 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
FLUORIDE
Let the water you and your loved ones consume be FREE of the POISON FLUORIDE.
Are the claimed benefits of ingesting fluoride over-rated
and the risks to our health and eco-system under-reported?
On this web page we address this question.
How many people know that lead has a toxicity rating
of 4 [mildly toxic] and fluoride has a toxicity rating of 4.5 [highly toxic]?
Fluoride is almost as toxic as Arsenic with a toxicity rating of 5 [extremely toxic] which has been used as a poison throughout history.
| Authors Note; I was appalled at what I found while researching the entire issue of fluoride. I wonder about people that intentionally poison other people not to mention their children and their children's children & nature for a few $. Big business and those that run it have known for a very long time the effects of consuming this poison we call fluoride. They have intentionally lied to the people of the world and covered up the effects of consuming this poison for a very long time. But like most lies and cover ups, the truth comes out given time. |
Fluoridation proponents often assert that there is no
legitimate scientific controversy over the benefits or safety of this measure. This web page and thousands of others
clearly show controversy existed from the outset and continues to this day.
| Literally hundreds of authorities in the medical field have come forwards in the recent years and documented and voiced there opinion and research into fluoride expressing how it should be outlawed and any products that contain it should also be outlawed. Most of these professionals have at least a Ph.D. and are considered as experts in their fields. In November 1978, Judge John Flaherty, later Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania was quoted after 2800 pages of testimony and documentation was recorded and studied. As saying "In my view, the evidence is quite convincing that the addition of sodium fluoride to the public water supply at one part per million is extremely deleterious to the human body, and, a review of the evidence will disclose that there was no convincing evidence to the contrary....Prior to hearing this case, I gave the matter of fluoridation little, if any, thought, but I received quite an education, and noted that the proponents of fluoridation do nothing more than try to impune (sic) the objectivity of those who oppose fluoridation." |
Dental fluorosis is now pandemic in fluoridated areas.
Fluoride ingestion in our children is clearly out of control given the sky-rocketing rise in fluorosis rates in
fluoridated communities. The United States, Canada & Mexico have some of the highest rates in the world.
 |
There is enough poison in the average family size tube of tooth paste to kill a child. Most of us brush our teeth with tooth paste that contains a toxin more hazardous than lead. Yet no one would brush there teeth with lead. |
The health problems caused by fluoride in some other countries is well-documented and staggering. There are over twenty nations with health problems due to fluoride ingestion. Many Nations have outlawed the use and sale of products containing fluoride and established exceptional high standards of control on water sources [in other words if the water contains fluoride, it can not be used to either agricultural or human purposes].
|
|
Trucking companies that transport toothpaste are required to display a Toxic Hazard sign on their vehicles in most countries, yet we are told this stuff is good for us and that we should eat foods, drink water, bathe in water, and brush our teeth with the poison known as FLUORIDE. |
The health problems attributed to the ingestion of fluoride
are staggering and as more research reports surface. It appears that fluoride may negatively effect every area
of the human body. This article is not meant to be a comprehensive listing of the health affects of ingesting fluoride.
It would require a complete web site of many gigs of information to be comprehensive on this subject. This article
is meant to be a comprehensive overview. A small sample of scientific research into how fluoride is affecting our
environment and questions raised.
|
Note: Many antidepressant drugs on the market contain fluoride. Antidepressant traces in creek raise concerns - Fort Worth Star Telegram
Researchers at Baylor University have found traces
of a pharmaceutical antidepressant in the livers, muscles and brains of bluegills in a Denton County creek, raising
concerns about the welfare of the popular sports fish and people who eat them. Fluoxetine and other antidepressants affect fish in roughly the same ways they affect people, said Bryan Brooks, a Baylor toxicologist who led the study. It relaxes them. "Maybe it makes you a happy fish and you're kind of hanging out," Brooks said. "But how does that influence your ability to capture prey? Do you instantly become candy for large-mouth bass because you're accumulating large amounts of Prozac in your system? These are areas where more research is needed." It's believed to be among the first studies to show that antidepressants in the water can accumulate in biological tissue, raising the possibility of long-term health and behavioral problems in fish, said Marsha white, an aquatic toxicologist at the University of Georgia. "That's really a significant finding," said white, who's using a federal grant to study the health effects of fluoxetine and other antidepressants in fish. "This opens up the door and says these things are important." Brooks' latest research comes on the heels of recent studies he helped conduct while a graduate student at the University of North Texas. That research found that some male fish in Denton County are developing female characteristics because estrogen from prescription drugs is winding up in the water. The estrogen -- from birth control pills, hormone replacement therapy and other sources -- could reduce the fish population by rendering some males unable to breed. The issue has garnered national attention in the past few years. A U.S. Geological Survey study last year found that 80 percent of the 139 streams it sampled in 30 states, including Texas, contained small amounts of pharmaceutical drugs, hormones, steroids and personal care products such as perfumes. "It's very common," said Herbert Buxton, coordinator of the Geological Survey's Toxic Substances Hydrology Program. "What this tells us is that these wastewater pathways are worthy of a lot more study." Brooks said he has already expanded the research to include catfish and white crappie. He said Pecan Creek was picked as the study site because it gets as much as 13 million gallons a day of treated wastewater from Denton's Pecan Creek Water Reclamation Plant. During the dry summer months, the wastewater from the plant comprises nearly all the creek's water flow. |
So that people may understand why we at MiraculeWater have designed our water processors to filter out more than 99% of the fluoride in the source water, we have decided to show what happens to people who consume fluoride. Please also remember that during W.W.II Hitler gave FLUORIDE to the Jews in the concentration camps because it made them so docile that they did not even try to escape or avoid there own deaths! |
New information on Fluoride and the effects of consuming it are being posted to the net on a daily basis by scientists and groups that are against this toxin, a toxin that is more poisonous than lead and which accumulates in the body. The human body can get rid of about half of the fluoride that it consumes. That means that it builds up in the body over time. Like any toxic substance even low levels that build up over time can cause severe damage or death. |
Let there be no mistake! Fluoride is a poison! If you doubt my words, then search around the Internet and find extraordinary amounts of documentation. If that's not enough information, there is a link section at the bottom of this page that will leave you with no doubt. The link section only scratches the surface of the information available on the web. A very good place to find accurate information all backed http://www.slweb.org/bibliography.html
Fluoride Effects On The Human Brain
[Partial listing]
Fluoride has been found to increase the uptake of aluminum into the brain. Aluminum in the brain is believed to be the number one cause of Altimers and Dementia. Since 1994 there have been at least six publications that directly link fluoride exposure to direct adverse effects on the brain. Consuming high doses of Fluoride for even a short time can be summed up to be similar to having a frontal lobotomy. With ones will to survive, intelligence, memory, and problem solving abilities all adversely effected. Places around the world where fluoride occurs naturally in the water produce people that just don't care about anything. Consuming water with even mild levels of fluoride for one year will adversely change a person in as far as we know irreversible ways both mentally and physically. Well documented studies have shown the I.Q. drops 11 to 19% from short term exposure to moderately high levels of fluoride. Prolonged exposure to low levels has a similar effect. Exposure to fluoride has been shown to cause drops in key chemicals that the brain needs to function properly. Prenatal exposure to moderate levels of fluoride causes the mother to give birth to children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder and autism. Fluoride consumption leads to anti-social behavior. Adverse effects on the brain's Pineal glad have also been documented.
Fluoride Effects On The Human Cells & Tissues
[Partial listing]
In 1990 the beginning of reports started surfacing showing the most common form of fluoride, sodium fluoride like that put into water supplies and toothpaste caused cancer. Reports using terms like "clear evidence of carcinogenicity" were brought to the attention of both politicians and big business alike. Yet, the fraud that fluoride was safe and healthy continued from both. Cancer, Brain and Kidney damage were only the tip of the iceberg in the reports. Reports of adverse pre-mature onset of sexual maturity in both humans and animals alike have also been documented. Fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland, which may inhibit the production of the hormone melatonin, which helps regulate the onset of puberty. The reports of many studies have been covered up or are not available.
Fluoride Effects On The Blood, Teeth & Bones
[Partial listing]
Fluoride inhibits antibodies from forming in the blood. Fluoride has been found to increase the uptake of lead into blood. Fluoride confuses the immune system, causing it to attack the body?s tissues. This can increase the growth rate of tumors in people prone to cancer. Totally contrary to the popular belief that fluoride helps us to have strong teeth and bones. The actual truth shows just the opposite.
Many Places in the world have water that has either naturally occurring fluoride or fluoride that is added to it. People with paralyzing bone diseases, stooped backs, crooked hands and legs, deformed teeth, blindness and other handicaps are a common sight.
| Here is a picture of Ramaswamy. At 18-years of age, when other youths are full of enthusiasm for life, Ramaswamy looks to be hardly five-years-old, with a physique completely devastated by the effects of fluoride. He is so weak that he cannot walk and weighs barely 15 kilo's (less than 34 lbs). He is blind and mentally challenged. He cannot recognize his own name and he cannot even eat by himself. The seriousness of the problem can be measured by the fact that the groundwater has 10 to 12 parts per million (ppm) of fluoride. |  |
| Saidamma is 36, but looks like a 60-year-old with gray hair and a thin body. Supplies of fresh water will be too late for some. She is a widow and is suffering from severe chest pains and recurring fever. Her son is crippled and her grandson was born with defective legs. With extensive suffering, there is growing anger, frustration and disappointment. Sudhakar Reddy is handicapped and uses a hand-driven tricycle to move around the village. |  |
 |
( A cross section of metatarsal bones from cows of same breed, size and age showing normal appearance on the left and severe osteofluorosis on the right ). |
Osteofluorosis is often misdiagnosed as osteoporosis.
Epidemiological evidence clearly showing elevated bone cancer and bone fractures in humans related to consumption of fluoridated drinking water. Bone fractures and bone cancer in areas where the water did not contain fluoride has risen after the water supplies have had fluoride added to them.
According to the National Institute of Dental Research in the USA, more than 66% of America's children in fluoridated communities show visible sign of over-exposure and fluoride toxicity, dental fluorosis. That figure is from a survey conducted in the mid-1980's and the figure today is undoubtedly much higher.
Most people unless they are specifically trained, do not recognize the early visual signs of dental fluorosis. Advanced signs are easily noticeable.
Dental Fluorosis pictures. Graphic examples of fluoride poisoning.
Dental fluorosis is a reflection of what's happening in our
bones and is the first visible sign of fluoride poisoning
 |
 |
 |
|
Because of water fluoridation and other fluoride products, dental fluorosis is now pandemic in our children. It's the first visible sign of fluoride poisoning. The structural integrity of enamel is compromised and small pits are left in teeth as it breaks away. Even with mild fluorosis, enamel is subject to increased erosion and attrition.
Fluorosis in 11-year-old Calgary Canada child, caused by the Public Health
Authority's "recommended" daily fluoride dose. No effort was made to determine other fluoride intake
found in formula, juices, toothpaste, naturally in water, etc. before supplements were prescribed for the is child.
|
More in depth scientific evidence and documentation on biological affects of consuming the poison Fluoride are available at; Bibliography of Scientific Literature on Fluoride |
Take a look at your teeth in the mirror,
or in the mouth of your loved ones.
What do you see?
THE HISTORY OF FLUORIDE -INTRODUCTION
The story of water fluoridation began at the beginning of the
20th century but it was not until much later that the disputes, claims, arguments and accusations that have been
made about this foul practice, have been made transparent to the public at large.
Fluoridation presented a new opportunity to industries which produced toxic fluoride waste products. Rather than
be seen as "villains of the peace", they could now transform the disposal of their "by-products"
into something perhaps never experienced before - a public health measure. "Garbage into gold" is the
expression most commonly used to describe this transformation.
There is also no doubt that the promoters of fluoridation have had a very healthy head start on their opponents
inasmuch that they were able to influence and control early research, as well as infiltrate and manipulate government
bodies. And by manipulating political institutions and science, by using the 'hard sell' approach to con subordinates,
the unconvinced and the skeptical, by the use of propaganda and fear of the establishment, the proponents of fluoridation
built up a powerful movement which was to sweep away virtually all opposition.
But even with the support that the proponents have built up either through fear, corruption or simple blinkered
and unwavering trust, it is not enough to keep the bandwagon rolling.
Today we have the more information at our fingertips than we could ever have dreamed of just a few decades ago.
And despite the reluctance of some official Government departments, agencies or bodies to release information,
there is certainly more openness and more access to valuable and meaningful data. As a consequence, the proponents
of fluoridation can no longer hide behind bad science, one-sided propaganda and the control or corruptibility of
public servants, scientists or important and influential institutions. Accountability is now the name of the game.
You do not have to be an Einstein to understand simple science. You do not need a degree in law to understand the
obvious breach of human rights. You do not need to be told again and again how devious, dishonest, stupid or egotistical
some of our politicians are.
Fluoridation and its consequences should be made honestly, openly and in clear language so that everyone can understand
the implications and risks involved.
But the establishment will still not give way. The proponents of fluoridation still to this day use trickery, and
deception, and all with the blessing, financial support and approval of political, scientific and industrial institutions.
This is why this site will be dedicated to speaking openly about fluoridation.
Sometimes the language will be uncompromising, brutal and implicit. No apologies are made for adopting this approach
because it is necessary to do so in the face of an establishment which has lost the right to be treated with respect.
Fluoride - EARLY HISTORY
Fluoride has two sources. It can appear "naturally"
in water or it can appear as a toxic waste. Even where it does appear without any help from industry it can cause
problems. This section of this web page concentrates on some of the possible, if not probable explanations, as
to why those industries who produce toxic fluoride wastes are in favor of water fluoridation.
The earliest problems associated with toxic wastes involved those businesses manufacturing aluminum with the resulting
waste usually being sodium fluoride. In Britain today, the most frequently used toxic waste product used for fluoridation
comes from the phosphate fertilizer industry. However, the principles are the same and what happened in the first
half of the 20th century is just as relevant as to what is happening today.
In the 1930's, the aluminum processing industry faced a serious threat to its existence - its toxic fluoride wastes
were seriously polluting the environment and this resulted in some very expensive litigation settlements. According
to George Waldbott's book, Fluoridation, The Great Dilemma ( published 1978 ), the production of aluminum involves
the following process;-
"During the smelting and reduction process, when bauxite ( aluminum oxide ) is dissolved and electrolyzed
in molten cryolite, hydrogen fluoride and other volatile fluorides are released into the air, and sodium fluoride
remains in the bath" ( source: Davenport, S. J., and Morris, G.G.: US Bureau of Mines. Circular 7687, US Department
of the Interior, June 1954, page 8 ).
The latter cannot simply be dumped on the ground because it seriously pollutes grass and other forage. Indeed,
in 1950 ALCOA's ( the Aluminum Company of America ) plant in Vancouver, Washington, was fined for dumping fluorides
into the Columbia River, and the airborne fluorides heavily contaminated the grass and forage, "which resulted
in injury and death to cattle." ( Reported by the Seattle Times, Dec.16, 1952 )."
Waldbott continues with a number of incidents which resulted in damages being awarded against the "industry".
The first involved a trout and fish hatchery. "eggs were worthless" and did not hatch properly; the fish
also exhibited malformations. "During the weeks after rains, the Meaders were hauling away about a ton of
dead fish per day." So how many hundreds or thousands of parts per million ( "ppm" ) of fluoride
caused this? Fluoride levels were no more than between 0.5 and 4.7 ppm in the samples taken from the hatchery.
I would take the opportunity at this to remind the reader that your Government wants to add 1 ppm of fluoride to
drinking water supplies. If you keep goldfish or other tropical fish, or ANY fish and are hoping to breed, then
keep this in mind. Waldbott goes on to say that this was not just one in a series of a few incidents. More cases
are mentioned which involved $100,000's being paid in compensation with the total liability running potentially
into $1,000,000's ( or even $1,000,000,000's).
The big "fluoride problem". Estimated total atmospheric inorganic fluoride emissions from major industries
in the USA ( 1968 );-
Industry Tonnage per year
Steel Industry 40,1000
Combustion of coal 16,000
Ceramics industries 21,200
Nonferrous metal industries 4,000
Phosphate fertilizer & processing industries 18,700
Welding operations 2,700
Aluminum industry 16,000
TOTAL 118,700 tons.
Why the producers of toxic fluoride wastes had to find another route for their poisons ......
( A cross section of metatarsal
bones from cows of same breed, size and age showing normal appearance on the left and severe osteofluorosis on
the right ).
( An advertisement for ALCOA's
sodium fluoride "drinking water supplement" ).
...... and their solution to this problem was to get ordinary people to consume it instead.
So how did the fluoride pollution industries get the American Government to turn around and support the disposal
of toxic fluoride wastes via the public water supplies? Surely no administration, however evil or corrupt it may
be, would endorse such a scheme - would they?
Perhaps if there were another agenda for fluoridation then things may just be different and another use for fluoride
would certainly appeal to an unscrupulous Government. Supporting this contention are the well known unprincipled
and clandestine experiments carried out on British and American subjects and involving LSD and radiation exposure
( just two examples ). So why not experiment with fluoride as well? This brings us up to the start of World War
II and up until this point fluoridation was a non-starter. But during the war another use for fluoride was found
and this resulted in a radical change of policy in the USA.
It is the end of World War II and the Allies ( read Americans ) have control of the German I G Farben factories
and all of it's technologies. Enter American Charles Eliot Perkins ( "Perkins" ). Perkins, so the story
goes, was a researcher in chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology. He and other scientists were put in
charge of the Farben industries shortly after the cessation of hostilities but it was Perkins who was informed
that the German General Staff adopted the plan of using sodium fluoride to make prisoners-of-war more docile and
easier to manipulate and control. There is no surviving evidence to suggest the Germans did actually do this though
it was well within their doctrine to carry out such a practice. It is also claimed that the ultimate intention
of the Nazis was to fluoridate every country that they occupied and this story, which the Pushers are desperate
to ridicule, has gained credibility in recent years for a number of reasons.
So what did Perkins do with the information given to him? Like most other scientists who fear for their job, their
future or even their lives, he could have kept quiet. Not Perkins. Even as early as the 1940's to 1950's Perkins
realized that fluoride could have an undesirable effect on a certain part of the brain - the hippocampus. Before
he died, he urged those who would follow him not to let the anti-fluoride cause fail.
This was done in part in 1987 by someone known as Harley Rivers Dickinson ( An Australian Liberal MP ) who raised
the issue of fluoridation and its sinister implications in an "Address in Reply to the Governor's speech in
Parliament." The 'Address' forms part of a document compiled by Ian E Stephens and is appropriately entitled
the 'Dickinson Statement' ( the "Statement" ). The main thrust of the Address was as follows;-
"At the end of the Second World War, the United States Government sent Charles Eliot Perkins, a research worker
in chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology, to take charge of the vast Farben chemical plants in Germany.
While there he was told of a scheme which had been worked out by them during the war and adopted by the German
General Staff. This was to control the population in any given area through mass medication of drinking water.
In this scheme sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place. Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluoride
will in time reduce an individual's power to resist domination by slowly poisoning and narcotizing a certain area
of the brain and will thus make him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him. Both the Germans and
the Russians added sodium fluoride to the drinking water of prisoners-of-war to make them stupid and docile."
( Reference: [Australian ] Victorian Hansard of 12th August 1987 ).
The Statement adds to this;- "... Farben was a German chemical manufacturing concern that supplied Chlorine
Gas used by Germany during the first World War, but the eventual creation of the huge Farben Cartel began in 1924
when American bankers began to arrange foreign loans in what Professor Carroll Quigley terms 'The Dawes Plan',
"largely a J P Morgan production." ( J P Morgan: one of the Wall Street élite - Author ). In 1928,
Henry Ford merged his German assets with Farben to be followed by the American Standard Oil Company who, in concert
with Farben, developed the coal to oil hydrogenation process. In a letter to Roosevelt from Berlin in the early
thirties, American Ambassador in Germany, William Dodd, said: "At the present, more than a hundred American
corporations have subsidiaries here or co-operative understandings. The DuPonts have their allies in Germany that
are aiding in the armament business. Their chief ally is the Farben company, a part of the Government which gives
200,000 Marks a year to one propaganda organization operating on American opinion. Standard Oil Company... sent
$2 million here in December 1933 and has made $500,000 a year helping Germans make Ersatz gas ( to convert coal
to gasoline ) for war purposes; but Standard Oil cannot take any of its earnings out of the country except in goods.
The International Harvester president told me their business here rose 33% per year but they could not take anything
out. Even our airplane people have secret arrangements with Krupps. General Motors and Ford do enormous business
here through their subsidiaries and take no profits out."
The Farben assets in America were controlled by a holding company, American IG Farben which listed on its Board
of Directors, Edsel Ford, President of the Ford Motor Company, Chas E Mitchell, President of Rockefeller's National
City Bank of New York, Walter Teagle, President of Standard Oil in New York, Paul Warburg, Chairman of the Federal
Reserve and brother of Max Warburg, financier of Germany's war effort, and Herman Metz, a Director of the Bank
of Manhattan, controlled by the Warburgs."
The Statement says of ALCOA;- "In 1939, ALCOA, then probably the world's largest producer of sodium fluoride,
transferred its technology to Germany ( the Alted Agreement ). The Dow Chemical Company transmitted it's experience
and technology in that same period." Other Cartel companies mentioned in the Statement include the names of
Kellogg and Proctor & Gambol ( of Crest toothpaste fame ).
NB. None of the Americans that sat on the Board of AIG Farben were prosecuted after the war though three "non-Americans"
were tried and convicted as war criminals.
Part 2 of the Statement looks at the roll of "Foundations". "In Australia, the Dental Health &
Research Foundation, which has such names as Colgate, Kellogg and other ex-Farben associates listed among it's
"governors and contributors", has been irreverently but accurately dubbed "the Fluoride Mafia".
Closely allied with this Sydney University "Foundation", in its printed promotional claims for fluorides
and fluoridation, is "Foundation 41". Unfortunately, the data of the "thorough investigations"
said to have been carried out by the Foundation into fluoride, its benefits and its hazards, have never been made
available, despite numerous appeals. A recent ABC Science Show's examination of the scientific integrity of Foundation
41 may explain the elusive data. America is literally bursting at the seams with such Foundations, but amongst
the earlier names were the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation and the Ford Foundation. It is necessary
to mention these specifically because they were the first Foundations to make grants in the population ( control
) field and the Carnegie family merged with the Mellon family Institute to create the Carnegie-Mellon University
in Pittsburgh in 1967."
fated Perkins. "In a letter abstracted from "Fluoridation and Lawlessness" ( published by the Committee
for Mental Health and National Security ) to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
on October 2nd 1954, a Charles Eliot Perkins said;-
"We are told by 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 ( meaning covetousness - to desire or eagerly wish for ) 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 very 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 that are much easier,
cheaper and more effective. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the masses to domination and
control and loss of liberty... When the Nazis decided to go into Poland ... the German General Staff exchanged
scientific and military ideas, plans and personnel and the scheme of mass medication was seized upon by the Russian
Communists because it fitted ideally into their plan to communize the world... I say this with all the earnestness
and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly twenty years research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology
and pathology of fluorine. Any person who drinks artificially fluoridated water for a period of one year or more
will never again be the same person, mentally or physically."
The Russian connection is further enhanced by the statement of Major George Racey Jordan who was in charge of the
shipment of sodium fluoride to Russia from Great Falls, Montana, via Alaska. He queried the shipment of considerable
amounts of sodium fluoride to Russia and was told "frankly" that it was put into the drinking water in
the prisoner-of-war camps to take away their will to resist. As for the CIA, who ultimately come into this story,
the Statement further adds that the 'Rockefeller Report' to the United States President on CIA activities said:
"The drug program ( LSD, fluoride?, etc. - Author ) was part of a much larger CIA program to study possible
means of controlling human behaviour ( Mk-Ultra? )."
NB. An earlier part of the Statement revealed that an advisor to the American Government on "hypnotism"
or psychological behaviour control, Dr George Estabrooks, later became Chairman of the Department of Psychology
at COLGATE UNIVERSITY.
The Statement also lists all the fluoridated TRANQUILIZERS that were on the market at the time ( and no doubt some
still are ). Perhaps it is just coincidence, but the first fluoridation trials were about to begin in the USA in
1945, the year *Operation Paperclip commenced ( *Operation Paperclip involved the movement of Nazi scientists to
the USA ). Until 1945, the US Public Health Service ( "USPHS" ) had resisted fluoridation but that was
all about to change, and rapidly so. The previous year, one Oscar Ewing was working for ALCOA as an attorney and
on an annual salary of $750,000 - an awful lot of money in those days. Was Ewing happy working for ALCOA and receiving
such a substantial wage? If so, why did he decide to leave ALCOA to become Federal Security Administrator in the
American Government at a lower income. Ewing is reported to have said that "he wanted to serve his country".
Consider also that the USPHS, just prior to and possibly during, was part of the US Treasury at the time Ewing
was employed. And who was the US Treasurer just prior to Ewing's appointment? It was no other than Andrew Mellon,
of ALCOA fame ( or should I say notoriety? ). It is more than a coincidence that in his position he could exert
his influence over the reluctant USPHS and arrange for 'favourable' research into fluoride to compel the USPHS
to reverse its decision. It has certainly been claimed on more than one occasion that past experiments into fluoridation
were not well designed - clearly indicating that such research was biased. The scientists controlling the research
programs, instead of being unbiased, could be carefully selected to produce such favorable results and so the fluoride
bandwagon began to roll. Therefore, appointments to influential positions under Ewing's control became a reality.
So why did the Government appoint him if he was going to use his position to further the cause of fluoridation?
Perhaps President Roosevelt ( 'Mr Wall Street' and I G Farben investor ), also had an interest in fluoride's 'alternative
use'.
THE ATOM BOMB CONNECTION
The early history of fluoridation continues with the following story. It has been written by Joel Griffiths and
Chris Bryson.
This version of the story is probably the most accurate, considering the numerous variations which have appeared
on different web-sites in recent years. Nothing has been changed or added.
FLUORIDE, TEETH AND THE ATOMIC BOMB
BY JOEL GRIFFITHS AND CHRIS BRYSON
Some fifty years after the United States began adding fluoride to public water supplies to reduce cavities in children's
teeth, declassified government documents are shedding new light on the roots of that still-controversial public
health measure, revealing a surprising connection between fluoride and the dawning of the nuclear age.
Today, two thirds of U.S. 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 this nation prevailed by building the world's first atomic bomb, U.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 documents obtained by
Griffiths and Bryson --including declassified papers of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. military group that built
the atomic bomb.
Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production, according to the documents. Massive quantities of fluoride--
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 rapidly emerged as the leading chemical health hazard
of the U.S atomic bomb program--both for workers and for nearby communities, the documents reveal.
Other revelations include:
* 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 defense contractors
for fluoride injury to citizens. The first lawsuits against the U.S. A-bomb program were not over radiation, but
over fluoride damage, the documents show.
* Human studies were required. Bomb program researchers played a leading role in the design and implementation
of the most extensive U.S. study of the health effects of fluoridating public drinking water--conducted in Newburgh,
New York from 1945 to 1956. Then, in a classified operation code-named "Program F," they secretly gathered
and analyzed blood and tissue samples from Newburgh citizens, with the cooperation of State Health Department personnel.
* The original secret version--obtained by these reporters--of a 1948 study published by Program F scientists in
the Journal of the American Dental Association shows that evidence of adverse health effects from fluoride was
censored by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) --considered the most powerful of Cold War agencies-- for reasons
of national security.
* 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 mind-set,
in which "national security" was paramount.
* The U.S. government's conflict of interest--and its motive to prove fluoride "safe" -- has not until
now been made clear to the general public in the furious debate over water fluoridation since the 1950's, nor to
civilian researchers and health professionals, or 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 aluminum to pesticides: fluoride is a critical industrial
chemical.
The impact can be seen, literally, in the smiles of our children. Large numbers of U.S. young people--up to 80
percent in some cities--now have dental fluorosis, the first visible sign of excessive fluoride exposure, according
to the U.S. 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," explains Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry at St. Lawrence University (N.Y.). In recent
years, pediatric bone specialists have expressed alarm about an increase in stress fractures among U.S. young people.
Connett and other scientists are concerned that fluoride --linked to bone damage by studies since the 1930's--
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 U.S. 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 Mullenix and co-workers conducted at Forsyth
in the early 1990's 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 I.Q. in children.) Mullenix's results were published
in 1995, in a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.
During her investigation, Mullenix was astonished to discover there had been virtually no previous U.S. 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 U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), where an NIH panel, she says, flatly told her that "fluoride
does not have central nervous system effects."
Declassified documents of the U.S. atomic-bomb program indicate otherwise. An April 29, 1944 Manhattan Project
memo reports: "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 --stamped "secret"-- is addressed to the head of the Manhattan Project's Medical Section, Colonel
Stafford Warren. 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 the Second
World War and the 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 of the U.S. National Archives. "If you find the memos, but
the document they refer to is missing, its probably still classified," said Charles Reeves, chief librarian
at the Atlanta branch of the U.S. 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." She went on, "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 that the results were buried because they might create a difficult legal and
public relations problem for the government.
The author of the 1944 CNS research proposal was Dr. Harold C. Hodge, at the time chief of fluoride toxicology
studies for the University of Rochester division of the Manhattan Project. Nearly fifty 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--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," says Mullenix, "he never once mentioned
the CNS work he had done for the Manhattan Project."
The "white 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," she says. "You can't just walk away from this."
Dr. Antonio Noronha, an NIH scientific review advisor familiar with Dr. Mullenix's grant request, says her proposal
was rejected by a scientific peer-review group. He terms her claim of institutional bias against fluoride CNS research
"farfetched." He adds, "We strive very hard at NIH to make sure politics does not enter the picture."
Fluoride and National Security
The documentary trail begins at the height of WW2, in 1944, when a severe pollution incident occurred downwind
of the E.I. du Pont du Nemours Company chemical factory in Deepwater, New Jersey. The factory was then producing
millions of pounds of fluoride for the Manhattan project, the ultra-secret U.S. military program 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. Their tomatoes were bought up by Campbell's Soup.
But in the summer of 1943, the farmers began to report that their crops were blighted, and that "something
is burning up the peach crops around here."
Poultry died after an all-night thunderstorm, they reported. Farm workers who ate the produce they had picked sometimes
vomited all night and into the next day. "I remember our horses looked sick and were too stiff to work,"
these reporters were told by Mildred Giordano, who was a teenager at the time. Some cows were so crippled they
could not stand up, and grazed by crawling on their bellies.
The account was confirmed in taped interviews, shortly before he died, with Philip Sadtler 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 riveted
on the New Jersey incident, according to once-secret documents obtained by these reporters. After the war's end,
in a secret Manhattan Project memo dated March 1, 1946, the Project's chief of fluoride toxicology studies, Harold
C. Hodge, worriedly wrote to his boss Colonel Stafford L. Warren, Chief of the Medical Division, 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," continued Hodge;
"1. A question of injury of the peach crop in 1944."
"2. A report of extraordinary fluoride content of vegetables grown in this area."
"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, then sued du Pont and the Manhattan Project for fluoride
damage -- reportedly the first lawsuits against the U.S. A-bomb program.
Although seemingly trivial, the lawsuits shook the government, the secret documents reveal. Under the personal
direction of Manhattan Project chief Major General Leslie R.Groves, secret meetings were convened in Washington,
with compulsory attendance by scores of scientists and officials from the U.S War Department, the Manhattan Project,
the Food and Drug Administration, the Agriculture and Justice Departments, the U.S Army's Chemical Warfare Service
and Edgewood Arsenal, the Bureau of Standards, and du Pont lawyers. Declassified memos of the meetings reveal a
secret mobilization of the full forces of the government to defeat the New Jersey farmers:
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," stated
Manhattan Project Lieutenant Colonel Cooper B. Rhodes, in a memo c.c.'d to General Groves.
27 August 1945
Subject: Investigation of Crop Damage at Lower Penns Neck, New Jersey
To: The Commanding General, Army Service Forces, Pentagon Building, Washington D.C.
"At the request of the Secretary of War the Department of Agriculture has agreed to cooperate in investigating
complaints of crop damage attributed... to fumes from a plant operated in connection with the Manhattan Project."
Signed, L.R. Groves, Major General U.S.A
"The Department of Justice is cooperating in the defense of these suits," wrote General Groves in a Feb.
28, 1946 memo to the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy.
Why the national-security emergency over a few lawsuits by New Jersey farmers? In 1946 the United States had begun
full-scale production of atomic bombs. No other nation had yet tested a nuclear weapon, and the A-bomb was seen
as crucial for U.S 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," writes Lansing Lamont in his acclaimed book about
the first atomic bomb test, "Day of Trinity."
In the case of fluoride, "If the farmers won, it would open the door to further suits, which might impede
the bomb program's ability to use fluoride," said Jacqueline Kittrell, a Tennessee public interest lawyer
specializing in nuclear cases, who examined the declassified fluoride documents. (Kittrell has represented plaintiffs
in several human radiation experiment cases.) She added, "The reports of human injury were especially threatening,
because of the potential for enormous settlements -- not to mention the PR problem."
Indeed, du Pont was particularly concerned about the "possible psychologic reaction" to the New Jersey
pollution incident, according to a secret 1946 Manhattan Project memo. Facing a threat from the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) to embargo the region's produce because of "high fluoride content," du Pont dispatched its lawyers
to the FDA offices in Washington, where an agitated meeting ensued. According to a memo sent next day to General
Groves, Du Pont'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 du Pont 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, new tests for fluoride in the New Jersey area would be conducted -- not by the Department
of Agriculture -- but by the U.S. Army's Chemical Warfare Service because "work done by the Chemical Warfare
Service would carry the greatest weight as evidence if... lawsuits are started by the complainants." The memo
was signed by General Groves.
Meanwhile, the public relations problem remained unresolved -- local citizens were in a panic about fluoride.
The farmer's 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 March 26, 1946. Although he had been
diagnosed with fluoride poisoning by his doctor, Kille departed the luncheon convinced of the government's good
faith. The next day he wrote to the general, wishing the other farmers could have been present, he said, so "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."
In a subsequent secret Manhattan project memo, a broader solution to the public relations problem was suggested
by chief fluoride toxicologist Harold C. Hodge. He wrote to the Medical Section chief, Col. 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 du Pont had vented into the atmosphere during
the war. "Disclosure... would be injurious to the military security of the United States," wrote Manhattan
Project Major C.A Taney, Jr. The farmers were pacified with token financial settlements, according to interviews
with descendants still living in the area.
"All we knew is that du Pont released some chemical that burned up all the peach trees around here,"
recalls 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, too, acted stiff and walked stiff, recalls
his sister Mildred. "Could any of that have been the fluoride ?" she asked. (The symptoms she detailed
to the authors are cardinal signs of fluoride toxicity, according to veterinary toxicologists.)
The Giordano family, too, has been plagued by bone and joint problems, Mildred adds. Recalling the settlement received
by the Giordanos, Angelo told these reporters that "my father said he got about $200."
The farmers were stonewalled in their search for information, and their complaints have long since been forgotten.
But they unknowingly left their imprint on history -- their claims 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 1945 memo from Manhattan Project Lt. Col. Rhodes to General Groves stated: "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 fluoride."
Much of the proof of fluoride's safety in low doses rests on the postwar work performed by the University of Rochester,
in anticipation of lawsuits against the bomb program for human injury.
Fluoride and the Cold War.
Delegating fluoride safety studies to the University of Rochester was not surprising. During WWII the federal government
had become 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 needs.
The prestigious upstate New York college, in particular, had housed a key wartime division of the Manhattan Project,
studying the health effects of the new "special materials," such as uranium, plutonium, beryllium and
fluoride, being used to make the atomic bomb. That work continued after the war, with millions of dollars flowing
from the Manhattan Project and its successor organization, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). (Indeed, the bomb
left an indelible imprint on all U.S. science in the late 1940's and 50's. Up to 90% of federal funds for university
research came from either the Defense Department or the AEC in this period, according to Noam Chomsky's 1996 book
"The Cold War and the University.")
The University of Rochester medical school became a revolving door for senior bomb program scientists. Postwar
faculty included Stafford Warren, the top medical officer of the Manhattan Project, and Harold 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 conducted at its Atomic Energy Project (AEP), a top-secret
facility funded by the AEC and housed in 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-winning account by Eileen
Welsome led to a 1995 U.S. Presidential investigation, and a multimillion-dollar cash settlement for victims. (Read
Eileen Welsome's account of the U. of Rochester's Medical Experimentation at http://www.fluoridealert.org/p-files.htm)
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 Harold C. Hodge, who had led the Manhattan
Project investigation of alleged human injury in the New Jersey fluoride-pollution incident.
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, of course, and the claims of human injury were 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, it might have
opened the bomb program and its contractors to lawsuits for injury to human health, as well as public outcry.
Comments lawyer Kittrell: "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, " adds Kittrell, "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 center for establishing
the safety of fluoride, as well as its effectiveness in reducing tooth decay, according to Dental School spokesperson
William H. Bowen, MD. The key figure in this research, Bowen said, was 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. The bomb program
needed human studies, as they had needed human studies for plutonium, and adding fluoride to public water supplies
provided one opportunity.
The A-Bomb Program and Water Fluoridation
Bomb-program scientists played a prominent -- if unpublicized -- 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 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 Dr. Hodge, then
chief of fluoride toxicity studies for the Manhattan Project.
Subsequent members 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 Pentagon group which sired the Manhattan Project.
Their military affiliations were kept secret: Hodge was described as a pharmacologist, Barnett as a pediatrician.
Placed in charge of the Newburgh project was David B. Ast, chief dental officer of the State Health Department.
Ast had participated in a key secret wartime conference on fluoride held by the Manhattan Project, 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 also selected the types of medical studies to be done,
and "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, which 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 ten years its residents were studied by the 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 - key information sought by the bomb program: "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 pediatric studies at Newburgh.
The final report of the Newburgh Demonstration Project, published in 1956 in the Journal of the American Dental
Association, concluded that "small concentrations" of fluoride were safe for U.S.citizens. The biological
proof -- "based on work performed ... at the University of Rochester Atomic Energy Project" -- was delivered
by Dr. Hodge.
Today, news that scientists from the atomic bomb program secretly shaped and guided the Newburgh fluoridation experiment,
and studied the citizen's 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 1950's, Mayor Carey was taken to the old firehouse on Broadway in Newburgh, which housed
the Public Health Clinic. There, doctors from the Newburgh fluoridation project studied her teeth, and a peculiar
fusion of two finger bones on her left hand she had been born with. Today, adds Carey, 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."
Contacted by these reporters, the director of the Newburgh experiment, David B. Ast, says he was unaware 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 du Pont case--as secret memos state? He told the
reporters he had no recollection of these events.
A spokesperson for the University of Rochester Medical Center, Bob Loeb, confirmed that blood and tissue samples
from Newburgh had been tested by the University's Dr. Hodge. On the ethics of secretly studying U.S 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 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), successor to the Atomic Energy Commission.
A spokesperson for the DOE in Washington, Jayne Brady, 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 du Pont 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, the spokesperson stated, "Nothing that we have suggests that
the DOE or predecessor agencies -- especially the Manhattan Project -- authorized fluoride experiments to be performed
on children in the 1940's."
When told that the reporters had several documents that directly tied the Manhattan Project's successor agency
at the University of Rochester, the AEP, to the Newburgh experiment, the DOE spokesperson later conceded her study
was confined to "the available universe" of documents. Two days later spokesperson Jayne 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 project," she said.
The crucial question arising from this investigation is: Were adverse health findings from Newburgh and other bomb-program
fluoride studies 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 WW2--on "fluoride metabolism"--is
missing from the files of the U.S. National Archives. Participants in the 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 Project, and U.S. Public Health Service dentist H.Trendley Dean, popularly known as
the "father of fluoridation." "If it is missing from the files, it is probably still classified,"
National Archives librarians told these reporters.
A 1944 WW2 Manhattan Project classified report on water fluoridation is missing from the files of the University
of Rochester Atomic Energy Project, the U.S. 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 "MP-1500 series" is present. "Either those documents are still classified, or they've been 'disappeared'
by the government," says 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 U.S. human
radiation experiments.
Seven pages have been cut out of a 1947 Rochester bomb-project notebook entitled "Du Pont litigation."
"Most unusual," commented chief medical school archivist Chris Hoolihan.
Similarly, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by these authors over a year ago with the DOE for hundreds
of classified fluoride reports have failed to dislodge any. "We're behind," explained Amy Rothrock, FOIA
officer for the Department of Energy at their Oak Ridge operations.
Was information 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. Comparison of the secret with the published version
indicates that the U.S. 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,
conducted by a team of dentists from the Manhattan Project.
* The secret version reports that most of the men had no teeth left. The published version reports only that the
men had fewer cavities.
* 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.
* 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.
The published version concludes that "the men were unusually healthy, judged from both a medical and dental
point of view."
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 U.S. agency which today funds fluoride research, said, "I
wasn't aware of any input from the Atomic Energy Commission." Nevertheless, he insisted, fluoride's efficacy
and safety in the prevention of dental cavities over the last fifty 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."
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-era fluoride safety studies, she asks, "Were
they all done like this?"
Archival research by Clifford Honicker
About the authors :
Joel Griffiths is a medical writer in New York City, author of a book on radiation hazards and numerous articles
for medical and popular publications.
Chris Bryson holds a Masters degree from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, and has worked
for the British Broadcasting Corporation, The Manchester Guardian, The Christian Science Monitor and Public Television.
"Most frequently
asked questions relating to fluoride"
Definitions:
Caries: Cavities
Dentifrice: Toothpaste
Fluoride: any combination of elements which contain the fluorine (F-) ion.
Dental fluorosis: a condition caused by an excessive intake of fluorides - while the teeth develop - characterized
mainly by mottling of the enamel, although the skeletal system is also affected.
1) I heard fluoride is a poison.
Is this true?
Yes. Fluoride is an acute toxin
with a rating slightly higher than that of lead. According to "Clinical Toxicology of Commercial products,"
5th Edition, 1984, lead is given a toxicity rating of 3 to 4, and Fluoride is rated at 4 (3 = moderately toxic,
4 = very toxic). On
Fluoride is also considered toxic waste. It is one of the most bone seeking elements known to mankind. The US Public
Health Service has stated that fluoride makes the bones more brittle and the dental enamel more porous.
2) How much fluoride am I taking
in?
Current intake is estimated
to be between 5 and 7 mg/day in "optimally fluoridated" areas. Current fluoride intake is equally divided
between drinking water (in fluoridated areas), food, other beverages, and dental products, meaning that even if
you don't live in a fluoridated area, fluoride is endangering your health. Average fluoride content in juices is
0.02 to 2.80 parts per million, in part because of variations in fluoride concentrations of water used in production.
Children's ingestion of fluoride from juices and juice-flavored beverages can be quite substantial and a crucial
factor in developing fluorosis. Grape juice has been found to contain up to 6.8 mg/L of fluoride, a can of chicken
soup up to 4 mg of fluoride. Fluoride can be found in water, toothpaste, mouthwash, Dentist's treatment, fluoride
pills, juice, soft drinks, canned food, commercial fruit and vegetables, Teflon and T-Fal
coated items (such as frying pans), etc. (Note: No "optimal" fluoride intake has ever been scientifically
documented.)
3) How much is too much?
As little as 0.04 mg/kg/day
has been proven to cause adverse health effects. Retention of 2mg a day will produce crippling skeletal fluorosis
in one's lifetime.
4) Does fluoride accumulate
in the body?
Yes. Approximately half of
each day's fluoride intake will be retained. This is what makes it so dangerous. "The dose makes the poison".
All sides agree to the fact that healthy kidneys can eliminate only about 50% of daily fluoride intake. The rest
gets absorbed in calcified tissues, like bones and teeth.
The National Academy Of Sciences (NAS) stated in 1977 that, for the average individual,
a retention of 2mg/day would result in crippling skeletal fluorosis after 40 years. Considering the above-mentioned
intake level, it is likely that skeletal fluorosis already affects a significant portion of the population.
Children, the elderly and any person with impaired kidney function (which includes many
AIDS patients), are in the
high-risk group for fluoride poisoning and must be warned to monitor their fluoride intake. Also at high risk are
people with immunodeficiencies, diabetes and heart ailments, as well as anyone with calcium, magnesium and Vitamin
C deficiencies.
(At the level of 0.4 ppm renal (kidney) impairment has been shown.) (Junco, L.I. et al, "Renal Failure and
Fluorosis", Fluorine & Dental Health, JAMA 222:783 - 785, 1972)
5) How does fluoride get into the water?
Most often as a by-product
from the fertilizer, aluminum and other industries, who manage to sell this toxic waste to municipalities WORLD-wide.
6) What about my toothpaste?
Studies show that adults can
absorb up to 0.5 mg per "TV ribbon" brushing. Small children, even if pea-size amount is used, will still
absorb the same, more if the child is younger and has less swallowing control skills. Half a tube of toothpaste
can kill a child. Current content of sodium fluoride in toothpaste in Canada and the US is up to 0.4% = 4000 ppm
(parts per million). Bubblegum- flavored dentifrice obviously is especially inviting for children. Since April
1997 all toothpaste in the US must carry a warning label, advising parents what to do if their child swallows more
than the pea-size brushing amount. Wholesale containers carry the poison symbol of skull and crossbones.
7) What about the fluoride
treatment at the dental office?
Fluoride treatments can contain
between 10,000 to 20,000 ppm. There is no regulated dose requirement. There are cases known of children dying in
the dentist's chair.
(New York
Times, Jan.20, 1979: "$750,000 Given in Child's Death in Fluoride Case" about a three year old child
killed by fluoride treatment in the Dentist's office.)
8) How can my dentist say that
it's good for my teeth?
By receiving limited training
on the subject and being misinformed on purpose by the ADA and CDA. Figures in ADA pamphlets contain an incredible
amount of untruths, and outright fraudulent claims. If you check the references cited and numbers listed in your
local libraries, you will undoubtedly come to the same conclusion. Some fluoridation endorsements are listed which
proves fraudulent when checked. Most dentists never bother to take the time to study both sides of the fluoride
issue. Consider this statement by the ADA in 1979: "Individual dentists must be convinced that they need not be familiar with scientific reports and field
investigations on fluoridation to be effective participants and that non-participation is overt neglect of personal
responsibility." There are NO reliable studies, conducted under ethical research guidelines, which prove the
benefits of fluoride supplementation. The FDA admits to this! There are more than 500 peer-reviewed studies documenting
the adverse effects.
Furthermore, dentists make higher profits in fluoridated areas and through fluoride use. As a result of mottled
enamel, many more restorative measures are necessary, such as braces, bridges, etc. For the ADA/CDA, this condition
is a real moneymaker, because cosmetic dentistry is far more lucrative than cavity repair. In addition, there is
an abundance of evidence in the scientific literature indicating that fluoride causes a delay in the normal shedding
of the "baby" teeth, and their replacement by permanent teeth. This delay has been shown to increase
the number of children with malpositioned teeth. Again, braces are far more expensive than fillings.
(Note: In a 1972 report by
the American Dental Association, it is stated that dentists make 17% more profit in fluoridated areas as opposed
to non-fluoridated areas.)
(Douglas et al., "Impact
of water fluoridation on dental practices and dental manpower", Journal of the American Dental Association;
84:355-67, 1972)
In 1993 the National Academy
of Sciences warned, "dental fluorosis...might be more than a cosmetic defect if enough
fluorotic enamel is fractured and lost to cause pain, adversely affect food choices, compromise chewing efficiency,
and require complex dental treatment."
The International Academy of
Oral Medicine and Toxicology has classified fluoride as an unapproved dental medicament due to its high toxicity.
The FDA considers fluoride
an unapproved new drug for which there is no proof of safety or effectiveness. The FDA does not consider fluoride
an essential nutrient.
Four major studies involving
480,000 children (US, 39,000; Japan, 22,000; India, 400,000; Tucson, 29,000) comparing fluoridated and non-fluoridated
areas showed no significant difference in decay rates. Proven is that a higher intake of fluoride will actually
cause MORE cavities, especially for children with low dietary calcium intake.
9) Is it true that fluoride
can cause cancer?
Yes. In 1990 fluoride was found
to be an equivocal carcinogen by the National Cancer Institute Toxicology Program.
(Maurer,
et. al.,"Fluoride an equivocal carcinogen. J.National Cancer Institute 82, 1118-26, 1990)
In 1992 further studies by
the New Jersey Department of Health confirmed a 6.9 fold increase in bone cancer in young males.
(Cohn, Perry D. Ph.D. "An
Epidemiological Report on Drinking Water" Fluoridation and Osteosarcoma in Young Males, New Jersey Department
of Health, Environmental Health Service, Trenton NJ November 8, 1992)
In 1997 there were more than
80 references available, linking fluoride to cancer.
10) Is it true that fluoride
can increase hip fractures?
Yes. According to Dr. J. William
Hirzy (vice-president of the NFFE LOCAL 2050, the union representing all scientists at the EPA, Washington, D.C.)
there have been 5 epidemiological studies done since 1990, in three different countries, all showing a higher increase
in hip fractures in fluoridated communities.
Some studies have indicated
a 87% higher risk of hip fractures to the elderly in areas
where water fluoridation was even below 1.5 ppm.
11) Is this also true for Osteoporosis
and Arthritis?
Yes, most definitely. There
are also studies proving that fluoride toxicity affects fertility.
12) Does it cause brain damage?
Yes. Fluorides lower the intelligence
capacity of humans, with children, again, especially susceptible to early fluoride toxicity. IQ levels were significantly
lower than children not exposed to fluorides in all age groups listed. (According to Dr. Hirzy, 5 to 19 points
lower!, other studies have shown 11 to 19 points lower!)
(Li,X.S.,Zhi,J.L.,Gao,R.O.,"Effects of Fluoride Exposure on
the Intelligence of Children", Fluoride;28:182-189, 1995)
Dr. Phyllis Mullinex and her
co-workers have also conducted further studies proving the neurotoxicity of fluoride in rats.
(Note: this also explains a recent
Studies proving that fluorides transfer through the placenta are well known.
(Meanwhile, Dr.Weil, Internet's Health Guru, advocates fluoride supplements for pregnant woman in his book "8
Weeks To Optimum Health"...)
There are also several studies
linking aluminum with fluoride, showing that the bioavailability of aluminum is increased in the presence of fluorides,
causing aluminum in the brain to double in treated animals. According to an October 28, 1992 Wall Street Journal
Article about a study conducted by Varnier JA, et al.: "Rats fed the highest doses developed irregular mincing
steps characteristic of senile animals.... Post mortem examination of the rat brains disclosed 'substantial cell
loss in structures associated with dementia -- the neo-cortex and hippocampus'."
(Note: Alzheimer's Disease, first diagnosed by Dr. Alois Alzheimer in 1907, is now
the #4 killer for every person over 60 in the
13) How wide-spread is this
problem?
The US Public Health Service
estimates that 1 in 5 children have dental fluorosis. (By the way, all native reservations in the
14) If all this is true, how
can all this be possible, sanctioned by government?
In 1939 a dentist named H.
Trendley Dean, DDS, examined water from 345 communities in
(J.Colquhoun;International Symposium on Fluoridation, Porte Alegre, Brazil, September
1988)
Meanwhile, a number of court
cases were being launched due to fluoride contamination, mainly by the aluminum industry. In addition the Manhattan
Project, the secret atomic bomb project, was in a big race to build the world's first A-bomb. A pollution incident
of great magnitude occurred at a factory in
In 1945, supposedly as a result of Dr. Dean's discovery, the PHS planned to conduct a 10-year study of fluoridation
in two cities.
15) How about the effects on
the environment?
Many studies have been conducted
examining the adverse effects of fluoride on the Eco-system. In 1995, the CEPA identified the now closed Brunswick
Mining and Smelting Fertilizer Plant in
Many serious toxic and detrimental effects to plants and animal species have been documented, salmon populations
in particular being in the high-risk category.
IT'S A TOXIC WASTE!
Think about it - day after day, millions of tons of fluoride are "legally" released into the environment,
especially in fluoridated areas. Showers, toilet flushes, lawn sprinkling...As a result of the original Manhattan
Project logic, industries, now mainly the fertilizer and aluminum industries, have a perfect way to release their
hazardous and toxic waste. It would cost up to $
16) What do I need to do? How
can I protect myself?
Your first
line of defence should be the water you drink. Very few water filtration systems remove fluoride. MiraculeWater processors systems for drinking water are designed to remove more than 99%
of the fluoride in the source water.
Also, eliminate any Teflon or T-Fal coated cooking ware, for scratches in the surface will release PTFE, another
toxic fluoride compound. Avoid fruit juices coming from fluoridated areas. All non-organic grape products are especially
high in fluoride content due to the number of fertilizer and pesticide applications. Wine can contain up to 3 ppm
fluoride. Avoid using any toothpaste or mouthwash containing fluoride. There are many alternatives on the market. A recent store survey in
In addition, lobbying is required to demand fluoride content labeling on commercial products. Steps to educate
the public about this proven health risk and fluoride's toxic properties must be taken immediately and health advisories
issued.
Water fluoridation
should cease immediately and steps should be taken to reduce fluoride in food, drink, and dental products.
If you live in a fluoridated
area, take action to stop the addition of fluoride into the water supply.
Individuals ARE successful
in educating legislators about the issue and have helped pass laws to stop the addition of fluoride into the water
supply. (Notably Darlene Sherrell, who not only discovered that the original Roholm/Hodge safety figures had been
miscalculated and then persisted with the help of Dr. Bob Carton and Senator Bob Graham in her efforts to get the
National Research Council (NAS/NRC) to adopt the new figures - which had even been corrected by Hodge himself in
1979 - but also managed to change the law in Michigan, giving people the right to vote on fluoridation.
I hope that everyone reading this understands why those of us at MiraculeWater designed our Coolers, Under Sink/Counter, & Portable water processors to remove 99%+ of the fluoride in the source water.
Link section
International Society for Fluoride Research
http://www.fluoride-journal.com
IAOMT Risk Assessment for ingested fluoride
http://www.SaveTeeth.org
Prominent Researcher Apologizes for Pushing Fluoride
http://www.mercola.com/2000/sept/3/fluoride_forbes.htm
The Fluoride Debate: A response to the American Dental Association's booklet, "Fluoridation Facts"
www.fluoridedebate.com
Fluoride Action Network (Excellent Resource, Very Up-to-Date)
www.fluoridealert.org
Fluoride: Protected Pollutant or Panacea? (Elkie Babiuk's site)
www.fluoridation.com
New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation
www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof/
Fluoride Controversy, the Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients
www.tldp.com/fluoride.htm
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water (Mountainview, California)
www.nofluoride.com
More Scientific Facts on Fluoride
www.all-natural.com/fleffect.html
Fluoridation Debate (Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 105, Number 11, November 1997)
ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1997/105-11/forum.html
Fluoridation: The Overdosing of America - Fact or Fiction? (Slides by Gerald H. Smith, D.D.S.)
www.icnr.com/FluoridePres.html
Darryl W. Roundy, D.C. - Fluoride Research
www.atlaschiro.com/fluorideresch.htm
Fluoridation Fluoride Toxic Chemicals In Your Water
www.holisticmed.com/fluoride
Does water fluoridation have negative side effects?
doctoryourself.com/fluoride_cancer.html