Brekend Nieuws | Forum | Brits Nieuws | Het Nieuws van de V.S. | Het Nieuws van de wereld | Politiek Nieuws | Nieuws sc.i-technologie | Het Nieuws van de oorlog & van het Terrorisme | Het Nieuws van sporten | Multimedia | Vastgestelde Homepage

Zaterdag, 28 Juni, 2008

SchNews | Als u wist dat iemand vergift in uw watervoorziening zette, wat zou u doen? Oproepen de autoriteiten? Goed hinder geen cos. het de overheid weten het doen van het is!

Als u in de West-Midlands of het Noordoosten leeft, zijn de kansen dat u reeds een fluoridated watervoorziening hebt - en de commentaren van de Secretaresse Alan Johnson van de Gezondheid maakten het duidelijk vroeger op het jaar dat hij scherp is om dit giftige industrieafval te zien dat aan iedereen anders water zo spoedig mogelijk wordt toegevoegd. Waarom? Hij gelooft dat het een zeer belangrijk middel `is om tandbederf' aan te pakken - ondanks het feit dat geen wetenschappelijk bewijsmateriaal dit bevestigt, en veel ander bewijsmateriaal verbindend fluorideopname met beendeficiënties, kanker, gezamenlijke pijn, huiduitbarsting, schade aan schildklieren en zelfs de tekorten van de IQ te voorschijn gekomen.

Zo wat gebeurt? Goed, heeft Alan Johnston de argumenten geslikt die door de tand en farmaceutische lobbyende groepen naar voren worden gebracht, die hier van de V.S. zijn uitgevoerd waar, sinds de jaren '40, zij erin zijn geslaagd om meer dan 70% van fluoridated water te krijgen. Het is enkel wetenschap die zij hebben gezegd - werd het fluoride getoond in de medio-jaren '30 om een gunstig effect op de weerslag van de tandbederf van kinderen te hebben, zo waarom het bij bron iedereen de tanden zonder hen moeten doen een ding beschermen niet toevoegen en?

Maar dit argument van het massamedicijn heeft meer gaten in dan mijn suiker-bedorven tanden. Het aantal is duidelijk, ER, massamedicijn? Het onbekende doseringsniveau (de het waterconsumptie van iedereen is verschillend) en zonder de patiënten' stemt toe? Sindsdien wanneer was die normale praktijk? U niet forcefeed mensenaspirine omdat één van hen een hoofdpijn kan ervaren… het onlogisch en verkwistend is - om de rechten van mensen niet te vermelden medicijn te weigeren.

In feite, is een onderdompeling in de wetenschappelijke fluorideliteratuur als het duiken in een zeer modderige pool, herinnerend van `die is niet werkelijk slecht voor u' rookt of `de klimaatverandering is werkelijk geen gebeurende' debatten van recente decennia. Dit alleen zou de alarmklokken moeten bellen. Vele studies suggereren die actuele' toepassing `van fluoride, d.w.z. applying it to the teeth directly by way of toothpaste etc does have some beneficial effect on cavity rates, although these don’t attempt to separate out all the other factors which may play a part in tooth health, like diet, or attempt to discover other ways of achieving the same benefits. While fluoride is proven (and accepted by all) to cause dental fluorosis (pitted or mottled tooth enamel) – now widespread in American mouths - little high quality study has been done on other side effects like bone deterioration or cancers, which may mean a slightly healthier smile is far outweighed by a shorter diseased life.

And the story with applying the fluoride by drinking it in water is even cloudier. There is no unequivocal proof that it works. In fact, since large parts of America started sipping it in the 1950s, numerous studies have shown that, all else being equal, tooth decay rates for fluoridated and non-fluoridated water areas are, er, exactly the same – or in some cases even higher in fluoridated areas! This has led to nearly all of Europe long since abandoning the practice – but it seems that governments in the UK (10% fluoridated) and Ireland (72%) just can’t resist the persuasive American connection.

If you were of a slightly cynical mind (who us?!), it would almost seem that nobody at the top wants to hear any evidence contradicting the fluoride dogma. The approved studies are designed (and funded) purely to decide whether adding fluoride for teeth can be considered ‘a good thing’. This is the result demanded by big business eager to turn an expensive-to-get-rid-of toxic industrial waste product (left over in pesticide production, aluminium processing and nuclear uranium enriching, amongst other things) into a ‘miracle’ health ingredient to be boxed up, re-branded and sold back in small amounts to the general public in return for a handsome profit. Well you can see their logic. Two birds with one stone and profits up. No wonder that the many more recent long term-studies and peer-reviews of past data showing no provable benefits (and many possible negatives) are swiftly discredited or ignored.

CLOSE TO THE BONE

And there are other (presumably weakened, deteriorating) skeletons in the closet. In 1997, two American journalists dug out previously classified documents revealing how fluoride policy and research was shaped by atom bomb making at the end of the Second World War. The first court cases against the government from people affected by living near to the bomb making facilities were not for the effects of radiation, but for damage to crops from fluoride pollution.

The secret ‘Manhattan Project’ memos – the group of government and industrial capitalists running the development of the nuclear option – show that they knew about the problems and commissioned pro-fluoride research merely to help fight these and future possible court cases. Despite editorial approval and full referencing, the damning article was dropped by the Christian Science Monitor and never widely published.

Despite Birmingham and other areas’ water being contaminated, no new UK regions have joined them since the mid 1980s when the rollout was put on hold. But the threat is back. In 1993, despite no demand, the government passed an act giving regional strategic health authorities (SHA) the power to compel water to be fluoridated. It must have been frustrating for them and their corporate sponsors that, to date, not one of them has done so. So it seems like a whole new round of propaganda and pressure is about to be applied. Anti-fluoride action groups have sprung up around the country (see www.hampshireagainstfluoridation.blogspot.com and www.freewebs.com/keepwatersafe for example) who are working to try and ensure that nobody else is unwillingly force-fed this harmful toxic poison for no health benefit. As recent studies in China and Mexico have shown a link between fluoride consumption and lower IQ scores, maybe they’re just out to keep us all dumb…?

* There’s tons more info to get yer teeth into at www.freewebs.com/keepwatersafe and www.fluoridealert.org

See More:UK News 

Have Your Say: Along For Fluoride
Please note, only selected comments will be published.

Or discuss this report in our new forums

RSS TrackBack URL

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

This entry was posted on Saturday, June 28th, 2008 at 4:54 am and is filed under Contributions & Guests . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Loading ...

ADVERTISEMENTS

SITE MAPS

7/7 Afghanistan Alternative Energy Art BBC Big Brother Bilderberg Biometrics Bush CIA Climate Change Cover Up Cults Culture Database State David Hicks David Ray Griffin Democrats Demos Drugs Education EU False Flag FBI Fraud Free Speech Freemasons G8 Globalization Guantanamo Health News History ID Cards Internet Iran Iraq Israel Law Marches MI5 MI6 Microsoft Military MoD Money Music NASA Neocons NSA Oil Pakistan Podcast Police State Propaganda RFID RINF Rumsfeld Science Secrecy Security Slavery Space Sports Spying Stephen Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony Blair Torture TV UK News UN USA News Video Voting Warfare White House Wolfowitz World News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version