The whole argument about fluoridating public water supplies brings out, I think, the worst of organized medicine and organized dentistry. It shows the egotistical, power-hungry nature of the American Dental Association and those dentists who follow its dangerous philosophy of demanding that people swallow bioactive substances on command -- "for their own good," of course. With the fluoridation argument, a few people in authority positions want to force every single citizen of this country to be medicated on a psychoactive, biologically active substance without having any medical diagnosis, with no public warnings of side effects, and with no real studies to back up its efficacy. But that's just the beginning of this story...
To make matters even worse, it's not that municipalities are actually dripping genuine fluoride into the water supplies in the first place -- they're largely using fluorosilicic acid, which, as I've covered before, is actually a toxic waste product produced in the smokestacks of various industrial chemical producers. If they weren't selling this substance to cities, they would have to pay a lot of money to have it handled as an environmental hazard and buried in EPA-approved landfills.
Thus, it is illegal to take this fluorosilicic acid and bury it in the ground or dump it in rivers or streams in this country, but it is perfectly legal to sell it to cities that drip it into the water supply with the intended purpose of it being ingested by human beings. And those human beings, of course, eventually pass the fluoride through their bodies and directly into the rivers and streams. Thus, it brings us to this bizarre reality of fluoridation: this environmentally hazardous, toxic substance is illegal to dump into rivers and streams, unless it passes through the bodies of human beings first, in which case it's not only perfectly legal, it's actually demanded by ADA dentists. That's a pretty bizarre situation. (Of course, these are the same people who are still putting mercury into peoples' mouths, so what did you expect?)
I'll hand it to the dentistry community on this one: they sure have come up with a creative way to get rid of toxic waste chemicals without using landfill -- just sell 'em to cities and call it a "public health policy!" Brilliant marketing. Seriously.
Think about it: now instead of dumping toxic waste products into landfills where the chemicals leach into the groundwater supplies and get consumed by people, these toxic chemicals get consumed by people first, then they get flushed into the rivers and streams. It reminds me of the beef industry, where one of the USDA-approved feed ingredients for cows is, believe it or not, "chicken litter." (I'm not making this up.) Apparently, there's no good way to get rid of all that chicken excrement unless you feed it to cows. You can look this up on the USDA website if you don't believe me. Here's a Google search that will bring up some articles on it. With fluoridation, the American public is basically being treated like cattle. Here: eat some industrial waste products for us, please! Meanwhile, we're going to feed chicken excrement to cows, and then you can eat the cows after that, too! Heck, with enough segments in the food chain, they can get American consumers to eventually eat just about anything.
Back to fluoride, keep in mind that all the public debate about fluoride isn't even about fluoride in the first place, because most cities that claim to be dripping "natural" fluoride into the water supply aren't even buying natural fluoride to begin with. They're buying the toxic waste product fluorosilicic acid and using that instead. Why? Basically because it's cheaper and it starts with the letters f-l-u-o-r, meaning they can pass it off as fluoride since most people don't know the difference. (There's a sad and disturbing history of mass populations being poisoned with things that start with "f-l-u-o-r," by the way. Fluorine gas, anyone?)
I was just thinking if we used the American Dental Association approach of eating everything that's supposed to be a topical treatment, then we could revolutionize the cosmetic industry. Women could eat lipstick to make their lips turn red. People could eat deodorant to stop body odor. And we could just eat shampoo instead of actually washing our hair. Maybe the American Dental Association label of approval will be found on these products as well. Maybe people should just start eating toothpaste instead of brushing their teeth with it, because certainly a lot of children eat toothpaste already, and many of those children suffer from dental fluorosis as a result. (A lot of senior citizens in this country also suffer from hip fractures and bone loss due partly to an overdose of fluoride.)
Or let's take a different track and follow the line of thinking of the American Dental Association -- let's mass medicate the entire population with lots of other drugs. Why stop at fluoride? Why don't we drip antidepressants into the water supply, and that way we can have more people committing violent acts and suicide -- documented side effects of antidepressants. Why don't we drip statin drugs into the water supply so that we can lower the HDL cholesterol of every citizen in this country? Believe it or not, that has actually been suggested by some doctors. They think we should mass medicate the entire population with a number of biochemically active drugs, with or without their consent. Fluoride could be just the beginning! The public waterways could be a genuine chemical cocktail... that is, if they weren't already.
All this demonstrates how egomaniacal and power-hungry organized dentistry is today. These people want to force drugs into the bodies of people, and they want to do it through a system of subterfuge that drips these drugs slowly into the water supply. That way people are taking these drugs whether they know it or not, and they don't even need a prescription.
I think the American Dental Association members and supporting dentists may have been dripping a little too much fluoride into their own water, because they've apparently gone mad with the idea that everyone needs fluoride in order to have healthy teeth. If you want fluoride, rub it on your teeth for a few minutes and then spit it out -- don't drink it. It's a topical treatment, folks. You wouldn't eat lipstick or deodorant or shampoo -- why are you eating fluoride in unmonitored quantities?
Finally, given that drinking fluorosilicic acid helps industrial companies get rid of a toxic waste product, shouldn't you get paid something for helping them dispose of this EPA-regulated substance? If you're going to feed poison to the American public, at least offer to pay them something for it. Right now, cities are being charged for this stuff. Frankly, industrial companies should be paying cities for their help in getting rid of it. Then those cities should turn around and pay the citizens for being willing to swallow it. "Here, I'll give you a dollar if you drink this!" You'd be amazed how many people would say yes. Think about the possibilities: you could solve the whole Yucca Mountain problem in Nevada by feeding radioactive waste to the American public! Or, if that didn't work, just feed it to the chickens and cows! (Don't laugh. There's probably some bureaucrat somewhere that takes the idea seriously.)
REVIEW TYPE