Fluoride in Drinking Water Increases Toxicity of Aluminum Pornrevolution.net • View topic - Fluoride in Drinking Water Increases Toxicity of Aluminum

Fluoride in Drinking Water Increases Toxicity of Aluminum

We are building a large collection of sex-related stuff. Anyone can have us publish their stuff, for free

Fluoride in Drinking Water Increases Toxicity of Aluminum

Postby admin_pornrev » Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:18 pm

Let's Roll Forums (http://letsrollforums.com/index.php)
- The Peoples Health Forum (http://letsrollforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=68)
- - Aluminum and Fluoride a deadly combination (http://letsrollforums.com/showthread.php?t=17620)

sewardsailor 07-31-2008 00:26
________________________________________
Aluminum and Fluoride a deadly combination

Fluoride in Drinking Water Increases Toxicity of Aluminum

FROM: http://www.newconnexion.net/article/07-01/fluoride.html

In 1994, the New York Times reported a scientific study that revealed that aluminum and fluoride in water could be responsible for the alarming increase in Alzheimer's Disease and senile dementia. This confirmed the long-held suspicion of environmental writer George Glasser that fluoride has the ability to react with other toxic minerals in drinking water. Serious drug interactions are common in medicine, and for years Glasser has badgered various US government agencies to investigate this specific interaction between fluoride and other substances. "Aluminum sulfate (alum) is used to clarify drinking water and I could see the possible relationship with Alzheimer's-like dementia," said Glasser. "

In 1999, the US Environmental Protection Agency finally reviewed three studies carried out by scientists at Binghamton University in New York. The scientists reported 80% death rates, kidney damage and brain damage in rats exposed to half of one milligram of aluminum fluoride complexes in a liter of drinking water. This is less than half of the amount of fluoride which is added in fluoridation schemes. Finally, the National Toxicology Program was asked to commission studies to determine the extent of neurotoxic damage from aluminum in drinking water, particularly stressing the fluoride interaction."

Last October, a Report by the National Institutes of Environmental Heath Sciences(NIEHS) acknowledged that fluoride has been observed to have synergistic effects on the toxicity of aluminum. "I was particularly pleased when the US Environmental Protection Agency report by Urbansky and Schock on the toxicity of lead and fluoride in drinking water confirmed that fluoride complexes with other substances in the water. They also acknowledged that most drinking water contains a substantial amount of fluoro-aluminium complexes. This should be a warning to dentists who hold with the simplistic notion that fluoride only affects teeth and is perfectly safe in drinking water."

According to the NIEHS Report, most water treatment processes result in increased levels of aluminum in the finished drinking water.
It stated that fluoridation will result in aluminum fluoride complexes which will enhance neurotoxicity, or that fluoride itself will enhance uptake and synergise the toxicity of the aluminum.

Other studies have shown that in the presence of fluoride, aluminum leaches out of cookware. Boiling fluoridated tap water in an aluminum pan leached almost 200 parts per million (ppm) of aluminum into the water in 10 minutes. Leaching of up to 600 PPM occurred with prolonged boiling. Different releases of aluminum depend upon the composition of the pan and the type of food being cooked. Using non-fluoridated water showed almost no leaching from aluminum pans.

Glasser is frustrated that the Report recommended further studies. "There are more than 40,000 studies on fluoride in the scientific literature. How many more do they need? The recent York review examined less than 300 - and they never bothered to review the Binghamton University studies.

The incidence of Alzheimer's Disease and Alzheimer's-like dementia is hitting people at much younger ages. The average age used to be 65 - now, it affects people in their forties in ever-increasing numbers. With these revelations, health authorities have a moral obligation to employ the precautionary principle and cease the practice of artificial fluoridation forthwith. In the meantime, six million people in England and about 160 million in the United States drink artificially fluoridated water."



Fluoride combines with aluminum in drinking water
http://www.actionpa.org/fluoride/aluminum.html


Phil Jayhan 07-31-2008 02:51
________________________________________
History of Water Fluoridation & the Manhattan Project

Great article Seward! Many of us already know the dangers of fluoridation and ingesting this seriously poisonous chemical. Many also are aware that many prisons in our not so distant past used fluoride to sedate their prison populations and make them more docile, less aggressive and basically make their prison populations apathetic;

Today, it is not only in our water, but in our toothpastes, mouthwashes, deodorants and many other daily used products, which are used by tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of people in this country (USA) alone.

But what many people don't realize is the even darker side of the story, that fluoridation of water, and health care products actually had its origins in the Manhattan Project, and the making of the atomic bomb. In order to process the uranium and plutonium, huge mega-amounts of this chemical was required, and as a consequence, they had leftovers of huge amounts of this rather poisonous substance, and no where to properly dispose of it.

No problem really, as they started a huge public awareness campaign on all sorts of health ills experienced by most Americans and sold Americans that fluoride was the answer, mostly through the widely used medium of radio, news-print media and eventually TV. Thus their solution to how to dispose of this rather obnoxious waste product was to simply take these poisons and put it into products such as toothpaste, drinking water, mouthwashes, etc...

Thus their solution to how to avoid the huge costs of disposal were answered, and how was it answered? Now, not only would they not have to pour hundreds of millions, billions of dollars into safely disposing of this product, but they would actually now make money off selling this poison to water treatment plants across the country, as well as manufacturers of tooth paste, mouthwash, deodorants, etc...

Having said all of that, I will now leave you off with this rather excellent article from fluoridedangers.blogspot.com;

Enjoy!
Phil :wink:
________________________________________

________________________________________



Introduction: "....The report offers a glimpse into the history of fluoride, a bio-accumulative toxic that Americans ingest every day. The authors, Griffiths and Bryson, spent more than a year on research. With the belief that the information should be withheld no longer, the authors gave their report to Waste Not, and others, with a short note: "use as you wish."

The science of fluoridating public drinking water systems has been, from day one, shoddy at best. As we learn from this report, the basis of that science was rooted in protecting the U.S. Atomic bomb program from litigation. Americans have been convinced that fluoride will save their teeth and we drink more fluoridated water than any other nationality on earth. We learned about the dirty politics involved in the science and selling of fluoridation to a trusting public. We spent three months researching fluoride which resulted in the longest newsletter we've ever produced: Waste Not # 373. We learned that fluoride is a poison that accumulates in our bones. It has been associated with cancer in young males;

osteoporosis; reduced I.Q.; and hip fractures in the elderly, to name a few. George Orwell would have been dazzled by the promotion of this toxic by dental and public health officials and concurrently, the avoidance of this issue by the environmental community. We think it has a lot to do with the sordid 50-year history of the promotion of fluoridation by the U.S. Department of Public Health and the American Dental Association. Rather than acknowledge the accumulating evidence of fluoride's threat to human health, they have en-trenched themselves in a position that has produced tactics that include the harassment of scientists and dentists who speak out."
Introduction to "Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb" from Waste Not #414 (September 1997) where the article was first published
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 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 "black 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 Wellsome led to a 1995 U.S. Presidential investigation, and a multimillion-dollar cash settlement for victims.

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?"

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.
Archival research: by Clifford Honicker

Waste Not #414: Waste Not is published 48 times a year. Annual rates: Groups & Non-Profits $50; Individuals $40; Students & Seniors $35; Consultants & For-Profits $125; Canadian $US45; Overseas $65. Editors: Ellen & Paul Connett, 82 Judson Street, Canton NY 13617. Tel: 315-379-9200. Fax: 315-379-0448. Email: Waste Not

http://www.fluoridation.com/images/up.gif

http://www.fluoridation.com/images/home.jpg

Fluoride: Protected Pollutant or Panacea?
Are the claimed benefits of ingesting fluoride over-rated
and the risks to our health and eco-system under-reported?

http://www.fluoridation.com/images/abstract.jpg

Bones | Calgary | Cavities | Fertility | Cancer | Health risks | Neurological | Dental Fluorosis and Pictures
ISFR | Ethics | Tributes | Fraud | Authors | Deaths | Quotes | Environment | Skeletal Fluorosis | Definitions
http://www.fluoridation.com/cgi-bin/...%7Cft=0%7Cmd=6


Phil Jayhan 08-03-2008 03:43
________________________________________
Seward,

I stuck this because it covers nearly all the very easy to see points against why nothing we consume should be fluoridated! So short, so succinct, and all so simple! Fluoridation is wrong, and even evil because it makes the consumers of fluoridation, guennia pigs of raw science!

And all that that implies!

cheers-
phil :)

Phil Jayhan 09-25-2008 02:30
________________________________________
This is a great story! And also shows what happens when we the people take back a single freedom or amount of sanity from the governing psychos.

Enjoy~!
Phil

http://www.naturalnews.com/gallery/w...st-results.jpg

Media Cries Foul When County Stops Fluoridating Water

Monday, September 22, 2008 by: Neil McLaughlin (see all articles by this author)

Key concepts: Fluoride, Water and Sodium http://www.naturalnews.com/images/Ic... ... 03.gifWant stories like this e-mailed to you? Click here for free email alerts Original link here: http://www.naturalnews.com/024271.html


(NaturalNews) A recent newscast delivered some great news for natural health advocates while portraying it as a bad thing. On July 19, 2008 Channel 9 News (ABC) in Seminole County, FL reported that "Soon, a natural element will no longer be added to county drinking water, find out how the county tried to avoid telling customers until Channel 9 got involved."

After a commercial break it was revealed that the "natural" element they were referring to was Sodium Fluoride. The idea that the fluoride added to municipal water supplies is "natural" is a common myth. While the Calcium Fluoride molecule is the 5th most abundant component in the Earth’s crust, it is Sodium Fluoride (Sodium Hexafluorosilicate), a toxic by-product of Aluminum production, that is added to the drinking water of most states in the U.S.

Sodium Fluoride has been shown to cause brain damage, ADD, Alzheimer's disease, various types of cancer, kidney problems, thyroid problems and (ironically) tooth problems. An uninformed man was shown on Channel 9 complaining that his children would no longer have the fluoride that they need for their teeth.

History of Fluoridation

In the 1930’s, out of the goodness of their hearts, ALCOA (the leading producer of Aluminum) began performing dental studies. The results of their original study actually determined that the cause of a tooth mottling (Colorado brown stain) was due to higher levels of fluoride. Yes, their own studies originally determined that Fluoride was bad to add to water. At the time it had to be treated as the toxic waste it is. However ALCOA kept at it, and one later study of theirs found that adding fluoride reduced cavities in children age 5 to 9. What a coincidence, they just happened to have lots of sodium fluoride available! As with most studies, the studies funded by the Aluminum Industry eventually found the exact results they were looking for. If they had continued to find the wrong results and couldn't manipulate them easily enough, the funding would have been cut and the study would have been canceled.

So, to protect children as only the Aluminum industry could, ALCOA began pushing for mandatory water fluoridation, which allowed them to start selling fluoride (at 20,000% markup) instead of having to pay for it to be disposed of.

Rat Poison

Many have expressed concern that sodium fluoride often goes by another name:Rat Poison! We shouldn't worry though, claims Dr. Stephen Barrett on Quackwatch dot com (the industry lapdog on health issues) for although fluoride really is rat poison, you'd need to drink a lot of fluoridated water to actually die.

Sodium fluoride was discovered in the 1930's to make people more docile and easily manageable. Fluoride is a key component of Sarin nerve gas and is also used in Prozac. The myth that fluoride helps teeth is so widespread that 70% of Americans believe it should be added to their water, and as of the year 2000, 41 U.S. States fluoridated their water. Even natural companies like Tom’s of Maine offer fluoridated toothpaste to appease customers who have apparently demanded it.

The Bottom Line

It may come as a surprise to learn just why Seminole county in Florida is making this important step that will almost certainly improve the health of their residents: cost reduction. Channel 9 reported that the cost of fluoride has increased and that budget cuts were the reason to longer add the element to water. According to Wikipedia, it costs 31 cents per person per year to add fluoride to water, along with other equipment repair costs.

This is the silver lining of our collapsing economy: people and cities can no longer afford to be so wasteful. Since most of the products people buy are toxic, the less they can spend, the better off the Earth will be. Given cheap gas, many Americans bought an SUV (because they love the outdoors) and a McMansion. The real estate boom caused acre after acre of farmland to be turned into toxic housing developments. Vegetables that would grow in our own towns are shipped 1200 miles on average. Apparently, having extra money allows counties to add extra poison to their water as well.

Channel 9 News simply did not mention that adding fluoride to water is a source of major controversy. Their point was to imply that people are being cheated out of the fluoride they deserve, and no doubt some will likely complain.

References:

* Effects of Fluoride: (http://www.preferrednetwork.com/FLUORID...)

* Industry Influence on Fluoride Policy
(http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/epa...)

* Wikipedia entry (ALCOA, etc)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluo...)

* Project for Poisoning the Water
(http://www.healthy-communications.com/f...)


About the author

Neil McLaughlin is a computer scientist specializing in 3d graphics and simulation. He can be reached at naturalnews461 (at) yahoo (dot) com.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 17:58.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
admin_pornrev
Site Admin
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 4:35 pm

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests

cron