-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
I met Paul Connett, PhD on Sunday at the planning meeting; he graciously allowed anyone to download his power point presentation, which I did, onto a thumb drive, last night at the Glaser Center talk. He was very clear that we ALL have to get involved and learn and remember as much of the facts as we can. There were quite a few of us who downloaded his presentation so among us we should be able to get it printed up and/or make it available online.
Hearing his comments about Dr. Silver-Chaflin's (SP?) behavior yesterday was quite illuminating, "talked like a robot" and "she has an agenda." This woman should lose her license to practice medicine. For those of you who weren't there, a complaint has been filed about her with the Sonoma County grand jury.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mudwoman:
Awesome recap!
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
If you look deeply enough, Tommy, you'll find that those "documented oral health benefits" are not true. Get a copy of Paul Connet's book on fluoridation or go to the Fluoride Action Network website; you'll find 17 years of research from all over the world that debunks the oral health through water fluoridation argument. Many of us who attended Dr. Connet's talks on Sunday and last night were able to download his power point presentation. My hope is that we can get that posted here soon.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by tommy:
Why do you think floridation, with so many documented oral health benefits, attract opposition?
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
I so appreciate your time and energy to report this educational meeting presenting Dr. Connett for the community. I had planned on coming but wasn't able to. Many of his points were the same as I've shared for several years on this forum (and his presence sounds like it added a great depth to this topic). What I didn't read below was about the calcification of the pineal gland from fluoride...I've seen some horrendous pictures of this, but he sure covered alot despite this.
I wrote to several supervisors almost two months ago, and Susan Gorin was kind enough to acknowledge that she received my information. Efren has not. No surprise.
And just like I've heard on this forum, there are many who buy into what the ADA/their dentists say. In having worked in this field for years, I can tell you that it's no different than any other backroom disinformation of the Big Pharm industry.
Again, much gratitude!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:
Last night, I attended an outstanding presentation by Dr. Paul Connett
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Thanks, SharingWisdom, for your kind words.
I had to step out for a moment to take a refreshment break (yes, the sponsors were kind enough to provide refreshments!) and I may have missed this important point about what happens to the pineal gland from overfluoridation. When I came back into the room, I seem to remember some rather scary pictures up on the screen, but then the subject changed. At any rate, thanks for filling in this important blank.
Keep on posting. Your posts on this issue have certainly inspired me to get involved! Onward!
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
03-25-2013 Paul Connett - YouTube Santa Rosa Fluoride Town Hall meeting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqSZJdpHfYY
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Thank you so much for posting this link! I passed it on to the Sonoma County Stop Fluoridation group on yahoo groups and posted on my Facebook page. I suggest everyone pass this on to as many people as possible.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by intheflow88:
03-25-2013 Paul Connett - YouTube Santa Rosa Fluoride Town Hall meeting
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Thanks so much for posting Dr. Connett's outstanding presentation
I was just reminded by a friend whom I told about the "supes" plans for forced fluoridation of something ominously funny from an old movie, Dr. Strangelove, starring Peter Sellers. In one scene, his co-star, Sterling Hayden, is telling him about plans for using fluoridation to rob bodily fluids, among other things. It appears as though the director, the late, great Stanley Kubrick, was trying to warn us of the dangers of fluor back in '64!
Go to Youtube and Google in "Dr. Strangelove fluoridation, and several clips of this famous scene will pop up for your viewing pleasure.
Again, I ask: What are our government's true motives? It's time we hear from them. And what is this business about not wanting to review any of the "opposition's" materials? Excuse me, but I thought that that was what they were getting paid for, NOT to exact draconian policy and junk science on the masses.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Here's a couple of clips:
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:
I was just reminded by a friend whom I told about the "supes" plans for forced fluoridation of something ominously funny from an old movie, Dr. Strangelove, starring Peter Sellers. In one scene, his co-star, Sterling Hayden, is telling him about plans for using fluoridation to rob bodily fluids, among other things. It appears as though the director, the late, great Stanley Kubrick, was trying to warn us of the dangers of fluor back in '64!...
Again, I ask: What are our government's true motives? It's time we hear from them
Somehow I don't think Sterling Hayden was the hero in that one...
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
You know that we're never going to hear the truth about why fluoridation of our water is so important to the supes or to our county health officer, Dr. Silver-Chaflin. I've said before that I believe that money is involved somewhere even though I have no proof. It's some of that "truthiness" Barry and I discussed a few weeks ago.
I totally agree with you, Sebastacat, on the issue of some of them not wanting to see "the opposition's" information. ( I hate the way they call us the "opposition, which makes us sound contrary and whiney) They are making decisions that affect over 600,000 people as well as all our watersheds, all the living beings in that watershed, and ultimately, the Earth itself. It just makes me wonder often what is wrong with these people who think that we can continue to poison our only home and not be adversely affected?! There is no Planet B that we can escape to! It doesn't matter how rich you are or how much political or financial power one might have; this is the ONLY HOME WE HAVE. And once it's gone, that's it; it's gone forever.
I was taught to always think seven generations ahead and plan for those descendants' health and safety as well as that of the earth itself. I cannot understand the mind-set that these people have that they have the right to do whatever they want regardless of how it affects others. This is the height of arrogance and irresponsibility, in my opinion. Like Paul said on Sunday and Monday, "Why do we think we can improve on Nature when it has worked perfectly for millions of years?!"
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:
Thanks so much for posting Dr. Connett's outstanding presentation
I was just reminded by a friend whom I told about the "supes" plans for forced fluoridation of something ominously funny from an old movie, Dr. Strangelove, starring Peter Sellers. In one scene, his co-star, Sterling Hayden, is telling him about plans for using fluoridation to rob bodily fluids, among other things. It appears as though the director, the late, great Stanley Kubrick, was trying to warn us of the dangers of fluor back in '64!
Go to Youtube and Google in "Dr. Strangelove fluoridation, and several clips of this famous scene will pop up for your viewing pleasure.
Again, I ask: What are our government's true motives? It's time we hear from them. And what is this business about not wanting to review any of the "opposition's" materials? Excuse me, but I thought that that was what they were getting paid for, NOT to exact draconian policy and junk science on the masses.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
I have not had time to read most of this thread so this has probably already been posted somewhere but just in case...
Harvard Study Confirms Fluoride Reduces Children's IQ
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/fluoride_b_2479833.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009&utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false
In this Huff Post article there is a link to the 32-page report.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Clearly they are not working for us. They are serving their egos, or a rescue fantasy, or Doug Bosco, or some other mystery master. So if they are not working for us, then why are we paying them?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:
... Again, I ask: What are our government's true motives? It's time we hear from them. And what is this business about not wanting to review any of the "opposition's" materials? Excuse me, but I thought that that was what they were getting paid for, NOT to exact draconian policy and junk science on the masses.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Glia:
Clearly they are not working for us. They are serving their egos, or a rescue fantasy, or Doug Bosco, or some other mystery master. So if they are not working for us, then why are we paying them?
Paul Connett said in that video that speaking this scientific info to Lynn Silver-Chafin was like speaking to a robot, and that her job depended on getting fluoride in Sonoma County. It seems that someone has set her up to do this job.
He also said the remedy is to get such an upswell of public opinion against fluoridation that the idea is ridden out of town on a rail. Be sure to make a point of speaking about it where ever you go to people who are not aware yet. This is key. We need BIG public opinion against this.
You can listen to the first part of this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=LqSZJdpHfYY where Paul makes 12 compelling reasons against fluoridation, memorize a few and share with many people.
The one that even avid pro fluoride people can agree on is this is a civil rights issue. No one should be forced to drink medication without their consent.
The second biggest one is this is not pharmaceutical grade fluoride. This is hexafluorosilicic acid which comes trucked labeled as hazardous waste from the phosphate fertilizer industry and is sold to water treatment plants as fluoride. It includes arsenic, radiation and other seriously toxic elements. And it is not acceptable to raise cancer and other illness rates to prevent tooth decay.
These 2 reasons are the ones that hundreds of town councils around the world have given as to why they refused or discontinued water fluoridation. They also said they didn't want to be in the role of practicing medicine. Keep it simple.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Dr. Connett's presentation at the Glaser Center on 25 March 2013 covered, among many other things, the weakness of the evidence of "oral health benefits" and the lie-by-statistics methods used by the water fluoridation promoters.
Here's a link to the video on YouTube for that section of his presentation (1:12:12 thru 1:19:55):
https://youtu.be/LqSZJdpHfYY?t=1h12m12s
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by DreadTori:
If you look deeply enough, Tommy, you'll find that those "documented oral health benefits" are not true. ...
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Here's a great post by Donna Westfall that appeared as a comment on the PD's article on the fuss over The Next Step newsletter advocacy against fluoridation:
As a former city councilwoman, I was instrumental in investigating my constituents complaints about the harmfulness of water fluoridation. As a result I helped in getting an initiative to the ballot and we successfully voted in a moratorium on Nov 6, '12 to turn off the toxic industrial waste fluoride (HYDROFLUSOLICIC ACID OR HFSA) because our supplier UNIVAR, (formerly Basic Chemical Solutions) would not provide three things:
1.) Toxicological report.
2.) Listing of contaminants.
3.) Proof that their product was safe for all water consumers, infants to seniors.
This absurd practice of adding HFSA is based more on politics than science. Why should a water department be given the power to medicate anyone when they don't take a health history, they don't pass out a listing of side effects or monitor the dose. This is tantamount to gross negligence. Water consumers started to send in their payment UNDER PROTEST so that when the class action lawsuits begin they would be covered.
After adding water fluoridation for 44 years, our town had 70% cavities in our childrens' teeth,(this figure was quoted from Dr. Susan Wellman, dentist who is pro-fluoride) high obesity rates and low test scores. Hardly an endorsement for continuing this unethical practice. We were also ranked 34th in the nation for cancer while Brookings, Oregon..... just 25 minutes north of us.... was ranked 765th in the nation for cancer for the same time period and Bookings never fluoridated their water.
We have high rates of not only cancer, but thyroid, diabetes and kidney disease all with links to HFSA. One constituent ended up in ER with seizures after showering for 10 minutes. Her doctor has subsequently written a letter describing her allergic reaction to water fluoridation. She was on a medication which contained fluoride and that in combination with absorbing this poison transdermally by showering put her in the Emergency Room.
New Hampshire Governor Lynch signed into law on Aug 4, 2012 infant warnings concerning mixing fluoridated water with formula because of the high prevalence of fluorosis. Fluorosis is the first visible sign of fluoride poisoning. Our Environmental Protection Agency announced in early 2011 that 41% of our nations teenagers had fluorosis and recommended cutting the parts per million down to.7. Our city council reduced the ppm from 1.2 to.7. That was a step in the right direction but not nearly enough because our EPA is doing nothing to really test or protect the public from this toxic industrial waste product. The only safe level when considering the addition of HFSA to drinking/bathing water is ZERO.
The State of Kansas, has successfully entered House Bill 2372 on January 18, 2013 listing the harm of water fluoridation. If passed, Kansas will become the first fluoride-free state in the United States.
If you happen to call the NSF (which is not a government agency) and ask them questions about the testing they do on HFSA, they will tell you that they won't provide that information because of non-disclosure agreements. If you call the manufacturer, distributor or supplier, they will not provide information about the 3 requested docs listed in my opening paragraph above as I already did that back in 2011. I sent out over 40 letters and got zero responses.
I predict that water fluoridation will become one of the biggest frauds and scams ever perpetrated against the public in the 20th and 21st century. That phrase often quoted by the CDC as being one of the best things since sliced bread was made up by a Public Relations guy. It's time to stop quoting that drivel. Water fluoridation will be compared to Tobacco science, DDT science, Asbestos science, Thalidomide science, etc.
It is my opinion based on the research I've done which has been extensive these last 5 years, that it's all about the money. Some brilliant schemers came up with this idea to get rid of toxic industrial waste by saying it was good for children's teeth. That's a bunch of baloney. It's good for the bank accounts of the producers of HFSA because if they had to get rid of their toxic industrial waste legally, it would cost them hundreds of millions of dollars. Instead they dupe the politicians with fraudulent science and endorsements which is not science and sell them a product in which humans are utilized to filter this poison through their bodies while 99% goes down the drain. The dumb politicians buy it hook, line and sinker and shut their brains down. They become incapable of independent thought as I witnessed first hand with my fellow council members and other councils I've visited. But the HFSA manufacturers, suppliers and distributors are laughing all the way to the bank because they've got these municipalities paying them for poison. Plus, I checked out our retirement accounts and lo and behold, the MOSAIC company is one of the funds city employees can invest their retirement money in. Again, as I said, brilliant scheme from start to finish. I just hope to see the day that some of them end up in prison.
But here's the part they don't tell you. In 2011, our city finished a $43.8 million upgrade/expansion on our waste water treatment plant with state-of-the-art technology that utilizes MBR or Membrane Bio-Reactor technology. When I asked our Public Works Director if this gets the fluoride out of the water, he replied, "NO." So this poison is going into our Pacific Ocean.
Poison the public. Poison the oceans. Poison the food and beverages. Because of that, we are all already over-fluoridated.
Please do your homework.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Just excellent! Exactly what I've said for years...Big Industry and money in the pockets. I'm grateful that more and more people are waking up to the pseudo-science that has been propagated on us in many areas and fluoride is just one component.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
...
I predict that water fluoridation will become one of the biggest frauds and scams ever perpetrated against the public in the 20th and 21st century. That phrase often quoted by the CDC as being one of the best things since sliced bread was made up by a Public Relations guy. It's time to stop quoting that drivel. Water fluoridation will be compared to Tobacco science, DDT science, Asbestos science, Thalidomide science, etc.
It is my opinion based on the research I've done which has been extensive these last 5 years, that it's all about the money. Some brilliant schemers came up with this idea to get rid of toxic industrial waste by saying it was good for children's teeth. That's a bunch of baloney. It's good for the bank accounts of the producers of HFSA because if they had to get rid of their toxic industrial waste legally, it would cost them hundreds of millions of dollars. Instead they dupe the politicians with fraudulent science and endorsements which is not science and sell them a product in which humans are utilized to filter this poison through their bodies while 99% goes down the drain. The dumb politicians buy it hook, line and sinker and shut their brains down. They become incapable of independent thought as I witnessed first hand with my fellow council members and other councils I've visited. But the HFSA manufacturers, suppliers and distributors are laughing all the way to the bank because they've got these municipalities paying them for poison. ...
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
I don't think I've seen this posted yet...
Here's the website and the full film for Fluoridegate! https://www.fluoridegate.org/
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Thanks for posting this, Barry!
For those of you who have not seen this film, please don't be turned off by the first few minutes of somber music; to me, it was kind of cheesy. The film is filled with facts about how fluoride got pushed on us, health info on the dangers of fluoride, and great commentary by so many scientists, some of whom worked at the EPA. It is well worth watching. I guarantee that you'll learn a lot.!
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
I so appreciate your time and energy to report this educational meeting presenting Dr. Connett for the community. I had planned on coming but wasn't able to. Many of his points were the same as I've shared for several years on this forum (and his presence sounds like it added a great depth to this topic). What I didn't read below was about the calcification of the pineal gland from fluoride...I've seen some horrendous pictures of this, but he sure covered alot despite this.
I wrote to several supervisors almost two months ago, and Susan Gorin was kind enough to acknowledge that she received my information. Efren has not. No surprise.
And just like I've heard on this forum, there are many who buy into what the ADA/their dentists say. In having worked in this field for years, I can tell you that it's no different than any other backroom disinformation of the Big Pharm industry.
Again, much gratitude!
Thanks for writing our supervisors sharingwisdom.
Not that I'm any great fan of Efren, but when I emailed ALL our supervisors on this issue OVER a year ago (mid-March 2012), Efren was the only supervisor who replied to me personally.
I also received an acknowledgement from Michelle Whitman, District Director to Supervisor Shirlee Zane.
The rest of the supervisors and their staff didn't have the courtesy to respond....even with a generic reply (ie. "Thanks for your email.") Tsk, tsk.
Obviously, we need to direct 'polite' intensity their way on this issue. Make them feel the heat of our disapproval.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County -- TWO COUNTY REPORTS
Just re-posting the names of two reports as handy reference. They are both on the same page at the county's website:
https://www.sonoma-county.org/health...ions/index.asp
Scroll down to section: "Assessments and Planning Reports."
I. The Final Report of the Sonoma County Task Force on Oral Health (pdf) posted February 28, 2012 is the 4th report listed. This project predates the county's hiring of Dr. Silver-Chalfin. The work was performed during six months of 2011.
II. Sonoma County Fluoridation Assessment Draft Report (pdf) posted February 26, 2013 and prepared by Dr Silver Chalfin is the 8th report listed.
Sonoma County Fluoridation Assessment Draft Report (pdf) posted February 26, 2013 and prepared by Dr Silver Chalfin --
She has personally chosen to entitle this official record: "Life is Better with Teeth." (You don't say? No kidding?) And so, the pathos begins, with more therein. Anyone arguing for fluoridation is going to have to resort to cheesy rhetoric from which a student of the discipline can make swiss cheese. A few of my personal favorites from her Executive Summary:
"Creating local policy in favor of fluoridation is complex..."
and
"... developments in California, beginning with AB 733 (the Fluoridation Act of 1996), have helped to move fluoridation forward, particularly in the metropolitan areas of southern California. In the last five years, the percentage of Californians who receive fluoridated water has risen from 27 to 58 percent. (AN INTRIGUING SLIPPERY SEGUE ENSUES -- she's a master:)
Although the Fluoridation Act of 1996 applies to retail water systems with over 10,000 connections, requiring them to fluoridate if funding is available, recent approaches to fluoridation have begun with an investigation of regional water delivery systems, which often involve a wholesale system.
By the way, you won't find any pathos-type rhetoric in the oral health task force's earlier 2011 project -- transparent, honest, and savvy, an example of both passion and sobriety.
-
Re: Quality information and Action on Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Thanks all for the conversation here.
I wanted to let folks know that I've created a central webpage for local Sonoma County actions about community water fluoridation (CWF), which offers a handy link for you to check out and forward to others. I keep updating it as I find new resources.
www.healthyworld.org/StopSCFAction.html
Some of the items there that you might find helpful:
1) I've created a handy webpage summary of what I see as the key problems with CWF, with citations, at www.healthyworld.org/SCFluoridation-About.html. Read this to learn more, identify key points you might make, and get supporting citations. It also offers my proposals for fixing the process with the Board of Supervisors, which I feel is currently biased towards CWF.
(Note: I think it's vital that we skip the more fringe arguments when trying to persuade mainstream people, as those are making people think that opposition is wacky and not founded in facts. In my writing, I focus on the science and other core arguments that even quite mainstream people can understand. Those arguments are really enough!)
2) If you want to create an informational flyer, you can use my two Ask EcoGirl columns on this topic, which includes most of the points on my summary webpage. Just go to each of these links, download the PDF for each column, then copy them double-sided on one page. [see page for more info]
3) You can join and participate in the email/online group I created to help us stop SC fluoridation. (You can have an email, digest, or web-only membership in this group.)
https://groups.yahoo.com/group/StopSCFluoridation
4) I've also created a low-volume priority action alert email list for this topic. It's one of the options on my personal email list page. See www.patriciadines.info/EList.
5) I also post ongoing information on this and other eco-topics on my Ask EcoGirl Facebook page. Come by for a visit! www.facebook.com/AskEcoGirl
So that just gives you some of the items on that action page. It also gives links to two SC petitions, local webpages and Facebook groups on this topic, a link to SC supervisors email addresses, information on the contractors in the SC water agency system, helpful handouts I've created with information and policy statements, and lots of good general resources on this topic.
I hope that folks find this helpful!
Best regards - Patricia
Patricia Dines
Freelance Writer, Educator, & Public Speaker
Specializing in Environmental & Community Issues
Serving periodicals, businesses, nonprofits, and government
www.patriciadines.info
www.askecogirl.info
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
In terms of the arguments we make to mainstream folks against fluoridation - I suggest that we stick with the very core scientific arguments - they really are enough - and the more fringe arguments are much more difficult to prove and make us seem "wacky" and not factual. I'd say this "wacky" image is our #1 barrier to being heard with the very real reasons not to fluoridate.
So for instance I really advice skipping the "Nazis used fluoride" argument. I know that's asserted by some, but I do not consider it a confirmed fact. And it's not needed for our argument. See the summary against this assertion at https://www.politifact.com/florida/s...lude-nazi-myth.
Also, many of us ask the question, "Since this is so disproven, why does it continue?" It's a reasonable question, and it's fine to explore it personally, if you wish. BUT I think we need to be VERY cautious about asserting our THEORIES about motivation as fact. How do you feel when others assume negative motives about you? It undermines fair conversation. We need to be the voice of reason here! Reason is our strongest card!
In this situation, we don't have one clear smoking gun of motivation. Yes, there's good evidence that fluoridation lets the fertilizer industry get rid of their toxic waste, and we can certainly mention that. But I don't think that fully explains the level of infrastructure supporting fluoridation. So then people make all sorts of UNSUPPORTED assertions that folks, including the Supervisors, must be being paid off. But I think those kind of unfounded claims just turn people off and are not helpful.
I actually think a fair number of people supporting fluoridation just sincerely believe the claims for it! The claims are so persuasive (safe and effective! etc.) and are being put out by expert organizations. We have to see how that looks to people! In med school, doctors and dentists are just told that fluoridation works. And we have a culture where people just believe what experts tell them. Many folks don't look under the surface, or know how to discern between lots of theories to where the truth lies.
Once we understand that, then to me we see that it's VITAL that we stick to the facts and demonstrate OUR expertise. We need to show the many facts that go against fluoridation. That's why the fringe arguments work against us.
There are other reasonable reasons that folks are sticking with the pro-fluoridation claims, for instance - ego; not wanting to admit they're wrong; risk of liability; risk of sticking one's neck out within organizations - etc.!
And yes it deeply concerns me that there is a structure that keeps promoting this, forcing it down our throats. We can theorize about why amongst ourselves, if we must.
But I think that we also need to be humble to what we don't know, and careful not to make unsupported assumptions.
My goal is to stop this practice, which many in the world think is barbaric. To do that, I think we need to be able to persuade mainstream people. And I don't think we need to assert covert motive to persuade them, especially when so many of the assertions aren't proven. Really, the science and facts that we have are enough!
To see my fact-based argument against fluoridation, with citations, go to www.healthyworld.org/SCFluoridation-About.html. Feel free to forward that link to others!
I hope this is helpful -
Patricia Dines
Freelance Writer, Educator, & Public Speaker
Specializing in Environmental & Community Issues
Serving periodicals, businesses, nonprofits, and government
www.patriciadines.info
www.askecogirl.info
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Thank you, thank you thank you, Patricia! I cannot agree more. All the "fringe" arguments convince others that we are a bunch of nuts and then they shut out everything we say, including the scientific facts against fluoridation. The facts are argument enough, as long as we know them well, and are willing to talk about them at every opportunity. I have talked to the clerks at Oliver's, the nurses at Kaiser while seeing my friend there, the young people working at my bank, people I'm standing in line with at the movies. I often start loud conversations with my friends in public places just so that others can eavesdrop & hopefully learn something! Lots of people have asked me about it when they overheard what I was saying.
If we could all wear anti-fluoridation buttons that said "ask me about the facts about fluoridation" lots of people would ask. In the prop 37 campaign, we handed out "GMO free grandma/kid/farmer/mom, etc. buttons and they started conversations. I still wear my grandma one.
And FYI- EVERY ICU NURSE I talked to at Santa Rosa Kaiser hospital thinks fluoridation is incredibly dangerous. They all cited elders, babies, young children, immune compromised folks getting doses that could harm them, plus they are all over the medication without informed consent issue AND the mass medication is unethical argument. We might want to consider asking the nurses' unions to make a statement.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by PDines:
In terms of the arguments we make to mainstream folks against fluoridation - I suggest that we stick with the very core scientific arguments - they really are enough - and the more fringe arguments are much more difficult to prove and make us seem "wacky" and not factual. I'd say this "wacky" image is our #1 barrier to being heard with the very real reasons not to fluoridate.
So for instance ...
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
You're most welcome. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, and for your actions too. I love the buttons idea! :-)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by DreadTori:
Thank you, thank you thank you, Patricia! I cannot agree more. All the "fringe" arguments convince others that we are a bunch of nuts and then they shut out everything we say, including the scientific facts against fluoridation. The facts are argument enough, as long as we know them well, and are willing to talk about them at every opportunity. I have talked to the clerks at Oliver's, the nurses at Kaiser while seeing my friend there, the young people working at my bank, people I'm standing in line with at the movies. I often start loud conversations with my friends in public places just so that others can eavesdrop & hopefully learn something! Lots of people have asked me about it when they overheard what I was saying.
If we could all wear anti-fluoridation buttons that said "ask me about the facts about fluoridation" lots of people would ask. In the prop 37 campaign, we handed out "GMO free grandma/kid/farmer/mom, etc. buttons and they started conversations. I still wear my grandma one.
And FYI- EVERY ICU NURSE I talked to at Santa Rosa Kaiser hospital thinks fluoridation is incredibly dangerous. They all cited elders, babies, young children, immune compromised folks getting doses that could harm them, plus they are all over the medication without informed consent issue AND the mass medication is unethical argument. We might want to consider asking the nurses' unions to make a statement.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
You're right for the most part, and I concur about the "wacky" aspect.
However, if it was just about the science (to paraphrase Efren Carillo), like some many other harmful practices it would have been gone long ago. So, there must be something else keeping public water fluoridation going. It is a legitimate concern; IMO it does need to be discussed -- carefully and effectively.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by PDines:
In terms of the arguments we make to mainstream folks against fluoridation - I suggest that we stick with the very core scientific arguments - they really are enough - and the more fringe arguments are much more difficult to prove and make us seem "wacky" and not factual. I'd say this "wacky" image is our #1 barrier to being heard with the very real reasons not to fluoridate.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Bravo nurses!! Definitely get the nurses' union to make a statement. And when they do, they should send out a formal press release and be sure to post the statement/release here on Waccobb.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by DreadTori:
And FYI- EVERY ICU NURSE I talked to at Santa Rosa Kaiser hospital thinks fluoridation is incredibly dangerous. They all cited elders, babies, young children, immune compromised folks getting doses that could harm them, plus they are all over the medication without informed consent issue AND the mass medication is unethical argument. We might want to consider asking the nurses' unions to make a statement.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
the "payoff" is not necessarily in dollars.
The payoff can be the appearance of providing "help to the needy" while also being "fiscally prudent." It can be a setup for the next political career move (Zane, McGuire).
The naive/gullible ones (Brown's replacement, Carrillo, Rabbit to some extent) actually believe the hogwash think it is a good idea.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mudwoman:
Yeah, have to agree with you. Looking VERY suspicious. Where's the money? Who benefits?
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
I believe you are absolutely right! One of the two is obviously Shirlee Zane. But who is the other one? Perhaps this photo she "tweeted" on April 2nd provides a clue:
and why is her hardhat lopsided?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:
... I believe that forced fluoridation is part of a master plan concocted by two of our "supes" who have aspirations to seek higher political office in the future. If they are successful in getting this plan enacted, they will have a notch on their belts to impress some of their economically disadvantaged voters, who might be impressed by such a thing, hoping that they are and will remain unaware of the true motives, inaccuracies, junk science and misinformation behind their hidden agenda.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Hardhat lopsided? YOU'RE absolutely right; it is!
Perhaps it was intentional, given the way that the "supes" have skewed the fluoridation debate in one direction.....
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Apparently the promise made for "affordable healthcare" implied -- w/outthe need to directly mention-- hose a "known cure" (contaminant) directly (&forcibly) into everyone's water supply? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZmC...948gyQ&index=9
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
ALSO, isn't fluoride a waste product from agriculture? Does Mike still have family/business ties to the agriculture industry? IF so, I would think some disclosures would eventually be expected? From where do they plan on procuring the fluoride -- that kind of thing. Just a thought and nothing else.
A few excerpts from his campaign website -- https://mikeforsupervisor.com/about.html
"Northern Sonoma County has been his family's home for three generations….Mike was raised right here in Sonoma County. His family farmed Alexander Valley lands – growing prunes and grapes – for almost a half century....Mike has worked his entire adult life to protect our environment and preserve our local agriculture heritage for future generations. He’ll continue to fight to protect our drinking water supplies and the fragile Russian River ecosystem, and to build partnerships with local communities to make the Sonoma County Water Agency a model for water conservation efforts.....As a co-founder of the Clean Water Coalition, Mike was a leader in the effort to stop the City of Santa Rosa from dumping billions of gallons of treated wastewater into the Russian River."
I wonder if he knows the Sierra Club is anti-fluoridation.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
This just in from the Sonoma County Water Coalition SCWC.
This is an excellent 31 minute video which includes solid data on the effect of fluoride on fish and people. Please forward to friends and family in Sonoma County.
The video was created for the 2013 Portland, Oregon anti-fluoridation campaign, "Fluoridation and the Environment" goes into detail about the effects of fluoridated water on fish, then goes on to offer clear
explanations of the science re. fluoridation's efficacy for dental health, and safety for human consumption. [links below]
Many thanks for getting the word out.
Video: Fluoridation and the Environment (2013) [31:06]
Howard Patterson
Published on Apr 10, 2013
High resolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYej_OgZHE
Medium resolution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdsK4O1E-J8
If you have trouble with the video, watch the
Low resolution version here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIsY-Ky_uaY
Note from Howard Patterson: Dr. Paul Connett points out a misattribution in the text of the video. At 22:22, I list a series of areas demanding further safety study, and attribute it to the York Review (2002): in fact, those quotes are from the later National Research Council study (2006), which I discuss at 23:31. Pardon the misattribution.
For more on Howard Petterson (you may remember the Flying Karamazov Brothers):
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/howard-...son/13/797/703
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Hope Sonoma County is this smart! https://www.fluoridealert.org/articl...tland_victory/
PORTLAND USES SCIENCE & INTEGRITY TO DEFEAT FLUORIDATION
https://www.fluoridealert.org/upload...to-550x300.jpg
Fluoride Action Network | Press Release | May 21, 2013
Portland, Oregon — A broad coalition of Portlanders have resoundingly rejected adding fluoridation chemicals to the city’s water supply. By a 61% to 39% margin, Portland voters agreed with the positon of most western nations that there are safer, more effective, and less intrusive ways to promote oral health than adding a chemical linked to thyroid disease, IQ loss, and other ailments to the water supply.
Continues here: https://www.fluoridealert.org/articles/portland_victory/
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ruthnew:
Thanks so much for posting this. You made my Memorial Day weekend!
I, too, hope that the people of this county are as smart as their Portland counterparts.
The task now, as I see it, is to re-shift the debate, as the "supes" seem to have made this a one-sided
proposition which some people seem to think is a foregone conclusion.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
I invite the "supes" to take note of this stunning victory. Think it can't happen here? Think again.
I, for one, have signed anti-fluoride petitions, have gotten others to do the same and will vote resoundingly
AGAINST ANY PROPOSAL which seeks to put poison in Sonoma County's precious water supply.
I have been doing my part by educating those who are unfamiliar with this unpopular, scientifically-devoid proposal to fluoridate our water. And I can tell you that I have not spoken to one -- NOT ONE -- person who
supports fluoridation of our water supply. I think that as people learn more about this, this number is only going to increase.
Let us all do our part by taking the time to educate those county residents among us who are unaware of this proposal and by continuing to speak out against it.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
https://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2...-fluoridation/
Is it possible, just possible that scientists aren't out trying to poison us?
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
"Is it possible, just possible, that scientists aren't trying to poison us?"
Maybe. But apparently, our elected officials at the county level are.
"Unlike the case with the anti-vaccine movement, the consequences of the antifluoridation movement are not illness, disability and death."
No, just increased fluorosis of the teeth, broken bones and decreased kidney function. Please remember, folks, that fluorosis from overfluoridation can strike both the young and the old. Remember, too, that adding fluoride to the water supply has very dangerous consequences for our older population. Fluoride is particularly hard on those undergoing dialysis. Let's not forget about our elderly population in this battle.
"Apparently, Portlandians must like going to the dentist."
No, apparently, from the results of the latest fluoride referendum, we can deduce that most Portlandians don't want to ingest a by-product of the phosphate fertilizer industry, much of which comes from China, and which has been proven to contain lead, arsenic and other toxic heavy metals.
And neither do a lot of Sonoma County residents either, including me!
The swipe by the blogger that Portland has a lot of uninformed and uneducated people was completely uncalled for. Portland, in some ways, is much more progressive than Sonoma County. And let's not forget, they grow some of the most beautiful roses in the world. (This coming from a national champion rose grower -- me!)
Maybe what it all really boiled down to up there in Portland was that Portlandians wanted to keep their precious Pacific Northwest water supply free of poison. If our "supes" truly care about the residents of this county, they will abandon this unpopular, misguided, dangerous proposal and instead endorse and embark on a program of dental education, which includes basic instruction at the elementary-school level on how to brush, how many times a day to brush, etc. Dental clinics could be dispatched to the schools to examine and treat and educate children for a fraction of what it will cost to implement the pro-fluoride agenda. They can even teach the students about fluoride toothpaste and let them and their parents make the decision whether or not they want to use it.
In the end, I believe that one's dental hygiene comes down to this: regular dental checkups -- with a dose of personal responsibility thrown in for good measure.
And remember, no one is going to brush your teeth for you.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
One should ponder why the Army was so interested in convincing the American citizenry to fluoridate their water.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ruthnew:
... These Native Americans were very resistant and would not let the government "poison" their water. She had "learned" from the dentists that fluoridation was needed. Because of her love and concern for the people she was able to convince them it would be good to do. After that happened she received an invitation to go to Washington D.C. She was offered an officer position in the Army and went around the country convincing communities to fluoridate their water. She is now retired.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Hi all,
Here is a link to a very informative interview with Ramiel Nagel regarding healing tooth decay. here is the narrative that goes with it:
Ramiel Nagel - Hour 1 - Cure Tooth Decay
May 23, 2013
Ramiel Nagel will talk about how to cure tooth decay and tooth infections. He’ll discuss the history of dentistry. The early findings of Dr. Weston A. Price, who founded what became the American Dental Association, have been largely suppressed and now dentistry has been turned into a very unsound and toxic industry. In the second hour we continue the story of dentistry, toxicity and how to heal your teeth naturally. Ramiel talks about sugar and high fructose corn syrup, the worst of them all. Are any sugar alternatives really better at all? Later, we’ll discuss amalgam fillings and how mercury leaches into the body from our teeth. Ramiel gives some tips on what to eat and what not to eat in order to remineralize your teeth. At the end, we also detail the options when it comes to dentistry and what you can do to make sure that you get a hold of a good holistic dentist if you need one.
https://www.redicecreations.com/radi...RIR-130523.php
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
I honestly don't understand the point of this story. Just because some dentists said the reservation needed fluoride doesn't mean anything. Considering the lobby of the American Dental Association, it just pushes the agenda of Big Pharm. Just because the hygienist loved the people didn't mean she wasn't misinformed. Monsanto says we need GMO food. If you love the people who work in their buildings, do you go out and promote that GMO's are safe?
I use to be a dental hygienist for 26 years, and I knew that dentistry was one of the worse situations for toxicity, both from Mercury and fluoride plus other dental materials. And then they started blitzing people's brain's with 'drill-less dentistry" in the 90's with the application of aluminum silicate. When my former employer introduced the product, he said, "The company said it's safe. Go promote it." I started laughing. I researched what aluminum does to the body and showed him. And aluminum is where the fluoride industry took off from...the dumping of their by-product, fluoride, into the water saying it's safe. I watched children vomit from fluoride.
So the point of my story is she who loves people can use discernment to do her own research and find the real facts. Get informed!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ruthnew:
I have a personal story about water fluoridation that I've thought about posting. But, I wondered what was the point? I think it demonstrates that some people are well meaning but misguided. They haven't done the research. Maybe they don't even know how. And they simply believe what they have been told by those in charge.
One of my dear friends grew up in Santa Rosa and is now in his 70s. Several years ago we started discussing water fluoridation and he told me this story. His sister went to school to be a dental hygienist. She got a job with two dentists. After awhile she decided that maybe this was not the job she wanted as a career. The dentists had invited her to go on a road trip with them to a reservation that had high tooth decay rates. She was excited to do so. These people did not have good oral hygiene and they drank lots of soda. She enjoyed working with the people and they loved her. The government had tried for many years to fluoridate their water.
These Native Americans were very resistant and would not let the government "poison" their water. She had "learned" from the dentists that fluoridation was needed. Because of her love and concern for the people she was able to convince them it would be good to do. After that happened she received an invitation to go to Washington D.C. She was offered an officer position in the Army and went around the country convincing communities to fluoridate their water. She is now retired.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Not only is it possible, it is probable because they truly believe this nonsense. They are true believers, the most dangerous of the deluded.
The pro-fluoridation "scientists" are in the same category as "scientists" who truly believe that climate change (aka global warming) is either a hoax or not caused by human activity, and the "medical" kooks who are genuinely convinced that cutting off part of a boy's penis somehow imparts "health benefits."
All of these naifs have fallen for what the late great Dr. Carl Sagan called 'The Bamboozle'. As James Randi is fond of pointing out, scientists are more susceptible to The Bamboozle than average folks because they are naive and trusting. In addition, being thought of as smart is a huge part of their self-image. Therefore once they have been captured by The Bamboozle they are compelled more than most to save face and protect their image/ego by defending it.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by gcarothers:
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Au contraire, it is a very telling story and I'm glad you posted it. What is the time frame on it? What year was the woman offered a position with the U.S. Army?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ruthnew:
Thanks, that was my point along with saying a good person can be misinformed and do the wrong thing. It was just a local anecdotal story that happened over 40 years ago. I thought some people might find it interesting. I probably shouldn't have posted it. I am strongly anti-fluoridation.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Hi all,
I just watched this short video regarding chemicals being used in Syria, guess what they say is being used?
Bombshell: Syria's "chemical weapons" turn out to be fluoride
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=et1NSxT1K4w
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by WeWe:
A BIG thanks WeWe for finding this video!
Please forward this video to your congressional legislators, senators, and Sonoma county's Board of Supervisors....and your dentist. They don't want to be international war criminals (according to John Kerry), do they?
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by WeWe:
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mudwoman:
Please forward this video to your congressional legislators, senators, and Sonoma county's Board of Supervisors....and your dentist. They don't want to be international war criminals (according to John Kerry), do they?
um, if you tend to write to the legislators or senators, I wouldn't reference this link too much, or your name will end up with one of those asterisks that help route your mail to the "give polite response without reading" desk. That's one of the least credible mashups of unrelated and self-contradictory claims I've foolishly wasted time watching.
One clue as to this guy's thinking: after pointing out how everything in the "main-stream media is a complete hoax", he immediately continues into an itemization of main-stream media reports that he's using as evidence of his claims. If you look around on the net a bit, you can find sites with more credible analysis of commonly-sold chemicals like this one: https://www.dhmo.org/facts.html - there are a lot of chemicals like this that you're far more likely to encounter in all sorts of products. Usually when you encounter flouride, you're also being exposed to dhmo.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
I love Mike Adams The Health Rangers work. I've been making my own Fluoride free with the ProOne filter from Infowars Store
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by WeWe:
I just watched this short video regarding chemicals being used in Syria, guess what they say is being used?
Bombshell: Syria's "chemical weapons" turn out to be fluoride
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin Mike Adams makes some interesting points, but "sodium fluoride" is not a chemical weapon. It is a substance used to MAKE a chemical weapon, sarin gas. Sodium fluoride is a powder (a solid). Sarin is a gas. Sodium fluoride is definitely a poison, used to kill rats, and lethal to humans also, though not in the dilutions used in water fluoridation. And sodium fluoride is actually used for fluoridation in very few US cities. The substance used is hydofluosilicic acid, a hazardous waste scrubbed from the smokestacks of phosphate fertilizer plants. But Mike is right that NO POISONS should be added to our water, and NO FLUROIDE should be given to babies. And the US should NOT bomb Syria unless Syria attacks us. If you contact your state and Federal representatives, ask them to outlaw water fluoridation because it causes many health problems, but not because fluoridation chemicals are chemical weapons. CRITICAL THINKING IS NEEDED HERE!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by WeWe:
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
It appears that DHMO is identical to H2O.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
...If you look around on the net a bit, you can find sites with more credible analysis of commonly-sold chemicals like this one:
https://www.dhmo.org/facts.html - there are a lot of chemicals like this that you're far more likely to encounter in all sorts of products. Usually when you encounter flouride, you're also being exposed to dhmo.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by lilypads:
It appears that DHMO is identical to H2O.
and as such is associated with many deaths, directly and indirectly. Well over 3000 deaths in the US and more than one hundred times that worldwide, from overexposure to naturally occuring DHMO. And it's an indispensable ingredient in lots of the substances that scare people. As you yourself pointed out in your discussion of the various flouride compounds, most people who are worked up over these chemicals aren't particularly clear on the details, so I thought the link might be instructive. It's certainly a more coherent description of the substance in question than most of the scare sites are about flouride, for example.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
It would seem perhaps, that there may be a need for common sense and perception of what is actually going on in the world around us along with some good solid critical thinking. It is my opinion that Mike Adams in his video was not stating what he considered fact but only restating what the media and our the government having been filling the mainstream media news with.
So if I understand him correctly, Mike Adams was emphasizing the contradiction regarding fluoride and pointing out that when the government wants to start a war, fluoride is a chemical weapon, but when they want to put it in our water supply, it's safe and healthy. Let me repeat that, Mike Adams was not saying that he believes fluoride is a chemical weapon, he was making an observation that the government has made various statements claiming that fluoride is a chemical weapon.
I realize there can be many perspectives and I think we need to recognize that fact in a way that doesn't discourage independent and responsible thinking. It's good to evaluate the facts and form our own opinions but before we put on the big boots and start stomping around on someone else's thoughts let's take a few moments in reflection and try to look at it from another angle.
Just read an interesting book: The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz and his four agreements are:
1. Be impeccable with your word.
2. Don't take anything personally.
3. Don't make assumptions.
4. Always do your best.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
what a crock, comparing water to fluorine and its compounds is a blazing straw pile. the only real poisonings of people by water that i am aware of was the advice for marathon runners to constantly drink. just because we are not fish does not make it toxic. you confuse the issue for your own amusement:(
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
and as such is associated with many deaths, directly and indirectly. Well over 3000 deaths in the US and more than one hundred times that worldwide, from overexposure to naturally occuring DHMO. and it's an indispensable ingredient in lots of the substances that scare people. As you yourself pointed out in your discussion of the various flouride compounds, most people who are worked up over these chemicals aren't particularly clear on the details, so I thought the link might be instructive. It's certainly a more coherent description of the substance in question than most of the scare sites are about flouride, for example.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Believe it or not our "public health officer" has made the same comparison!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
what a crock, comparing water to fluorine and its compounds is a blazing straw pile. the only real poisonings of people by water that i am aware of was the advice for marathon runners to constantly drink. just because we are not fish does not make it toxic. you confuse the issue for your own amusement:(
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
you confuse the issue for your own amusement:(
you mean :-)
the invocation of chemical names in a way to raise fear is a common technique that muddies this argument tremendously. People are being asked to look at a list of claims about flouride's chemical properties and compounds and extrapolate to what it means if it's used in a municipal water supply. The DHMO site is an accurate description of its chemistry. When people recognize a familiar substance (or, equally, a familiar situation) they tend to discount evidence of its danger whether it's good evidence or not. For example, people don't really accept the danger of texting while driving, at least not in a way that changes behavior. Many ARE scared of airplanes. If it's scary sounding and unfamiliar, they almost anticipate it's dangerous regardless of the quality of evidence. This Mike Adams video exploits that heavily. So no, it's not just for amusement - it's an illustration of the weakness of typical arguments being made.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
The "scary chemicals" approach is used by some like this Mike Adams guy -- very unfortunately because it harms credibility -- but it is hardly a "typical" argument.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
you mean :-)
This Mike Adams video exploits that heavily. So no, it's not just for amusement - it's an illustration of the weakness of typical arguments being made.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
i agree that responding to bs with bs is fair. and amusing. rank is also an issue. in the straw flurrie of fluorine claims big health orgs and county health officers rule. how willing are you to play follow the leader to a mistake? conspiracy's are sometimes true and this ones got legs. trash water with bs if you want, i am a defender.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
you mean :-)
the invocation of chemical names in a way to raise fear is a common technique that muddies this argument tremendously. People are being asked to look at a list of claims about flouride's chemical properties and compounds and extrapolate to what it means if it's used in a municipal water supply. The DHMO site is an accurate description of its chemistry. When people recognize a familiar substance (or, equally, a familiar situation) they tend to discount evidence of its danger whether it's good evidence or not. For example, people don't really accept the danger of texting while driving, at least not in a way that changes behavior. Many ARE scared of airplanes. If it's scary sounding and unfamiliar, they almost anticipate it's dangerous regardless of the quality of evidence. This Mike Adams video exploits that heavily. So no, it's not just for amusement - it's an illustration of the weakness of typical arguments being made.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
During the recent Sonoma County BoS meeting on Sept 24th, Supervisor Zane voiced the following concerns about the impact of water pollution on fish:
She advised that she attended the Sonoma County Waste Management Board of Directors meeting because she is trying to move the plastic bag ordinance ahead. She said that, next to cigarette butts, plastic bags are the second highest polluter of our waterways. And continued: "They really do kill a lot of our fish and our birds as well....So we really need to get rid of these (plastic bags)." However, she wants to force-fluoridate the drinking water. Her concern for water quality was shared with the public at 23.00 minutes in (Sept 24th BoS public video).
More bizarre contradictions:
At the beginning of the meeting, Supervisor Carrillo, who would also like to force-fluoridate -- (for unknown reasons) -- reported that he had participated in a Water Bond Coalition conference call...(https://www.waterbondcoalition.com/).
And announced a hearing scheduled for the Natural Resources Water and Environmental Quality Committee...
And announced that he will participate in the Department of Fish and Wildlife Fishery Restoration grant program.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
In case you missed the article in the PD (like I did), Dr. Lynn Silver Chalfin reassigned a couple of weeks ago and has now left the post.
Anybody know the scuttlebutt about replacing her?
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Hmmm.... this is a great opportunity to abolish the county Public Health Officer position. It would save us all a lot of trouble and expense. Do we really need to spend $200K+ per year to pay someone to prop up the allopathic for-profit medical-industrial complex and try to poison our water and environment?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
In case you missed the
article in the PD (like I did), Dr. Lynn Silver Chalfin reassigned a couple of weeks ago and has now left the post.
Anybody know the scuttlebutt about replacing her?
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
In case you missed the
article in the PD (like I did), Dr. Lynn Silver Chalfin reassigned a couple of weeks ago and has now left the post.
Anybody know the scuttlebutt about replacing her?
Don't yet. But was relieved at news of her resignation.
Were you aware the Cotati City Council unanimously (!!) REJECTED water fluoridation on November 12th, 2013? https://www.ci.cotati.ca.us/headline...uncementID=353
Interestingly, this was first reported in the Community Voice and also reported by the Sonoma County Gazette, but NOT reported by the Press Democrat (as far as I know). Curious the PD doesn't consider this 'major' decision newsworthy.
https://www.sonomacountygazette.com/...icle-2083.html
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
the pd did report it 11/22. quoted her as stating absolutely not about fluoridation resistance. no explanation as for why she is resigning after 1 1/2 years at 200k+/yr. goodbye to a jobhopping public health pro. hope this failure to understand an informed citizenry becomes a permanent part of your professional record...
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mudwoman:
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
After watching this fluoride drama unfold for years now it seems to me that Carrillo and this Lynn Chafin character are in their positions because of the fluoride industry. Carrillo, if he was just a regular Joe would have folded up his deck chair and left office while he still had a semblance of community respect. With that all but gone he continues to show up and sit there like an autobot doing business that is none of his.
I sincerely believe he is in that position as a paid industry insider to push the water poisoning into our area. As you can see once Lynn's bombastic moves to poison the area were refuted, she basically failed at her core mission so there was no reason for her to continue and so , perhaps the next one up will be even nicer and softer and sneakier at pushing this agenda.
SO proud of Cotati for their knowledgeable stand on this issue. We must maintain public pressure on this hollow man and who ever replaces Lynn to be sure these county succubus cannot poison us our children and our waterways.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
the pd did report it 11/22. quoted her as stating absolutely not about fluoridation resistance. no explanation as for why she is resigning after 1 1/2 years at 200k+/yr. goodbye to a jobhopping public health pro. hope this failure to understand an informed citizenry becomes a permanent part of your professional record...
"Curious the PD doesn't consider this 'major' decision newsworthy. " Was referring to the Cotati City Council decision, not Silver-Chalfin's resignation. Who's going to be hired next? Am concerned about that. Also, concerned about Carrillo and Zane's positions on this crucial issue.
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
The PD article did, in fact, report on the controversy at Chaflin's departure at the end of the article here.."In discussions of the plan, Silver Chalfin did not provide “valid evidence as to its value,” Adelman said.The supervisors were scheduled to resume consideration of the fluoridation proposal in March, but Zane said that might be pushed back due to Silver Chalfin's departure.
“It's a big issue we will want to pass on to the new health officer,” Zane said."
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
all the more reason to get rid of the Public "Health" Officer position -- as well as both Shirlee Vane and Captain Underpants.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rikwiz:
... “It's a big issue we will want to pass on to the new health officer,” Zane said."
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation - 9 Shocking Dangers of Fluoride Exposure
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...8_14-31-15.png
9 Shocking Dangers of Fluoride Exposure
https://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/02/...ride-exposure/
February 5, 2014 | By WakingTimes
Dr. Edward F. Group, Guest
Exposure to fluoride is a contentious topic, mostly because exposure is everywhere. Not only is fluoride a common ingredient in toothpaste, many municipalities have a fluoridated water supply. Why? Well, the reason we’re given is that it encourages oral health… even though it’s not known to prevent harmful oral bacteria. [1] What is known is that fluoride is toxic. In fact, the number one reason for poison control calls concerning fluoride are for children who’ve eaten toothpaste. [2] [3] Long-term ingestion is harmful to the brain, digestive system, heart, bones… even the tooth enamel it’s supposed to help. [4] [5] [6] These next 9 shocking facts will make you take a second look at your exposure to fluoride.
1. Weakens Skeletal Health
Skeletal fluorosis is a condition resulting from fluoride consumption. The liver is unable to process fluoride, thus it passes into the bloodstream where it combines with calcium that’s been leeched from the skeletal system. You’re left with weak bones, otherwise known as skeletal fluorosis. The risk has been known about for decades yet it’s not been established how much exposure will trigger skeletal fluorosis… and the impact it has on quality of life is horrendous. [7] [8] [9] The best way to protect yourself is to avoid fluoride. Recently, Chinese authorities established a link between reductions in fluoride exposure and the incidence of fluorosis. [10]
2. Causes Arthritis
Fluoride has been shown to cause calcification of cartilage, the essential tissue for joint health. [11] Degenerative osteoarthritis has been linked to skeletal fluorosis. [12] And in a study of individuals suffering from fluorosis, osteoarthritis knee conditions occurred frequently. [13]
3. Toxic to the Thyroid
Iodine and fluoride belong to a family of compounds known as halogens. Although iodine is beneficial to the thyroid, fluoride is not. However, because of the similarities, the thyroid can absorb fluoride instead of iodine. This is bad. Fluoride is toxic to thyroid cells; it inhibits function and causes cell death. [14] For decades, fluoride was used to reduce thyroid function in individuals suffering from an overactive thyroid. [15] Now — and pay attention to this — the range used in water fluoridation matches the levels typically used to reduce thyroid function. [16]
4. Calcifies the Ultra-Important Pineal Gland
Although the full capabilities of the pineal gland have been the subject of debate for centuries, it’s known for certain that, at a minimum, the pineal gland regulates body rhythms and wake-sleep cycles; two extremely important functions. Fluoride is especially toxic to the pineal gland, where it accumulates and calcifies the gland. In fact, by the time the average person reaches old age, their pineal gland will have higher calcium density than their bones. [17]
5. Accelerates Female Puberty
It also deserves mention that the pineal gland plays an integral role in the onset of puberty. Research has shown that girls living in areas prone to more fluoride exposure experience puberty earlier than girls exposed to less. [18] Fluoride’s damaging effect onsexual function only begins here…
6. Harmful to Male and Female Fertility
A direct link exists between fertility rates and fluoridated drinking water. Higher levels of fluoride correspond to lower fertility rates, particularly with drinking water levels of 3 ppm.[19] Animal models show that fluoride reduces reproductive hormones in females. [20] Men have it just as bad; those suffering from fluorosis have lower testosterone and fertility than men with limited fluoride exposure. [21]
7. Bad for Kidney Health
Fluoride is toxic to the kidneys and a higher rate of chronic kidney disease has been reported in areas where the water contains high levels of fluoride.[22] [23] According to Chinese researchers, a fluoride level of 2 mg/L is all it takes to cause renal damage in children. [24] While water fluoridation levels are often much lower than this, the fluoride bombardment continues with toothpaste and other sources.
8. Harmful to the Cardiovascular System
Research suggests that exposure to fluoride causes cardiovascular inflammation and atherosclerosis. [25] [26] Other research has examined its effect on blood pressure but had mixed results. Regardless, despite that cardiovascular disease can have many causes, the evidence, and history show its incidence increases with exposure to fluoride.
9. Negative Cognitive Effects
The Fluoride Action Network reports that, as of May 2013, 43 studies have examined the effect of fluoride on human intelligence. The results should motivate anyone to minimize their fluoride exposure. One observation is that fluoride negatively impacts children’s neural development. [27] Another is that children living in highly fluoridated areas have up to five times greater chance of developing a low IQ compared to those who do not. [28]
Reducing Your Exposure to Fluoride
Using non-fluoride toothpaste can immediately reduce your fluoride exposure. Maintaining healthy iodine levels can help protect the thyroid from fluoride. Fluoridated water is the largest concern and most water filters are not adequate for removing fluoride; instead look to a reverse osmosis water purification systems.
Have you made efforts to reduce your exposure and minimize the dangers of fluoride? What tips do you have? Please leave a comment below and share with us.
-Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, ND, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM
References:
(see original article here)
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
not sure if this has been sited before...its a study identifying carcenogenic properties of tobacco.the findings point to radiactive fertilizer...leading to where does that type of radiactive molecule come from...it is found in flouridated water from ....."Rather the fluoride that is typically used to fluoridate local water supplies is a frequently contaminated chemical byproduct created during the phosphate fertilizer manufacturing process. It's a concentrated, highly toxic chemical riddled with hazardous impurities, making it extremely expensive to safely dispose of when not sold for profit as a water additive"
and the study goes onto say this...
"But let's get back to phosphate fertilizers and its use on tobacco and food crops... According to the report in Nicotine and Tobacco Research,11radioactivity in tobacco comes from two sources: the atmosphere and uptake through soil rich in calcium phosphate fertilizer contaminated with polonium phosphates. In 1995, the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research12 stated that:"
and yet here is what the EPA said our defenders of a clean environment about this same substance...
In regard to the use of fluosilicic (fluorosilicic) acid as a source of fluoride for fluoridation, this agency regards such use as an idealenvironmental solution to a long-standing problem. By recovering by-product fluosilicic acid from fertilizer manufacturing, water and air pollution are minimized, and water utilities have a low-cost source of fluoride available to them."....
ref..https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/02/10/radioactive-fertilizer.aspx
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by andrew espinoza:
not sure if this has been sited before...its a study identifying carcenogenic properties of tobacco.the findings point to radiactive fertilizer..
ref..https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/02/10/radioactive-fertilizer.aspx
I'd prefer better refs -- for a contrasting opinion on the merits of this site:
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4283
not that I'd rely on someone as opinionated as skeptoid as authoritative either. But remember, the kid was able to point out that the emperor had no clothes even if she herself wasn't qualified to run the country.
and yeah, I remember that, at the end of that story, the parade was still going on...
-
Re: Expanding Water Fluoridation in Sonoma County
Ok. I went to your link, interesting...yet there problem with Mercola was not based on his write ups on scientific papers (peer review, widely accepted in authentic science circles), they were specifically talking about his sales and natural health supplements....so back to what you are saying.....Did you even look at the write up, prob not. and if you don't like him or his website, that's cool...yet his write up, that I posted link to has an authoritive list(ref's) of scientific papers...so maybe you haven't looked deep enough...go to those links he sites and you will see atomic industry papers, medicine papers, and other science based info...
cheers
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
I'd prefer better refs -- for a contrasting opinion on the merits of this site:
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4283
not that I'd rely on someone as opinionated as skeptoid as authoritative either. But remember, the kid was able to point out that the emperor had no clothes even if she herself wasn't qualified to run the country.
and yeah, I remember that, at the end of that story, the parade was still going on...
