Alternative thinking: A hidden agenda behind fluoridation?

by STAN CIAPALA
Staff writer

The fluoridation of the public water supply has been touted by dentists as being a preventative measure against cavities for nearly a century, but when has any industry endorsed preventative measures that contradict their own profit-oriented interests? In other words, if dentists generate most of their income from treating cavities, but fluoridation of the water supply prevents you from having to step into a dentist’s office to pay for treatment, then how does the endorsement of water fluoridation serve the interests of the dentistry community? 

Based on observation and personal experience, I have held steadfast in the belief that the medical community does not seek to implement permanent cures, but rather to provide treatments that entail continuous treatment and alleviation of symptoms. Why provide a cure when you can create life-long consumers of pharmaceuticals and medical treatment? There is an obvious conflict of interest within pharmaceutical and medical corporations. Is their higher duty owed to their patients through the Hippocratic Oath or to their stockholders, for whom they are legally obligated to produce profit? But I digress.  

Straight from the horse’s mouth, “the American Dental Association continues to endorse fluoridation of community water supplies as safe and effective for preventing tooth decay.” The ADA makes this claim despite a recently issued report from one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious medical journals, The Lancet, that designated fluoride as a neurotoxin in the same category as arsenic, lead, and mercury. So which is the most important prerogative: healthy teeth or a healthy mind? 

This isn’t anything new. This a concern that has been discussed for decades within interest groups, from health food advocates to conspiracy theorists. Former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura dared to make an ostentatious claim that informed the country of the dangers of fluoride, saying, “I worry about it tremendously. We’re forever incorporating Nazi things into our lives. Fluoride in the water – that was originally done by the Nazis! I don’t particularly like anything the Nazis did too much, and they were the first ones to put fluoride in the water. [Dentists] tell us, ‘Oh, it’s for your teeth’ and all that – well, isn’t that your parents’ job, to teach you how to brush your teeth and use mouthwash? Why do you need the government putting some type of chemical in your water? I don’t know if you know this [but] fluoride is the main component of Prozac! What you’ve got is people drinking Prozac-water. Well, what does Prozac do to you? It calms you and dumbs you down, so you’re less emotional. There’s a reason for all that stuff; what do we need fluoride in our water for? There’s no reason whatsoever to put chemicals in our water.”

Ventura is correct in that Prozac, one of the most widely used antidepressants on the market today, contains the active ingredient fluoxetine, which is comprised of five different elements, including fluoride.

While his claim of the Nazis fluoridating their water – and being the first to do so – has been debated, let’s say they did taint their concentration camp population’s water supply with fluoride. But why did they do it: to keep their prisoners’ teeth from decaying?

While documents pinpointing the origins of water fluoridation are scarce – for obvious reasons – according to cancer.gov, “in 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan, adjusted the fluoride content of its water supply to 1.0 ppm and thus became the first city to implement community water fluoridation.”

In 1945, the U.S. government put Operation Paperclip into effect, with the objective of securing and transporting as many Nazi scientists to America as possible before Russia could get to them. The fact that the first instance of domestic policy to fluoridate the water was enacted at the same time as the initial arrival of Nazi scientists could give credibility to the popular belief that water fluoridation was a method instituted by the Nazi regime to keep their concentration camp population docile and obedient. 

To further substantiate my claims concerning the dangers of water fluoridation, I turn to one of the most reputable names in academia, Harvard University, and an excerpt from one of its studies published in Environment Health Perspectives that examined other studies of cognitive development from Chinese journals. In multiple studies involving more than 8,000 children of school age, all but one suggested that high fluoride content may negatively impact cognitive development. The Harvard study found: 

“The average loss in IQ was reported as a standardized weighted mean difference of 0.45, which would be approximately equivalent to seven IQ points for commonly used IQ scores with a standard deviation of 15. Some studies suggested that even slightly increased fluoride exposure could be toxic to the brain. Thus, children in high-fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low-fluoride areas.”

Upon arrival to Tiffin, I invested in buying bottled water only from companies that verified that they did not use fluoride in their water purification process. Fluoride appears in the ingredients lists of almost all toothpastes, so I switched to fluoride-free toothpaste. Since then, I think the change in the potency of my motivation is noticeable. 

I believe there is further explanation behind the addition of fluoride in the public water supply than teeth whitening. The American government has nearly 400 million people to keep in line while circulating the illusion that we Americans possess the highest state of freedom circumstantially possible, and the combination of these two factors results in a government that rules through subversion.

While some may not want to make that leap, take heed of the medical community’s new stance on the fluoridation of water, especially in regards to that fact that fluoride is now considered by some as dangerous as arsenic, lead, and mercury.