Senior Member

343 posts, Mar 2003

posted 07-05-2003 05:54 AM            

---

More evidence of what Jim Phelps has been saying
http://www.lightnet.co.uk/informer/health/20000412.htm

Fluoride, Teeth, & The Atomic Bomb
Source: Sightings

12th Apr 2000

The following article exposes the biggest on-going medical experiment ever carried out by the United States Government on an unsuspecting population. Although commissioned by the Christian Science Monitor in early Spring of 1997, it has not yet been published. Readers are invited to inquire when publication can be expected, by calling the Christian Science Monitor at 1-800-288-7090. . . . . . about the authors Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb By Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson July 1997 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 World War II 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 analysed 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 (N.Y.) University. 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, Col. 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, it's 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 World War II, in 1944, when a severe pollution incident occurred downwind of the E.I. du Pont de 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. Army "The Department of Justice is cooperating in the defense of these suits," wrote General Groves in a February 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 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, Colonel 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 "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. Colonel 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 World War II 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. 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, M.D. 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 U.S. 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 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 - the 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 cases as secret memos state? He said 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 Brody, 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 these reporters had several documents that directly tied the Manhattan Project's successor agency at the University of Rochester, the Atomic Energy Project, to the Newburgh experiment, the DOE spokesperson conceded her study was confined to "the available universe" of documents. Two days later spokesperson Jayne Brody 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 World War II - 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 said. A 1944 World War II 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, chief FOIA officer at Oak Ridge National Laboratories. 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 who lives in New York City. Author of a book on radiation hazards, he has contributed numerous articles to medical and popular publications. Chris Bryson, who holds a masters degree in Journalism, is an independent reporter with ten years' professional experience. He has worked with BBC Radio and Public Television in New York, plus numerous publications, including the Christian Science Monitor and the Mansfield Guardian. Additional Notes Harold C. Hodge and the U.S. Army Dr. Hodge is deceased. However, in 1979 his chapter in a book titled "Continuing Evaluation of the Use of Fluorides" set the record straight. With regard to the "safe" dosage of fluoride for children, Hodge wrote: "The most important and widely disregarded fact about dental fluorosis is this: no safe established daily intake exists, i.e., the maximal amount in mg fluoride which consumed daily does NOT produce cosmetically damaging extensive white areas or brown stain in some individuals has not been fixed." In the same publication, Dr. Hodge also corrected his figures for crippling skeletal fluorosis. In his calculations made during the early 1950s it appears, although not spelled out, that Hodge had neglected to convert pounds to kilograms. As a result, most reviews which contain the "crippling daily dose of fluoride," including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 1991 document, Review of Fluoride: Benefits and Risks, as well as the current Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) and the new Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) - another document from the Institute of Medicine - use 20?80 mg/day figures. (Although these documents refer to Hodge, and the first two specifically refer to Hodge 1979, they completely ignore Hodge's 1979 correction of the older erroneous figures.) Sandra Schlicker, study director for the DRI, has acknowledged her understanding of Hodge's error, as well as the correction in 1979; yet, offers no explanation for using the older erroneous figures. In addition, this latest report dismisses the correction made by another NAS/NRC panel in 1993, falsely claiming the corrected figures for "Crippling" were meant to apply only to the earlier non-crippling stages of the disease. The bottom line is this: At currently reported intake levels, excess fluoride from multiple sources has surpassed the quantity known to cause serious adverse health effects within about forty years. (i.e., 5 mg/day will cause crippling deformities of the spine and major joints) Within about twenty years, with a daily intake of 5 mg, the symptoms to be expected include chronic joint pain as well as brittle bones. Knowing full well that five milligrams of fluoride daily would be expected to produce phase 3 crippling skeletal fluorosis in the average individual after about 40 years, the committee has determined that 10 milligrams of fluoride daily is "tolerable." The question, "Tolerable to whom?" remains unanswered. More about the Army Although facilities had been constructed to provide fluoride in the drinking water system at Ft. Detrick, key components corroded to the point that the system was shut down. Reinstating fluoridation became subject to regulations involving an environmental assessment. On 11 December 1996 Commander, Colonel Henry O. Tuell, III, wrote to U.S. Army Medical Command, Fort Sam Houston, Texas. In this memo Colonel Tuell states: "...recent research and findings regarding efficacy of fluoridation and the adverse health effects, could be serious." In other words, drinking fluoridated water may be unsafe. As yet, the Army post at Fort Detrick, (Frederick, Maryland) remains unfluoridated.

Senior Member

343 posts, Mar 2003

posted 07-05-2003 02:36 PM            

---

Dear Mr Or Ms moderator

Was the edit of this from chemtrail to health for a reason? I felt is was very relevant to chemtrails with the Jim Phelps link?

respectfully
Mark

Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000

Senior Member

343 posts, Mar 2003

posted 07-06-2003 08:03 AM            

---

http://www.uhuh.com/control/chemtrail/fmindcon.htm

Use of Sodium Fluoride for Population Behavior Control in Nazi Germany, Russia and
America

Use of Sodium Fluoride for Population Behavior Control It is a matter of record that sodium

fluoride has been used for behavior control of populations. In an "Address in Reply to the

Governor's Speech to Parliament" , Mr. Harley Rivers Dickinson, Liberal Party Member of the

Victorian Parliament for South Barwon, Australia made a statement on the historical use of

fluorides for behavior control.

Mr. Dickinson reveals that, "At the end of the Second World War, the United States

Government sent Charles Elliot 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 by German chemists of a scheme which had been worked out by them

during the war and adopted by the German General Staff. This scheme 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

narcotising 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 fluoride to the drinking water of prisoners of war to make them stupid

and docile."

It is interesting that Dr. George Estabrooks, an advisor to the United States Government on

hypnotism and psychological behavior control, later became chairman of the Department of

Psychology at Colgate University. Internationally, Colgate was and remains today the most

ardent producer and advocate for fluoridated toothpaste.

The use of chemicals by the government to modify behavior of select population groups is not

new. During the first two World Wars, bromides were administered to service men to dim the

libido in an attempt to inhibit forrays into local bordellos. Today, in Australia, the military

fluoridates the drinking water of the soldiers, ostensibly to protect the teeth. However, since

the mythical ability of fluorides "to prevent tooth decay" only exists for those under the age of

12, it is certain that the real purpose is less altruistic.

In volume one of Matrix III, we discussed the role of Alcoa Aluminum in the production of

fluoride, the role of Alcoa lawyer Oscar Ewing, who eventually gained control of what was to

become the United States Public Health Service, his promotion of fluoridation and the use of

advertising and false propaganda in an attempt to sell water fluoridation to an unsuspecting

public. Interestingly, it turns out that Alcoa transferred its sodium fluoride production

technology to Germany in 1939 under the Alted Agreement, and Dow Chemical Company

transmitted its experience and technology to Germany during the same period. So, we have the

U.S. transmitting technology to Germany before the war

that allows Germany to experiment on select elements of the European population, and then

after the war Nazi scientists and the results of experiments are brought back to the United

States under Operation Paperclip. Curious, isn't it?

A little research turned up the fact that I.G. Farben developed organophosphate nerve agents,

Zyklon B cyanide-based extermination gas used on the Jews during the war, and many other

interesting substances. I.G. Farben, financially supported by the United States, was the first to

develop and process heroin and cocaine. They also

developed fluorinated nerve gases Sarin and Soman. Farben had many interconnections with

companies in the United States and Britain. Consult the illustrative chart in this book.

In a letter abstracted from Fluoridation and Lawlessness, published by the Committee for

Mental Health and National Security (with obvious implications) from the aforementioned

Charles Perkins, U.S. appointed post-war head of I.G. Farben, to the Lee Foundation for

Nutritional Research, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, October 2, 1954, we read the following:

"We are told by the 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 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 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 which are much easier, cheaper and far more effective. The real

puspose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination,

control and loss of liberty."

Furthermore, "When the Nazis decided to go into Poland, the German General Staff and the

Russian General Staff exchanged scientific and military ideas, plans and personnel. The

scheme of mass control through water medication was seized upon by the Russian Communists

because it fitted ideally into their plans to Communize the

world. I say this in all earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years

research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology of fluorides. 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."

When Major General Racey Jordan was in charge of the massive lend-lease airlift operations

from Great Falls, Montana to Russia, via Alaska, he queried the transshipment of considerable

amounts of sodium fluoride. He was told frankly that it was to put into the drinking water of

the prisoner of war camps to take away their will to resist.

It is also interesting that former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who has a

background in academic chemistry, initiated a program involving astronomical expenditures of

UK revenue on a fluoridation campaign in Northern Ireland.

Last changed: May 17, 1999

Scientific Facts on the Biological Effects of Fluorides

©1996 Val Valerian, Leading Edge Research Group

1.Fluoride exposure disrupts the synthesis of collagen and leads to the breakdown of collagen

in bone, tendon, muscle, skin, cartilage, lungs, kidney and trachea.

A.K. Susheela and Mohan Jha, "Effects of Fluoride on Cortical and Cancellous Bone

Composition", IRCS Medical Sciences: Library Compendium, Vol 9, No.11, pp.1021-1022

(1981); Y.D. Sharma, "Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Collagen Cross-Link Precursors",

Toxocological Letters, Vol.10, pp97-100 (1982); A.K. Susheela and D. Mukerjee, "Fluoride

poisoning and the Effect of Collagen Biosynthesis of Osseous and Nonosseous Tissue",

Toxocologiocal European Research, Vol 3, No.2, pp. 99-104 (1981); Y.D. Sharma, "Variations

in the Metabolism and Maturation of Collagen after Fluoride Ingestion", Biochemica et

Bioiphysica Acta, Vol 715, pp.137-141 (1982);Marian Drozdz et al., "Studies on the Influence

of Fluoride Compounds upon Connective Tissue Metabolism in Growing Rats" and "Effect of

Sodium Fluoride With and Without Simultaneous Exposure to Hydrogen Fluoride on Collagen

Metabolism", Journal of

Toxological Medicine, Vol. 4, pp.151-157 (1984).

2. Fluoride stimulates granule formation and oxygen consumption in white blood cells, but

inhibits these processes when the white blood cell is challenged by a foreign agent in the

blood.

Robert A. Clark, "Neutrophil Iodintion Reaction Induced by Fluoride: Implications for

Degranulation and Metabolic Activation," Blood, Vol 57, pp.913-921 (1981).

3. Fluoride depletes the energy reserves and the ability of white blood cells to properly

destroy foreign agents by the process of phagocytosis. As little as 0.2 ppm fluoride stimulates

superoxide production in resting white blood cells, virtually abolishing phagocytosis. Even

micro-molar amounts of fluoride, below 1ppm, may seriously depress the ability of white

blood

cells to destroy pathogenic agents.

John Curnette, et al, "Fluoride-mediated Activation of the Respiratory Burst in Human

Neutrophils", Journal of Clinical Investigation, Vol 63, pp.637-647 (1979); W.L. Gabler and

P.A. Leong, ., "Fluoride Inhibition of Polymorphonumclear Leukocytes", Journal of Dental

Research, Vo. 48, No. 9, pp.1933-1939 (1979); W.L. Gabler, et al., "Effect of Fluoride on the

Kinetics of Superoxide Generation by Fluoride", Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 64, p.281

(1985); A.S. Kozlyuk, et al., "Immune Status of Children in Chemically Contaminated

Environments", Zdravookhranenie, Issue 3, pp.6-9 (1987);

4. Fluoride confuses the immune system and causes it to attack the body's own tissues, and

increases the tumor growth rate in cancer prone individuals.

Alfred Taylor and Nell C. Taylor, "Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Tumor Growth", Proceedings

of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine, Vol 119,p.252(1965)

Shiela Gibson, "Effects of Fluoride on Immune System Function", Complementary Medical

Research, Vol 6, pp.111-113 (1992); Peter Wilkinson, "Inhibition of the Immune Syetem With

Low Levels of Fluorides", Testimony before the Scottish High Court in Edinburgh in the Case

of McColl vs. Strathclyde Regional Council, pp. 17723-18150, 19328-19492, and Exhibit 636,

(1982); D.W.Allman and M.Benac, "Effect of Inorganic Fluoride Salts on Urine and Cyclic

AMP Concentration in Vivo", Journal of Dental Research, Vol 55 (Supplement B), p.523

(1976);

S. Jaouni and D.W. Allman, "Effect of Sodium Fluoride and Aluminum on Adenylate Cyclase

and

Phosphodiesterase Activity", Journal of Dental Research, Vol.64, p.201 (1985)

5. Fluoride inhibits antibody formation in the blood.

S.K. Jain and A.K. Susheela, "Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Antibody Formation in Rabbits",

Environmental Research, Vol.44, pp.117-125 (1987).

6. Fluoride depresses Thyroid activity.

Viktor Gorlitzer Von Mundy, "Influence of Fluorine and Iodine on the Metabolism,

Particularly on the Thyroid Gland," Muenchener Medicische Wochenschrift, Vol 105, pp182-

186 (1963); A. Benagiano, "The Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Thyroid Enzymes and Basal

Metabolism in the Rat", Annali Di Stomatologia, Vol 14, pp.601-619n (1965);Donald Hillman,

et al.,

"Hypothyroidism and Anemia Related to Fluoride in Dairy Cattle," Journal of Dairy Science,

Vol 62, No.3, pp.416-423 (1979); V. Stole and J. Podoba, "Effect of Fluoride on the

Biogenesis

of Thrroid Hormones", Nature, Vol 188, No.4753, pp.855-856 (1960); Pierre Galleti and

Gustave Joyet, "Effect of Fluorine on Thyroid Iodine Metabolism and Hyperthyroidism",

Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, Vol. 18, pp.1102-1110 (1958).

7. Fluorides have a disruptive effect on various tissues in the body.

T.Takamorim "The Heart Changes in Growing Albino Rats Fed on Varied Contents oif

Fluorine,"

The Toxicology of Fluorine, Symposium, Bern, Switzerland, Oct 1962, pp.125-129; Vilber

A.O.

Bello and Hillel J. Gitelman, "High Fluoride Exposure in Hemodialysis Patients", American

Journal of Kidney Diseases, Vol. 15, pp.320-324 (1990); Y.Yoshisa, "Experimental Studies on

Chronic Fluorine Poisoning", Japaneses Journal of Industrial Health, Vol 1, pp.683-690

(1959).

8. Flouride promotes development of bone cancer.

J.K. Mauer, et al., "Two-year cacinogenicity study of sodium fluoride in rats", Journal of the

National Cancer Institute, Vol 82, pp1118-1126 (1990); Proctor and Gamble "Carcinogencity

studies with Sodium Fluoride in rats" National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

Presentation, July 27, 1985; S.E. Hrudley et al., "Drinking Water Fluoridation and

Osteocarcoma" Canadian Journal of Public Health, Vol 81, pp.415-416 (1990); P.D. Cohn, " A

Brief Report on the Association of Drinking Water Fluoridation and Incidence of

Osteosarcoma in Young Males", New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton, New Jersey, Nov

1992; M.C. Mahoney et al.,"Bone Cancer Incidence Rates in New York", American Journal of

Public Health, Vol 81, pp.81, 475 (1991); Irwin Herskowitz and Isabel Norton, "Increased

Incidence of Melanotic Tumors Following Treatment with Sodium Fluoride", Genetics Vol 48,

pp.307-310 (1963); J.A. Disney, et al., " A Case Study in Testing the Conventional Wisdom;

School-Based Fluoride Mouthrinse Programs in the USA" Community Dentistry and Oral

Epidemiology, Vol 18, pp.46-56 (1990); D.J. Newell, "Fluoridation of Water Supplies and

Cancer - an association?", Applied Statistics, Vol 26, No.2, pp.125-135 (1977)

9. Fluorides cause premature aging of the human body.

Nicholas Leone, et al., "Medical Aspects of Excessive Fluoride in a Water Supply", Public

Health Reports, Vol 69, pp.925-936 (1954); J. David Erikson, "Mortality of Selected Cities

with Fluoridated and Non-Fluoridated Water Supplies", New England Journal of Medicine,

Vol.

298, pp.1112-1116 (1978); "The Village Where People are Old Before their Time", Stern

Magazine, Vol 30, pp.107-108,111-112 (1978);

10. Fluoride ingestion from mouthrinses and dentifrices in children is extremely hazardous to

biological development, life span and general health.

Yngve Ericsson and Britta Forsman, "Fluoride retained from mouthrinses and dentifrices in

preschool children", Caries Research, Vol.3, pp.290-299 (1969); W.L. Augenstein, et al.,

"Fluoride ingestion in children: a review of 87 cases", Pediatrics, Vol 88, pp.907-912, (1991);

Charles Wax, "Field Investigation report", State of Maryland Department of Health and Mental

Hygiene, March 19, 1980, 67pp; George Waldbott, "Mass Intoxication from Over-Fluoridation

in Drinking Water", Clinical Toxicology, Vol 18, No.5, pp.531-541 (1981)

11. Fluorides diminish the intelligence capability of the human brain.

X.S.Li et al, Fluoride, Vol 26, No.4, pp.189-192, 1995, "Effect of Fluoride Exposure on

Intelligence In Children". Presented to the 20th Conference of the International Society for

Fluoride Research, Beijing, China, September 5-9, 1994.

12. Fluoride studies in rats can be indicative of a potential for motor disruption, intelligence

deficits and learningdisabilities in humans. Humans are exposed to plasma levels of fluoride as

high as those in rat studies. Fluoride involves interruption of normal brain development.

Fluoride affects the hipppcampus in the brain, which integrates inputs from the environment,

memory, and motivational stimuli, to produce behavioral decisions and modify memory.

Experience with other developmental neurotoxicants prompts expectations that changes in

behavioral functions will be comparable across species, especially humans and rats.

Neurotoxicology and Teratology, Vol 17, No,2, p.176, "Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in

Rats", Muellenix, Denbesten, Schunior, Kernan, 1995.

13. Fluorides accumulate in the brain over time to reach neurologically harmful levels.

Neurotoxicology and Teratology, Vol 17, No,2, p.176, "Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in

Rats", Muellenix, Denbesten, Schunior, Kernan, 1995.

14. "Fluorides are general protoplasma poisons, with the capacity to modify the metabolism of

cells by inhibting certain enzymes. Sources of fluoride intoxication include drinking water

containing 1ppm or more of fluorine."

Journal of the American Medical Association, September 18, 1943.

15. "Drinking water containing as little as 1.2 ppm fluoride will cause developmental

disturbances. We cannot run the risk of producing such serious systemic disturbances. The

potentialities for harm outweigh those for good."

Journal of the American Dental Association, Editorial, October 1, 1944.

Other Facts

The contents of a family-size tube of fluoridated toothpaste is enough to kill a 25-pound child.

In 1991, the Akron (Ohio) Regional Poison Center reported that "death has been reported

following ingestion of 16mg/kg of fluoride. Only 1/10 of an ounce of fluoride could kill a 100

pound adult. According to the Center, "fluoride toothpaste contains up to 1mg/gram of

fluoride." Even Proctor and Gamble, the makers of Crest, acknowledge that a family-sized tube

"theoretically contains enough fluoride to kill a small child."

Fluorides have been used to modify behavior and mood of human beings.

It is a little known fact that fluoride compounds were added to the drinking water of prisoners

to keep them docile and inhibit questioning of authority, both in Nazi prison camps in World

War II and in the Soviet gulags in Siberia.

Fluorides are medically categorized as protoplasmic poisons, which is why they are used to kill

rodents.

1943 The Journal of the American Medical Association on September 18, 1943, states,

"fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, changing the permeability of the cell membrane

by

inhibiting certain enzymes. The exact mechanismof such actions are obscure.".

Fluoride consumption by human beings increases the general cancer death rate.

1975 Dr. John Yiamouyiannis publishes a preliminary survey which shows that people in

fluoridated areas have a higher cancer death rate than those in non-fluoridated areas. The

National Cancer Institute attempts to refute the studies. Later in 1975, Yiamouyiannis joins

with Dr. Dean Burk, chief chemist of the National Cancer Institute (1939-1974) in performing

other studies which are then included in the Congressional Record by Congressman Delaney,

who

was the original author of the Delaney Amendment, which prohibited the addition of

cancer-causing substances to food used for human consumption.

Both reports confirmed the existence of a link between fluoridation and cancer. (Note:

Obviously Dr. Burk felt free to agree with scientific truth only after his tenure at NCI ended,

since his job depended on towing the party line).

Fluorides have little or no effect on decay prevention in humans:

In 1990 Dr. John Colquhoun is forced into early requirement in New Zealand after he conducts

a study on 60,000 school children and finds no difference in tooth decay between fluoridated

and unfluoridated areas. He additionally finds that a substantial number of children in

fluoridated areas suffered from dental fluorosis. He makes the study public. There is no

scientific data that shows that fluoride mouth rinses and tablets are safe for human use.

1989 A study by Hildebolt, et al. on 6,000 school children contradicts any alleged benefit

from the use of sodium fluorides.

In 1990 a study by Dr.John Yiamouyiannis on 39,000 school children contradicts any alleged

benefits from the use of sodium fluorides.

In 1992 Michael Perrone, a legislative assistant in New Jersey, contacts the FDA requesting

all information regarding the safety and effectiveness of fluoride tablets and drops. After 6

months of stalling, the FDA admitted they had no data to show that fluoride tablets or drops

were either safe or effective. They informed Perrone that they will "probably have to pull the

tablets and drops off the market."

The fact that fluoride toothpastes and school-based mouth rinses are packaged in aluminum

accentuates the effect on the body.

In 1976, Dr. D.W.Allman and co-workers from Indiana University School of Medicine feed

animals 1 part-per-million (ppm) fluoride and found that in the presence of aluminum in a

concentration as small as 20 parts per billion, (like in a toothpaste tube, using aluminum pans

to boil water, or drinking beverages in aluminum cans, fluoride is able to cause an even larger

increase in cyclic AMP levels.

Cyclic AMP inhibits the migration rate of white blood cells, as well as the ability of the white

blood cell to destroy pathogenic organisms. Ref: Journal of Dental Research, Vol 55, Sup B,

p523, 1976, "Effect of Inorganic Fluoride Salts on Urine and Tissue Cyclic AMP

Concentration in Vivo". (Note: It is no small accident that toothpaste tubes containing fluoride

are often made of aluminum)

"Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century"

Robert Carlton, Ph.D.,former U.S. EPA scientist on "Marketplace" Canadian Broadcast

Company Nov 24, 1992

"Regarding fluorodation, the EPA should act immediately to protect the public, not just on the

cancer data, but on the evidence of bone fractures, arthritis, mutagenicity and other effects"

William Marcus, Ph.D., senior EPA toxicologist, Covert Action, Fall 1992, p.66

Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000

Senior Member

343 posts, Mar 2003

posted 07-09-2003 07:37 AM            

---

One of the things that people notice when being low level poisoned with
fluorides is an increase in the muscle twitch rate. It can get so bad that one
knows what it is like to have Parkinson's syndrome. It is a random
spontaneous twitch of muscles all over the body.

When one sees/feels this happening, one needs to become alert to the
problems of low level poisoning.

As we have been discovering, fluorides do affect the G-protein triggers in
cells, and these G-protein trigger points in nerve cells do cause responses.
The rate of these twitch responses is directly related to the toxic levels of
fluoride.

The effect is also seen for pesticides like DDT, and the nerve gases sarin
and soman. When your system is at the point of noticeable twitch rates, your
overdosed on toxic's like fluoride.

It is this same process, where these toxic's migrate into the brain that
lead to conditions like Parkinson's Syndrome. As you can see, there is not a
real mystery to Parkinson's syndrome. Parkinson's comes from the retention
of these toxic materials that trigger the nerve cell G-proteins. Many of
these toxic's retain and increase in the body over time.

Below is a report of how it works on frog muscle:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_u
ids=3485732&dopt=Abstract
Jpn J Pharmacol 1986 Jan;40(1):191-3

Enhancement of the twitch of bull frog sartorius muscle by fluorides.

Hattori T, Maehashi H.

Effects of 5 kinds of fluorides on the twitch of the sartorius muscle of the
bull frog were investigated. All of the fluorides (0.1-2.0 mM) enhanced the
twitch evoked by nerve stimulation. The extents of enhancement at 2.0 mM were in
the order: stannous fluoride much greater than potassium fluoride greater
than sodium silico fluoride greater than sodium fluoride greater than diammine
silver fluoride. The extent of each enhancement was larger than that in the case
of direct stimulation of the muscle. These findings show that fluorides
commonly enhance the twitch of skeletal muscle and that the extent of enhancement
is related to the properties of cations included in the fluoride.

PMID: 3485732 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

New Member

Eastern Central Indiana
7 posts, Mar 2002

posted 07-30-2003 02:42 PM            

---

Fluoride in chemtrails?
Hey you all...have you thought of the possibility that FLUORIDE is one of the substances being dumped on us in chemtrails?
Not just in water and toothpaste... double the pleasure, double the fun...give it to'em in the air, too, and really dumb 'em down!!
I believe beyond a doubt that this is true.

------------------

Senior Member

343 posts, Mar 2003

posted 09-07-2003 07:14 AM            

---

Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/immune-system.htm
========================================================
Is the Ingestion of Fluoride an Immunosuppressive Practice?

Medical Hypotheses
Volume 35; Year 1991; Pages 1-3

Is the Ingestion of Fluoride an Immunosuppressive Practice?

P.R.N. Sutton
Melbourne, Australia

Abstract - This paper records several observations which suggest that
habitual ingestion of small doses of fluoride, even as small as the 1 mg/L contained
in fluoridated water, may decrease the function of the immune system.

Introduction

In 1987, Moolenburgh (1) stated: 'I am absolutely convinced that fluoride is
an immune suppressive substance.' He came to that conclusion following
double-blind clinical tests which showed that there were many adverse reactions
resulting from drinking fluoridated water.

In 1987, Sutton (2) advanced the hypothesis that, as a result of the normal
resorption of bone containing a high concentration of fluoride (which forms in
those who habitually drink fluoridated water) (3), the released fluoride could
pass through the Haversian canals into the marrow and damage, even destroy,
some of the developing cells of the immune system.

There is laboratory evidence that fluoride can affect the efficacy of the
cells of the immune system in several ways: for instance, Gibson (4) reported in
the High Court, Edinburgh, in 1981, that a 6h exposure of white cells to 0.1
ppm fluoride reduced their unrestricted migration rate by 21% (and 0.5 ppm
fluoride reduced it by 74%).

In 1983, Wilkinson (5) acknowledged that: 'If the claim presented in court
was correct, then fluoride in water would present a hazard to health as those
drinking the water would be at risk from bacterial infections.' He studied the
effect of NaF on the locomotion and chemotaxis of human neutrophils and
monocytes, using a microphore filter assay and a time-lapse photographic assay, and
found that there was total inhibition of neutrophil locomotion when the cells
were exposed to NaF at 10-2 M. The dose-response curve of monocytes was similar
to that of neutrophils. At concentrations greater than 10-4 M, NaF inhibited
locomotion of both types of cell, but this was not seen if lower
concentrations of NaF were used. He stated that: 'Therefore, these experiments give no
reason to believe that fluoride at levels used in drinking water supplies, or at
levels likely to be found in the body fluids of individuals drinking
fluoridated water, has any deleterious effect on the locomotor properties of the
leucocytes involved in defense against infectious disease.' That statement does not
take into account the release of fluoride during the resorption of
high-fluoride bone developed as a result of habitually drinking fluoridated water (1
mg/L). This practice greatly enhances the annual rate of increase of the fluoride
concentration in 'total' bone from approximately 5 ppm to 26 ppm in women, and
from 3 ppm to 18 ppm in men (3), resulting in a considerable accumulation of
fluoride in their bones.

Alhava et al (3), in 1980, found that the mean fluoride concentration in
cancellous bone was 2070 ppm in 24 fluoridated women of average age of 69 years
who had been drinking fluoridated water for approximately 20 years. However, in
23 women of average age 64 years who lived in a non-fluoridated area, the mean
fluoride concentration was only 622 ppm. The mean fluoride concentrations in
men were lower - 1360 ppm in the fluoridated area and 447 ppm in the control
one, as in the women less than a third of the mean bone fluoride concentration
found in the fluoridated area.

That concentration of fluoride in cancellous bone in women (2070) is more
than 200 times (and in men more than 150 times) the 'high' concentration of
fluoride (NaF greater or equal to 10-3 M) which Wilkinson (5) stated: '...inhibited
locomotion of both neutrophils and monocytes' in laboratory experiments.
Furthermore, Rich and Feist (6) stated that fluoride deposited in bone is located
mainly in the walls of the canaliculi and of the lacunae containing the
osteocytes. Therefore, the fluoride concentration in those places is likely to be
much higher than that found (3) in total cortical bone (2070 ppm in females and
1360 ppm in men).

It is not known what concentration of fluoride is attained in the canaliculi
and lacunae when this high-fluoride bone surrounding them is resorbed and its
fluoride content released into the small volume of fluid containing them.
However, in cattle, it is sufficiently high to inactivate or kill osteocytes (7).

It is postulated that, as a result of the resorption of this high-fluoride
bone, the fluid in the canaliculi will contain a high concentration of fluoride,
some of which will stream into the marrow, producing a prolonged exposure of
some developing immune system cells to concentrations of fluoride which would
considerably exceed the level and exposure time (NaF 10-3 M for 30 min) which
Wilkinson (5) found caused inhibition of the locomotor action of neutrophils
and monocytes in vitro. In addition, Gabler et al (8) observed the effect of F
(0.0 - 5.0 mmol/L) pre-treatment on the kinetics of 02- generation by human
neutrophils, and stated: "F inhibits the activation and activity of neutrophils.'

Allman et al (9) found that if 'fluoridated water (NaF at 1 ppm)' was fed to
rats for 6 weeks, their 3', 5' cyclic AMP levels in the six tissues tested
were increased significantly - in liver, tibia and heart by more than 100%. They
stated: 'It is clear that low levels of NaF are able to cause an elevation of
tissue cAMP.'

Curnette et al (10) found that '20 mM F is a potent stimulus for 02-
production by neutrophils' and that it 'abolishes phagocytosis.'

Conclusions

The above-mentioned observations suggest that fluoride released in high
concentrations during the normal resorption of high-fluoride bone, formed as a
result of the habitual ingestion of fluoridated drinking-water for a period of
years, may damage some immune system cells and reduce the efficacy of others.
Following on the recent string of about 40 in vitro studies which have found that
fluoride is a mutagen even when in low concentrations (e.g. 11, 12, 13), this
prospect raises further doubts about the safety of compelling whole
populations to ingest daily, for the whole of their lives, uncontrollable and
cumulative doses of fluoride through their drinking water.

This evidence that the ingestion of fluoride may damage the cells of the
immune system certainly raises the question whether HIV+ patients should be
permitted to drink fluoridated water

References:

1. Moolenburgh H. Fluoride: The Freedom Fight. Mainstream Publishing,
Edinburgh, 1987.

2. Sutton PRN. Does fluoride ingestion affect developing immune system cells?
Medical Hypotheses 23: 335-336, 1987.

3. Alhava EM, Olkkonen H, Kauranen P and Kari T. The effect of drinking water
fluoridation on the fluoride content, strength and mineral density of human
bone. Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica 51: 413-420, 1980.

4. Gibson S. Testimony before the Scottish High Court in Edinburgh in the
case of McColl vs. Strathclyde Borough Council, pp 4106-4173, 4228-4234,
4249-5046, 5127-5157, and exhibit 165, 1981. (Cited from Yiamouyiannis J. The Aging
Factor. 2 ed., Health Action Press, Delaware, 1986).

5. Wilkinson PC. Effects of fluoride on locomotion of human blood leucocytes
in vitro. Archives Oral Biology 28: 415-418, 1983.

6. Rich C, Feist E. The action of fluoride on bone. p 70 in: Fluoride in
Medicine (TL Vischer, ed) Hans Huber, Bern, 1970.

7. Krook L, Maylin GA. Industrial fluoride pollution. Cornell Vetenarian 69:
Supp. 8, 4, 1979.

8. Gabler WL, Creamer HR and Bullock WW. Modulation of the kinetics of
induced neutrophil superoxide generation by fluoride. J Dental Research 65:
1159-1165, 1986.

9. Allman DW, Miller A, Kleiner HS. Effect of fluoridated water on 3', 5'
cyclic AMP levels in various rat tissues. J Dental Research 57: 881, 1978.

10. Curnette JT, Babior BM, Karnovsky ML. Fluoride-mediated activation of the
respiratory burst in human neutrophils. A reversible process. J Clinical
Investigation 63: 637-647, 1979.

11. Tsutsui T, Ide K, Maizumi H. Induction of unscheduled DNA synthesis in
cultured human oral keratinocytes by sodium fluoride. Mutation Research 140:
43-8, 1984.

12. Scott D, Roberts SA. Extrapolation from in vitro tests to human risk:
experience with sodium fluoride clastogenicity. Mutation Research 187: 47-58,
1987.

13. Aardema MJ, Gibson DP, LeBoeuf RA. Sodium fluoride-induced chromosome
aberrations in different stages of the cell cycle: a proposed mechanism. Mutation
Research 223: 191-203, 1989.

Senior Member

343 posts, Mar 2003

posted 09-07-2003 07:16 AM            

---

Source: http://www.slweb.org/sutton-1987.html
=========================================================

Medical Hypotheses

Volume 23; Year 1987; Pages 335-336

Does Fluoride Ingestion Affect Developing Immune System Cells?

Phillip R.N. Sutton
Melbourne, Australia

INTRODUCTION

Generally about half of the fluoride absorbed is deposited in bone. It was
found in Finland (1) that the fluoridation of a water supply greatly increased
the rate of fluoride accumulation in bone, from a mean of 11 ppm annually in
low-fluoride areas to a mean of 44 ppm in the fluoridated people. In a warmer
climate with a very 'soft' water supply the rate of increase may be more rapid.
In a pilot study in Melbourne (2) the annual fluoride concentration increase
in alveolar bone in young women was 50 ppm and 103 ppm in those who suffered
from overuse injuries - variously described as: cervico-brachial disorder,
tenosynovitis and, in Australia, where it is a major problem, repetition strain
injury, RSI.

Fluoride does not normally accumulate in the bones of breast-fed infants.
They have a negative fluoride balance (3), the excretion of fluoride mobilized
from bone exceeding the amount absorbed. This is due to the presence of a
physiological 'barrier' which protects the infant from fluoride by almost completely
preventing the passage of fluoride from the mother's blood into her breast
milk (4). However, in bottle-fed infants in fluoridated areas, there is a
positive fluoride balance. They ingest approximately 150 times as much fluoride as
their breast-fed counterparts (3), 65 per cent of which is absorbed (5).

Rich and Feist (6) said that fluoride deposited in bone is located mainly in
the walls of the canaliculi and of the lacunae containing the osteocytes. They
postulated that, when the osteocytes resorb this high-fluoride bone they
would be damaged. Krook and Maylin (7) found, in fluorosed cattle, that osteocytes
and osteoblasts were 'target' cells for fluoride, the most affected being the
osteocytes, which were inactivated or killed. In developing teeth, fluoride
damaged the ameloblasts, odontoblasts, and the cells of the tooth pulp.

It is likely that, during its normal resorption by osteocytes, some of the
fluoride released from the high-fluoride bone will pass through the canaliculi
into the bon marrow. As fluoride affects bone and tooth cells: osteocytes,
osteoblasts, ameloblasts, odontoblasts, and pulpal cells, it is postulated that
fluoride reaching bone marrow will inactivate or kill some of the developing
cells of the immune system.

To test the effect of fluoridating public water supplies, Greenburg (8)
provided Swiss mice with fluoridated water and made cell counts bimonthly for eight
months. He reported: 'Basket cells (degenerating leucocytes) appeared after
the first month; their number subsequently expanded. By the fourth month,
cytoplasmic RNA ... was often clumped or fragmented; sometimes it totally
vanished.' The leucocytes from control mice were unaffected. He said: 'These data
suggest that fluoride in drinking water may induce leucocytic degeneration
accompanied by alterations in the RNA content of the affected cells.'

CONCLUSIONS

Theoretical considerations, supported by some published experimental
evidence, suggest that fluoride released during the resorption of high-fluoride bone
may produce detrimental effects not only on bone cells but on developing cells
of the immune system.

References

1. Arnala I. Bone Fluoride, Histomorphometry and Incidence of Hip Fracture.
University of Kuopio, Kuopio, 1983.

2. Smith GE. A simple method for obtaining bone biopsy specimens for fluoride
analysis and some preliminary results. New Zealand Medical Journal 98: 454,
1985.

3. Ekstrand J, Hardell LI, Spak CJ. Fluoride balance studies on infants in a
1-ppm-water-fluoride area. Caries Research 18: 87, 1984.

4. Ekstrand J, Boreus LO, de Chateau P. No evidence of transfer of fluoride
from plasma to breast milk. British Medical J. 283: 761, 1981.

5. Spak CJ, Ekstrand J, Zylberstein D. Bioavailability of fluoride added to
baby formula and milk. Caries Research 16: 249, 1982.

6. Rich C, Feist E. The action of fluoride on bone. p 70 in Fluoride in
Medicine (TL Vischer, ed) Hans Huber, Bern, 1970.

7. Krook L, Maylin GA. Industrial fluoride pollution. Cornell Vetinarian 69:
Supp. 8, 4, 1979.

8. Greenburg SR. The response of murine leucocytes to extended fluoride
exposure. Anatomical Record 196: 232A, 1980.