CONSPIRACY/NYPA - MEGATHREAD - [NWO/ZEITGEIST/CERAGEM/Illuminati]- OMG HELP ME WITH MY CAUSE!!!!

You wasn't wrongfully accused if they knew you knew about it. Expect us!

You and me both.
I'm the one and only Richard Kimble.
Does the name ring any bells?

You should.
Im a doctor who has been wrongly convicted of the muder of my wife and they've sentenced me to death
My train was derailed on the way to death row so now I'm going to use my freedom to search for the one armed man who killed my wife.

DeathHamster be more sympathetic, I had to act this out for 4 seasons.3 in black and white and the 4th in color

It didn't pay much.
Tommy Lee Jones earned more than I did in the re make.

Bad times.


All good now I'm dead.

Fuck, joke much?



When did the humor bypass take place?

Looking at that is doing wonders for my epilepsy.

Mary had a little lamb.
The doctor was surprised.
Old MacDonald had a farm.
The doctor almost died.

Well, if that's the way it's going to be, I shall hence forth be known as "The Big Ragoo"

If Laverne and Shirley approve of course.

I'm sure they won't mind. I grew up with them. Funny though, they always seemed to be stuck inside this little box..............

So was I and imagine the difficulties I experienced having to run around in it time after time.




Or do I mean episode after episode?

Backpacks weren't invented yet....

Yeah, that's way back when mastodons and Richard Nixon roamed the earth. There were wiretaps and shit but no backpacks.

There is the belief that fluoride is good for you. This is not true and with a little research you can understand why.


From The Lancet, a well respected medical journal:
Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity
"A meta-analysis of 27 cross-sectional studies of children exposed to fluoride in drinking water, mainly from China, suggests an average IQ decrement of about seven points in children exposed to raised fluoride concentrations.44 Confounding from other substances seemed unlikely in most of these studies. Further characterisation of the dose–response association would be desirable."
- http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laneur/article/PIIS1474-4422(13)70278-3/fulltext#article_upsell


Harvard Study Confirms Fluoride Reduces Children's IQ
"There are so many scientific studies showing the direct, toxic effects of fluoride on your body, it's truly remarkable that it's NOT considered a scientific consensus by now. Despite the evidence against it, fluoride is still added to 70 percent of U.S. public drinking water supplies." - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/fluoride_b_2479833.html


Which Countries Fluoridate Their Water?
"One of the little known facts about this practice is that the United States, which fluoridates over 70% of its water supplies, has more people drinking fluoridated water than the rest of the world combined. Most developed nations, including all of Japan and 97% of western Europe, do not fluoridate their water."


THE PHOSPHATE FERTILIZER INDUSTRY: AN ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW
"Damage to vegetation and livestock, caused by fluoride emissions from large industry, has resulted, as one might expect, in a great deal of expensive litigation. In 1983, Dr. Leonard Weinstein of Cornell University, stated that “certainly, there has been more litigation on alleged damage to agriculture by fluoride than all other pollutants combined” (Weinstein 1983). While Weinstein was referring to fluoride pollution in general, his comments give an indication of the problem facing the phosphate industry – one of the most notorious emitters of fluoride – in its early days."
- http://fluoridealert.org/articles/phosphate01/

Toxicity is at 1mg/l according to the Harvard study.

Water fluoridation is now recommended to be at most 0.7 mg/l by the FDA
http://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/ConstituentUpdates/ucm444401.htm

You think they can regulate the amount of fluoride coming from the tap?
They estimate it, plus, the quantity does not matter since it accumulates in the body.

Fluoride is a bioaccumulator and is toxic to bones
"It is widely recognised that fluoride "therapy" for osteoporosis adds mass to bones but produces inferior bone -- at least seven studies found structural abnormalities or mineralization defects. In short, the biomechanical competence of the skeleton may be compromised because the tensile (elasticity) strength of bone is sacrificed. These studies not only show that fluoride may cause increased skeletal fragility (more non-vertebral fractures such as hip), but that it can lead to osteomalacia (another bone disease)."

"The effect of drinking water fluoridation on the fluoride content of human bone, on cancellous bone strength and on the mineral density of bone was studied by analysing 158 autopsy samples of the anterior iliac crest from persons from two different areas. In the samples from the town of Kuopio, where drinking water has been fluoridated since 1959, the fluoride concentrations were considerably higher than in samples from the surrounding area where low-fluoride drinking water is used. The fluoride content of bones from Kuopio increased significantly with age, while considerably less change with age was found in samples from outside Kuopio. The highest fluoride content in bone ash was observed in women with severe osteoporosis. Cancellous bone strength measured by a strain transducer was statistically significantly higher in women with chronic immobilizing disease from Kuopio, compared with the corresponding group from outside Kuopio. No statistically significant differences in bone strength were found in men. There were no statistically significant differences in bone mineral density, as measured by gamma ray attenuation, between the samples from the fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas." - http://fluoridation.com/bones.htm

Fluoride accumulation in bone and the effect on their physical properties in guinea pigs given different levels of fluoridated water.
"Guinea pigs were exposed to fluoridated water (2-20 ppm) for a period ranging from 15 to 42 weeks. The fluoride content of the bones increased in proportion to the concentration of fluoride in drinking water and the period of exposure. The rate constant of accumulation of fluoride in guinea pig bones was estimated to be 2.5 X 10(-2) week-1, with a half-life of plateau formation in the order of 28 weeks. This indicated that maximum accumulation of fluoride during a continuous exposure, or a computed complete elimination of fluoride after exposure, will take approximately four years. Although fluoridated water improved the weight gain of guinea pigs, no effect on physical properties of bones was observed. No other toxic effects of fluoride under these conditions were noted." - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/913074

WATER FLUORIDATION
"Fluoridation goes against all principles of pharmacology. It’s obsolete." -- Dr. Arvid Carlsson, Nobel Laureate in Medicine/Physiology.

"Water fluoridation is the practice of adding industrial-grade fluoride chemicals to water for the purpose of preventing tooth decay. One of the little known facts about this practice is that the United States, which fluoridates over 70% of its water supplies, has more people drinking fluoridated water than the rest of the world combined. Most developed nations, including all of Japan and 97% of western Europe, do not fluoridate their water." - http://fluoridealert.org/issues/water/

10 Facts About Fluoride You Need to Know
"If fluoride is really the panacea for dental disease that it's been portrayed as, then why is it that the United States is one of the only developed countries that fluoridates their citizens' drinking water?
Hint: It's not because the other countries aren't aware of fluoride's supposed "miracle" powers for your teeth … it's because they fully realize that adding a known poison to your population's water supply is probably not a good idea.
Even in North America, water fluoridation has come under increasing scrutiny; since 2010, more than 75 US and Canadian communities have voted to end water fluoridation, and the issue is heating up as more and more people begin to demand water that does not expose them to this highly toxic industrial waste product.
If you're new to this issue, and even if you're not, please take 20 minutes to watch Michael Connett, an attorney with the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), summarize 10 important facts about fluoride that everyone needs to know." - http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/04/30/water-fluoridation-facts.aspx


THE MANUFACTURE OF THE FLUORIDE CHEMICALS
"All of the fluoride chemicals used in the U.S. for water fluoridation, sodium fluoride, sodium fluorosilicate, and fluorosilicic acid,
are useful byproducts of the phosphate fertilizer industry."- http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/reeves-2000.pdf

Fluorine Recovery in the Fertilizer Industry, by H. Denzinger, H. Konig & G. Kruger,

Phosphorus & Posassium Magazine, Sept/Oct 1979

"In the past, little attention was paid to the emission of gaseous fluorine compounds in the fertilizer industry. But today fluorine recovery is increasingly necessary because of stringent environmental restrictions which demand drastic reductions in the quantities of volatile and toxic fluorine compounds emitted in the waste gases. These compounds now have to be recovered and converted into harmless by-products for disposal or, more desirably, into marketable products."

- http://www.dealmortgage.net/fluorid...orine-recovery-in-the-fertilizer-industry.pdf

Also, the PRC removes excess fluoride salts from their water supplies.

How much fluoride comes out of the tap can be controlled using two fascinating technologies called measuring and basic chemistry.

The study produced is about guinea pigs, and the study found no harmful effects. Where is the study showing that water fluoridation has produced harmful effects in people to such an extent that the harm outweighs the benefit?

The "fascinating technologies", must be magic then, no need to know how it happened.
From all that info, your point is that testing in guinea pigs doesn't prove harmful effects on humans?
What benefits? You must have skipped the Lancet and the Harvard links above.

Look it up yourself, you're good at that. Also, you haven't answered the question.

The Lancet and the Harvard links above. You seem to have missed does.

Brainstorm once again you've caused disturbances here.

Flourine/Flouride is actually a chemical too harmful to dump in the environment. So, they put it in the water system under the guise that it's "good for teeth"

You don't think that measuring is a way of knowing?

Yes they can measure from the home taps. But they are not precise numbers, they CANNOT control how much goes into each house.
Anyway, the point is that industrial-grade fluoride is poison, the quantity doesn't matter, it has no benefits to health.
Debating measurements is irrelevant.

Which is why there's this thing called sampling and measuring.

WHY I AM NOW OFFICIALLY OPPOSED TO ADDING FLUORIDE TO DRINKING WATER

Dr. Hardy Limeback, BSc, PhD, DDS | Former President,
Canadian Association for Dental Research

To whom it may concern:
Since April of 1999, I have publicly decried the addition of fluoride, especially hydrofluosilicic acid, to drinking water for the purpose of preventing tooth decay.
The following summarize my reasons.
New evidence for lack of effectiveness of fluoridation in modern times.

Dr. Hardy Limeback

1. Modern studies (published in the 1980’s 1990’s) show dental decay rates are so low in North America that the effects of water fluoridation cannot be measured. Because of the low prevalence of dental decay, water fluoridation studies today must be carefully conducted to correct for mobility of subjects between fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas, access to fluoride from other sources, the lack of blinding and problems with the `halo’ effect. Even when very large sample sizes are used to obtain statistically significant results, the benefit of water fluoridation is not a clinically relevant one (the number of tooth surfaces saved from dental decay per person is less than one half). Recent studies show that halting fluoridation will either result in only a marginal increase in dental decay which cannot be detected or no increase in dental decay at all.

2. The major reasons for the general decline of tooth decay worldwide, both in non-fluoridated and fluoridated areas, is the widespread use of fluoridated toothpaste, improved diets, and overall improved general and dental health (antibiotics, preservatives, hygiene etc).

3. There is now a better understanding of how fluoride prevents dental decay. What little benefit fluoridated water may still provide is derived primarily through topical means (after the teeth erupt and come in contact with fluorides in the oral cavity). Fluoride does not need to be swallowed to be effective. It is not an essential nutrient. Nor should it be considered a desirable “supplement” for children living in non-fluoridated areas. Fluoride ingestion delays tooth eruption and this may account for some of the differences seen in the past between fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas (i.e. dental decay is simply postponed). No fluoridation study has ever separated out the systemic effects of fluoride. Even if there were a systemic benefit from ingestion of fluoride, it would be miniscule and clinically irrelevant. The notion that systemic fluorides are needed in non-fluoridated areas is an outdated one that should be abandoned altogether.
New evidence for potential serious harm from long-term fluoride ingestion.

1. Hydrofluorosilicic acid is recovered from the smokestack scrubbers during the production of phosphate fertilizer and sold to most of the major cities in North America, which use this industrial grade source of fluoride to fluoridate drinking water, rather than the more expensive pharmaceutical grade sodium fluoride salt. Fluorosilicates have never been tested for safety in humans. Furthermore, these industrial-grade chemicals are contaminated with trace amounts of heavy metals such as lead, arsenic and radium that accumulate in humans. Increased lead levels have been found in children living in fluoridated communities. Osteosarcoma (bone cancer) has been shown to be associated with radium in the drinking water. Long-term ingestion of these harmful elements should be avoided altogether.

2. Half of all ingested fluoride remains in the skeletal system and accumulates with age. Several recent epidemiological studies suggest that only a few years of fluoride ingestion from fluoridated water increases the risk for bone fracture. The relationship between the milder symptoms of bone fluorosis (joint pain and arthritic symptoms) and fluoride accumulation in humans has never been investigated. People unable to eliminate fluoride under normal conditions (kidney impairment) or people who ingest more than average amounts of water (athletes, diabetics) are more at risk to be affected by the toxic effects of fluoride accumulation.

3. There is a dose-dependent relationship between the prevalence/severity of dental fluorosis and fluoride ingestion. When dental decay rates were high, a certain amount of dental fluorosis was considered an acceptable `trade off’ of providing an `optimum’ dose of 1.0 ppm fluoride in the water. However, studies published in the 1980’s and 1990’s have shown that dental fluorosis has increased dramaticallyin North America. Infants and toddlers are especially at risk for dental fluorosis of the front teeth since it is during the first 3 years of life that the permanent front teeth are the most sensitive to the effects of fluoride. Children fed formula made with fluoridated tap water are at higher risk to develop dental fluorosis. A relatively small percentage of the children affected with dental fluorosis have the more severe kind that requires extensive restorative dental work to correct the damage. The long-term effect of fluoride accumulation on dentin colour and biomechanics is also unknown. Generalized dental fluorosis of all the permanent teeth indicates that the bone is a major source of the excess fluoride. The effect of this excess amount of fluoride in bone is unknown. Whether stress bone fractures occur more often in children with dental fluorosis has not been studied.

4. A lifetime of excessive fluoride ingestion will undoubtedly have detrimental effects on a number of biological systems in the body and it is illogical to assume that tooth enamel is the only tissue affected by low daily doses of fluoride ingestion. Fluoride activates G-protein and a number of cascade reactions in the cell. At high concentrations it is both mitogenic and genotoxic. Some published studies point to fluoride’s interference with the reproductive system, the pineal gland and thyroid function. Fluoride is a proven carcinogen in humans exposed to high industrial levels. No study has yet been conducted to determine the level of fluoride that bone cells are exposed to when fluoride-rich bone is turned over. Thus, the issue of fluoride causing bone cancer cannot be dismissed as being a non-issue since carefully conducted animal and human cancer studies using the exact same chemicals added to our drinking water have not been carried out.
The issue of mass medication of an unapproved drug without the expressed informed consent of each individual must also be addressed. The dose of fluoride cannot be controlled. Fluoride as a drug has contaminated most processed foods and beverages throughout North America. Individuals who are susceptible to fluoride’s harmful effects cannot avoid ingesting this drug. This presents a medico-legal and ethical dilemma and sets water fluoridation apart from vaccination as a public health measure where doses and distribution can be controlled. The rights of individuals to enjoy the freedom from involuntary fluoride medication certainly outweigh the right of society to enforce this public health measure, especially when the evidence of benefit is marginal at best.
Based on the points outlined briefly above, the evidence has convinced me that the benefits of water fluoridation no longer outweigh the risks. The money saved from halting water fluoridation programs can be more wisely spent on concentrated public health efforts to reduce dental decay in the populations that are still at risk and this will, at the same time, lower the incidence of the harmful side effects that a large segment of the general population is currently experiencing because of this outdated public health measure.

Sincerely,
Dr. Hardy Limeback BSc PhD (Biochemistry) DDS
Head, Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto
References at: http://fluoridealert.org/articles/limeback

Cyanide is lethal at 270ppm in the air, let's put only 260ppm of it in our A/Cs so we don't have any problems with it.
Ain't that a genius idea ?

http://www.ada.org/en/public-progra...why-fluoride-in-water-is-good-for-communities

5 Reasons Why Fluoride in Water is Good for Communities

1. 1. Prevents tooth decay. Fluoride in water is the most efficient way to prevent one of the most common childhood diseases – tooth decay. An estimated 51 million school hours and 164 million work hours are lost each year due to dental-related illness. Community water fluoridation is so effective at preventing tooth decay that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention named it one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century.

1. 1. Protects all ages against cavities. Studies show that fluoride in community water systems prevents at least 25 percent of tooth decay in children and adults, even in an era with widespread availability of fluoride from other sources, such as fluoride toothpaste.

1. 1. Safe and effective. For 70 years, the best available scientific evidence consistently indicates that community water fluoridation is safe and effective. It has been endorsed by numerous U.S. Surgeons General, and more than 100 health organizations recognize the health benefits of water fluoridation for preventing dental decay, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Medical Association, the World Health Organization, the American Dental Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

1. 1. Saves money. The average lifetime cost per person to fluoridate a water supply is less than the cost of one dental filling. For most cities, every $1 invested in water fluoridation saves $38 in dental treatment costs.

1. It’s natural. Fluoride is naturally present in groundwater and the oceans. Water fluoridation is the adjustment of fluoride to a recommended level for preventing tooth decay. It’s similar to fortifying other foods and beverages, like fortifying salt with iodine, milk with vitamin D, orange juice with calcium and bread with folic acid

http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/factsheets/70-years.htm

Scientists in the United States and other countries have studied the safety and benefits of fluoridated water for decades, and found no convincing evidence to link water fluoridation and any potential unwanted health effect other than dental fluorosis. Dental fluorosis is a change in the appearance of tooth enamel. It can occur when young children (less than 8 years of age) regularly take in fluoride when their permanent teeth are still developing.

I would question factoids coming from an organization that still advocates for mercury amalgam fillings, which have proven toxicity, when non-toxic polymer composite fillings are widely available.

There is nothing "natural" about the fluoride chemical put into public drinking water across North America, which is hydofluorosilicic acid, a byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry, a means to sell their toxic sewage, rather than pay to have it neutralized and stored.
Along with that stuff, you also get an additional dose of heavy metals that leach out of the phosphogypsum.
The FDA has never found HFA to be "safe and effective" and in the U.S. only they make that determination.
Fluoride treatments work on teeth without side effects, like fluorosis, when properly applied to tooth surfaces. Systemic ingestion is what causes illnesses.

tell to the president of your school that was me.
remember to edit the thread's title with the TAG [SOLVED]