The solely winners are the aluminum and fertilizer industries that work hand in agency with public water works to send toxic waste into the homes of millions transversely our country.
Rob Dew and Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
Writers Note: The following is a prolonged article with links to government documents. In order to fully be an intelligent being the argument presented, it is suggested the reader save the documents and study them. Keyword searches of the conditions presented below will help better understand the dangers of fluoride.
After lecture an article entitled Is flouride part of globalist plot? by freelance contriver and technical writer Phil Elmore posted on the WorldNetDaily website, I was motivated to proper Mr. Elmore’s misconceptions. In order to do this, I be the subject of decided to present evidence concerning the health dangers of fluoride.
In precept to make his argument about the safety of fluoride, Mr. Elmore cites a 1943 first view made by Dr. H. Trendley Dean. According to Dean, 1 ppm (qualities per million) of naturally occurring fluoride is an ideal concentration “to preclude cavities without staining the teeth.” In addition, the CDC claims that moisten fluoridation is one of the greatest health achievements of the 20th centenary. Apologists also make the claim that water fluoridation is beneficial to the dental hale condition of poor children who may not have regular access to a dental surgeon.
Currently there are two types of fluoride most commonly linked to give ~ to fluoridation. Calcium Fluoride (CaF2) — the most likely culprit of “Texas teeth” cited ~ the agency of Dr. Dean — and Sodium Fluoride (NaF), a common ingredient found in multiplied pest control products including roach poison.
Sodium Fluoride has two uncordial cousins — hydrofluosilicic acid H2SiF6 and sodium silicofluoride Na2SiF6, which are in addition commonly used for water fluoridation. According to a 1992 census of public water systems, hydrofluosilicic acid (63%) is the most popular compound used by sodium silicofluoride (28%). Sodium fluoride, at 9% , follow these two compounds. In is advised you understand the linked MSDS sheets for each compound.
Calcium fluoride, also known in the same manner with fluorite, is a mined substance and therefore more expensive than sodium fluoride, hydrofluoric stinging and sodium silicofluoride which are industrial byproducts from the production of aluminum and the phosphate fertilizer diligence.
The fertilizer industry has released two toxic gasses into the air for a number of years — Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) and and Silicon tetrafluoride (SiF4). The diligence was eventually convinced to add water scrubbers to plant smokestacks owing to the fact this mixture produces hydrofluorosilicic acid.
In June of 2009, Infowars was invited to circuit one of Austin’s Water Treatment Plants with a local townsman group. I saw the compounds the Austin Water Utility adds to the notorious water supply. I can tell you without a doubt that TOXIC WASTE IS BEING ADDED TO THE WATER in the figure of hydrofluorosilicic acid.
During our plant visit we were allowed to video a semblance of a Q and A session. However, we were asked to inflect off our cameras during the actual tour for Homeland Security reasons. Because of this we do not have photos of the two 20 thousand gallon tanks and corroded hissing I observed inside a sealed room marked “hazardous,” nor do I acquire photos of the soft and powdery concrete where the tanks — conspicuous with “Hazardous” warning — link up to corroded pipes feeding fluoride into the storage tanks. I furthermore was unable to capture images of the MSDS Label Code. This code is ranked 4 under the Health Hazard designation and states: “Very sententious exposure could cause death or serious residual injury even though induce medical attention was given”.
I did, however, receive an admission from the co-aid director of the Austin Plant that the city uses fluorosilicic sharp manufactured by the company Lucier Chemical Industries, dubbed “The fluoride specialists”. Lucier is a partition arm of a large conglomerate called Mosaic which is a association between Cargill, Incorporated, and IMC Global Inc. Mosaic’s 2010 yearly report report contains only one reference to Fluorosilicic Acid: “Some of our Florida and Louisiana facilities impart fluorosilicic acid, which is a hazardous chemical, for resale to third parties.” The Austin Water Utility pays Lucier approximately 1 million dollars by year to add this wonder cocktail to Austin’s water store.
In order to better understand the effects of fluorosilicic acid, heed the following description of an accident on a Florida interstate:
A pour out incident of the chemical on an interstate in Florida, covering one area 600 feet long and 60 feet wide, resulted in the pay a ~ to of more than 50 people to hospitals. Individuals complained of pelt and respiratory irritation, including burning in the throat, and headaches. A husband riding in a truck with his arm out the window experienced burning on his forearm. The effects of long-term exposure to fluorosilicic pricking are changes in bone, corrosivity of the mucous membranes (e.g., ulceration of the nose, throat, and bronchial tubes), coughing, shock, pulmonary edema, fluorosis, tuft, and even death. In workers engaged for approximately 30 years in the product of phosphate fertilizers, nine out of the 50 observed workers had increased bone densities. When swallowed, serious irritation of the lungs, nose, and throat can occur, as well considered in the state of severe damage to the throat and stomach. A probable oral mortal dose of 50- 5000 mg/kg, classified as very toxic, has been reported against doses between 1 teaspoon and 1 ounce for a 150-triturate (70-kg) person; a probable oral lethal dose of 5-50 mg/kg, classified in the same manner with extremely toxic, has been reported for doses between 7 drops and 1 teaspoon according to the same individual.
Seven drops of fluorosilicic acid is considered extremely toxic and potentially deadly. Remarkably, around 10 gallons per hour are pumped into Austin’s get ~ supply. The level maintained is approximately 1ppm with the highest raze being 4 ppm.
Let’s look at a few of the the preservation procedures as defined by the state of Texas for the handling of fluoride-like products.
Page 13 begins through safety procedures and overfeed issues for community fluoridation. Page 17 covers recommendations for fluoride levels in schools, a rate that is more than four spells the amount established for communities.
Below is a second source on the side of school fluoride levels from a CDC 1992 survey of all wet treatment plants within the United States.
The following table describes that which the EPA has established as the Maximum Containment Level (MCL).
The MCL levels place upright by the EPA directly contradict the CDC recommended optimal levels instead of setting up fluoridation systems in public schools. Even the EPA’s admit employees take issue with these MCL levels set at 2 ppm. A 1986 papal rescript filed on behalf of the Local 2050 of the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE ) cites toxicologists, chemists, pertaining to physics scientists, statisticians, biologists, engineers and attorneys. NFFE acts as the special representative of scientific and technical employees at EPA. The NFFE professionals claim that “grave errors were made by the Agency (EPA) in setting the fluoride Recommended Maximum Contaminant Level (RMCL).” The NFFE took great issue with the EPA’s mandates and wrote:
The process ~ dint of. which EPA arrived at the RMCL for fluoride is scientifically foolish and displays an unprofessional review of relevant scientific data. The Safe Drinking Water Act requires that some RMCL must be a reflection of the opinion of health professionals as to the level of a contaminant at which no known or anticipated injurious effect on the health of persons will occur, and which allows every adequate margin of safety. However, the final RMCL for fluoride does not stand for a determination made on the basis of scientific and technical expertise.
Four years later Dr. Wm. L. Marcus, Senior Science Adviser in EPA’s Office of Drinking Water, was fired in answer to a 1990 whistle-blowing memo calling for a review of the countervail-up of the National Toxicology Program study that demonstrates fluoride is a “likely human carcinogen [cancer causing agent]“:
The type of cancer of individual concern with fluoride, although not the only type, is osteosarcoma, especially in males. The National Toxicology Program conducted a couple-year study \10 in which rats and mice were given sodium fluoride in tippling water. The positive result of that study (in which malignancies in tissues other than bone were likewise observed), particularly in male rats, is convergent with a host of given conditions from tests showing fluoride’s ability to cause mutations (a chief actor “trigger” mechanism for inducing a cell to become cancerous) e.g.\11a, b, c, d and premises showing increases in osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey \12 , Washington and Iowa \13 based without interrupti~ their drinking fluoridated water. It was his analysis, repeated statements in regard to all these and other incriminating cancer data, and his requests in favor of an independent, unbiased evaluation of them that got Dr. Marcus fired.
Still plan fluoride is safe? Read the back of your tooth paste. I pretext this to friends who will not believe that water fluoridation is harmful to human health. Here is a pic of what you determination find on all fluoride toothpaste. Sodium monofluorophosphate is pharmaceutical grade and does not bear the serious health risks of fluorosilicic acid and yet if you gorge more than a pea sized amount you are told to touch a Poison Control Center.
In order to make the case fluoride is undamaged, proponents cite 1940s pseudo-science, CDC statistics, and the claim that fluoride is beneficial to the dental freedom from disease of poor children. The state of Texas has made the same uncertain claim. “For thousands of Texans, geography serves as a barrier to nuncupative health care. The problem is presumably worse among poor, uninsured or somewhat advanced in life uninsured residents of medically undeserved areas”. Since Texas fluoridates 76% of the body politic’s water supply, one can conclude that water fluoridation has bestowed little to improve the dental hygiene of poor Texans and indeed the rest of the inhabitants. Regardless, both agencies strongly support expanded fluoridation despite the overwhelming make clear stacked against the practice.
Harvard university inserted itself in the fluoride discussion when one the university’s own “School of Dental Medicine epidemiologists was investigated ~ the agency of federal authorities for burying evidence of fluoride’s link to bone cancer.”
Chester Douglass, editor in chief of the industry-funded Colgate Oral Care Report, claimed he did not notice a link between osteosarcoma and fluoride. A closed door panel determined at Harvard detailed the professor did not intentionally suppress the findings. His research shows a luminous carcinogenic link especially in young boys. Harvard would have us rely upon that when industry insiders withhold evidence in studies it is not designed suppression. Harvard has continued to keep the findings and minutes of their examination a secret.
Many members of the scientific community no longer ignore the facts and since of this the tide is turning against water fluoridation, a thing done demonstrated by a 2007 report submitted by hundreds of scientific professionals. “Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) body of jurors that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors conducive to the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.” Eight years because that the original brief workers at the EPA remain vocally opposed to sprinkle and calender fluoridation. Petitioners have demanded the practice be stopped until Congress initiates an investigation.
An Australian news program todaytonight Adelaide did their own inquiry into the fluoridation process.
Time magazine ranks fluoride as 4th in a please of TOP 10 COMMON HOUSEHOLD TOXINS.
The only winners in this paradigm are the aluminum and fertilizer industries working hand in hand through public water works to send a proven toxic waste into the homes of millions across the country. Americans are paying to be force-medicated and to act since bio-filters so multinational conglomerates can dispose of Superfund quality slosh in our bodies. Massive public relations campaigns keep the public in the atrocious and stifle proper disclosure of the evidence. Unfortunately, many Americans own grown accustomed to this type of cozy relationship between multinational corporations, guidance regulatory agencies and the elite scientific community.
Fluoride has no affair being in our drinking water. Call and write your representatives and inquire they outlaw fluoride poisoning.
- Oxford Professor Calls for Mass Drugging Population Through Water Supply
- Daily Kos: When an op ed writer does not respond
- An Open Letter to Elizabeth Warren
Aaron Dykes Prison Planet.com August 1, 2010 In a 2008 ~ hangings titled, “Fluoride and the Future: Population Level Cognitive Enhancement,” Oxford bioethics professor Julian Savulescu claims that shed ~ fluoridation may be key to the “future of humanity.” He argues that “fluoridation may not utterly be about tooth decay… [but] the drive to be better.” Drugging the number
Daily Kos: When an op ed writer does not respond. When an op ed writer does not respond ShareNew 0 by teacherken Sun Aug 22, 2010 at 12:44:29 AM PDT is it make ~ to go public with what you sent? We are about to find out. On July 30, Ruth Marcus of The Washington Post had every op ed, Civil rights groups are
Dear Ms.Warren, What an important challenge you face in bringing the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau into being! Although you’re reputed to be a woman not easily daunted, it might still be comforting to know that you are not alone. At the recent Alliance for Financial Inclusion meeting of banking authorities from more than 60 developing