CHLORINATION water

---

tiggered 5 26 by grothman

merri ok

VICE

https://www.vice.com › en › article › why-are-governments-putting-fluoride-in-our-water-sheeple

A Deep Dive into the Conspiracy Theory That Governments Are ... - VICE

If you dig into why water fluoridation began, you find a convoluted, suspicious mess. According to the conspiracy theory, the name of the company with the biggest profit to be made from water ...

Food and Drug Administration (.gov)

A Deep Dive into the Conspiracy Theory That Governments Are Controlling Us with Fluoride

On the World Wide Web, there are few black holes more enticing to fall down than the great fluoride conspiracy. Some would call it the ramblings of paranoid truth gurus who spend too much time maintaining their dreads and making YouTube videos about Atlantis. Others insist that it’s the largest mass control experiment of our times.

Where does the truth lie in an argument taken up by both sides with near religious conviction? It’s almost impossible to decipher. Perhaps it’s somewhere between the two.

The idea, in a nutshell, is that governments put fluoride in our water supply in order to negatively affect huge populations, for their own financial gains. That fluoride is actually a strong tranquilizer in disguise. That the US want their citizens to be zombies. That Kellogg’s, Nestle, Crest, and other food companies—known as “The Fluoride Mafia”—are all in on it. That fluoride dumping is secretly wrapped up in Illuminati interests.

If you dig into why water fluoridation began, you find a convoluted, suspicious mess. According to the conspiracy theory, the name of the company with the biggest profit to be made from water fluoridation was ALCOA. The ALCOA Company had an unlimited supply of toxic waste—a byproduct of aluminum, AKA fluoride. At their lab, an ALCOA-sponsored biochemist did a test on rats that showed cavities were reduced with the fluoridated water and concluded that: “The case should be regarded as proved.” In this historic moment in 1939, so the story goes, the first public proposal that the US should fluoridate its water supplies wasn’t made by a doctor or a dentist, but an industry scientist working for a company that was also threatened by fluoride damage claims.

Another part of the theory is that, during the Second World War, industrial fluoride pollution increased because of the production and extensive use of ALCOA aluminum in aircraft manufacturing. It was after the Second World War that many governments began to put fluoride in our water supplies to protect people against cavities. Coincidence!?

Currently, about 372 million people (around 5.7 percent of the world’s population) receive artificially fluoridated water in about 24 countries, including Australia, Canada, Ireland, the US, and the UK. Since the 1950s, there has been relentless debate over whether there’s any real reason to do this. Early conspiracy theorists declared that it was a communist plot to weaken American public health. Many have argued from a moral and ethical view that the public haven’t chosen to be consuming it and so it’s against individual will. From an economic standpoint, public money is being used on something without definitive proof of benefits. Some dentists and medical professionals have even said fluoridation of water isn’t the best way to reduce tooth decay.

The tangled conspiracy gets even darker with comments on Reddit threads such as “Hitler used fluoride first!!” and “They got this from the Nazis! Illuminati scum.” The so-called “fact” that Hitler gave people in concentration camps fluoride water to keep them docile and unable to resist Nazi power is used often by the anti-fluoridation brigade. Many say this treatment was then repeated in Russian gulags.

Ian E Stephens, a writer for the Australian “alternative news” magazine Nexus (which covers “health breakthroughs, future science, and technology, suppressed news, free energy, religious revisionism, conspiracy, the environment, history, and ancient mysteries, the mind, UFOs, paranormal, and the unexplained”) claims he was told by chemist and researcher Charles E Perkins, who wrote the book The Truth About Water Fluoridation, that the Nazis envisioned a far-reaching plan of mass control and reduced population by using a medication in water that could cause sterility in women.

“Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluoride will in time reduce an individual’s power to resist domination, by slowly poisoning and narcotizing a certain area of the brain, thus making him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him,” Perkins wrote. He goes on to say: “I say this with all the earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years’ research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology, and pathology of fluorine—any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person mentally or physically.” There is no trace of a credible living source on Nazi history coming out in support of this theory.

To many in the new age community, this doesn’t matter. They believe fluoride is instrumental in mind control because, they insist, it blocks the “third eye.” Mystics and spiritual masters have concluded that the pineal gland, situated in the center of the brain, is a connection between the body and the soul. They say: wake up, sheeple, the government-slash-Illuminati-slash-powers-that-be want us to stay on this spiritual plane. It’s not in their best interests that we are conscious. If people get conscious, they’ll stop turning up to their horrible jobs, eating meat, and wasting food, and they’ll live in collectives and spoil their ballot papers.

This might sound ridiculous to some, but it has a degree of basis in science. In the 1990s, a British scientist, Jennifer Luke, discovered that by old age, the pineal gland contains about the same amount of fluoride as teeth, and we now know that calcification of the pineal gland gets worse with age and can occur in children as young as two. This gland is in the brain—it maintains the body’s sleep-wake cycle, regulates the onset of puberty in females, and helps protect the body from cell damage. A huge review on fluoride toxicity published by the National Research Council in 2006 reported a range of negative side effects from fluoride, including “decreased melatonin production” and “other effects on normal pineal function, which in turn could contribute to a variety of effects in humans.”

Go on YouTube and you’ll find plenty of people sharing “knowledge” of the spiritual dangers of fluoride and how to reverse the effects of a “calcified” pineal gland (many say you can’t; it’s too late). They say stop drinking tap water. Stop using regular toothpaste and find a fluoride-free one. Get a shower filter to cut the fluoride from your shower. Cut out meat because you can be sure as heck they’ve been guzzling the fluoride water, too. Tell your dentist you don’t want fluoride-based products used. And after all that, detox.

However, there are more serious scientific objections to fluoride, and many are far removed from the assertions of David Icke disciples. Numerous studies researched by Harvard and China Medical University in Shanghai have shown that fluoride may be linked to reduced IQ in children, and even suggest that it could be toxic to a developing brain. Fluoride at high levels has been shown to destroy the male reproductive system in rabbits. Fluoride lowers the thyroid function. One study linked it to bone cancer in boys. A 2007 Nuffield Council on Bioethics report reached a conclusion that the benefit-to-risk ratio on water fluoridation is unclear due to lack of good evidence, that alternatives to water fluoridation exist, and that the role of consent gets priority when there are potential harms.

Professors doing this research have been met with numerous attempts to discredit them. Stephen Peckham—director of the Centre for Health Services at the University of Kent, and professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine at the University of Toronto—has had his research of water fluoridation rejected from dental health journals. He’s spoken out about being accused of “statistics-hacking” and for research that made the link between fluoride and hypothyroidism. Catherine Carstairs, a professor who wrote about the history of water fluoridation, was attacked and the Journal of Public Heath had to defend itself for publishing “strong… research even when [it does] not fit well with our preconceived ideas.”

Why are efforts to uncover the effects of fluoride so vilified, and why is the atmosphere so toxic?

In fact, there has been a sea change in attitudes towards water fluoridation. About ten years ago, York University found that tooth decay in children across Europe had fallen, regardless of whether or not there was fluoride in the water. The countries showing the biggest decrease—Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, and Denmark—don’t fluoridate their supplies.

Increasingly, water fluoridation is being rejected in local British areas. In 2014, Bolton refused to add fluoride to their water supply, with David Crausby, MP for Bolton North East, likening it to “mass medication.” That same year, Public Health England had to drop plans to fluoridate water in Southampton and parts of Hampshire because of fierce opposition from Southampton City Council. But still, Public Health England encourages fluoridation and the NHS website states that fluoride provides no significant health risk. Millions around the country still drink fluoridated water.

But what do the water companies think? I called United Utilities, who said that most water companies have to have a “neutral position” on fluoridation. “The water company is just obliged to fluoridate where asked,” a spokesperson said. “We’re just a contractor.” But have they heard the conspiracies? I asked a Severn Trent Water spokesperson, who laughed and said: “Oooh yes, don’t worry, we’ve heard all sides of the story very loudly, but to be honest we try and stay out of it. We don’t want to get involved because then it makes it much too complicated.” Complicated indeed.

In countries like Brazil, China, and, unsurprisingly, the US, fluoridation still has a stronghold. Significantly, 194 million Americans are supplied with this water, including those who live in 43 of its 47 largest cities. It’s there that the “truth” is being spread with most fervor.

Despite various claims by “truth gurus” being torn down—it’s unlikely that Margaret Thatcher pumped fluoride into Northern Ireland to control the rebels or that pharmaceutical companies are pumping us full of fluoride via Prozac—the conspiracy rages ahead, while science slowly erodes fluoride’s reputation. Will this be the next formaldehyde? The next lead? Don’t forget that dentists and doctors once promoted cigarettes. Should we listen to YouTubers? What if this became the greatest public health conspiracy of our time—of all times?

*Follow Hannah Ewens on Twitter.

Tagged:

britain concentration camps fluoridation fluoride Nazis New Age Shit sheeple Stuff water

---

Salon.com

https://www.salon.com › 2022 › 09 › 13 › why-anti-fluoride-conspiracy-theories-have-persisted-for-over-70-years

Why anti-fluoride conspiracy theories have persisted for over 70 years

Sep 13, 2022There are some conspiracy theories that defy traditional ideological classification, and the anti-fluoride theories are among the oldest that still have currency. Though it is well-established ...

Why anti-fluoride conspiracy theories have persisted for over 70 years - Salon.com

matt r

there are some conspiracy theories that defy traditional ideological classification, and the anti-fluoride theories are among the oldest that still have currency. Though it is well-established that fluoridated water supplies improve dental hygiene, and that communities with fluoridated water are healthier in this regard, fluoride-phobia still runs rampant.

Disgraced right-wing broadcaster Alex Jones, during his heyday, would famously and frequently trumpet his fear of fluoride, specifically saying it had caused his IQ to drop. Scan the conspiracy theory pages on Facebook and Reddit and one will stumble upon innumerable anti-fluoride conversations, large and small. They can be inspired by practically anything, from a grassroots movement in Portland, Ore. to a single post about a 2012 Harvard meta-analysis linking fluoridation to neurological disease (by the researchers’ own admission, it relied on studies of varied quality). During the Cold War, anti-fluoride citizens’ movements often claimed, falsely, that water fluoridation was a Soviet plot.

Fluoridated water isn’t just good for teeth — it can lead to higher incomes, too

There are real-world consequences to these beliefs. Studies from Sweden to the United States have consistently found that fluoride helps prevent dental cavities and tooth decay. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) named community fluoridation one of the great American achievements of the 20th century because of the significant role that it played in leading to mass reduction in cavity rates among children and adults. Cohort studies consistently show that fluoridated water reduces the risk of tooth decay, cavities and tooth loss in both adults and children. However, only 63.4 percent of Americans receive fluoridated water, according to 2018 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data.

Yet fluoridation is not without its drawbacks: There are risks associated with too much fluoride being put in water supplies, with a 2019 study in Mexico and Canada that focused on possible links between fluoridation and brain development issues concluding that “neurotoxicity appeared to be dose-dependent.” The study warned that safe levels of fluoride concentration in drinking water are likely to actually be lower than the commonly accepted and recommended amounts. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandates as a “current enforceable drinking water standard” that fluoride amounts should not exceed “4.0 mg/L,” but the Sierra Club argues that this standard is much too high.

Nicole Johnson, an associate director at the CDC, told Salon by email that fluoridation “has made substantial contributions to narrowing oral health disparities.”

When all is said and done, however, fluoridation has overall been a net gain for public health, even if in certain regions the execution has been faulty. Nicole Johnson, an associate director at the CDC who works in their Division of Oral Health, told Salon by email that fluoridation “has made substantial contributions to narrowing oral health disparities and is a practical, cost-effective, and equitable measure that communities can take to prevent tooth decay and improve residents’ oral health.”

---

Given that community fluoridation is such a public health triumph, why do conspiracy theorists still target it? Part of the problem is that the internet is a fertile breeding ground for every type of misinformation out there, with anti-fluoride conspiracy theories being no different.

“Regardless of the topic, vetting and validating online information is important,” explained Dr. Corey H. Basch, chair of the Department of Public Health at William Patterson University and an expert in analyzing health-related YouTube information. “Misinformation and disinformation are rampant problems that have a range of ramifications from confusing the public to fueling violence and hatred. If online information is presented in a way that promotes dialogue and respect, this can be beneficial, but unfortunately this is often not the case.”

Basch later added, “Based on the research I have conducted, misinformation about fluoride persists on-line and it is typically embedded in a larger debate about community water fluoridation.”

In addition to benefiting from the intellectual anarchy of the internet, anti-fluoride conspiracy theories are also propped up by a long history. Indeed, anti-fluoridation conspiracy theories even managed to precede the actual dawn of fluoridation itself. When Grand Rapids, Mich. became the first American community to put fluoride in its water supply in 1945, the city leaders already knew there would be backlash because it had managed to materialize prematurely. Citizens who mistakenly thought the fluoride had been added weeks earlier were already complaining of sore gums and chipped tooth enamel, blaming a fluoridation program that had not yet been implemented.

Not surprisingly, once fluoridation was widespread, some figured out how to make their complaints seem plausible. A conservative Democratic congressman, James J. Delaney, held a series of hearings in 1952 where seemingly “gotcha” questions were asked of scientists to discredit the practice of fluoridation. Conservative political activist and FBI agent Dan Smoot asserted in 1959 that fluoride had been introduced to the water supply after leftist authoritarians had asked themselves, “How could ruling authorities ever manage to give drugs to an entire population?” The John Birch Society, a popular far right conspiracy theory group at the time, endorsed Smoot’s views.

Yet as evidence rolled in that fluoridation had improved community dental health, more communities began to implement fluoridation programs. By 1960, 41 million Americans out of a population of nearly 180 million drank from fluoridated water supplies. By 2008, that number had grown to 72 percent of the total population. Throughout that period there has been considerable pushback, but today any American can find out if their community is fluoridated through the CDC’s My Water’s Fluoride link. It includes information through 2018 — as of that year, the CDC estimates that 207,426,536 Americans (out of roughly 326.8 million) drank from fluoridated water supplies (the 2020 data is expected to be released in the fall).

Today anti-fluoride conspiracy theories are still prevalent, but nowhere near their mid-20th century peak.

Basch argued that the argument over fluoridation today often fixates on communal water sources, and has similarities with other public health fracases.

“As far as fluoride, I would not be as worried as I would be in the early 1960s when the John Birch Society was in its heyday, and fluoride was not as ubiquitous in our society,” Dr. Ted Miller, a history professor at Northeastern University, told Salon by email. He argued that the advantages of fluoridation are widely perceived; and, as such, “I don’t think we are going to abandon the salubrious benefits of fluoride overnight.”

Basch observed that the argument over fluoridation today often fixates on communal water sources, and has similarities with other public health fracases. “What fuels the debate about community water fluoridation is the argument about the right to make an informed decisions about if and how one wants to receive fluoride,” Basch noted. “The political and emotional nature of the debate is accompanied by misinformation and disinformation, which mirrors what we have seen in current debates on vaccination in general and COVID-19 vaccination more specifically.”

While scientists continue to monitor the effects of fluoridation, even those who advise caution — such as Dr. Junhewk Kim, author of a 2021 paper on fluoridation — still note that overall community fluoridation has advantages.

“I do not think there is any general risk, if the procedure for administering fluoride to the water supply is properly managed,” Kim told Salon by email. “However, there may be locations where fluoride is overutilized. If the water fluoridation policy is combined in areas where high-fluoride toothpaste and fluoride gels and varnishes use in dental clinics are common, there is a possibility that a weak level of fluorosis will occur, in children especially.” Fluorosis is a cosmetic condition in which one’s teeth appear to have small speckles on them.

Kim added, “However, when we ask which poses a greater oral health risk to children between mild fluorosis versus dental caries [tooth decay], of course the latter has significant bad impact to oral health. Therefore, I think mild fluorosis is a tolerable risk.”

about conspiracy theories

---

8. Opposes water sanitation.

National Journalreports that “in 2011, Grothman sponsored a bill to do away with municipal water disinfection. For context: in 1993, a Cryptosporidium outbreak in the Milwaukee area's water supply led to the deaths of at least 69 people.”

---