
accounted for 69% and those who met two items made up 56%.


One hundred and four children with mental retardation were detected in all.
Area A had 25%, area B 16%, and area C 8%. The significant differences in
IQ among these regions suggests that fluoride can exacerbate central
nervous lesions and somatic developmental disturbance caused by iodine
deficiency. This may be in keeping with fluoride's known ability to cause
degenerative changes in central nervous system cells and to inhibit the
activities of many enzymes, including choline enzymes, causing disturbance
of the nerve impulse (5). We found significant differences among the three
areas, indicating that lack of iodine in children results in disturbance of
the process of growth and ossification and that high fluoride intake can
further disturb bone development (6,7). Also, the auditory threshold was
significantly different among the three areas, with severe loss of hearing
in high fluoride and low iodine areas. Severe iodine deficiency in early
fetal life has adverse effects on the development and differentiation of
the acoustic organ, and we suggest that high fluoride intake may also
promote hearing loss.

In this study, we found that 69% of the children with mental retardation
had elevated TSH levels. IQ and TSH were negatively correlated. Many
investigators regard an elevated TSH in the presence of normal T4 and T3
levels as evidence for hypothyroidism that is subclinical but that can
still affect the development of brain and cerebral function to some degree
(6). Reverse T3 (rT3) is formed from T4 by 3-deiodination in peripheral
tissue. The balance of active T3 and inactive rT3 in the serum reflects
thyroid hormone economy. In high fluoride and low iodine areas, the rT3
value was 58 ng/dl (the normal value, 21 ng/dl), and the ratio of rT3/T3
was 2.91, significantly low. In areas of low iodine the rT3 value was 32
ng/dl, and the ratio of rT3/T3 was 5.8. It is possible that excess fluoride
ion affects normal deiodination.

We detected 104 cases with mental retardation among 769 schoolchildren,
aged 7-14, in different affected areas. Some 69% of our cases with mental
retardation had one or more items of the accessory conditions recommended
for the diagnosis of subclinical cretinism by the National Conference on
Subclinical Cretinism held in Xinzhou (4). According to the cautious
suggestion of Qian Qi-Dong that the diagnosis should require two or more of
the accessory conditions, 56% of our cases could still be diagnosed as
having subclinical cretinism.

Currently, in the vast remote areas of South Xinjiang the control of IDD
with iodized salt has not yet been generally implemented and the prevalence
of subclinical cretinism is still high. This situation is a great obstacle
to the child health, agricultural development, and economic prosperity of
minority nationalities in South Xinjiang and necessitates prompt
implementation of iodine supplementation to control subclinical cretinism.


We studied a total of 769 schoolchildren of 7-14 years in three areas,
characterized by intakes of (A) low iodine, high fluoride; (B) low iodine,
normal fluoride; and (C) iodine supplemented, normal fluoride. Results for
the following parameters for areas A, B, and C, respectively were: (a)
average IQ: 71, 77, 96; (b) average auditory threshold (in dB): 24, 20, 16;
(c) bone age retardation (%): 28, 13, 4; (d) thyroid 131I uptake (%): 60,
50, 24; and (e) serum TSH (mU/ml): 21, 11, 6. Statistically significant
differences existed between these areas, suggesting that a low iodine
intake coupled with high fluoride intake exacerbates the central nervous
lesions and the somatic developmental disturbance of iodine deficiency. The
detection rate of subclinical endemic cretinism in children with mental
retardation was 69%, and the total attack rate of subclinical endemic
cretinism 9%.


1.Ma Xin-Yuan, et al 1987 The study of subclinical endemic cretinism in
Fujian province. Proceedings of the 3rd National Conference on Endemic
Goitre and Endemic Cretinism. Chinese Centre for Endemic Disease Control
and Research, pp 120-125.
2.Ding Zhi-Min 1987 Use of psychomotility function test and exploration of
its normal values. Chinese J of Control of Endemic Diseases 3:18-20.
3.Li Guo-Zhen, et al 1979 A study of the development of bone: II Percentage
estimation of bone age. Chinese J Rad 13:19-23.
4.Li Jian-Qun, et al 1987 A Practical Handbook of Prophylaxis and Treatment
of Endemic Goitre and Endemic Cretinism. Chinese Environmental Science
Publishing House, 1st edition, pp 64-69.
5.Ren Da-Li 1989 An investigation of intelligence development of children
aged 8-14 years in high-fluoride and low-iodine areas. Chinese J of Control
of Endemic Diseases 4:251.
6.Liu Cheng-Shan, et al 1987 Studies on diagnostic criteria for subclinical
cretinism. Proceedings of the 3rd  National Conference on Endemic Goitre
and Endemic Cretinism. Chinese Centre for Endemic Disease Control and
Research, pp 142-147.
7.Zhang Ying-Xiu 1989 Effect of fluoride on the growth development of
children. Chinese J Endemiology 4:240.
8.Qian Qi-Dong 1987 Subclinical endemic cretinism. Chinese J Endemiology

The harm shown here is truly horrendous.

As iodine deficiency affects a third of the global population, this is a
very GREAT and urgent  problem - would anyone with common sense, integrity
and concern for mankind here NOT agree?

By comparing areas of endemic fluorosis with those of endemic iodine
deficiency, PFPC has estimated that a quarter of these deaths are directly
attributable to fluoride - a very conservative figure - meaning every
minute at least one child dies due to fluoride-induced iodine deficiency.
We informed York of this as well.

Not only do we accuse the York Review of gross scientific fraud, we also
accuse them of  knowingly contributing to the unnecessary death of over
500,000 children.

Instead of advising those millions and millions of people at risk of IDD to
stay away from ALL sources of F-,  these people are now being told by this
great scientific marvel that an INCREASE of fluoride levels to 1ppm surely
would cause no harm besides those nasty "enamel defects" which are only of
"aesthetic concern" and can be rectified, according to Wilson. Meanwhile,
those enamel defects are identical to those caused by IDD.

How much longer is this fraud going to continue before we ALL do something
to stop it, on a GLOBAL level??

Parents of Fluoride Poisoned Children (PFPC)
Vancouver, BC, Canada
FALSE STATEMENT: made with knowedge that it is false. ("knowingly").

MISLEADING : calculated to lead astray or lead into error.

FRAUD : Exploitation through misrepresentation of the facts or concealment
of the purposes of the exploiter.

horizontal rule

Drink city water and use flouride tooth pastes at your peril.
Forewarned is forearmed!  The information is out there
if you're willing to look. What the author of this article
neglected to mention is that flouride inhibits the
production of neurotransmitters in the brain. 
Long term exposure is soporific in effect.
You become lethargic, dull, languid and
easily controlled.  Hmm.....Why would
anyone want to do that to us?

Dentist's Tale

Fluoride can kill. Prepare yourself for the tragic fable of the chemist, the
water board, the dentist and his life.

By George Glasser

The Ecologist, September, 2000

Once, there was a dentist. His name was Lester. For many years, like all the
other dentists he knew, Lester believed that fluoride in the drinking water
was good for everyone. Like all the other dentists, Lester had learnt in
dental school that fluoride reduces tooth decay. And, like all the other
dentists, Lester believed that fluoride was fluoride.

Then, one day, he met a chemist and began discussing drinking water
fluoridation. The chemist asked what kind of fluoride was being used to
fluoridate the drinking water. Lester replied: "We are simply adjusting the
fluoride level in the water by adding one part per million of, well, just

There is no such thing as "just fluoride", said the chemist.

Lester scratched his head. But they told me that it was only fluoride they
are adding to the water.

The chemist laughed heartily. "Fluorine is the most reactive,
electronegative element and it's never found alone in nature," he said.
"There are many kinds of fluorides: for instance, calcium fluoride is found
naturally in water. Then there are other fluorides such as lead fluoride,
aluminium fluoride, etc. If you add fluoride to the water it has to be a
compound. You can't just add fluoride to the water, so which one is it?"

Lester felt silly. He didn't know.

The next day Lester went to the library to check the chemistry books and
learnt that calcium fluoride is,
indeed, found naturally in the water. He also discovered that calcium
fluoride is almost insoluble and could not be easily absorbed by the body.
And his friend the chemist was quite right - there were innumerable fluoride

Now intrigued, Lester looked up some scientific studies about water
fluoridation. He read that in laboratory tests, workers use a very pure
grade of sodium fluoride and purified water to do their research. He
discovered that sodium fluoride is taken up by the body much more readily
than calcium fluoride.

His friend was right.

The dentist wondered how anyone could say that calcium fluoride is the same
as sodium fluoride.

The next day, Lester called his water department to ask if they were adding
fluoride or calcium fluoride to his drinking water.

The Water Department (WD) manager said that they were adding a product
called silicofluorides to
the water.The WD manager said they bought a very low grade product because
it would be too expensive to use a good grade and, anyway, the public health
people would not pay for a good quality calcium fluoride, because, they
said, fluoride is fluoride, no matter where it comes from.

By now, Lester was completely bewildered. "Where do you buy these
silicofluorides from?" he

The WD manager said that the silicofluorides - known as hexafluorosilicic
acid - are the toxic waste product from phosphate fertilizer pollution

The dentist was aghast. "You have to be crazy putting that stuff in the
water!" The water department manager agreed because, he said, the
hexafluorsilicic acid also contains other toxic substances such as arsenic,
beryllium, mercury, lead and many more.

He said he didn't drink the city water because many of the contaminants in
the fluoridation agent cause health problems. "For instance," he said,
"arsenic causes prostate, bladder, kidney, skin and lung cancers and there
is no safe level for arsenic."

Lester was appalled. He asked the manager why he did not stop fluoridating
the water with this pollution scrubber liquor. "And why would anyone add any
amount of a known carcinogen to the water?"

Shrugging, the manager replied, "I'm just doing my job. The public health
people have their agenda, and I have a family to feed."

After a sleepless night, Lester contemplated the fluoridation dilemma as he
soaped himself in the shower.
"They say they are simply adjusting the level of natural fluoride in the
water - which is calcium fluoride - but they are using a pure grade of
sodium fluoride and very pure water for the rat experiments in the
laboratory. But they are adding toxic pollution scrubber liquor to my
drinking water!" It didn't make sense.

He called a man at the dental association and told him what he had learnt.

The man said, coldly: "If you value your licence to practise, don't ever
mention this subject again!"

Lester was shocked. He had worked hard and was very proud of his practice
and his two classic cars. He couldn't bear to lose them. He thought about
his wife and family and how they would miss their luxury home with its four
bathrooms and a jacuzzi, the private schools and foreign vacations.

After a while he made a decision. "We won't drink the tap water. We'll buy
bottled water." But he was not a happy man as he walked into the reception
room and greeted his first patient of the day.

Several months later he visited his friend the doctor for his annual
check-up and was stunned to learn that he had prostate cancer.

He recalled the words of the water department manager. "Arsenic causes
prostate cancer."

Lester was shattered. He couldn"t understand it. Yet there was a reason.
Despite taking care to drink only
bottled water, Lester didn't know that much more of the pollution-laced tap
water is absorbed through the skin from bathing and washing clothes.

Poor Lester.

Although 64-91 per cent of exposure to waterborne contaminants is known to
occur via dermal absorption, no studies have ever been done to determine the
toxicity of pollution scrubber liquor - the fluoride used in
water fluoridation schemes.

George Glasser is an investigative journalist who focuses on environmental
issues. Taken from The Ecologist, September 2000 Vol 30 No 6.
( ).

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: As my long-time readers know, I am no fan of water
fluoridation. Please click on
the links below for more information and also check out our fluoride links
page, with links to lots of great sites dedicated to exploring this issue
fully. If you live in the New Jersey vicinity, you had the opportunity to
see a very rare event take place this past Monday, October 23. There was an
actual debate between a pro-fluoridation dentist and one of the leading and
most well-respected anti-fluoridation activists, Dr. Paul Connett, PhD, who
is a Professor of Chemistry at St. Lawrence University in Canton, NY.

It was chaired by the Morris County League of Women Voters. The reason that
this was such a rare event is that the pro-fluoridation forces have been
sticking to a strict "No-Debate" policy, saying that this lends credibility
to the anti-fluoridation cause.

Can you imagine the Democrats refusing to debate the Republicans (or
vice-versa), because this would lend too much credibility to the other
party? Dr. Connett has been asking for a pro-fluoridation authority to
debate him for four years and this is the first time anyone has accepted. Be
sure to visit Dr. Connett's website at

Related Articles: How Fluoride Kills Human Cells Prominent Researcher
Apologizes for Pushing Fluoride Canadian Dental Association Advises AGAINST
Fluoride Supplements in Young Children Links for Fluoride Information
Fluoridation Increases Lead Absorption In Children The Fluoride Controversy
Toothpaste and Other Fluoride Sources Can Damage Preschoolers' Teeth.

eGroups Sponsor



horizontal rule

> Subj: PAY HEED X
> Date: 10/27/2000 3:22:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> From: (M.O.M.)
> Sender:
> Reply-to: <A HREF=""></A>
> To: (m.o.m. email alert list)
> Cosa Nostra BG and his clan are creating chaos and the 4 cities are
> Chicago, Atlanta, N. Branson and Palo Alto. Cows. The dispensers are
> cows on nearby farms. Be as observant about cows in farm areas near
> these cities. Bossie and Daisy are their names. Bossie is brown and
> white. Daisy is the same but only black and white. Bossie contains
> Benalin and something else to make people sleepy. These Bossies land in
> fields. Helicopters plant them. Watch helos over farm fields. Bossie is
> to be at Chicago and Atlanta. They are not really cows; they just look
> like cows. Robot cows. They lie on the ground most of the time and edge
> forward now and then. Not bombing these cities but poisoning them.
> At this time the cows are in a lab named Socanama (sp) near a freeway in
> Pennsylvania near 80 and 380; near the Coyn Company.
> Plan"A" Oct. 28 thru 30th, plan "B" is really Nov. 6th. Bowling balls
> rolling along on roads inside of campers. Campers are songsters, kind
> and cheery. They sing about freedom and play instruments. The plan is to
> dispense bowling balls as they roll along at night. Bowling balls
> contain bacteria combination plagues. One is ebola and one is bubonic.
> Hurry. Bowling balls are held in Brig. Gen. house. Fran is his name.
> Turbans are on the brigadier now. False Arab. Residence in Minot, N.D.
> His code name Obe 1wan Kenobe. His mail box #2. There are several post
> offices there. This one is on Second Street.
> Pick up the cows on the 28th and 30th. About 10 cows, several for each
> area. Dump them on farms on Oct. 30th. Roads to be on with bowling balls
> are I-90 near Rapid City, I-90 near Detroit, I-90 near Chicago, I-70
> also near Anchorage.
> The lining of the cows puff up with air when they land. They are remote
> controlled to dispense the material. U.N. troops come out then. Put
> patriots in underground hives under mountains in W. Va. where mine
> collapsed, where sludge spill occurred. Behind everything there is a
> China connection. Boarding house in Minot is a safe house for
> terrorists. O'Brian is the name on the door knocker; sign reads "rooms
> for rent".
> --
> **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,
> any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
> without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest
> in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and
> educational
> purposes only.[Ref. ]
> Join the Militia of Montana Email Alert List by writing to:
> with "SUBSCRIBE" in the Subject Line!
> For the latest in great survival, preparedness and politically incorrect
> materials visit our Online Catalog at:
> Some great deals are to be had! Or,
> send $2.00 to the address below for a copy of our 40+ page Preparedness
> Catalog.
> Militia of Montana
> P.O. Box 1486, Noxon, MT  59853
> Tel: 406-847-2735    n Fax: 406-847-2246

horizontal rule

Chemtrail Equipment Pictures + CIA Link and More from "joe 6pk"

Dear list members and those on forward,
The following information was gathered by me on 10/24/00 beginning at 4 am
when the good Lord woke me from a sound sleep. There is massive info
contained here re: this obnoxious and sickening spraying. You better
believe your local TV meteorologist/weatherman knows much about these
activities (per my conversation with a friend who is a TV news director).
However they are ordered by the government agencies, not to report on it.
Please take the time to review this material and pictures. Feel free to
repost and forward far and wide. Many people globally have been made very
ill or died from the effects of these diabolical programs. You may have
noticed in your area increases in the following illnesses: Multiple
Sclerosis, Lupus, Flu like illnesses, Bronchial/Asthma, Allergy/Respiratory
illness, Sore throat, Mouth abscesses and much more. Infants and elderly
especially affected.

Joe Burton AKA Citizen "joe 6pk" Amer I CAN / make a difference

PS. This work should draw me yet another black chopper visit or another
hard drive wiped clean like last month.

See the Chemtrail Equipment pictures here:

I excerpted the following paragraph * from this CIA info. DO NOT confuse
the CIA's weather modification program with the Corporate and University's
programs or UN/NGO's (ie.National Institute for Global Environmental Change)
* Excerpted from " For Your Eyes Only"

Begin excerpt:
"I'll tell you, the kind of clearance most of us get doesn't give us enough
access, but it gives us great stories," Volgy begins. "And I tell my story
in my class all the time. I walked past an office called the 'Office of
Weather and Climate Modification.' And I knocked on the door, I walked in,
and there was this guy sitting behind the desk, but there was nothing on
the desk. And I said, 'What do you do?'and he said, 'I can't tell you.' And
I said, 'I've got security clearance,' and he said, 'Not for me, you
don't.' " Volgy laughs.

Many of my list members will recall, an article I wrote a couple of years
ago, wherein I described a toxic fog which made my wife,myself and our dog
very ill. The article was titled: " Say Chicken Little the Sky IS Falling"
See the flares used for this below:

Additional info. Here you will find the US & USSR "partnership":

*Caveat Lectuer on this one since it's from an anonymous source, BUT from
what I have researched in the past I tend to believe a major portion of it.

horizontal rule

10.29.00   Israel Close To UN/NATO Occupation

Soon to follow in the Illuminati/NWO scheme of things is
U.N./NATO/NewWorldOrder occupation of Israel and other regions in the
Middle East, followed by a likely end to Israeli sovereignty under the
jack-booted heel of George Dubya Bush's globaloid stormtroopers.

Which should make all those rabid, slavering anti-Semites AND and all
those 4th Reich/Brave New World Order supporters out there VERY happy.

Too bad for the rest of us, though.

NewsHawk® Inc.

WIRE:10/29/2000 01:44:00 ET
Barak Says Israel Closer to Emergency

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak said on Sunday
that he was closer than ever to forging a national emergency government
with hawkish Likud leader Ariel Sharon to cope with raging
Israeli-Palestinian violence. "We are closer than a week ago first of
all because of the emergency situation that goes on. But I don"t know
exactly what day it will be established," Barak told Israel"s Army
Radio. "We are first of all truly closer than in the past," he said. He
insisted his left-center Labor party would not abandon its bid for
with the Palestinians even in a partnership with the rightist Likud. He
also ruled out giving Sharon any veto over security or diplomatic
issues, saying: "There is no veto over the prime minister." At least
people have been killed in violence since September 28. All but eight
the dead have been Arabs. The violence erupted following a highly
publicized visit by Sharon to a Jerusalem shrine revered by Muslims and
WIRE:10/29/2000 08:47:00 ET
Barak Nears Sharon Union; Arafat Defiant

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak met hawkish
Likud party chief Ariel Sharon Sunday to try to forge an emergency
coalition to cope with a Palestinian uprising which President Yasser
Arafat vowed would continue. "We are first of all truly closer than in
the past," Barak told Israel Radio several hours before hosting Sharon
at his home to discuss forming a national unity government. "We are
closer than a week ago first of all because of the emergency situation
that goes on," Barak said. Israeli tanks advanced to open a
Palestinian-controlled road leading to a nearby Jewish settlement which
had been blocked by Palestinians throwing stones and firebombs to
protest the presence of Israeli armor at the Karni crossing with
Israeli forces in armored personnel carriers opened fire on the
demonstrators, wounding at least eleven, witnesses said. A Palestinian
died of gunshot wounds suffered in a "day of rage" Friday, bringing the
death toll in more than a month of violence to at least 140 people, all
but eight of them Arabs. "The blessed Intifada (uprising) of our people
will continue," Arafat said in a speech read in Gaza on his behalf by a
senior aide, Tayyeb Abdel Rahim. "Our people have proven that they are
able to continue the confrontation for years." The Palestinian leader
earlier told reporters at a Gaza hospital that his people would remain
steadfast "until a boy or a girl holds the flag of Palestine over
Jerusalem, the capital of our Palestinian state." Palestinians say
Sharon provoked the unrest on September 28 by visiting Jerusalem"s
al-Aqsa mosque, one of Islam"s holiest shrines built on the site
by Jews as the Temple Mount where biblical temples once stood. Israel
insists Palestinians seized on Sharon"s visit as a pretext to launch
"al-Aqsa Intifada" to seek political gain. BARAK FIGHTS FOR POLITICAL
LIFE Barak vowed his left-center Labor Party would not abandon its bid
for peace with Palestinians even in a partnership with Sharon"s Likud,
right-wing party opposed to the prime minister"s readiness to swap
occupied land for peace. Barak, who lost his parliamentary majority in
July over his willingness to make deep peace concessions to the
Palestinians at the failed Camp David peace summit, is struggling to
save his political skin before parliament ends a three-month recess.
Barak was cautious about when a unity government could be established
and a Likud source earlier said there were still "substantial
difficulties" to sealing a coalition deal. Barak ruled out giving
a veto over peace issues, insisting: "There is no veto over the prime
minister." Sharon, who opposes uprooting West Bank Jewish settlements,
has said that should Barak fail to accept his terms the country will
have to face early elections, perhaps by early 2001. Palestinians,
left-wing Israelis and some of Israel"s closest allies have warned that
Sharon -- a former defense minister reviled by Arabs over the 1982
Lebanon invasion -- will deal a fatal blow to seven years of Middle
peacemaking. Barak has suspended the stalled peace talks, alleging
Arafat fanned the violence to shore up world support for a unilateral
declaration of statehood as early as mid-November. Sharon has said he
will not join a government that would hold future talks with the
Palestinians based on the land concessions Barak was willing to
at Camp David. Barak told the radio that if unable to create a national
emergency government with Likud, he might still be able to stay afloat
with the help of other parties that would give him a safety net in
parliament. SKIRMISHES ERUPT Skirmishes between Palestinian
stone-throwers and Israeli troops, who fired teargas, rubber-coated
bullets and live rounds, flared in several West Bank flashpoints. The
Red Crescent Society said 51 Palestinians were wounded in unrest
Saturday, a toll considerably lighter than Friday"s "day of rage" when
troops shot dead four Palestinians. Palestinian police Saturday handed
over to Israel the scorched and bullet-riddled body of a man found in a
burned-out car near Palestinian-ruled Ramallah. Palestinians said the
man was killed in a criminal dispute, but Israeli police said the death
might also have a political background. Barak told his cabinet Sunday
viewed "the murder of an Israeli civilian in Beitunia with severity."
The bloodshed has left an October 17 cease-fire deal brokered by
President Clinton in tatters. Palestinian Economy Minister Maher
al-Masri said Israel"s blockage on trade and workers had cost the
Palestinian economy about $10 million a day. As the clashes raged on,
Israel"s foreign ministry said acting Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami
would leave for Paris, London and Washington Monday to discuss
for ending violence and resuming stalled peace talks. It said Ben-Ami
would meet officials including French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine,
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and British Prime Minister Tony

        John Quinn
        PO Box 106
        Laytonville, Calif. 95454

horizontal rule

European Countries Banning the Use of Fluoride
document.write ( "E-mail to a friend" );E-mail to a friend
Because of health concerns, Belgium banned the sale of fluoride supplements to
prevent tooth decay, France removed sodium fluoride from the market for the
treatment of osteoporosis and Ireland plans to lower water fluoride levels.
And, because poor quality research has been carried out on fluoride and health,
British scientists called for more research into the health effects of adding
fluoride to drinking water in a report published by the Medical Research


Belgium banned fluoride supplements because excessive use of fluoride increases
the risk of osteoporosis, could damage the nervous system and, even Belgian
dentists agree, is ineffective when ingested.

"Belgian health minister at the time Magda Aelvoet said she was now pressing
for a Europe-wide ban, hinting that the removal of supplements was just the
first step towards removing the chemical from the food chain," according to the
article. Belgium's ban is a result of a report by the health ministry's
advisory body. The health ministry plans to present the review to the European
Commission this month in a bid to make Europe follow its lead, the article

According to "'We think we have very strong arguments for
the ban,' responded the ministry spokesman. 'And it is rather uncertain when
the list of supplements (the Directive) will come in. We have asked the council
of health to prepare a review of the existing scientific evidence to be
presented to the European Commission so we are presenting them with a solid
scientific basis for the ban to be brought into Europe...,' said Belgium's

According to "'We base our opposition to fluoride on the
fact that there is no positive impact from the supplements - brushing teeth
with fluoride toothpaste is sufficient and there is no reason to do anything
else. Fluoride should be applied topically to prevent caries, but should not be
swallowed, especially by children who are more vulnerable to it. Although there
is natural fluoride in tea and water, for example, we think that there are
significant differences between the natural chemical and the synthetic fluoride
used in dental products. And we have looked at a general review of the total
literature, rather than a single study - we all know studies can sometimes be
biased,' responded the health ministry spokesman,"

"He explained: '.... The position is very clear now, and it is supported by the
dentists in Belgium. People should not consume fluoride but instead use it
directly on teeth, such as when brushing with fluoride toothpaste. There may be
an issue for children under the age of six, who sometimes swallow toothpaste,
but we recommend that doses should be as low as possible,' according to the article."


France's health products' regulating agency suspended the sale of products
containing fluoride salts for the treatment of osteoporosis and was reported in
January 2002. The efficacy of fluoride to treat osteoporosis appeared
unfavorable compared to alternative treatments and it poses a risk of fluorosis
in the long run.

An Ireland Government-commissioned report advises that fluoride levels added to
water supplies be reduced and proposes further research into fluoridation,
according to The long-awaited report of the Forum on
Fluoridation is to be published on September 10 in Dublin.

The dose reduction is proposed because of the wider ingestion of fluoride today
from other sources - mainly by children and adults through regular use of
toothpaste, according to "A major High Court action is being
taken by medical campaigner, Dr. Andrew Rynne against the State on the issue of
fluoridation claiming that it is against the interests of public health due to
toxicity. Around three quarters of the population receive fluoridated water,
although some county councils have petitioned the government to be allowed not
to add fluoride to the water in their areas," reports

United Kingdom

Because poor quality research has been carried out on fluoride and health,
British scientists called for more research into the health effects of adding
fluoride to drinking water.

About five million people in Britain receive water with the fluoride content
artificially increased.. Another 1.5 million drink naturally fluoridated water.
It's unknown whether naturally and artificial fluoride react the same or
differently in the human body.

The Department of Health said it would study the absorption of fluoride, as the
council recommended.

Much of the current evidence on the benefits of fluoride comes from research
conducted several decades ago. A review conducted by York University, published
in September 2000, concluded that little high quality research had been carried
out on the broader question of fluoride and health. The British Government
commissioned the Medical Research Council to consider what further research in
this area might be required and what priorities should apply to inform public
health policy in this area in 2000.

The group concluded that if new studies show that the uptake of fluoride from
artificially fluoridated water is substantially higher than from naturally
fluoridated water, then it will be necessary to further investigate the long
term effects of fluoridation on hip fractures.

The group recommended an updated analysis of the data on fluoridation and
cancer rates and suggested that any new studies on the causes of bone cancer
could easily include an assessment of exposure to fluoride


Fluoride Linked to Low IQ, Studies Show

From Fluoride Action Network Monday, August 25, 2003


Children scored inferior IQ's even when fluoride levels were similar to that added to U.S. water supplies to prevent tooth decay(1).

"As the fluoride levels in drinking water increased, the IQ fell and the rates of mental retardation and borderline intelligence increased," write researchers Xiang, et al.

Tested were 512 children, aged 8-13 years from Wamiao, a high-fluoride village, and Xinhuai, a low-fluoride village. The high-fluoride village was divided into five subgroups by water fluoride levels, from 0.62 mg Fluoride per Liter to 4.38 mg F/L. As water fluoride levels increased within the high fluoride village, IQ decreased.

"When the data from the 512 children in the two villages were considered as a whole, a significant inverse correlation was found between IQ and the level of fluoride in urine," the researchers report. "These results are consistent with the findings recorded by Li at al.(3), Zhao et al.(4), and Lu et al.(5) of an inverse correlation between intelligence and dietary fluoride from either contaminated food or drinking water," they report.

Neither village experiences coal burning pollution nor do residents drink brick tea, two common fluoride sources in China. Children with brain disease or head injury history were excluded. Only water fluoride levels differed between the two rural, low-income villages situated in the same province (Jiangsu) and county. Neither blood lead levels(2) nor urinary iodine differed between the test groups. The authors also controlled for family income and parental education

Fluoride crosses the blood-brain barrier producing biochemical and functional impairment of the nervous system during the developmental periods of infancy and childhood, the authors report.

"...despite growing evidence of serious neurotoxicity for both fluoride and lead, U.S. safety standards for fluoride in water have been moving in the opposite direction to those for lead in blood. From a scientific standpoint, this is very difficult to understand or to justify," says organic chemist Albert Burgstahler, Ph.D., Editor, Fluoride(5a).

Chemistry Professor Paul Connett, Ph.D., presented (5b ) and explained these and other fluoride adverse-effect studies, published since 1993, to the National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council (NRC) panel studying "Toxicologic Risk of Fluoride in Drinking Water"(6) on 8/12/03. See power point presentation at . The NRC will recommend safe levels of fluoride in drinking water

"Two neurological studies are particularly important," says Connett. "In 1995 Mullenix and colleagues(7) discovered fluoride gets into the brain, contrary to former beliefs. Then Varner and his team, in 1998,(8) found that even 1 part per million fluoride, the amount purposely added to U.S. water supplies, facilitated uptake of aluminum into rats' brains causing amyloid deposits similar to Alzheimer's patients," says Connett.

The American Dental Association (ADA), a union that represents dentists' interests, told the NRC panel "... the ADA urges the subcommittee to support retaining the current (1993) regulations...Since that time, there has been no published scientific evidence that should change those conclusions," according to the ADA news.(9)

"Contrary to the ADA's assurances of fluoridation's safety, the ADA is disregarding new adverse fluoride studies," says Attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation. "The ADA can't be relied on by the media, legislators, health officials and the public about fluoride and fluoridation's safety or bodily effects," says Beeber.

Contact: Albert Burgstahler,,, Paul Connett,, Paul Beeber,,

References 1) "Effect of Fluoride in Drinking Water on Children's Intelligence," Fluoride, Xiang et al., May 2003

2) "Blood Lead of Children in Wamiao-Xinhuai Intelligence Study," letter Fluoride Xiang et al, August 2003

3) Li et al., "Effect of excessive fluoride intake on mental work capacity of children and preliminary study of its mechanism," J West China University of Medical Sciences 1994; 25:188-9

4) Zhao LB, et al., "Effect of a high fluoride water supply on children's intelligence, Fluoride 1996;29:190-2

5) Lu Y. et al., Fluoride Vol. 33 No. 2 74-78 2000 "Effect of High-Fluoride Water on Intelligence in Children"

5a) Editorial, Fluoride Vol. 35 No. 2 79-81 2003, by Albert W. Burgstahler, Editor

5b) Paul Connett's presentation to the NRC

6) Toxicologic Risk of Fluoride in Drinking Water

7) Mullenix, PJ, et al, "Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats," Neurotoxicity and Teratology, 1995;17:169-72

8) Varner JA, et al., "Chronic administration of aluminum-fluoride or sodium-fluoride to rats in drinking water: alterations in neuronal and cerebrovascular integrity," Brain Res. 1998 Feb

(9) ADA NEWS, "Association urges NAS review panel to support current EPA fluoride practices, by Craig Palmer, posted August 14, 2003 

Also See: Fluoride and the Brain

For more information, contact:

Paul Connett, PhD Co-Founder Fluoride Action Network

Web site:

The Absurdities Of Water Fluoridation
By Paul Connett, PhD

Water fluoridation is a peculiarly American phenomenon.
It started at a time when Asbestos lined our pipes, lead was
added to gasoline, PCBs filled our transformers and DDT
was deemed so "safe and effective" that officials felt no
qualms spraying kids in school classrooms and seated at
picnic tables. One by one all these chemicals have been
banned, but fluoridation remains untouched.
For over 50 years US government officials have confidently
and enthusiastically claimed that fluoridation is "safe and effective".
However, they are seldom prepared to defend the practice in
open public debate. Actually, there are so many arguments
against fluoridation that it can get overwhelming.
To simplify things it helps to separate the ethical from the scientific arguments.
For those for whom ethical concerns are paramount, the issue
of fluoridation is very simple to resolve. It is simply not ethical; we simply shouldn't be forcing medication on people without their "informed consent". The bad news, is that ethical arguments are not very influential in Washington, DC unless politicians
are very conscious of millions of people watching them. The
good news is that the ethical arguments are buttressed by solid common sense arguments and scientific studies which convincingly show that fluoridation is neither "safe and effective" nor necessary. I have summarized the arguments in several categories:
Fluoridation is UNETHICAL because:
1) It violates the individual's right to informed consent to medication.
2) The municipality cannot control the dose of the patient.
3) The municipality cannot track each individual's response.
4) It ignores the fact that some people are more vulnerable to fluoride's toxic effects than others. Some people will suffer while others may benefit.
5) It violates the Nuremberg code for human experimentation.
As stated by the recent recipient of the Nobel Prize for Medicine (2000), Dr. Arvid Carlsson:
"I am quite convinced that water fluoridation, in a not-too-distant future, will be consigned to medical history...Water fluoridation goes against leading principles of pharmacotherapy, which is progressing from a stereotyped medication - of the type 1 tablet
3 times a day - to a much more individualized therapy as regards both dosage and selection of drugs. The addition of drugs to the drinking water means exactly the opposite of an individualized therapy."
As stated by Dr. Peter Mansfield, a physician from the UK and advisory board member of the recent government review of fluoridation (McDonagh et al 2000):
"No physician in his right senses would prescribe for a person he has never met, whose medical history he does not know, a substance which is intended to create bodily change, with the advice: 'Take as much as you like, but you will take it for the rest of your life because some children suffer from tooth decay. ' It is a preposterous notion."
Fluoridation is UNNECESSARY because:
1) Children can have perfectly good teeth without being exposed to fluoride.
2) The promoters (CDC, 1999, 2001) admit that the benefits are topical not systemic, so fluoridated toothpaste, which is universally available, is a more rational approach to delivering fluoride to the target organ (teeth) while minimizing exposure to the rest of the body.
3) The vast majority of western Europe has rejected water fluoridation, but has been equally successful as the US, if not more so, in tackling tooth decay.
4) If fluoride was necessary for strong teeth one would expect to find it in breast milk, but the level there is 0.01 ppm , which is 100 times LESS than in fluoridated tap water (IOM, 1997).
5) Children in non-fluoridated communities are already getting the so-called "optimal" doses from other sources (Heller et al, 1997). In fact, many are already being over-exposed to fluoride.
Fluoridation is INEFFECTIVE because:
1) Major dental researchers concede that fluoride's benefits are topical not systemic (Fejerskov 1981; Carlos 1983; CDC 1999, 2001; Limeback 1999; Locker 1999; Featherstone 2000).
2) Major dental researchers also concede that fluoride is ineffective at preventing pit and fissure tooth decay, which is 85% of the tooth decay experienced by children (JADA 1984; Gray 1987; White 1993; Pinkham 1999).
3) Several studies indicate that dental decay is coming down just as fast, if not faster, in non-fluoridated industrialized countries as fluoridated ones (Diesendorf, 1986; Colquhoun, 1994; World Health Organization, Online).
4) The largest survey conducted in the US showed only a minute difference in tooth decay between children who had lived all their lives in fluoridated compared to non-fluoridated communities. The difference was not clinically significant nor shown to be statistically significant (Brunelle & Carlos, 1990).
5) The worst tooth decay in the United States occurs in the poor neighborhoods of our largest cities, the vast majority of which have been fluoridated for decades.
6) When fluoridation has been halted in communities in Finland, former East Germany, Cuba and Canada, tooth decay did not go up but continued to go down (Maupome et al, 2001; Kunzel and Fischer, 1997, 2000; Kunzel et al, 2000 and Seppa et al, 2000).
Fluoridation is UNSAFE because:
1) It accumulates in our bones and makes them more brittle and prone to fracture. The weight of evidence from animal studies, clinical studies and epidemiological studies on this is overwhelming. Lifetime exposure to fluoride will contribute to higher rates of hip fracture in the elderly. (See studies)
2) It accumulates in our pineal gland, possibly lowering the production of melatonin a very important regulatory hormone (Luke, 1997, 2001).
3) It damages the enamel (dental fluorosis) of a high percentage of children. Between 30 and 50% of children have dental fluorosis on at least two teeth in optimally fluoridated communities (Heller et al, 1997 and McDonagh et al, 2000).
4) There are serious, but yet unproven, concerns about a connection between fluoridation and osteosarcoma in young men (Cohn, 1992), as well as fluoridation and the current epidemics of both arthritis and hypothyroidism.
5) In animal studies, fluoride at 1 ppm in drinking water increases the uptake of aluminum into the brain (Varner et al, 1998).
6) Counties with 3 ppm or more of fluoride in their water have lower fertility rates (Freni, 1994).
7) In human studies the fluoridating agents most commonly used in the US not only increase the uptake of lead into children's blood (Masters and Coplan, 1999, 2000) but are also associated with an increase in violent behavior.
8) The margin of safety between the so-called therapeutic benefit of reducing dental decay and many of these end points is either nonexistent or precariously low.
Fluoridation is INEQUITABLE, because:
1) It will go to all households, and the poor cannot afford to
avoid it, if they want to, because they will not be able to purchase bottled water or expensive removal equipment.
2) The poor are more likely to suffer poor nutrition which is known to make children more vulnerable to fluoride's toxic effects (Massler & Schour 1952; Marier & Rose 1977; ATSDR 1993; Teotia et al, 1998).
3) Very rarely, if ever, do governments offer to pay the costs of those who are unfortunate enough to get dental fluorosis severe enough to require expensive treatment.
Fluoridation is INEFFICIENT and NOT COST-EFFECTIVE because:
1) Only a small fraction of the water fluoridated actually reaches the target. Most of it ends up being used to wash the dishes, to flush the toilet or to water our lawns and gardens.
2) It would be totally cost-prohibitive to use pharmaceutical
grade sodium fluoride (the substance which has been tested) as a fluoridating agent for the public water supply. Water fluoridation is artificially cheap because, unknown to most people, the fluoridating agent is an unpurified hazardous waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry.
3) If it was deemed appropriate to swallow fluoride (even though its major benefits are topical not systemic) a safer and more cost-effective approach would be to provide fluoridated bottle water in supermarkets free of charge. This approach would allow both the quality and the dose to be controlled. Moreover, it would not force it on people who don't want it.
Fluoridation is UNSCIENTIFICALLY PROMOTED. For example:
1) In 1950, the US Public Health Service enthusiastically endorsed fluoridation before one single trial had been completed.
2) Even though we are getting many more sources of fluoride today than we were in 1945, the so called "optimal concentration" of 1 ppm has remained unchanged.
3) The US Public health Service has never felt obliged to monitor the fluoride levels in our bones even though they have known for years that 50% of the fluoride we swallow each day accumulates there.
4) Officials that promote fluoridation never check to see what the levels of dental fluorosis are in the communities before they fluoridate, even though they know that this level indicates whether children are being overdosed or not.
5) No US agency has yet to respond to Luke's finding that fluoride accumulates in the human pineal gland, even though her finding was published in 1994 (abstract), 1997 (Ph. D. thesis), 1998 (paper presented at conference of the International Society for Fluoride Research), and 2001 (published in Caries Research).
6) The CDC's 1999, 2001 reports advocating fluoridation were both six years out of date in the research they cited on health concerns.
The proponents of water fluoridation refuse to defend this practice in open debate because they know that they would
lose that debate. A vast majority of the health officials around
the US and in other countries who promote water fluoridation
do so based upon someone else's advice and not based upon
a first hand familiarity with the scientific literature. This second hand information produces second rate confidence when they
are challenged to defend their position. Their position has more
to do with faith than it does with reason.
Those who pull the strings of these public health 'puppets', do know the issues, and are cynically playing for time and hoping
that they can continue to fool people with the recitation of a
long list of "authorities" which support fluoridation instead of engaging the key issues. As Brian Martin made clear in his book Scientific Knowledge in Controversy: The Social Dynamics of
the Fluoridation Debate (1991), the promotion of fluoridation
is based upon the exercise of political power not on rational analysis. The question to answer, therefore, is:
"Why is the US Public Health Service choosing to exercise its power in this way?"
Motivations - especially those which have operated over several generations of decision makers - are always difficult to ascertain. However, whether intended or not, fluoridation has served to distract us from several key issues. It has distracted us from:
a) The failure of one of the richest countries in the world to provide decent dental care for poor people.
b) The failure of 80% of American dentists to treat children on Medicaid.
c) The failure of the public health community to fight the huge over consumption of sugary foods by our nation's children, even to the point of turning a blind eye to the wholesale introduction
of soft drink machines into our schools. Their attitude seems to
 be if fluoride can stop dental decay why bother controlling sugar intake.
d) The failure to adequately address the health and ecological effects of fluoride pollution from large industry. Despite the damage which fluoride pollution has caused, and is still causing, few environmentalists have ever conceived of fluoride as a 'pollutant.'
e) The failure of the US EPA to develop a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for fluoride in water which can be scientifically defended.
f) The fact that more and more organofluorine compounds are being introduced into commerce in the form of plastics, pharmaceuticals and pesticides. Despite the fact that some of
these compounds pose just as much a threat to our health and environment as their chlorinated and brominated counterparts
(i.e. they are highly persistent and fat soluble and many accumulate in the food chains and our body fat), those organizations and agencies which have acted to limit the
wide-scale dissemination of these other halogenated products, seem to have a blind spot for the dangers posed by organofluorine compounds.
So, while fluoridation is neither effective nor safe, it continues
to provide a convenient cover for many of the interests which stand to profit from the public being misinformed about fluoride.
Unfortunately, because government officials have put so much
of their credibility on the line defending fluoridation, it will be very difficult for them to speak honestly and openly about the issue. As with the case of mercury amalgams, it is difficult for institutions such as the American Dental Association to concede health risks because of the liabilities waiting in the wings if they were to do so.
However, difficult as it may be, it is nonetheless essential - in order to protect millions of people from unnecessary harm - that the US Government begin to move away from its anachronistic, and increasingly absurd, status quo on this issue. There are precedents. They were able to do this with hormone replacement therapy.
But getting any honest action out of the US Government on this
is going to be difficult. Effecting change is like driving a nail through wood - science can sharpen the nail but we need the weight of public opinion to drive it home. Thus, it is going to require a sustained effort to educate the American people and
then recruiting their help to put sustained pressure on our
political representatives. At the very least we need a moratorium on fluoridation (which simply means turning off the tap for a few months) until there has been a full Congressional hearing on the key issues with testimony offered by scientists on both sides.
With the issue of education we are in better shape than ever before. Most of the key studies are available on the internet and there are videotaped interviews with many of the scientists and protagonists whose work has been so important to a modern re-evaluation of this issue.
With this new information, more and more communities are rejecting new fluoridation proposals at the local level. On the national level, there have been some hopeful developments as well, such as the EPA Headquarters Union coming out against fluoridation and the Sierra Club seeking to have the issue re-examined. However, there is still a huge need for other national groups to get involved in order to make this the national issue it desperately needs to be.
I hope that if there are RFW readers who disagree with me on
this, they will rebut these arguments. If they can't than I hope they will get off the fence and help end one of the silliest policies ever inflicted on the citizens of the US. It is time to end this folly of water fluoridation without further delay. It is not going to be easy.
Fluoridation represents a very powerful "belief system" backed
up by special interests and by entrenched governmental power and influence.
Paul Connett.
All references cited can be found at




jewn McCain

ASSASSIN of JFK, Patton, many other Whites

killed 264 MILLION Christians in WWII

killed 64 million Christians in Russia

holocaust denier extraordinaire--denying the Armenian holocaust

millions dead in the Middle East

tens of millions of dead Christians

LOST $1.2 TRILLION in Pentagon
spearheaded torture & sodomy of all non-jews
millions dead in Iraq

42 dead, mass murderer Goldman LOVED by jews

serial killer of 13 Christians

the REAL terrorists--not a single one is an Arab

serial killers are all jews

framed Christians for anti-semitism, got caught
left 350 firemen behind to die in WTC

legally insane debarred lawyer CENSORED free speech

mother of all fnazis, certified mentally ill

10,000 Whites DEAD from one jew LIE

moser HATED by jews: he followed the law Jesus--from a "news" person!!

1000 fold the child of perdition


Hit Counter


Modified Saturday, March 11, 2017

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party