FLUORIDE -- The Modern Day DDT

20 September 1997

Table of Contents

History
Effects of Sodium Fluoride
Sources and Levels of Fluoride
Fluoridation in Australia
Conclusion
References

Back to Index


FLUORIDE -- The Modern Day DDT

This information is important because this substance may harm you

From a document about fluorides
Prepared by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry,
A subsidiary of the U.S. Public Health Service

History

DDT was once thought to be a wondrous substance. Troops were being sprayed from the air during World War II with it, The Australian government was advising the population to spray it onto window ledges to stop those nasty flies, just at the hight that a small child could reach. Old newsreels show trucks driving down the streets spraying it onto children and passers by. With the power of hindsight, these actions were, to say the least, moronic. DDT has now been found to be a VERY hazardous substance, and in turn has been banned from use or its use restricted.

Fluoride is still thought of by the mainstream, TV dulled population to be a non-hazardous, helpful substance. For far to long the mass medication of the population by the fluoridation of drinking water has been a thing which just is, a thing that a lot of people think every government in the world does for its people. In reality, 96% of the world's population does not have fluoridated water. The remaining 4% of the world's population who have fluoridated are in America (currently 62% fluoridated), 10% of England, Australia, New Zealand and Europe (currently only 2% [2]). There are many countries that once had fluoridated water supplies, but have since stopped, in most cases because the toxicity of the substance has come to light [1].

The Beginning of Fluoridation 1940: Both Germany and The Soviet Union added sodium fluoride to the drinking water in their Prisoner Of War (POW) camps. A Belgian gentleman called Joris who was active during the war in shipping sodium fluoride to the Soviet Union told a fluoride researcher, Dr. Hans Moolenburgh, that they [the `Soviets'] said it kept the Germans calm. [2 + 3]

1945, The end of World War II: The United States Government immediately sends a chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology research worker by the name of Charles E. Perkins to Germany (with an entourage of staff) to take charge of the I.G. Farben Chemical plants. During his time there, Mr Perkins learned of a scheme developed by German chemists during the war, and adopted by the German General staff, to medicate the populations of the occupied countries by introducing sodium fluoride to the drinking water. The German chemists had discovered that fluoride slightly damages the Hippocampus. This caused, over time with repeated dosages, the effected person to become more submissive. On a larger scale, making the populations of fluoridated areas easily governable and less likely to defend their freedom. [4 + 5]

1945, Shortly after World War II: The Grand Rapids Study, U.S. Experimental fluoridation plants were established in selected areas, one of those being the City of Grand Rapids. A 10-year study was undertaken between the fluoridated city of Grand Rapids and a non-fluoridated control city. After 5 years, it was found that the population of the control city had better teeth than that of Grand rapids. The Control City was quickly fluoridated to stop any further comparison. [1]

1945 + Onwards, during The Presidency of Harry S. Truman: Oscar Ewing, who was the legal counsel to ALCOA aluminium, was appointed director of Social security, in charge of the U.S. Public Health System (P.H.S.). Soon after this, Mr. Ewing was appointed to President Truman's cabinet. Mr. Ewing committed the P.H.S. to the promotion of (read: creating propaganda about) fluoride. [4]

It is very interesting also to note that not only was fluoridation being pushed publicly by a man who had obvious links to Alcoa Aluminium, but behind the scenes fluoridation was being pushed along by the aluminium smelting industry in America (Alcoa, Alcan and others) [1+ 2]

As we delve deeper into the fluoridation issue, it will become apparent why it is so suspect that a major aluminium manufacturer was linked to fluoridation in America and why the events surrounding its insertion correlate in such a disturbing way.

Why Fluoride Isn't a Pair Of Rose Coloured Glasses

Fluoride has a cumulative effect [8]. A lot of the proponents of water fluoridation will say that at the recommended levels, fluoride does not cause any side effects, which may be the case for a singular isolated dose. (The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has set a maximum at 4mg/L of drinking water or 4ppm [Parts Per Million] and recommends that fluoridation of drinking water be limited to 2mg/L, or 2ppm)[9]

What we are talking about here however is continuous repetitions of dosage, each time you have a glass of water, or ingest any other substance that contains fluoride. Fluorides accumulate in the bones and in the brain (as discussed earlier with the hippocampus) [1+7]. As people get older, their kidney efficiency decreases, causing fluoride to be stored more and more in the body, in effect making the cumulative nature of fluorides increasingly dangerous as people age [1]. Fluoride is not biodegradable and as such it accumulates in the biosphere, resulting in a continual increase of fluoride levels [7].

There is no verifiable proof that fluoride stops tooth decay [1]. There has been absolutely no correlation found between the level of fluoride in drinking water, and the reduction of tooth decay [10]. Inversely, a study involving 26 000 primary school students done during 1992 in Tuscan, Arizona in the US found that the more fluoride a child consumes, the more cavities appear [5]. The study was headed by Professor Emeritus Cornelius Steelink, and was conducted by the University of Arizona [5]. On the home front, Australia's own governmental figures show that children's teeth in Brisbane (currently non-fluoridated) are BETTER than children in the fluoridated cities of Melbourne, Perth and Adelaide [1]

Dental fluorosis appears as mottled opaque white spots or stained enamel on the teeth and is the first sign of fluoride poisoning [2]. According to the U.S. Public Health Service [P.H.S.] high fluoride exposure can cause dental fluorosis [9], but then, the National Research Council (US) has found that in America, fluorosis effects 8% to 51% of children growing up in areas in which water supplies contain only 1ppm of fluoride [7]. It seems that what the U.S. P.H.S. would like people to believe is a high fluoride exposure is in reality the dosage that their government sets.

In Melbourne, varying levels of dental fluorosis effect at least half the children [1]. In what is hopefully the first in a long line of compensation cases involving fluorosis, in Essex, England the parents of a 10 year old boy, who was diagnosed with Dental Fluorosis, were given a good will payment of 1000 pounds from Colgate-Palmolive after the mother phoned the company. This case is directly related to fluoride toothpaste as the area the family lives in does not have fluoridated water and the mother never used fluoride tablets [2]. Already, more than 200 parents in England are attempting to sue toothpaste manufacturers [2].

Fluoride brittles and structurally effects bones by attacking calcium [1]. In high doses, fluoride causes the mass of the bones to increase, while it decreases the strength [1]. This coupled with joint pain and limited join movement is sometimes referred to as skeletal fluorosis [9] At the recommended level (1ppm), fluoride thins and brittles the bones [1] and it doubles the number of hip fractures in older men and women in fluoridated communities [10]. Increases in hip fractures are found at even 1/10th the recommended level [7].

The occurrence of cancer has increased by 5% in fluoridated communities [7].The U.S. National Cancer Institute Toxicological program found fluoride to be an equivocal carcinogen [10]. The New Jersey Health Department did further studies and found that cases of osteosarcoma (cancer of the bone) increased dramatically by 6.9 fold in men 20 years old or younger in fluoridated communities [3+10].

Fluoride settles in the brain where it causes listlessess, drowsiness and confusion.[2]. The net result of this, and the reason why Nazi Germany so liked the idea, is that it turns the person into a virtual couch potato, not caring too much about anything and less likely to resist authority. Fluoride is known to be able to numb tooth pain [6]. When it gets into the blood stream, either by ingestion or entering the gums via toothpaste or mouth rinses, it then moves its way to the brain where it settles. Could it be that this numbing effect also happens to the brain? [6] (In scientific terms, fluoride blocks acetylcholine. When in the brain it could do the same by interfering with acetylcholine neuron communication [6]) In recently declassified documents brought to light on October 24th, 1996, Scientists in America have known about the mental side effects of fluoride since 1944 [2]. In Australia, parliamentarian Mr. Harley Dickenson raised the issue in the Victorian Legislative council, which is recorded in the official Hansard report on August 12th, 1987 [4].

Fluoride increases the infant mortality rate. Chile abolished fluoridation in 1976 after Professor Albert Shaltz showed that infant mortality rates had significantly increased in fluoridated areas [4].

Fluoride adversely effects the fertility rates in most species of animals including humans [10]. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (F.D.A.) reported a very close correlation between increasing infertility in women aged 10 to 49 and increasing fluoride levels [10]. Even Americas own Public Health Service stated We don't know the effects of fluoride on reproduction or developing foetuses [9]. Again, we see governmental bureaucracy at it's finest, the F.D.A. says fluoride is lowering fertility rates, then the health service says I dunno…, the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.

It seems that the army has found a use for fluoride as well. The Australian Journal of Public Administration reported in Vol. 38, No.3 in 1978 reported that Puckapunyal army camp had been fluoridated since 1972 Under directions of the Commonwealth Government. Another army camp at Bandiana has a fluoridated water supply, although it draws its water from the non-fluoridated Wodonga [4]. These are only a few examples; most of the main bases in the U.S. and Australia are supplied with fluoridated drinking water [4]. This is interesting when one takes into consideration the dociling effect of fluoride, and how much this would help when training/brainwashing new recruits.

Uncontrolled dosages. Exact measurements and dosages closely control the administration of other drugs. To administer fluoride however, governments put it into the water and allow people to take as much as they want. It is a dosage measured by thirst. [1]

Apart from fluorosis, fluoride adversely effects children in other ways. Fluoride ingestion in children is extremely hazardous to biological development and lifespan [6]. It can also have a deleterious effect on bone growth [7]. Professor Carlson, professor of pharmacology at the University of Sweden, stopped fluoridation in Sweden after he showed that the learning capabilities of children were effected and the I.Q. levels of children were much lower in fluoridated areas [1].

Sources and Levels of Fluoride

The fluroides that occur in nature are at low levels. This fluoride is taken up into plants and stored. When superphosphate is applied to edible plants (fluoride levels are about 3% in superphosphate), these levels increase dramatically. Celery has a high fluoride content because high levels of superphosphate are used during its growth. Tea also has naturally occurring high levels of fluoride [1].

However, these levels are always on the increase. Fluoride accumulates in the environment, it doesn't biodegrade, and levels are now on the increase in the food chain. The more we put in, the higher the levels get. People who support fluoridation seem to think that they have a watertight argument when they say that 1ppm in the drinking water doesn't hurt you. This may be true if it was only one dose, they seem to neglect the fact that we ingest fluoride everyday in our diet, which adds up over time. Grape Juice for example may have up to 6.8ppm of fluoride [7]. Store bought juices can contain up to 2.8ppm. In total, exposure to dietary fluoride can easily exceed 100ppm [8].

The fluoride that is put into drinking water, the fluoride your dentist smears you teeth with, the tablets kids are forced to eat and the fluoride put into salt (salt fluoridation occurs in Mexico and 6 other parts of the world [5]) all contain manufactured fluoride. This fluoride comes from the aluminium industries and also the superphosphate industries as a waste product [1]. Because of the toxicity of fluoride, these industries are not allowed to dump the fluoride into the environment [1].

The main sources and levels (in Parts Per Million) of manufactured fluoride are given below:

Fluoridated Drinking WaterDental FluorideFluoride ToothpasteMouth Rinses
1 ppm
20 000ppm [1]
500ppm -1500ppm [1+8]
230ppm – 900ppm [8]

Anaesthetics used in hospitals are mostly fluoride based [1] Any beverage or food which contains water from fluoridated areas will also contain fluorides (ie. beers, soft drinks, tinned soups etc.)[7]. Distilled water doesn't contain fluoride, however filtered water usually does (depending on the source) [6]. The only way to successfully remove fluoride from water is to use a reverse osmosis filter [11].

Fluoridation in Australia

Discussions about fluoridating water supplies in Sydney, Canberra and Hobart began in the 1960's. Beaconsville just outside Hobart was the first area in Australia to be fluoridated. Hobart followed soon after. [1]

Currently every major city in Australia except Brisbane is fluoridated. All up, 86% of Australia's population drinks fluoridated water. Tasmania has one of the most intensive fluoridation schemes, with 48 fluoridation plants for + a million people in comparison to Melbourne's 6 plants for 4 million people. The fluoride for the Melbourne metro area comes from China (as does the fluoride for some other areas in Australia), costing us AU$500 per Tonne. It's fairly ironic that we pay for another countries industrial waste to put into our water supples. China doesn't fluoridate it's own water supplies. [1]

In Victoria, at the end of the parliamentary session in 1994, the Victorian government passed a new fluoride act that altered the constitution of Victoria (a state can alter it's own constitution, federal parliament can't) prohibiting the Supreme Court of Victoria from hearing any cases against fluoride. This means that no case against fluoride will ever make it to the High Court of Victoria because it would have to go through the Supreme Court first. No newspapers, TV or radio reported any of this. [1]

In Tasmania during 1995, the state governments Lower House put a bill through that would prohibit public meetings and groups of people gathered and talking about fluoridation. When it got to the upper house, they knocked it back and pretended nothing ever happened as it had caused a bit of a panic throughout the Tasmanian government. In the words of Glen Walker (see references) Why would they go to these extremes if it's safe? [1]

Brisbane is one of the only major cities in Australia that doesn't have a fluoridated water supply, yet [11]. On Thursday 30th of January 1997, the Brisbane city council announced it would set up a committee to decide if Brisbane's water supply was to be fluoridated. This announcement was made after Liberal candidate Cr. Bob Mills announced earlier that week that if the Liberal party won the local government elections that were held on March 15th, they were going to fluoridate Brisbane's water. Suffice to say that Mr Mills didn't win, but the committee still exists.

It is very strange that electioneering on the fluoridation of Brisbane's water supply instantly turned into a committee which was going to come up with a one-and-for-all yes or no answer. Soon after the announcement of the committee was made, the local council called for public opinion on the subject by placing a singular advertisement in The Courier Mail. At the date of this writing (Saturday, March 29, 1997) not a word has been heard from the committee. It seems as though the committee has been stacked so that the decision will be for fluoridation. The committee is going to include representatives from The Australian Dental Association (everybody should know their point of view, and anyone who saw the TV propaganda stirred up from this will defiantly know their point of view), The Australian Medical Association (tending towards fluoridation), Natural Health Practitioners and parent groups (who would have jumped on the fluoridation bandwagon after seeing TV the propaganda turn fluoride into a god-send). It's strange how a local council can get what they want by stacking committees. The final nail in the coffin is that Mr Mills himself will be asked to be deputy chair for the committee. [11]

Under The Thin Yellow Veil of Fluorine Gas

But why would our wonderful governments be doing something like this that is so bad for the people? The more fluoride they pump into us, the more docile we become and easier we are to control, as if TV wasn't enough. A low birth rate means fewer people that governments have to control. The more cancer they can create means that people die younger stopping all these old people from clogging up the system and draining resources, why do you think smoking hasn't been banned? (Apart from the money it generates in taxes). Conspiracy theories aside, one of the main reasons is money. Whole empires have been built upon fluoridation, people are getting very rich off of it and their money will make sure that they stay where they are [1]. The only way it will ever be stopped is if the truth gets out to the larger population. The one power that Governments still fear is that which lies in the people.

They are still guilty, and can be found guilty of poisoning the community

Glen Walker

References:

(Please note: Original articles contain full referencing)

  1. Taped interview done with Glen Walker on 12.8.96. for 4ZzZfm 102.1 in Brisbane. Glen is the Chairperson for the Freedom From Fluoridation Federation of Australia. Ph: 03-95925444 Fax: 03-95925088

  2. Search Net's mailing list (email)from the Santiago Business Wire Nov. 29, 1996. Original email titled Fluoride and IQ's. Original sender may be contacted by email at: rlawler@dfw.net

  3. Search Net's mailing list (email). Part 2 of article described in reference # 8

  4. Original article titled Fluroides and Population Behaviour Modification in Literature and Government.. Original sender was Steve Wingate, who can be contacted by email at steve@linex.com Original posting date was: Sunday 28th of July 1996.

  5. Search Net's mailing list (email). Part 3 of article described in reference # 8

  6. Original article titled The Biological Effects of Fluorides. Original sender was Steve Wingate who can be contacted by email at: steve@linex.com Original posting date was: 4th of August 1995.

  7. Extracted from the World Wide Web Site: htttp://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/fluoride/blunder1.htm Original article was titled Blunder. Date of extraction was March 10th, 1997

  8. Original article titled Behavioural Effects of Fluorides on Mass Populations. Author: Valdamar Valerian. Written: July 20th 1996. Extracted from the World Wide Web site of Leading Edge International Research Group at: http://www.cco.net/~trufax/ . Part 1 of article, parts 2 and 3 are references #3 and #5

  9. Original article titled Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluoride, and Fluorine. Extracted from the World Wide Web site of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Original date: April 1993. Further contact: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Division of Toxicology, 1600 Clifton Rd NE, Mailstop e-29, Atlanta, GA 30333.

  10. Extracted from the World Wide Web Site: http://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/fluoride/blunder1.htm Original article was titled Adverse Health Effects Linked to Fluoride. Originally posted by Search Net's mailing list (email).

  11. The Courier mail, January 31st 1997, page 4. Article titled Soorley sets up fluoride inquiry

Document info:

Written By: BELGRAVE zarkon Finished On: Sunday, March 30, 1997 Word Count Before References: 2989 (not including this) Word Count After References: 3333

Back to Index