Comment

Comment by Christopher on March 29, 2011 at 12:31pm

The proper amount of fluoride ('they'; the CDC, et al., should be ashamed, for using this worthless statement - there is no present, and or credible method, or metering system available, to accurately determine "the proper amount of fluoride", especially that which is consumed, by the average human being, who needs to drink water. And, not forgetting all the other drinks and foods, which are manufactured, with polluted water, containing fluoride. Especially of the industrial toxic waste pollutant type, which GOVERNMENTS are willfully purchasing from the phosphates industry, and with premeditation; contaminating our drinking water supplies and, the entire environment too) from infancy through old age helps prevent and control tooth decay. Community water fluoridation is a widely accepted practice (apart from being a great big misnomer - that statement is a big fat lie - most people who live in areas where their drinking water is artificially polluted with industrial grade fluoride, aren't even aware whether the water is or is not artificially fluoridated) for preventing and controlling tooth decay by adjusting the concentration of fluoride in the public water supply (the only reasons why 'they' have recently been lessening "adjusting the concentrations of fluoride"; is because everyone's children are ending up with "dental fluorosis" - this is a definite causal effect on the human body system, which shows up on the teeth, the sign posts if you will. Have you not heard of "skeletal fluorosis"? - Well; its not as easy to see a person's bones, as it is to see their teeth...right?).

As per the CDC's (Criminally Deceptive Campaign) perspective on FLUORIDE: http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/safety/infant_formula.htm

Comment by Tara on March 29, 2011 at 11:56am

You know what really irks me is that you still can buy water containing flouride in stores and it is marketed for infants to mix with their formula. Really young infants don't even have teeth yet so even if flouride was healthy for teeth (which it is not), why would there be any need for it? Unbelievable!!!!

Comment by Christopher on March 29, 2011 at 11:40am

JUDGES - THE GOVERNMENT'S WILD CARDS

 

Judge's decision on Fluoridation Consultation announced in London
Health Authority was not required to defer to public opposition.

JUDGE AND JUROR - [HOLMAN EDWARD] - recently ruled that the the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SCSHA), acted in accordance with the regulations on public consultation, over the proposed fluoridation scheme in Southampton, [UK] UNITED KING-DOMINATED (united - this being an obvious contradiction - particularly where the public expresses their concern - but obviously not worthy of, or granted the courtesy of due consideration).

THE STRATEGIC HEALTH AUTHORITY or, indeed, [THE STATE] itself, apparently possesses the power, to order the product [ARTIFICIAL WATER FLUORIDATION] to be administered to the public in a fashion that is virtually unavoidable, and with the intent to prevent a disease.

That determination (prevention of a so-called disease), is usually based on the medical schooling (education) and thus, the appropriate licencing, of a true, Health Professional (MEDICAL DOCTOR). And even then, only on a one-to-one basis - and most importantly - with the full and, controlled consent of the patient.

Artificially fluoridating the public's drinking water supplies - and - thus - entire water systems (environmental impact), is therefore a clinical intervention - As such; it would be in gross violation of medical law and, clinical Codes of Practice.

Link to original article: http://www.ukcaf.org/health_authorities_can_ignore_public_opinion.html