The Extremely Dangerous Effects of Flouride!

Sourced from: http://www.fluoridealert.org/fluoride-dangers/health/index.aspx

FLUORIDE HEALTH EFFECTS DATABASE - OVERVIEW PAGE

“Over the past ten years a large body of peer-reviewed science has raised concerns that fluoride may present unreasonable health risks, particularly among children, at levels routinely added to tap water in American cities.”
ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP, July 2005.
"In summary, we hold that fluoridation is an unreasonable risk."
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY HEADQUARTERS' UNION, 2001.
“Carefully conducted studies of exposure to fluoride and emerging health parameters of interest (e.g., endocrine effects and brain function) should be performed in populations in the United States exposed to various concentrations of fluoride.”
US NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, 2006
"I am quite convinced that water fluoridation, in a not-too-distant future, will be consigned to medical history."
Dr. ARVID CARLSSON, Pharmacologist, Nobel Laureate in Physiology and Medicine, 2000.

FLUORIDE ACCIDENTS & POISONINGS (Click for more detail)

Fluoride, the active ingredient in many pesticides and rodenticides, is a powerful poison - more acutely poisonous than lead. Because of this, accidental over-ingestion of fluoride can cause serious toxic symptoms.

Each year there are thousands of reports to Poison Control centers in the United States related to excessive ingestion of fluoride toothpastes, mouthrinses, and supplements.

Water fluoridation accidents, resulting in excess levels of fluoride in water, have been one of the sources of acute fluoride poisoning.

FLUORIDE & DENTAL FLUOROSIS (Click for more detail)

Excessive ingestion of fluoride during the early childhood years can damage the tooth-forming cells, leading to a defect in the enamel known as dental fluorosis.
Teeth impacted by fluorosis have visible discoloration, ranging from white spots to brown and black stains.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, 32% of American children now have some form of dental fluorosis, with 2 to 4% of children having the moderate to severe stages (CDC 2005).
According to Dr. Hardy Limeback, Head of Preventive Dentistry at the University of Toronto, "it is illogical to assume that tooth enamel is the only tissue affected by low daily doses of fluoride ingestion.

FLUORIDE & ALLERGY/HYPERSENSITIVITY (Click for more detail)

As acknowledged by the Physicians' Desk Reference, some individuals are allergic/hypersensitive to fluoride. The largest, government-funded, clinical trial found that 1% of individuals exposed to 1 mg/day of fluoride exhibited allergic/hypersensitive reactions, including skin reactions, gastric distress, and headache.

FLUORIDE & the KIDNEYS(Click for more detail)

The kidneys play a vital role in preventing the build-up of excessive fluoride in the body. Among healthy individuals, the kidneys excrete approximately 50% of the daily fluoride intake. However, among individuals with kidney disease, the kidneys' ability to excrete becomes markedly impaired, resulting in a build-up of fluoride within the body.
It is well recognized that individuals with kidney disease have a heightened susceptibility to the cumulative toxic effects of fluoride.
Of particular concern is the potential for fluoride, when accumulated in the skeletal system, to cause, or exacerbate, renal osteodystrophy - a bone disease commonly found among people with advanced kidney disease.
In addition, fluoride has been definitively shown to poison kidney function at high doses over short-term exposures in both animals and humans. The impact of low doses of fluoride, given over long periods of time, has been inadequately studied. A recent animal study, conducted by scientists at the US Environmental Protection Agency (Varner 1998), reported that exposure to just 1 ppm fluoride caused kidney damage in rats if they drank the water for an extended period of time, while a new study from China found an increased rate of kidney disease among humans consuming more than 2 ppm (Liu 2005). Hence, the adverse effects to kidney function that fluoride causes at high doses over short periods of time, may also be replicated with small doses if consumed over long periods of time.

FLUORIDE & the BRAIN (Click for more detail)

Fluoride's ability to damage the brain represents one of the most active areas of research on fluoride toxicity today.
Concern about fluoride's impact on the brain has been fueled by 18 human studies (from China, Mexico, India, and Iran) reporting IQ deficits among children exposed to excess fluoride, by 4 human studies indicating that fluoride can enter, and damage, the fetal brain; and by a growing number of animal studies finding damage to brain tissue (at levels as low as 1 ppm) and impairment of learning and memory among fluoride-treated groups.
According to the US National Research Council, "it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain."

FLUORIDE & the PINEAL GLAND (Click for more detail)

In the 1990s, it was discovered that the pineal gland is a major site of fluoride accumulation within the body - with higher concentrations of fluoride than either teeth or bone.
Subsequent animal studies indicate that the accumulation of fluoride in the pineal gland can reduce the gland's synthesis of melatonin, a hormone that helps regulate the onset of puberty. Fluoride-treated animals were found to have reduced levels of circulating melatonin and an earlier onset of puberty than untreated animals. The scientist who conducted the research concluded:
"The safety of the use of fluorides ultimately rests on the assumption that the developing enamel organ is most sensitive to the toxic effects of fluoride. The results from this study suggest that the pinealocytes may be as susceptible to fluoride as the developing enamel organ" (Luke 1997).
The fact that fluoride's impact on the pineal gland was never studied, or even considered, before the 1990s, highlights a major gap in knowledge underpinning current policies on fluoride and health.
According to the US National Research Council, "any agent that affects pineal function could affect human health in a variety of ways, including effects on sexual maturation, calcium metabolism, parathyroid function, postmenopausal osteoporosis, cancer, and psychiatric disease.”

FLUORIDE & the THYROID GLAND (Click for more detail)

According to the US National Research Council, "several lines of information indicate an effect of fluoride exposure on thyroid function" - particularly among individuals with an iodine deficiency.
Fluoride's potential to impair thyroid function is most clearly illustrated by the fact that -- up until the 1970s -- European doctors used fluoride as a thyroid-suppressing medication for patients with hyperthyroidism (over-active thyroid). Fluoride was utilized because it was found effective at reducing the activity of the thyroid gland - even at doses as low as 2 mg/day.
Today, many people living in fluoridated communities are ingesting doses of fluoride (1.6-6.6 mg/day) that fall within the range of doses (2 to 10 mg/day) once used by doctors to reduce thyroid activity in hyperthyroid patients. This is of particular concern considering the widespread problem of hypothyroidism (under-active thyroid) in the United States. Symptoms of hypothyroidism include obesity, lethargy, depression, and heart disease.

FLUORIDE & BONE DISEASE (Click for more detail)

Excessive exposure to fluoride is well known to cause a bone disease called skeletal fluorosis.
Skeletal fluorosis, especially in its early stages, is a difficult disease to diagnose, and can be readily confused with various forms of arthritis including osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.
In its advanced stages, fluorosis can resemble a multitude of bone/joint diseases.
In individuals with kidney disease, fluoride exposure can contribute to, and/or exacerbate, renal osteodystrophy.

FLUORIDE & BONE FRACTURE(Click for more detail)

The majority of animal studies investigating fluoride's effect on bone strength, have found fluoride to either have no effect or a negative effect on strength. According to the US National Research Council, "The weight of evidence indicates that, although fluoride might increase bone volume, there is less strength per unit volume."
Studies on human populations consuming fluoride in drinking water have found an association between dental fluorosis and increased bone fracture in children; and between long-term consumption of fluoridated water and increased hip fracture in the elderly.
Carefully conducted human clinical trials - including two "double-blind trials" - have found that fluoride (at doses of 18-34 mg/day for just 1-4 years) increases the rate of bone fracture, particularly hip fracture, among osteoporosis patients.

FLUORIDE & CANCER (Click for more detail)

According to the National Toxicology Program, "the preponderance of evidence" from laboratory 'in vitro' studies indicates that fluoride is a mutagenic compound. Many substances which cause mutagenic damage also cause cancer.
While the concentrations of fluoride causing mutagenic damage in laboratory studies are higher than the concentrations found in human blood, there are certain "microenvironments" in the body (e.g. the bones and the bladder) where the concentrations of fluoride can accumulate to levels comparable to, or in excess of, those causing mutagenic effects in the laboratory.
Fluoride has been found to cause bone cancer (osteosarcoma) in government animal studies and rates of osteosarcoma among young males living in fluoridated areas have been found to be higher than young males living in unfluoridated areas. Osteosarcoma, while rare, is a very serious cancer. Children who develop osteosarcoma face a high probability of death (usually within 3 years) or amputation.
Fluoride exposure has also been linked to bladder cancer - particularly among workers exposed to excess fluoride in the workplace. According to the US National Research Council, “further research on a possible effect of fluoride on bladder cancer risk should be conducted.”

FLUORIDE & the GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT (Click for more detail)

Among people hypersensitive to fluoride, gastrointestinal ailments have been produced following ingestion of 1 mg tablets of fluoride or consumption of 1 ppm fluoridated water.
A single ingestion of as little as 3 mg of fluoride, in carefully controlled clinical trials, has been found to produce damage to the gastric mucosa in healthy adult volunteers. No research on the gastric mucosa has ever been conducted to determine the effect of lower doses with repeated exposure.

FLUORIDE & TOOTH DECAY (Caries)(Click for more detail)

According to the current consensus view of the dental research community, fluoride's primary - if not sole - benefit to teeth comes from TOPICAL application to the exterior surface of teeth, not from ingestion.

Perhaps not surprisingly, therefore, tooth decay rates have declined at similar rates in all western countries in the latter half of the 20th century - irrespective of whether the country fluoridates its water or not. Today, tooth decay rates throughout continental western Europe are as low as the tooth decay rates in the United States - despite a profound disparity in water fluoridation prevalence in the two regions.

Within countries that fluoridate their water, recent large-scale surveys of dental health - utilizing modern scientific methods not employed in the early surveys from the 1930s-1950s - have found little difference in tooth decay, including "baby bottle tooth decay", between fluoridated and unfluoridated communities

Global Warming - Exposing the Deception

Exposure of global warming deception goes viral

Kirk Myers, Seminole County Environmental News Examiner

December 30, 2011 -

The manufactured climate change crisis may one day be remembered as the greatest fraud in science history.

Credits: ScienceBlogs.com

With the advent of the new year, perhaps it’s a good time to once again expose the global warming narrative for what it actually is: fact-free alarmist fear-mongering – scientific fraud, to be exact – designed to shut down fossil-fuel industries, enrich carbon traders, soak taxpayers and reduce affluent western societies to a state of pre-industrial poverty – all the while purporting to save the world from what turns out to be an imaginary man-made bogeyman.

The body of evidence discrediting the global warming-turned -“climate change” theory (yes, it’s only a theory) is growing exponentially as it smacks head-on with observational and empirical facts that undermine the entire manufactured edifice of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

Take a look at the views of some of the experts, including a few candid assessments by die-hard True Believers, who reveal just how little evidence exists to keep alive the theoretical Global Warming Godzilla that lumbered onto the scene in the late 1980s.

First, here are a few statements from within the ranks of the global warming camp that expose the fraudulent science they themselves are disseminating:

Dr. Phil Jones – No statistically significant warming for 15 years

From the Daily Mail: “Professor [Phil] Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon . . . And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.”

NASA GSS – no sign of global warming in North America

From Strata-sphere.com: “In response to a freedom of information request, NASA’s GISS was required to produce a series of emails, which in turn revealed that (a) NASA admits the current warm period is not historically different from the period around 1921-1950, and (b) that there has been no sign of global warming in North America or the US. How is global warming possible when it is not ‘global’?”

 Dr. Phil Jones, Climate Research Unit

From a ClimateGate email: “With their LIA [Little Ice Age] being 1300 -1900 and their MWP [Medieval Warm Period] 800 -1300, there appears (at my quick first reading) no discussion of  synchroneity of the cool/warm periods. Even with the instrumental record, the early and late 20th century warming periods are only significant locally at between 10-20% of grid boxes.”

Professor Richard Muller – 70% of measuring stations poorly sited

Reports Ken Haapala (via WattsUpWithThat.com): “Professor Muller presented himself as a former skeptic [to the House National Resources Committee], but he couched his skepticism as questioning the quality of the land-based surface measurements . . . According to him 70% of measuring stations in the US are poorly sited with a possible error of 2 to 5 degrees C. He evaded the real issue: that most skeptics realize that temperatures have risen, but question that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the principal cause of global warming.”

“Muller failed to mention that . . . he questioned the human influence on global warming; that his calculations of temperatures show no warming for the past ten years; that he has suggested that the cause for the pause in warming is a change in ocean oscillations, and that there is a disconnect between land surface data and atmospheric data.”

 An admission: Medieval Warm Period at least as warm as today

From Strata-sphere.com: “The real killer is the global temperature itself, which has been cooling since 2000, and not showing any warming since 1995 – according to Dr Phil Jones, previous head of CRU. In addition, Jones admitted there is no data to overturn the long held scientific theory that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was as warm or warmer than today. Jones admits lack of data in other regions was used by Mann and others to make up the idea the MWP was cooler, but lack of data is not the same thing as proxies showing cooler temps!”

NASA GISS – 10 warmest years spread throughout last century

From Strata-sphere.com: “In fact, NASA GISS is on record noting that the ten warmest years are spread throughout the last century and are all statistically tied for warmest year. Because of the margin of error in global indexes, there is no way to determine which of the following years are warmer than the others.

“For the earlier period these are the warmest years in the top ten: 1921, 1931, 1934, 1938, 1939 – 5 all told. For the latter it is: 1990, 1998, 1999, 2006 – which is 4. And then there is the outlier 1953. These all have a temperature index that is statistically the same – and it proves there is not ‘significant’ warming, which blows the AGW theory right out of the water.”

While consensus scientists are stuck in defense mode, credentialed and respected skeptics around the globe have taken no time out in their efforts to expose the soft underbelly of the alarmist scientific data churned out by manipulated climate models.

Professor Terry Mills – Warming just as likely to be caused by random fluctuations

From the Herald Sun in Australia: “Terry Mills, professor of applied statistics and econometrics at Loughborough University, looked at the same data as the IPCC. He found that the warming trend it reported over the past 30 years or so was just as likely to be due to random fluctuations as to the impacts of greenhouse gases. Mill’s findings are to be published in Climatic Change, an environmental journal.”

John Christy, professor, UAH – Land temperature records unreliable

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC. 

From the Herald Sun: “The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years. These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site . . . .”

Joe D’Aleo and Dr. Don Easterbrook – No link between CO2 and temperature changes

“During the past century, global climates have consisted of two cool periods (1880-1915 and 1945 to 1977) and two warm periods (1915 to 1945 and 1977 to 1998). In 1977, the PDO [Pacific Decadal Oscillation] switched abruptly from its cool mode, where it had been since about 1945, into its warm mode and global climate shifted from cool to warm.

“This rapid switch from cool to warm has become known as “The Great Pacific Climatic Shift” (Figure 1). Atmospheric CO2 showed no unusual changes across this sudden climate shift and was clearly not responsible for it. Similarly, the global warming from ~1915 to ~1945 could not have been caused by increased atmospheric CO2 because that time preceded the rapid rise of CO2, and when CO2 began to increase rapidly after 1945, 30 years of global cooling occurred (1945-1977).”

Only one global warming period in 500 years matches rising CO2 

“Only one out of all of the global warming periods in the past 500 years occurred at the same time as rising CO2 (1977–1998). About 96% of the warm periods in the past 500 years could not possibly have been caused by rise of CO2. The inescapable conclusion of this is that CO2 is not the cause of global warming.

Two ocean oscillations drive climate shifts

“The PDO leads the way [in climate shifts] and its effect is later amplified by the AMO [Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation). Each time this has occurred in the past century, global temperatures have remained cool for about 30 years. Thus, the current sea surface temperatures not only explain why we have had global cooling for the past 10 years, but also assure that cool temperatures will continue for several more decades.

“The cool phase of the PDO is now entrenched and ‘global warming’ (the term used for warming from 1977 to 1998) is over.”

Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov, Pulkovo Observatory – Warns of deep temperature drop

From WorldNetDaily: “The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998 - 2005, while the value of the TSI by July-September of last year had already declined by 0.47 watts per square meter,” Abdussamatov wrote. “Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop, but not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth.”

 Dr. George Kukla – Changes in orbit responsible for climate change

From Climate Realists.com and Helium.com: “George Kukla, 77, retired professor of paleoclimatology at Columbia University and researcher at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory responds, "The only thing to worry about global warming is the damage that can be done by worrying. Why are some scientists worried? Perhaps because they feel that to stop worrying may mean to stop being paid."

 "I feel we're on pretty solid ground in interpreting orbit around the sun as the primary driving force behind Ice Age glaciation," he says. "The relationship is just too clear and consistent to allow reasonable doubt. It's either that, or climate drives orbit, and that just doesn't make sense."

 Earth on the brink of an Ice Age?

Pravda Science Report, via IceAgeNow: “The AGW theory is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change. The data from paleoclimatology, including ice cores, sea sediments, geology, paleobotany and zoology, indicate that we are on the verge of entering another Ice Age, and the data also shows that severe and lasting climate change can occur within only a few years.

“While concern over the dubious threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming continues to distract the attention of people throughout the world, the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.”

Michael Crichton – There is no human-caused global warming

In his book, “State of Fear,” Michael Crichton offers his assessment of the scientific evidence for global warming. His conclusion: There is no human-caused global warming.

Crichton is correct, writes Donald Miller: “Most of the rise in temperature in the 20th century occurred before 1940, before CO2 levels started rising. Temperatures fell 0.3° F from 1940 to 1970 while CO2 levels rose, from 310 to 325 ppmv . .  . .”

“The temperature of the planet's upper atmosphere (which the theory of global warming predicts should warm first), as measured by satellites, beginning in 1979, and weather balloons, has remained unchanged over the last 25 years despite a rise in atmospheric CO2 levels to 370 ppmv [now near 390 ppm].”

Weather Channel founder says global warming science is rigged

Writes Weather Channel founder John Coleman: “Any person who spends a decade at a university obtaining a PHD in Meteorology and becomes a research scientist, more likely than not, becomes a part of that single minded culture . . . These scientists know that if they do research and results are in no way alarming, their research will gather dust on the shelf and their research careers will languish.

“But if they do research that sounds alarms, they will become well known and respected and receive scholarly awards and, very importantly, more research dollars will come flooding their way. . . It was easy for them to manipulate the data to come up with the results they wanted to make headlines and at the same time drive their environmental agendas.”

"The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. It is all a scam, the result of bad science."

Temperatures rose four times as fast in 18th century

From David Archibald: “After the invention of thermometers, records started to be kept . . . A number of interesting things can be seen in this record, including the depths of the Little Ice Age in the late 17th century when the Thames regularly froze over, and the Dalton Minimum which was the last time the Thames froze over in the City of London.”

“What is also interesting is the 2.2° temperature rise from 7.8° in 1696 to 10.0° in 1732. This is a 2.2° rise is 36 years. By comparison, the world has seen a 0.6° rise over the 100 years of the 20th century. That temperature rise in the early 18th century was four times as large and three times as fast as the rise in the 20th century.”

 * * *

These represent only small fraction of the many facts that rip away at the theological underpinnings of the global warming gospel. Awaiting any inquisitive person is a virtual Mother Lode of informed analysis and scientific data, available at the touch of a keyboard, impeaching the tenets of the AGW doctrine and challenging the certitude of the True Disciples – formerly practicing scientists – who are now engaged in a desperate effort to defend and preserve their revered scripture.

Source: http://www.examiner.com/seminole-county-environmental-news-in-orlando/exposure-of-global-warming-deception-goes-viral

 

Do you understand Psychological Operations (PsyOps)

Psychological operations are planned propaganda operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behaviour of foreign governments, organisations, groups, and individuals.

The purpose of United States psychological operations (PSYOP) is to induce or reinforce behaviour favourable to US objectives. They are an important part of the range of diplomatic, informational, military, and economic activities available to the US. They can be utilised during both peacetime and conflict. There are three main types: strategic, operational, and tactical. Strategic PSYOP include informational activities conducted by the US government agencies outside of the military arena, though many utilise Department of Defense (DOD) assets. Operational PSYOP are conducted across the range of military operations, including during peacetime, in a defined operational area to promote the effectiveness of the joint force commander's (JFC) campaigns and strategies. Tactical PSYOP are conducted in the area assigned to a tactical commander across the range of military operations to support the tactical mission against opposing forces.

PSYOP can encourage popular discontent with the opposition's leadership and by combining persuasion with a credible threat, degrade an adversary's ability to conduct or sustain military operations. They can also disrupt, confuse, and protract the adversary's decision-making process, undermining command and control. When properly employed, PSYOP have the potential to save the lives of friendly or enemy forces by reducing the adversary's will to fight. By lowering the adversary's morale and then its efficiency, PSYOP can also discourage aggressive actions by creating disaffection within their ranks, ultimately leading to surrender.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/Psychological_Operations_United_S...

[US Army] Introduction to Psychological Warfare - GF33-27 (1955)

Proof of an Object behind the Sun

Proof of an Object behind the Sun that Nasa has removed from their images. 

Could this be the Red Planet? Hercolubus? Nibiru? ELEnin? Only time will tell.