Arkansas Ushers in Mass Fluoridation

[Unregistered]

www foodconsumer.org/newsite/Politics/Politics/arkansas_senate_voting_on_mandatory_fluoridation_b ill_0223110904.html

With almost no warning, a group of Arkansas State Senators and Representatives introduced a bill this week that, if passed, will require that all public water systems in the state fluoridate their drinking water if they serve 5000 or more residents. Within 24 hours of the bill being introduced, a 10 minute long public hearing was held and a committee vote was taken with only one dissenting vote against the bill.

Tomorrow (Thursday, Feb. 24) the full Arkansas State Senate will vote on SB359, "an act to provide for certain water systems to maintain a level of fluoride to prevent tooth decay; and for other purposes".

[admin]

foodconsumer.org/newsite/Politics/Politics/arkansas_senate_voting_on_mandatory_fluoridation_b ill_0223110904.html

With almost no warning, a group of Arkansas State Senators and Representatives introduced a bill this week that, if passed, will require that all public water systems in the state fluoridate their drinking water if they serve 5000 or more residents. Within 24 hours of the bill being introduced, a 10 minute long public hearing was held and a committee vote was taken with only one dissenting vote against the bill.

Tomorrow (Thursday, Feb. 24) the full Arkansas State Senate will vote on SB359, "an act to provide for certain water systems to maintain a level of fluoride to prevent tooth decay; and for other purposes".

Holy shit. There are very many jurisdictions FINALLY getting over this stupid harmful practice and discontinuing mass medication with a non-FDA-approved drug in a non-controllable dosage. And NOW Arkansas decides to get IN? I totally smell a rat. Where's the good old 60-Minutes journalism to sniff out the corruption behind this?

[Saracen_restorer]

Holy shit. There are very many jurisdictions FINALLY getting over this stupid harmful practice and discontinuing mass medication with a non-FDA-approved drug in a non-controllable dosage. And NOW Arkansas decides to get IN? I totally smell a rat. Where's the good old 60-Minutes journalism to sniff out the corruption behind this?

If I recall correctly, Dr Strangelove was supposed to be an anti-fluoride film (among other things - it was directed by Kubrick after all).

What's worse is these days hexafluorosilic acid is used for the fluoridation...

A similar bill (well, not bill, an order by an unaccountable government agency) resulted in fluoridation of the water supply in the British town of Southampton recently. They were careful to insure in the new regulation that the water company couldn't be sued for any ill effects. Clearly they know it's mass drugging and don't care that 80% of the local population opposed the move.

[John Flushing]

That's why all I drink is Poland Spring.

[Karem]

Southampton aims to fluoridate its citizenry:

Hampshire council and three quarters of residents oppose the plans drawn up by the strategic health authority. But dentists say the scheme will cut tooth decay in children.

Just 10 per cent of England’s water is fluoridated, covering 5.5million people, mainly in the North East and West Midlands. The last fluoridation scheme was introduced in 1985.

Refusing a claim for judicial review by Southampton mother-of-three Geraldine Milner, the judge said there had been no illegality.

‘It is important to stress that our democratic Parliament decided long ago that water can, in certain circumstances, be fluoridated,’ he added.

‘It is not the law that fluoridation can occur only when a majority of the local population agree. Parliament has firmly entrusted area-specific decision making to the relevant strategic health authority.

John Flushing, the beauty of fluoridation from a mass medication standpoint is that you can not simply bypass it by refusing to drink your public water. Showering and bathing are both perfectly effective routes of exposure through both inhalation and dermal absorption. Many foods as well are effective, notably canned goods, sodas, and juices, particularly when considering that hydrofluorosilicic acid is highly bioaccumulative so that each exposure is increasingly more significant than the last.

The corruption angle admin sniffs out goes like this: "The cities of the U.S. spend approximately 180 million to buy the hazardous waste product so that all the citizens can be the human filters of the F- poison. If industry had to dispose of it it would probably cost them 180 million to bury this as a hazardous waste product."

Decades ago, fluoride used to be released into the air through the smokestacks of phosphate mining operations, but this resulted in the widespread death of cattle and plants on nearby farms and ranches. To stop the deaths, phosphate mining companies installed “wet scrubbers” that captured the toxic fluoride chemical vapors.

While consumers might think that the fluoride chemicals captured in these wet scrubbers are disposed of as hazardous industrial waste, the surprising truth is that they are sold to cities and towns to be dripped into the local water supply. This is being done to “prevent cavities” — a medical claim that technically turns fluoride into an unapproved drug being used in an illegal mass medication scheme.

“This is clearly the fox guarding the henhouse," states Daniel Stockin about the CDC. Stockin is a career public health professional & former manager of the EPA West Lead Training Center. "Groups, law firms, and journalists now want the names and job descriptions of persons inside CDC, both now and previously, that have been responsible for CDC's promotion of water fluoridation," Stockin says. Stockin says law firms are investigating legal strategies for personal injury, failure to warn, negligent misrepresentation, consumer fraud, environmental justice harm, and medical malpractice. "This will expose the fluoride money trail and tell Americans about kidney risks, thyroid issues, and dental fluorosis," he adds.

A 1999 statement about fluoride in the journal Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology predicted fluoride trouble ahead:

"It is only a matter of time until a case is brought that gets public attention. The risk is that noticeable fluorosis will be perceived by the public as a toxic consequence of fluoride ingestion -- which, arguably, it is -- and there will be a reaction against all fluoride..."

"I call on our political leaders to hold Fluoridegate hearings to investigate CDC and other groups that have not openly shared vital information about fluorides with Americans," Seydel says.

Like RIC, water fluoridation is an excellent potential class action lawsuit. As one says, "The fluoridation of drinking water is one of the cruelest hoaxes ever perpetrated against the public in the history of mankind." You could equally write, "The routine sexual mutilation of infants is one of the cruelest hoaxes ever perpetrated against the public in the history of mankind."

[Dasher]

Fluoridation and routine infant circumcision have a lot in common. Both are hoaxes that were put over on a gullible American public beginning in the late 1940s. They were the big twin crusades of the American public health bureaucracies. And both fluoridation and circumcision have done untold damage to American citizens.

Water fluoridation and RIC are both starting to unravel. Although both have rock-solid proponents who will likely never change their minds about either one, the American public has become uneasy about them, and is beginning to take a second look. The enthusiasm for them has cooled considerably. But the government agencies that promoted them are incapable of admitting error. In fact, the CDC is desperately looking for new justifications for RIC. It is starting to look like the strategy of the public health bureaucracies will be to blame local authorities for fluoride-related health problems, by accusing local water districts of overdosages.

Fluoridation and circumcision achieved great popularity in the U.S. mainly because we Americans let our collective minds go on vacation. We put blind faith in faceless government bureaucracies whose only oversight was an occasional question every few years by a politician on a Congressional committee. We indulged fantasies that these public health bureaucracies represented the pinnacle of advanced science, and swore obedience to them. We never questioned their trail of failures. We never observed the damage they were doing to our fellow citizens. We never realized that they represented bad science instead of good. We never realized that their edicts for us were mostly rejected in the rest of the world. We behaved like sheep.

As for the situation in Arkansas, if fluoridation is so wonderful, how come it took Arkansans 60 years to figure that out? Or does Arkansas just have the best state legislators that money will buy?

[jeff71913]

Here in Arkansas they are running a strong campaign for the fluoridation of drinking water. We hear it on the radio quite often, however, I doubt that it will make any difference as most of the people that I know drink bottled water. This is probably just another way for some individuals to make more money off the tax payers. Ads say that it will help build stronger bones and healthier teeth. I suspect it will build healthier tax revenues.

jeffrey

[INeedAForeskinTransplant]

I'm going to repost a comment I made on another, similar thread, because I think it applies just as well here.

My opinion on these types of “conspiracy theories”, is that they are very much like a religion. The evidence for them is (or at least seems to be) not readily available, and so you almost have to go on faith about them. The “don't confuse me with facts, my mind's already made up” effect is in play here. Either you think it sounds like it's not true, in which case you probably won't want to look into the facts and examine them for yourself, or you think it probably is true, in which case you will go look for the facts that back up your conviction.

It really comes down to your gut. Do you think the world is a place that's “on the level”, so to speak, where everything is what it seems and the people in charge are just doing their best to keep everything running smoothly, perhaps incompetently so at times, but doing their best all the same?

Or does the world seem to you more like it's fundamentally “wrong”? Like almost nothing is the way you're told it is, and people with power, money, and agendas are using what they've got to make more money, consolidate more power, and further their agendas, at the expense of everyone else?

Me personally, I believe these theories are true. I believe there is a New World Order. I believe there are elite people plotting very evil things behind closed doors. I believe those things. But if you don't, that's ok. I can understand why you might consider me a nut for believing in those things.

I no longer try to convince people of my points of view, whether it's about politics, circumcision, any other controversial topic, or even a non-controversial topic.

But, to be clear about my opinion (though I'm not going to argue with anyone about it, as I stated above; if you think I'm wrong, or just plain crazy nuts out of my head, well then, I respect your opinion but that's that, really), to be clear about it though, I do believe that at the top 1% of the top 1% of the top %1 of wealth and power in the institutions of this world (big business, government, organized religion) there is an incredibly corrupt, vicious, and evil race of…sort of people, but not regular people, people who see themselves as something other than people, more than people, who are operating on a code of ethics and morality that even the most sadistic criminals don't, because they see people as insects, bacteria.

They see themselves as gods, essentially. And they have an irrational, needless, unearned hatred for humanity. And they invent things like poisons and diseases and fake, fraudulent surgeries such as circumcision, to kill and hurt and degrade the quality of life and enjoyment, and the lifespan of humans, the species they so despise.

That is my “crazy, tin-foil-hat-wearing” opinion.

[jeff71913]

I "think" circumcision probably started with good intentions. When Columbus came to America he was surprised to find that many American Indians were circumcised. I believe that very long ago circumcision was carried out for purely therapeutic reasons. People didn't know anything about germs and good hygiene probably wasn't at the top of anyone's "to do" list. I suspect the first circumcision was probably performed on a man that was prepared to do just about anything to get relief from a bad infection. Infections can and do happen, but like many things that started with good intentions, things went awry at some point. We have a better understanding of good hygiene practices today and RIC is rarely, if ever, needed in these times. Problem is, RIC is now a huge business and it is therefore difficult to stop.

jeffrey

[admin]

We have a better understanding of good hygiene practices today and RIC is rarely, if ever, needed in these times.

If we expand the definition of hygiene to include all manner of care and treatment affecting health, the "bad hygiene" - of some ancient day when circumcision seemed like a good idea - might have been as simple as the loss of a certain food-borne nutrient due to over-harvesting. It might also have involved infections engendered by cosmetic application of biodegradable matter to the genitals.

I really think NO special care of the penis is required for good health, as long as mammals are living where they evolved and eating what they evolved eating.

[Dasher]

I'm going to repost a comment I made on another, similar thread, because I think it applies just as well here.



But, to be clear about my opinion (though I'm not going to argue with anyone about it, as I stated above; if you think I'm wrong, or just plain crazy nuts out of my head, well then, I respect your opinion but that's that, really), to be clear about it though, I do believe that at the top 1% of the top 1% of the top %1 of wealth and power in the institutions of this world (big business, government, organized religion) there is an incredibly corrupt, vicious, and evil race of…sort of people, but not regular people, people who see themselves as something other than people, more than people, who are operating on a code of ethics and morality that even the most sadistic criminals don't, because they see people as insects, bacteria.

They see themselves as gods, essentially. And they have an irrational, needless, unearned hatred for humanity. And they invent things like poisons and diseases and fake, fraudulent surgeries such as circumcision, to kill and hurt and degrade the quality of life and enjoyment, and the lifespan of humans, the species they so despise.

That is my “crazy, tin-foil-hat-wearing” opinion.

I don't think you're crazy at all, INAFT. I think you are in touch with reality. You have the ability to look around you, see what's going on in this country, analyze what you see, and draw your own conclusions. You have the ability to add up two and two, and come out with four. You are not a parrot of the status quo. You are not a trained seal intellectually. Some of what you believe might not be politically correct, but you are intellectually honest. Not everyone is as courageous as you. Most people are either naive or pussyfooters, terrified of saying what they really think, and constantly kowtowing to people they must know are lying to them. I feel sorry for the people who feel they must sell out to the status quo in order to conform or make a living. It is exactly this mentality that brought us routine infant circumcision in the U.S. No one dared speak against it, because the so-called experts all endorsed it. When Dr. Spock jumped ship and reversed his position on RIC, it was the beginning of the end.

Most people on this forum know the truth about circumcision. But you might be interested to know that water fluoridation (with sodium fluoride, a toxic compound, instead of the naturally-occurring nutrient calcium fluoride), was one of two big public health iniatives undertaken by U.S. government health agencies beginning in the late 1940s. Circumcision was the other one. The government's public health agencies were successful in getting both of these measures adopted from coast to coast. Both these measures now have a cloud over them, and the adverse effects of ingesting sodium fluoride are just now coming into the open. As for circumcision, how did that one work out for you?

But there are plenty of people heavily invested (including literally invested) in these two public health measures, who still swear they are fine and are backed up by "science". The truth is that both were hoaxes. And the joke is on the American people.

[jeff71913]

I really think NO special care of the penis is required for good health, as long as mammals are living where they evolved and eating what they evolved eating.

Well, since I'm part American Indian that would probably mean that I would be somewhere in the Dakota Badlands chewing on a dried out buffalo carcass. And since some of the Indians were apparently circumcised, I would probably still be circumcised with no one to provide special care for my penis. Not a pretty picture.

jeffrey

[INeedAForeskinTransplant]

I "think" circumcision probably started with good intentions. When Columbus came to America he was surprised to find that many American Indians were circumcised. I believe that very long ago circumcision was carried out for purely therapeutic reasons. People didn't know anything about germs and good hygiene probably wasn't at the top of anyone's "to do" list. I suspect the first circumcision was probably performed on a man that was prepared to do just about anything to get relief from a bad infection. Infections can and do happen, but like many things that started with good intentions, things went awry at some point. We have a better understanding of good hygiene practices today and RIC is rarely, if ever, needed in these times. Problem is, RIC is now a huge business and it is therefore difficult to stop.

jeffrey

Perhaps there is some aspect of that, some cultures that started circumcising only for purely legitimate—if primitive—therapeutic reasons. However, the “problem” I referred to in my earlier post, this unsavory “group”, I believe dates back much further than Columbus or the Native American Indians…back at least 7,000 years, to the Priest-Kings of Ancient Sumer. Maybe further.

[INeedAForeskinTransplant]

I don't think you're crazy at all, INAFT. I think you are in touch with reality. You have the ability to look around you, see what's going on in this country, analyze what you see, and draw your own conclusions. You have the ability to add up two and two, and come out with four. You are not a parrot of the status quo. You are not a trained seal intellectually. Some of what you believe might not be politically correct, but you are intellectually honest. Not everyone is as courageous as you. Most people are either naive or pussyfooters, terrified of saying what they really think, and constantly kowtowing to people they must know are lying to them. I feel sorry for the people who feel they must sell out to the status quo in order to conform or make a living. It is exactly this mentality that brought us routine infant circumcision in the U.S. No one dared speak against it, because the so-called experts all endorsed it. When Dr. Spock jumped ship and reversed his position on RIC, it was the beginning of the end.

Most people on this forum know the truth about circumcision. But you might be interested to know that water fluoridation (with sodium fluoride, a toxic compound, instead of the naturally-occurring nutrient calcium fluoride), was one of two big public health iniatives undertaken by U.S. government health agencies beginning in the late 1940s. Circumcision was the other one. The government's public health agencies were successful in getting both of these measures adopted from coast to coast. Both these measures now have a cloud over them, and the adverse effects of ingesting sodium fluoride are just now coming into the open. As for circumcision, how did that one work out for you?

But there are plenty of people heavily invested (including literally invested) in these two public health measures, who still swear they are fine and are backed up by "science". The truth is that both were hoaxes. And the joke is on the American people.

Mmm, indeed. Thank you, Dasher. You're right. I truly feel much of the time as if people in this world are living in two completely separate realities. To the people in each of them, their reality is completely real. One is the “mainstream” reality, let's call it, and the other is the “alternative” reality. One of these realities is “really real” and the other is not, though I can't tell you which is which, just based on my own personal opinion, you have to make up your own damn mind (and yes, I'm quoting The Matrix at this point, I admit it. Classic, classic film). I suppose there are some people caught in-between the two realities, (like “I believe water fluoridation is bad, but I don't see what's wrong with circumcision”, or vice versa), but…

[jeff71913]

Ineedaforeskintransplant, do you ever go by any other names, cause that's a very long name to type out. BTW,would you really want a foreskin transplant? You would have to take anti-rejection drugs or the rest of your life if you did have one. Just curious.

jeffrey

[InfoWarrior]

youtube.com/watch?v=k9m1PVBd5w8&feature=related

{As mod I often convert URLs - on behalf of those ineligible to post them - into working links.

I will never do that in a case like this where someone can't bothered to tell us a bit about what the hell we'd be potentially wasting time on if we clicked.}

[INeedAForeskinTransplant]

Ineedaforeskintransplant, do you ever go by any other names, cause that's a very long name to type out. BTW,would you really want a foreskin transplant? You would have to take anti-rejection drugs or the rest of your life if you did have one. Just curious.

jeffrey

Hey Jeff, thanks for your questions! You can feel free to abbreviate it (or technically, acronymize it) to INAFT, for brevity's sake, if you like. Yes I go by other names, I have lots of different user names I use, it really depends on what the subject matter of the site itself is lol, and my mood at the time of me making my account. My real name is *****.

I was quite desperate to have a new foreskin when I first found this site, lo those many moons ago lol. I'm still pretty desperate. At the time, Foregen didn't exist yet. No one took the idea of any kind of bioengineering solution to this problem seriously. I would have taken a foreskin transplant, a lifetime of anti-rejection drugs and the attendant risks seem a small price to pay for being my whole self.

But yeah, these days I'm thinking something like Foregen is a bit more realistic than a foreskin transplant. But still my username remains, a legacy of those heady days when this was all new, unexplored terrain. :)