|
Copy List
Some Fluoridation History
By Glen S.R. Walker
Today there is little
difference in the fluoridation question compared with the past.
A letter written by Dr
Hubert Arnold, May 28, 1980, to Dr Ernest Newbrun (profluoridation)
contained the description of fluoridation propaganda that fits today’s false
messages to the public.
The letter was in answer to
Newbrun’s inquiry about studies at University of California, Department of
Mathematics, titled, “The Statistical Frauds Group”.
“We investigated all
manner of questionable statements and activities, some qualitative, but
most of them quantitative. We conducted interviews and collected published
matter, and analysed all these, using standard statistical procedures.
In addition to deliberate
frauds, errors in judgement or method were examined. Often it was
difficult to detect if there was a deliberate fraud. We looked over
statements by manufacturers or purveyors of consumer goods. But a very
copious source was papers in medical research journals. Particularly good
examples of blatant statistical misconduct were found in the Public Health
Service reports.
The announced opinions
and published papers favouring mechanical fluoridation of public drinking
water are especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of
statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain
muddleheadedness and hebetude. Many of the blunders were so glaring that I
gave them to my beginning freshman classes in statistics at the very first
meeting. The students see through them straightaway, and are afforded
great amusement. Uproarious laughter frequently ensues. No special
statistical equipment is necessary to detect those peccancies. Of course
the class and the Group soon tired of those infantilities and sought and
found greater challenge.
By the way, a study by
John Yiamouyiannis and Dean Burk on possible connection between cancer and
waterborne fluoride was fairly tightly reasoned. The statistical
procedures were standard, and much better applied than in much of the
Public Health work.
In this connection, a
great source of entertainment to the Group was the ferocity with which the
researchers attacked any criticism. Invariably they violated in their own
work the very principles they insisted on in others’ work.
The old “Frauds Group”
should be revived and reorganised. If funds are forthcoming, I may
consider the undertaking. Every campus should have an invulnerable group
that punches holes in stuffed shirts and lets the air out.”
The public suffer that
terrible disease called APATHY.
The dictionary describes
“apathy” as: “Insensibility to suffering, passionless existence,
complacency, self satisfied.” Do you fit this description?
Every day you are served
through your kitchen tap a fluoride toxic soup with the compliments and
compulsion of your political representative whom you voted into Parliament
to do the “Will of the People” (and your will in particular) in a
trustworthy manner.
Time is overdue for “Zero
Tolerance” concerning “compulsory daily drugging with fluoride pollutants”.
Where does this great
fluoridation promotional agenda originate with such unequalled power?
It comes from large foreign
consortiums, who in turn control the lesser important establishments down to
individuals looking for the easy mega-dollar rewards. They have the
compliance of the Establishment Do-gooder groups whose platform is, “Don’t
rock the establishment boat.”
If you live in a
non-fluoridated area and think fluoride will be good for my child, would you
go to the garden shed, open the tin of Fluoride Rat Poison, take out a
spoonful, mix into a cup and give it to your child to drink?
Otherwise you go to the
local chemist and purchase a packet of fluoride tablets. Do you ask the
chemist to show you a scientific study on these tablets proving they are
perfectly safe for your child? Do you ask if the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration lists fluoride tablets as safe? (They do not)
Perhaps you happily fit
into the public who consider it proper to accept the Political, medical and
dental fluoridation grand-standing, rather than the pure honest science
presented by unpaid Australians speaking in honorary positions on behalf of
the Australian population without any commercial cum-drug purveyor’s
association. Fluorides are classified as drugs.
Principles of Trust
Eroded
The Fluoridation reality as
opposed to Government rhetoric makes it abundantly clear that the Australian
Governments concentrate on dreams of public deception, using their “given”
trust in reverse.
Their actions in
fluoridation do nothing but erode the principles of trust and expected
democracy from “elected” politicians and their Party.
Years ago I wrote an
article in the Australian Fluoridation News Vol. 29 No 5, 1993
- “In Whom Do You Put Your Trust”? Not Politicians and secondhand car
salesmen, nor the well-heeled drug ring including the Fluoride Lobby selling
their waste poisonous fluorides pollutant to gullible Parliament members, or
is there another word for gullible?
The introduction to that
Article was a statement by the then Prime Minister, Robert Hawke who
declared:
“By the year 1990 no
Australian child will be living in poverty.”
The audience rose to that
important Prime Minister’s statement in adoration and acceptance, their
vocal admiration resonated around Australia. Such exhortation fitted only
such a Government and Prime Minister’s “statement of fact”.
What really happened?
By 1990 there were over one
million unemployed and charitable institutions, Salvation Army etc. were
saturated with poverty stricken people.
Most of the Australian
public do not intelligently seek out the difference between propaganda and
truth. They devour anything easy to accept, and seem to dislike those using
their right to test propaganda, irrespective of its origin, that controls
most world populations.
Fluoridation Propaganda
The Fluoride Lobby is a
kind of science that controls public silence, out-performing war time public
and political mind-boggling mass controls of no benefit to the people, but
certainly profitable and following their commercial equation - more control
more profit.
Who benefits from that
control?
Check the obvious signposts
that point towards Parliaments! Public health has become a bad second in
today’s world of commercialism and money, direct and indirect, mostly
covertly directed, but always a priority over everything else.
Short term democracy, and
super short-term personal political life, not to be confused with proper
Constitutional procedures, such as representing the people and Government by
the People for the People.
What do we ask of
politicians?
There is not one
independent comprehensive published scientific study, proving the fluoride
chemicals sodium silicofluoride, hydro-fluosilicic acid, placed in our
drinking water supplies by Government direction, are safe for humans,
irrespective that also there is no known daily dose of fluoride for babies,
children, young people, older people, different states of health, and the
countless existing variables. Pharmacology by commercialism!
Fluoride pollutant sludges
must be good because your politicians say so!
The latest article by
George Glasser is appropriately titled - “The Official Spinning of Pollution
into ELIXIR, Semantics, Politics or Fraud?”
The world population really needs to get some passion,
forget those blunderheads who back the wrong organisations in the community
just because it’s fashionable to follow the new Politically Correct Syndrome
and ignore the realities of community mis-management by people in privileged
positions of trust.
Fluoridation has walked away from
democracy and science
Fluoridation is a world-wide Commercial Culture which has
walked away from democracy and science, unheeded and indeed promoted by
your Government.
Truth is a rare commodity
these times, caused by no dollars in being scientifically honest.
The media live on reports
about the work of citizen groups in the Community, photos, pages of
information, all in the interest of the people.
Our Federation and anyone
writing against fluoridation seem banned and our real work on behalf of the
people is kept from the public. Why?
This is exemplified by the
number of letters on fluoridation or associated matters but using the F word
that never sees the light of day. Why?
Letters to the press from
our Federation are ignored, except in a few Regional Papers where democracy
and honesty exists (but rarely).
The main stream daily
papers must have special sorting of letters, either by hand or
electronically, culling out anything where the F word appears except when
promoting the process.
There are times when one
considers even the most dumbfounded politician may stop for a moment, and
think we are in reality “The Secret Service, financed by ASIO, and our
science must remain secret.”
This strange world of ours!
When a child in U.S.A. has dental decay, fluoride must be added to
Australian drinking water supplies.
When the U.S. Fertilizer
Factories increase production of super-phosphate, we must use more of their
fluoride chemicals in our water.
When cities throughout the
world vote fluoridation out, the event remains strictly confined to those
particular areas, and ignored by mainstream media. They are bound to keep it
secret.
Stopping fluoridation is
almost a case of treason against the U.S. Government and the producers of
poisonous fluoride waste by-product pollutant, that by command of
politicians we must drink, because there is no other way of disposing of the
poisonous chemical junk.
Question: Where in
democratic reality is this act of treason and assault on the people?
Perhaps the following
letter from San Antonio, U.S.A. sheds light on fluoridation.
Copy List
|
