Friday, July 2, 2010

The Fluoride Cover Up.

Yes, folks, they used to tell us that lard was good for us. And we believed it.
And they also told us a lot of other things were good for us, too. This post is going to be somewhat different from the fun topics I usually cover. I'm going to jump up on my soapbox, just for today, and lecture a wee bit about something that really irritates me.

It's not so much the fact of what has been done that's irritating because the damage has been done. It's more the method in which it was skewed and delivered to the American public. It was deceitful in that they didn't really truthfully reveal the facts related to the decision and why they felt it preferable to subject American children to a dangerous situation rather than subjecting major industries and companies to massive litigation.

The subject I want to cover here involves the fluoridation of the nation's water supply, which began back in the early 1950s. We were told how good fluoride was for us and that it should be added to our water supply. Because of that decision, we had no choice. We've been drinking fluoridated water all our lives. It's possible that adding fluoride to our diet may help prevent tooth decay. But it's also possible that it was nothing more than a cleverly conceived solution to a large industry's problem and to prevent massive litigation against the Atomic Energy Commission and others.

Now, even though dental practitioners recommend and perform fluoride treatments, very few dentists are aware that the fluoride in public water supplies is not a pharmaceutical grade product. It is in fact industrial waste. It’s primarily the waste from the Florida phosphate industry. So why was our government allowing industries to dump their waste products into the nation's water supply?

In order to answer that question, we need to examine what was going on at the time. The American public of the 1950s was a gullible entity. We believed everything our government told us. And, because of that, it wasn't difficult to sell the benefits of fluoride (and bury the dangers and the potential litigation) if you enlist the services of respected authorities such as the Mellon Institute and Kettering Laboratory. And if you needed one of the most respected scientists of the day as a spokesman, there was none better than Dr. Harold Hodge of the University of Rochester. After all, Hodge had worked with the Atomic Energy Commission and was responsible for the Human Radiation Injection Project in which patients were injected with plutonium .

Dr. Donald Kehoe was also enlisted to help sell the advantages of fluoride to the American public. Kehoe was previously responsible for having lead added to our gasoline. This has been proven to be responsible for brain damage in children of that era. And, of course, they needed Edward Bernays, the father of public relations, to put a spin on the concept and sell the idea to the American public.

Naturally, getting this idea out to the American people required advertising, and advertising required funding. This was an easy sell to the companies who were potential defendants in the possible litigation that could have followed, and included such giants as Alcoa Aluminum, US Steel, DuPont, Monsanto, and others. Also, the Department of Public Health was involved for added credibility, as well as the American Dental Association. All bases were covered, and it was a complete and successful snow job.

Keep in mind that in the 1950s the Florida phosphate industry was being sued by farmers and citizens living near those plants because the fluoride was killing their cattle and destroying their crops. Unless something was done (cover up) other industries were going to be found responsible for similar dangerous activities and the resulting connections and damage awards could have been monumental. Because of the potential danger to cattle and crops, the Florida phosphate industry is today prevented from having to dispose of its industrial affluent in a toxic waste dump. Instead, they ship it in tanker trucks around the country and dump it in our water supply for our children to consume. Now, that's certainly logical.

Anyway, the issue and the opportunity for litigation was headed off at the pass by providing America with disinformation while adding an unnecessary environmental risk. But the monetary problem for industrial America and their executive bonuses was averted.

It's interesting that 98% of western European countries have rejected water fluoridation, and the childrens' teeth are as healthy as those of our children. And I'm stepping down from my soapbox now. If you want more information on this subject, view the video on the sidebar. It is packed with data and evidence on how we were duped and why it continues to remain a dangerous environmental hazard.