portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

environment | health

Healthy kids drink fluorosilicic acid.

It's a poisoning. Let's say it. Fluorides have a shocking status when ranked against other poisons in the table of toxicity. Don't be shy. Get a message.
1. water.jpg, healthy kids drink fluorosiicic acid.  2.  poison.jpg, no caption
1. water.jpg, healthy kids drink fluorosiicic acid. 2. poison.jpg, no caption
fluoride.html

Healthy kids drink fluorosilicic acid.

water.jpeg



How healthy is that?
This healthy:

TABLE OF TOXICITY

poison.jpg

lethal dose
grams to kill a person of average weight
from most toxic to less toxic:

strychnine .002

plutonium citrate .021

VX.070

sodium cyanide.154

fluorosilicic acid .56

mercury chloride 2.87

metallic arsenic 5.34

lead dioxide 14.9

ammonia 17.5

silvex 45.5

2,4,5-T 46.4

sulfur dioxide70

Roundup307


Source:
Gerald Judd, PhD., chemist, professor of chemistry, Johns Hopkins. Average weight = 70 kg (154 pounds)
.

also on teslapress

It's poison. Let's say it!

The most telling caseagainst fluoridation I've ever seen was a table of toxicity expressed in grams-to-kill. It's the science in a nutshell. Fluoride compounds show a shockingly high status when ranked among other poisons. Grams-to-kill is a striking metric.

Because fluoridation is sold as dentistry, one may be tempted to fight a resistance campaign in dental terms. This is just what the fluoridators want. But dental health is not the issue; it is just the pretext. The real issue is mass poisoning.

The expert needed is not a dentist or doctor but a chemist, a toxicologist. (The dentist is that chemistry-ignoramous who plants mercury in our teeth.) The toxicologist will tell you that fluoridation is not just a "risk" but a dead certainty. Toxify the water supply and negative public health impacts are assured.

I figure that, if toxicity tables speak to me, they might be useful in communicating with the public at large. Perhaps the vocabulary is too esoteric? You decide. The toxicity table is just one way to state the message: Hello, it's a poisoning!

I have not been able to recover that original grams-to-kill document, seen circa 1990, but a similar table is published in a later edition by chemist Judd that expresses lethality more obscurely in milligrams-per-kilogram of body weight (mg/kg). From this table I selected a short list and multiplied the mg by 70, today's official average weight in kg. That yields mg-to-kill. Divide that by 1000 to get grams-to-kill.

Dr Judd has passed, but a worthy successor is chemist, toxicologist, and fluoride-fighter Paul Connett. He's got a video lecture on You-tube, but I prefer the radio interview by Dennis Bernstein on KPFA's Flashpoint 4/10/13 (aired on KBOO 4/11). I have yet to see a table of toxicity from Dr. Connett.


Gerald Judd

Tables of toxicity are hard to come by considering their obvious utility in environmental and medical issues, so we are grateful to the late Gerald Judd, chemist and fluoride-fighter, for his work on the toxicology of fluoridation. Judd, a professor of chemistry at Johns Hopkins, wrote Good Teeth Birth to Death. (You can find a PDF on the web and in print from Tesla Tech. The complete Table of Toxicity is on pages 57 and 58. This links you to a PDF of page 57.

Judd's book was not published by a university press but somewhat eccentrically by Judd himself. Judd laments that one cannot sit in a dentist's chair for under $300. (We all think this, but nobody prints it.)

Judd saw ADA dentistry as a racket and as a health risk, reminding us of the mercury filings and ofthat McMinneville teenager, Keith Kantor, who perished in the dentist's chair after swallowing fluoride gel.

Is fluoride filterable? Judd insists that, contrary to some product claims, no commercial filter exists that can remove fluorides from drnking water, incluuding reverse-osmosis and distillation units.


tables of toxicity

Surely there are more Keith Kantors. However, most data on human lethality comes from extrapolations based on the poisoning of lab rats. The one exception is strychnine, for which there are human figures. (I know not why.)

I suspect that, if you went digging into the archives of the CDC, you would find numbers corresponding to those in the table above. I also suspect that some digging might even turn up a few human studies with titles like The Auschwitz Chemical Lethality Study of 1940 or The CDC-Vacaville Toxicity Study of 1985, but my mind wanders darkly.



a poisoning

The issue is poisoning, say the toxicologists. Anti-fluoride campaigners: you need not be so shy as to dilute this dark truth.
Was it not the poisoning that moved you to join this campaign in the first place?

Sounding the depths of darkness can only give energy to a campaign. Ask an adman. Then hire an agency and task the creatives to finding fifty witty ways of saying: It's poison.

Yes it's a mass poisoning. But, oh, that has the ring of conspiracy theory in it! Sorry, the political landscape beneath the surface is not pretty.
One has to defy a gentified social ethic even to discuss it.

We live under a system which enshrines debilitation. But such an utterance is impolite, although the evidence is everywhere. Mass toxification is conducted through various environmental vectors, but also through medical and dental vectors, and it is conducted under various pretexts, including medical and dental pretexts: "This is good for you."

Shy campaigners like to show their reasonableness by saying that the fluoridators are "well meaning," conceding that fluoride does have some dental benefits. Sorry, apologists, the evidence says the contrary, not surprising given the status of fluoride compounds in tables of toxicity.



The fix is in.

Let's remember that the old council went for fluoridation unanmously, with lame ducks Sam Adams and Randy Leonard leading the way. The unanimity of the decision was a shock in itself, but then, as the election approached, all the council candidates, including mayor Charlie Hales, got roped into the consensus, this in spite of the fact that any dissenting candidate might have won decisive votes on his antifluoridation position alone.

On their fluoridation position alone, I didn't vote for any of them, and I will forever distrust them all.

In another unanamous decision, the new council moved the fluoridation election, set for November, 2013, back to May, lest there be time for folks to think about what was being done to them.

The fluoridators put propagandist Mark Wiener on the payroll, also Rep. Ben Unger. Then Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland went to the poisoners to fund their message, which is essentially: "Here in healthy Portland, healthy kids drink fluorosilicic acid."

Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland can raise big advertising dollars from all the fluoridation front organizations in the nation, because green Portlandia is high stakes in the national game. The Healthy Kids will fight hard and dirty, because, as people wise up to the poisoning and municipalities, like Berkeley, end the practice, they are becoming desperate.

How did such an absolute (totalitarian) fix get in, here in democratic Portland? An investigative reporter is needed. I think we have a few here in town. He might inquire: Was there some irresistable quid-pro-quo? Was there an ominous threat to any candidate dissenting? Who besides Randy was twisting the arms? There is a city story here asking to be told.

Can an honest election (especially a mail-in) even be expected, given this totalitarian intensity of committment? A very special fix is in. Is it premature to be thinking direct-action?

A San Francisco adman said that, In an election like this, the liars must outspend the opposition ten-to-one. Such is the resonant power of the truth. This assumes an honest vote count, of course, but it also assumes some power and focus in the message.
















.


homepage: homepage: http://teslapress.com
phone: phone: 503-223-0410