|
Copy List
The Terror of Force-Fed Fluoridation
by Glen S.R. Walker
Today the world is engrossed in talking
"terrorism", a loosely used expression from the English language. The Oxford
Dictionary describes a Terrorist as:
"One who favours or uses "Terror"
-inspiring methods of governing, or coercing government or community."
"Terror - Extreme fear".
Many people throughout the world
consider Fluoridation fits exactly-into a category of "Terror" because
compulsory mass medication with an unproven safety chemical is "against the
swill of the people", and Democracy!
What can cause more health "Terror" than
being daily force-fed a poisonous fluoride waste pollutant junk, too toxic,
and too dangerous to leave in superphosphate, because of its human and farm
toxicity, but dispensed into all homes via the kitchen tap and the daily
poisonous fluoride dose unknown, uncontrolled and indeed uncontrollable?
The medical daily drugging of a population
with fluoride has a Government and A.M.A. approval for an unwanted
prescription dose, that is controlled only by each person's individual
thirst.
Some would say, that kind of
professional medical practice and claiming expertly qualified medical
knowledge, causes human "Terror" in those affected.
The following is real fluoride data,
showing exactly where your force-fed daily dose of fluoride originates, as a
waste poisonous by-product, a pollutant, collected in the exhaust of
fertiliser factories.
Superphosphate
Professor Tom O'Donnell, a world authority
on fluorine chemicals, stated, 5th April, 1982:
"That samples of superphosphate,
analysed at the Melbourne University, contained up to three per cent
(30,000 ppm F) of fluoride particles."
"Samples of
superphosphate ... contained up to 30,000 ppm of fluoride particles."
The Chief Chemist of Victoria Department of
Agriculture is reported as saying,
"Superphosphate sold in Victoria was
required to contain less than 25,000 ppm of fluoride. This level was set
up in 1975 in conjunction with industry, he said."
Professor O'Donnell is reported as
replying:
"I bet it was in consultation with
industry ... that is their dumping method (for fluoride)." (The Age
6th April, 1982.)
Compulsory fluoridation for Defence
Forces
Consider a second phase of unethical,
unlawful fluoridation promotion, protection by Australian Governments,
obviously to follow the U.S.A., the home of fluoridation and its strange
fluoridation progression programme based on the Domino System.
They use, add, force, in every possibility,
irrespective of scientific research into safety, or even common chemical
knowledge.
All U.S.A. Defence personnel, Army, Navy,
Air Force, must by Defence Law, drink only fluoridated water.
One of the strange World War II, U.S.
Defence actions was that immediately or just before troops landed in battle,
the Army Corps was there with the regulation Ice Cream production.
After 50 years, Ice Cream machines have
been superseded with Artificial Fluoridation Units or bulk fluoridated water
supplies for the troops.
The Australian Defence Law also requires
all Australians in Army camps, stations, ports and ships must have ONLY
fluoridated drinking water. Yet fluoridation has been claimed to benefit
only children during the growth of their teeth up to the age of 12 years.
This most strange pseudo-medical science,
used on adult Army, Navy, Air Force adults, prompted this author to question
the Minister of Defence in the Parliament through my representative.
The Minister for Defence, Mr K. Beazley,
answered my House of Representatives question (No. 851) on 24th March, 1988.
"Question 851.
Do Defence establishments in Australia
use fluoridated drinking water, if so, what are the scientific and medical
reasons for doing this?"
Mr Beazley - The answer to the
honourable member's question is as follows:
(1) Yes.
(2) The safety and efficacy of water
fluoridation are well established; there is voluminous literature
available to support the view. The scientific and dental reasons are
addressed and confirmed in one of the more recent publications supporting
water fluoridation; the "Report of the Working Party on Fluorides in the
Control of Dental Caries" ; adopted at the 100th session of the National
Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC) - November 1985."
The N.H. and M.R.C. publication provided
absolutely no scientific evidence of benefit to adult defence personnel
teeth.
Obviously not satisfied by the Minister's
unanswered question, I again questioned the compulsory use of fluoridated
drinking water under Defence Law.
In August 1987 I wrote to Mr K. Beazley,
re-elected Minister for Defence, complaining about no proper answer to the
scientific reason for fluoridating Defence drinking water for men and women.
On 17th September, 1987 I received a letter
from The Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Science and Personnel, signed
by The Hon. Ros Kelly, M.P.
Once again I was referred to the N.H. and
M.R.C., claiming the data I required was published in that N.H. and M.R.C.
Report. It was not.
However, all was not lost because the
letter from Defence Science and Personnel in expert fluoridation
pronouncement, included the following two paragraphs:
"In the Summary of Recommendations of
the statement, the Council (N.H.&M.R.C.) confirmed its previous
recommendations concerning the fluoridation of water as being a safe and
effective measure for the control of dental caries.
The statement does not confirm or
deny any benefit to the adult dentition from fluoridated water;
nevertheless, references cited within it state that fluoridated water at
the recommended level is not a hazard to health."
The first paragraph is a false statement
relative to my question. the N.H. and M.R.C. has never been able to show
scientific proof of fluoridation safety.
Confirmation of this was published in
Australian Fluoridation News, Vol. 34, No 6, Nov-Dec 1998.
For no scientific,
medical or dental reason, they force-feed all Australian Defence personnel
with fluoridated water.
The second paragraph contradicts the first
statement but more seriously admits fluoridation has no proven benefits
for adults, their claims are without any scientific evidence or proof of
safety.
Therefore, for no scientific, medical or
dental reason, they will force-feed all Australian Defence personnel with
fluoridated water. Terror for those involved.
Advance Australia Fair
The question is asked, where does all this
waste by-product fluoride pollutant poison chemical policy originate?
There is no proof of either claim by the
Minister for Defence. Fluoridation has no proven benefit for adults and
world-wide there is no published scientific evidence of safety by usual
medical, scientific procedure.
The Victorian Government Hansard, 24th
October 1963 published a statement by the President of the United States.
John F. Kennedy is quoted in this statement:
"In his message to the Consumers'
Protection and Interest Programme, he said that that esteemed gentleman
placed very strong emphasis on the right to be informed of, and to be
protected against, fraudulent, deceitful, or grossly misleading
information, advertising, labelling, or other practices, and to be given
the facts one needs in order to make an informed choice. He also went on
to say there should be the right to choose, and the right to be heard and
to be assured that consumer interests would receive full and sympathetic
consideration in the formulation of Government policy, and fair and
expeditious treatment in its administrative tribunals."
That sounds like REAL DEMOCRACY.
Where, why and how did it get lost?
Does U.S. Fluoridation forced onto
communities follow the above President's statement?
Could it not be reasoned that Governments
using taxpayers' money to actually fight the "will" of the population (the
taxpayer) who do not want fluoride polluted drinking water, is a means of
"Terror Action" against the people? A sample of Government against the
people, using the people's money (taxes) to Terrorise them accordingly?
Fluoridation is the American Dream, but the
people are awake to its fraudulent basis, its origin and Governments
draconian and totalitarian political action contrary to the Constitution.
Is this not Dictatorship in claimed
democratic countries supposedly free of "Terror"?
The Overview of Fluoride in Water by
United Nations' International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), 2001
"THE FACT THAT AN ADULT MAY SHOW NO
SIGNS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT HIS OR HER
FLUORIDE INTAKE IS WITHIN THE SAFETY LIMIT.
CHRONIC INTAKE OF EXCESSIVE FLUORIDE
CAN LEAD TO THE SEVERE AND PERMANENT BONE AND JOINT DEFORMATIONS OF
SKELETAL FLUOROSIS."
"Early symptoms include sporadic pain
and stiffness of joints; head-ache, stomach-ache and muscle weakness can
also be warning signs. The next stage is osteosclerosis (hardening and
calcifying of the bones), and finally the spine, major joints, muscles and
nervous system are damaged"
Consider that you are forced each day to-
drink a poisonous fluoride fertilise waste pollutant Sodium Silicofluoride
that your politicians boast of its proven safety.
"Silicofluorides and Higher Blood Levels
Recently the Assistant Administrator of
the U.S. E.PA. admitted to Congress that his agency had no data on SiF
toxicity and the Chief of the Treatment Technology Evaluation Branch at the
National Risk Management Research Laboratory confirmed that the E.PA. has -'no
data on the health and behavioural effects of fluorosilicic acid'."
"Pharmaceutical grade fluoride compounds
are not appropriate for water fluoridation, they are used in the formulation
of prescription drugs. (The
Manufacture of the Fluoride Chemicals, Centre for Disease Control (CDC)
Statement, 2000)."
The U.S. F.D.A. have
never had an application to prove and register the safety of fluoride
tablets, even though they have been prescribed for over 50 years.
After 50 years of "Public Terror" related
to forced daily ingestion of a fluoride pollutant, a waste by-product of
fertiliser factories, mainly from the U.S.A., the U.S. Congress was advised
by a Senior E.P.A. Administrator that no scientific data exists that
proves the daily drugging of fluoridated water is safe.
Is this a case of Treason on the people,
forced to ingest such a poison chemical that has never been scientifically
and lawfully declared safe for humans?
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration,
2000, admitted
they have never had an application to prove
and register the safety of fluoride tablets even though fluoride tablets
have been prescribed by U.S. Doctors and Dentists for over 50 years.
Contrast the above statement with that of
senior EPA scientist, Bill Hirzy, PhD, who wrote:
"When a chemical manufacturer wants to
make a new chemical to use, for example, as an additive in motor oil, all
existing toxicological data must be presented to the Environmental
Protection Agency for review of potential risks before manufacture and use
can begin. In the DRI we see risk assessment principles as applied to a
major public policy issue flouted - even the existence of a massive body
of information on adverse effects of fluoride is ignored, let alone
discussed.
And this for a chemical the National
Academy recommends we purposely add to our diets, not our motor oil ...
In summary, our union members' review
of the literature over the last 11 years has led us to conclude that a
causal link exists between fluoride exposure and cancer, increased risk of
hip fracture, and damage to the central nervous system. (For the National
Academy of Sciences to attempt to anoint this substance an 'essential
nutrient' is a travesty and a matter of shame for the US science
community.) (Press Release dated
23 September 1997 issued by the Union of government employees - NFFE,
Local Branch 2050 - at the US Environmental Protection Agency HQ,
Washington, DC.)" - (T.J. Greene)
The U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC)
produced their expert treatise on fluoridation 2001.
"They've been cookin'
the books for fifty years ...
George Glasser
A criticism of their fluoridation research:
"From the outset the C.D.C. Draft is
riddled with misinformation and omissions," said environmental writer
George Glasser. 'They've been cookin' the books for fifty years ...
burying all the negatives in a mountain of conflicting studies."
This is real news you will not hear from
your politician, nor will it be published in your daily newspapers or talked
about on Radio or Television.
Normally it would result in a Government
Royal Commission into discovery of the people controlling such news, and
those controlling the compulsory use of a fluoride waste by-product
pollutant in drinking water supplies.
A simple question to Australian
Governments
If the above data is true and you attempt
to disprove it, why is it kept from the very people affected?
That is the scientific enormity of this
"public health issue", an issue that proceeds under political covert
undemocratic "Terror" on a population.
At the last Australian Election 2001, the
community letter boxes were full of the Howard Government's literature
claiming "they listen to the people", but seem only to hear that which is
good for the party, the protector's of fluoridation, and not the necessary
good of the people complaining of forced fluoridation.
Politicians are the epitome of "The Three
Wise Monkeys". With fluoridation they see, hear and speak "no ill of
fluoridation".
This is where the Governments keep
scientific data on fluoridation.
The Science and Ethics of Fluoridation
Howard Cohen, B.A., M.A., PhD, David
Locker, B.D.S., PhD, some interesting quotations:
"Bioethics is the study of the moral,
social and political problems that arise from biology and the life
sciences, and that involves human well-being.
Of particular relevance are the core
values of autonomy, beneficence and truthfulness.
In practice, however, acts such as
water fluoridation, tend to be in conflict with autonomy, since it is
effectively impossible for individuals to opt out, fluoridation takes away
the freedom of choice.
... since it is
effectively impossible for individuals to opt out, fluoridation takes away
the freedom of choice.
On Truthfulness
An assessment of the ethics of water
fluoridation must also take into account the moral issue surrounding
scientific inquiry in order for health professionals to be justified in
their recommendations.
This aspect pertains to the principles
of truthfulness whereby health professionals are obliged to tell patients
the truth, for one cannot influence the way others act without first being
justified in one's own beliefs.
Canadian studies of fluoridated and
non-fluoridated communities provide little systematic evidence regarding
the benefits to children of water fluoridation. Moreover, studies of the
benefit to adults are largely absent and there is little evidence that
water fluoridation has reduced social inequalities in dental health.
Conclusion
There is need for new guidelines for
water fluoridation that are based on sound, up-to-date science, and sound
ethics.
In this context, we would argue that
sound ethics presuppose sound science."
Fluoride Chemicals and Human Toxicity
Nothing is new in the field of poisonous
fluoride chemicals relating to human toxicity.
The Victorian State Government appointed a
Committee of Enquiry 1966, into "The Effects of Pesticides" - Terms of
Reference included: Toxicity and Toxic effects of pesticides on
humans in Victoria.
Section 11.42 lists, Sodium
Silicofluoride
That is the same toxic fluoride chemical,
today imported from the U.S.A. and added to our drinking water supplies that
called compulsory Artificial Fluoridation.
"Sodium Silicofluoride - USE - to kill
insects.
Basis of Toxic Properties - Enzyme
inhibition by fluoride ion
Registered under Pesticide Act 1958.
Under Possible non-target hazards it
warns -
'HAZARD TO VERTEBRATES'."
Yes! that is exactly the same
silicofluoride your politician forces you to unwittingly drug yourself every
day from the cradle to the grave.
Every day of your life, drugged by fluoride
that is supported by the A.M.A., A.D.A., N.H. and M.R.C., and universities.
Isn't that TERROR, when knowingly, the Government (politicians) document
such dangerous data and still force-feeds everyone with the same poisonous
sodium silicofluoride of UNPROVEN MEDICAL HEALTH SAFETY FOR HUMANS.
The President of the U.S.A., George W.
Bush, is correct; there is "Terror" in many places, but will he identify
fluoridation and act accordingly in the real interests of the people other
than the heavy commercial wealth?
Future statements in medical history on
force-fed fluoridation may classify daily drugging populations with
poisonous fluoride pollutants, as an international case of heresy and
genocide.
The Prime Minister, John Howard, is
reported in the Sydney Sun-Herald, 23rd December 2001
"Intelligence and emotive testing for
all four year olds and free child care for poor are set to become key
parts of the Howard Government plan to reform the welfare system."
Will the Prime Minister consider any or all
real scientific research of scientists? Will he consider or even read the
scientific data published 2001 by:
Roger D. Masters, Research Professor
of Government, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Myron J. Coplan, PE, Consulting
chemical engineer, Intellequity Consulting, Natick, MA.
"There is reason to believe that the
use of a particular class of water treating chemicals (the 'silicofluorides')
has been contributing to adverse health and behavioural effects for many
stages of life from fetal damage to Alzheimer's Disease. Historical and
scientific data both show that every administration since that of Harry S.
Truman has failed to deal with the latent health problem that has grown
steadily over the last 50 years, more ..." (And the same applies to
Australian population since fluoridation.)
If only the above researchers had not
identified sodium silicofluoride, the Australian politicians and even the
Prime Minister may have been willing to read that particular research, but
using that F word excludes real scientific understanding, consideration or
action from politicians, who Govern the Country, but who governs the
politicians?
"... Australia,
Britain, Canada and the United States ... endemics of mental health
problems, of asthma and other complex diseases (inflammatory bone diseases,
... autism and cerebral palsy)."
Professor Stanley, W.A. child health expert.
As a suggestion, politicians should start
investigations with known scientific facts and proceed with honest, open
minds, honouring the Australian Constitution where "the will of the people"
is paramount, relegate commercialism short term de:lars, and highly paid
political lobbyists, where representation of the people does not exist.
The Herald-Sun, 23rd December, 2001,
reports on data "inspired the Prime Minister":
"Mr Howard has been inspired by
research conducted by WA child health expert Professor Stanley, and the
Family and Community Services Department has set up a task force to
examine proposals put forward by her.
Professor Stanley said studies had
shown people from Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States
were arguably the world's worst parents - despite the fact that those
countries were among the world's most stable democracies. (But all
fluoridated)
We are observing epidemics of mental
health problems (such as suicides, risk-taking behaviours, ADHD,
depression, eating disorders), of asthma and other complex diseases
(pre-term births and low birth weight, diabetes, inflammatory bowel
disease, autism and cerebral palsy), she said in her institute's annual
report. Those in other research disciplines are observing similar
increases in developmental problems in children and young people
(behavioural problems, learning disabilities, school drop-out) and in
juvenile crime. " (Karney McManus, Herald Sun 23rd December, 2001)
All those countries force feed their
children with unproven safety fluoride chemicals.
Strange that the serious fluoride force
feeding of 80% Australian population goes "unnoticed" by politicians and
health professionals.
Perhaps this open-ended scientific
instrument below is used by politicians and health hierarchy to measure the
toxicity of fluoride chemicals.
You ask where is the missing part of the
instrument? Good question!
Copy List
|
