It is!

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

Update November 12, 2000

UNOFFICIAL FLUORIDE VOTE

Like Florida, we have been waiting for the official count to see who accepted and rejected fluoridation. We are still waiting! However, the unofficial count is in:

THOSE TOWNS VOTING AGAINST FLUORIDATION

Ithaca, New York; Wooster, Ohio; Hyrum City, Utah; Logan City, Utah; Nibly City, Utah; Providence City, Utah; River Heights, Utah; Smithfield City, Utah; Brattleboro, Vermont; Spokane, Washington; Wenatchee, Washington.

THOSE TOWNS VOTING FOR FLUORIDATION

Las Vegas, Nevada (people asked if they wanted to continue fluoridation); San Antonio, Texas; Davis County, Utah; Salt Lake County, Utah.

CONGRATULATIONS to all those who pulled off these amazing victories against overwhelming financial odds and congratulations also to those who came really close to winning despite these same odds. The folks did incredibly well in San Antonio, coming within few percentage points to victory despite the $500,000 spent against them and a loaded press. And so did the people in Salt Lake County and Davis Counties, Utah. They also pulled within a few percentage points even though the polls there a few weeks ago were showing a pro-fluoridation lead of 70% to 30%.

None of us need to feel demoralized by those we temporarily lost. The scientific arguments are clearly in our court, as proved convincingly by the failure of the opponents to accept the challenge to open public debates. Those empty seats speak volumes to the weakness of their case.

Here are some suggestions for what can be done in areas where we have suffered a temporary setback and elsewhere. Nothing has happened in Cumberland or Frostburg yet, but it would be wise to be ready should that time ever come. Loch Lynn, Mt. Lake Park, Oakland, etc. can start working to get this toxic industrial waste out of their drinking water supply.

1. Look into legal possibilities of fighting for "individual rights" or "human rights" against forced medication. 2. Approach your municipality to provide a separate supply of unfluoridated water for those who want it. (They won this concession in the Netherlands - see Hans Mollenburg's book, Fluoridation: The Freedom Fight); 3. Ask for a reduction on your water bill to pay for bottled water or fluoride removing equipment. 4. Certainly encourage mothers who bottle feed their babies to request distilled water for their formula. Even the American Dental Association has stated that babies should NOT have fluoridated water. Many pediatricians have not kept up to date on this information. 5. Prepare for a class action lawsuit by identifying all new cases of dental fluorosis. 6. Approach pharmacies and supermarkets for non-fluoridated toothpaste, now that fluoride is in the water, people will have to be extra careful against overdosing. 7. Support efforts at the National level - if you haven't done so, sign on to Jeff Green's petition of Congressional Action. (More about this later).

Update November 10, 2000

TROUBLE IN FROSTBURG'S FLUORIDE PARADISE!

Mayor John Bambacus teaches Political Science and knows how to get what he wants politically. When he ran up against some very dedicated Council people who disagreed with him, he knew just how to get them out and his "yes" people in. This strategy isn't new. It's as old as politics. First you get an "issue," and you get everybody fired up over the issue. Then you get the people to run who are "for the issue," or "against the issue," as the case might be. In this case, he got two dedicated one-issue candidates "for" fluoridation since it was the hot dental topic. His strategy worked. Now, Dental Councilman Jeffrey Rhodes, one of the "one-issue" candidates, is finding out that he doesn't even have time to handle that one issue!

We are told Jeffrey Rhodes has made only one trip to the Filtration Plant, and has never met with the outside people. His mail piles up until he has to be called to pick it up, and his idea of being a Councilman is to attend the monthly meeting so he can say "yes" to the Mayor's ideas! Two filtration plant employees have quit; one is contemplating quitting.

Well, folks, dumping toxic industrial waste into the drinking water supply isn't as easy as you have been led to believe. The Government demands 24-hour monitoring of the deadly poison where both chlorine and its sister poison fluoride are used. Frostburg can't handle 24-hour monitoring; they can't even handle 16-hour monitoring, and there are only two remaining Filtration Plant workers, and one of them is on vacation, the Filtration Plant is being manned by one employee, making even 8-hour monitoring difficult.

Temporary workers from the Maryland Environmental Service are getting $35.00 an hour and Frostburg just can't afford those wages! However, they are offering more money to new potential hires than their long-time employees are making, and this doesn't make for good employer-employee relations. In other words, Frostburg's fluoridation program is in a mess!

As the Pure Water Committee told you, this isn't about children's teeth, it's about politics. And Frostburg's politics are at an all-time low. Mayor Bambacus has lost control, and this usually happens when some arrogant officials try to force industrial poison into the drinking water of their constituents! It's time to kick Bambacus upstairs and get someone in who will quit attempting to medicate all the people on the regional water system and give them the purest water possible at a price they can afford to pay!

Frostburg's water supply is a regional water supply. All the small towns either put money or goods into the new dam and Filtration System. But did Bambacus ask those small towns how they felt about fluoridation? No! His attitude toward having his authority questioned was answered by his statement that even though Frostburg is going to spend $85,000 plus to get a $50,000 grant for fluoridation equipment, Mayor Bambacus said, "Bottom line" we will get the money the same way we always do (from the taxpayers) and we will fluoridate!

Update November 3, 2000

FLUORIDE'S SMOKING GUN

Members of the Pure Water Committee have wondered and discussed why the Clinton Administration, the EPA Clinton appointees, etc. have put so much emphasis on pushing fluoridation throughout the United States. Why should a President be so interested in mass medicating everyone in the country? We thought it was because the aluminum and fertilizer industries put so much money into the political campaigns. Now, we have the "smoking gun." We suggest you read this for yourself and watch developments! This news comes from Robert J. Carton, Ph.D., Environmental Coordinator, U. S. Army Medical Research & Materiel Command:

PROPOSALS SOUGHT FOR DEPLETED URANIUM PROCESSING PLANTS, WASHINGTON, D. C. November 1, 2000 (ENS).

The Department of Energy (DOE) is seeking proposals for the design, construction and operation of new facilities at uranium enrichment plant sites in Ohio and Kentucky. Once built, these facilities will convert the federal government's inventory of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) to a more stable form and prepare the material for disposal or potential reuse.

"We are committed to dealing effectively with our depleted uranium inventory and continuing the environmental restoration of these sites," said Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. "The issuance of this Request for Proposals puts us one step closer to addressing the government's inventory of depleted uranium hexafluoride at the gaseous diffusion plant sites."

The department manages about 700,000 metric tons of DUF6 in about 57,000 cylinders stored at its Paducah, Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and Oak Ridge, Tennessee sites. This material is a byproduct from more than 40 years of uranium enrichment operations. Depleted uranium hexafluoride is a granular solid at normal temperatures which can release hazardous chemicals under certain conditions.

The inventory is maintained in large 10 and 14 ton steel cylinders. In July, 1999, the department decided to move forward with the conversion of the depleted uranium hexafluoride inventory. The conversion plants will convert this material to a more stable chemical form, suitable for either use or disposal. The DOE estimates that it will take up to 25 years of plant operations to convert all its depleted uranium. Proposals must be submitted by February 1, 2001, and the contract is expected to be awarded during the summer of 2001. The Request for Proposals is available at http://www.oro.doe.gov/duf6disposition.

Watch the source of your "fluoride" in the next few years when all of the political sheep have followed the devious leader who is trying to get rid of industrial and governmental waste by telling you "Not to worry, my children, it can only kill you!"

Update October 28, 2000

ARSENIC IN DRINKING WATER CAUSED

BY TREATMENT CHEMICALS--

PRIMARILY FLUORIDE

In the October, 2000 issue of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Journal, there is an article entitled "Treatment Chemicals Contribute to Arsenic Levels," by authors Darrell Smith, Gary Huntley & Cheng-nam Weng. The article opens with the following paragraph:

"Arsenic is an issue that water utilities no longer can avoid. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to propose a reduction in the federal drinking water standard on arsenic from 50 ppb (parts per billion) to 5 ppb later this year, although EPA IS CONSIDERING SETTING THE MAXIMUMN CONTAMINANT LEVEL AT 3 PPB, 10 PPB AND 20 PPB. The final arsenic rule is due by January 1, 2001."

According to this article, "utilities should review and estimate the maximum possible arsenic concentrations contributed by the chemicals they used in drinking water treatment. Even trace amounts add up and may contribute to a substantial portion--possibly up to 10 percent-- of a 3 or 5 ppb maximum contaminant level."

The authors also point out that: "It is interesting to note that about 90 PERCENT OF THE ARSENIC THAT WOULD BE CONTRIBUTED BY TREATMENT CHEMICALS IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO FLUORIDE ADDITION."

MOST COMMON CONTAMINANT IN

HYDROFLUOSILICIC ACID IS ARSENIC

According to the application to Pennsylvania for permission to fluoridate Cumberland's water supply, Hydrofluosilicic acid is the chemical Cumberland plans to use to fluoridate. When arsenic is found in hydrofluosilicic acid, the average concentration, after being diluted down into the public water supply, is 0.43 ppb. According to date from the National Academy of Sciences, drinking water containing 0.5 parts per billion arsenic presents a 1 in 10,000 risk of developing cancer.

When we factor in the "non-detects" (the hydrofluosilicic acid without detectable arsenic) the average contribution to arsenic levels in the water supply from fluosilicic acid is 0.1 ppb. Arsenic levels vary considerably in the acid, with after-dilution levels reaching as high as 1.66 parts per billion in the water.

A study from Finland (Kurttio, et al, 1999) found that people drinking water with 0.1 to 0.5 parts per billion arsenic, had a 50% greater risk of developing bladder cancer than people drinking water with less than 0.1 ppb.

SHOULD PUBLIC OFFICIALS BE ALLOWED

TO ADD CANCER-CAUSING CHEMICALS TO

PUBLIC DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES?

With this knowledge being reported by the American Water Works Association (AWWA) EPA Scientists, and many other prestigious sources, why does Mayor Lee Fiedler, Councilmen Ed Hedrick, Harold Hendershot, Jr., Harvey May and Terry Rephann, along with Mayor John Bambacus, Councilpeople John Ralston, James Cotton, Robin Gorrell, and Jeffrey Rhodes refuse to look into the dangers of adding this cancer-causing contaminant to Cumberland and Frostburg's water supplies? The very children they have been told fluoridation will help, are the very children who will be getting CUMULATIVE doses of arsenic all their lives with its potential for bladder cancer. The children will be getting more arsenic over their lifetime than their elders, with a greater potential for cancer.

Arsenic isn't the only thing hydrofluosilicic acid contains. It also contains lead, and Cumberland already has a lead problem! 20% of the lead ingested by children comes from the water supply already, and hydrofluosilicic acid, being one of the most corrosive chemicals known to man, leaches lead from old lead pipes or solder from non-lead pipes.

The Pure Water Committee has been trying to get through to these elected officials since the allegedly illegal referendum, to make them realize the harm they will be causing the people on the water supply, but they sit there like bumps on a proverbial log and information doesn't seem to penetrate their brains. They appear to have closed their minds to anything beyond an unfounded statement by a few dentists who simply say, "fluoride is good for children's teeth." This is ignorance at its worst, especially when this kind of ignorance opens everyone up to life-threatening diseases.

No one has yet answered our question, "Why does anyone want to drink toxic industrial waste from the scrubbers of the aluminum or fertilizer industries?" The Fiedler and Bambacus Administrations seem to have one cause in mind - make people drink it whether they can answer the question or not!

If fluoridation is so good for everyone and harms no one, why won't either the Fiedler Administration or the Bambacus Administration show us toxicological studies proving this? Is it because we are not important enough to discuss it, or is it because there are no such studies? The answer, of course, is that there are no studies on what hydrofluosilicic acid or sodium silicofluoride does to the human body. EPA Scientists have been asking for such studies for years, but politicians like those we have had consistently refused to order studies because they know fluoridation would have to be stopped immediately because of the danger! Think about it, politicians!

US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ADMITS "FLUORIDATED DRINKING WATER MAY BE HARMING MILLIONS OF 'AT RISK' AMERICANS!"

In a September 5 letter from EPA responding to a U. S. House Committee on Science inquiry into the safety of artificial drinking water fluoridation, Charles Fox, USEPA Assistant Administrator, wrote "There are no water quality criteria for fluoride either for the protection of aquatic life or for the protection of human health." He said that the EPA has made a requirement for public water systems to provide their consumers with information on health effects and contaminants, including fluoride, in their water supply.

Fox stated that EPA is in the process of developing medical fact sheets for medical practitioners (doctors, nurses, dietitians, etc.) with health information on drinking water contaminants that can be used to counsel patients about waterborne contaminants, including fluoridation chemicals. He said that the fact sheets will initially focus on the elderly, children and pregnant women. However, the EPA will later expand the informational sheets to cover other at-risk populations.

The action on fluoridated water was prompted by the 1993 "Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluoride and fluorine" (U. S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), 1993, PAGE 112 STATEMENT:

"POPULATIONS THAT ARE UNUSUALLY SUSCEPTIBLE. Existing data indicate that subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the effects of fluoride and its compounds. These populations include the elderly, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium and vitamin C, and people with cardiovascular and kidney problems. Poor nutrition increases the incidence and severity of dental fluorosis and skeletal fluorosis."

The EPA letter also revealed that 'at risk' populations for exposure to fluorides in drinking water are in the tens of millions of Americans: *55 years and older population - 52,000,000; *Cardiovascular disease, 22,000,000; *Kidney (renal) disorders - 2,000,000; *Vitamin C deficiency -27% of the population; *Magnesium deficiency - 37% of the population; *Calcium deficiency - 44% of the population.

FOR THOSE INTERESTED IN READING ALL 22 PAGES OF FOX'S ANSWERS FROM EPA TO THE COMMITTEE OF SCIENCE INQUIRIES, GO TO WEB SITE:

www.citizens.org Then click "fluoridation" and go from there.

HOW DOES PENNSYLVANIA GET INVOLVED IN MARYLAND'S DRINKING WATER SUPPLY?

Cumberland, Maryland's drinking water supply is located on Evitts Creek in Bedford County, Pennsylvania. Cumberland built two dams backing up two lakes: i.e., Lake Gordon and Lake Koon. Cumberland, Maryland's filtration plant is located at these dams from which drinking water is piped through Pennsylvania into Maryland and on into customers in West Virginia, making this a "Regional" water supply.

Because the dams and filtration plant are located in Pennsylvania, this makes the Water Supply Management Program of South-central Region in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania responsible for overseeing the water supply, with Mr. David Mittner, Sanitary Engineer, 909 Elmerton Avenue, Harrisburg, Pa. 17110 in charge.

To complicate matters, the filtration plant is owned by the Evitts Creek Water Co., with the current Cumberland Mayor, who is now Mayor Lee N. Fiedler, serving as President. The purpose of this explanation is because the City of Cumberland has now applied to the State of Pennsylvania for a permit to artificially fluoridate the drinking water supply with hydrofluosilicic acid, the corrosive toxic industrial waste from the smokestack scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry. How this came about is as follows:

For the past decade, the Charter of the City of Cumberland, in Section 226, forbade the fluoridation of the City's water supply. This came about as a result of a referendum in which the people of Cumberland overwhelmingly voted not to fluoridate the City's water supply. Prior to this referendum, Section 226 was put into Cumberland's Charter back in the 50's, with even some of the council people working to get it in, after sodium silicofluoride was purchased and stored in glass containers at the filtration plant while a referendum was in process. During the time of storage, the sodium silico-fluoride ate through the glass containers, and when the Council people saw how dangerous it was, they also worked to get the protective language into the Cumberland Charter. However, ten years ago, Mayor George C. Wyckoff and his City Council decided to remove Section 226 from the Charter and fluoridate the water supply. Under the laws of Maryland, the people have a certain period of time to protest any City Charter change, and this time was utilized by the opponents to force another referendum.

The opposition to fluoride was way ahead in the vote until the vote counting machine broke down. With only one precinct to be counted, and it was not a big precinct, Mayor Wyckoff took a screwdriver and "repaired" the voting machine. The opposition lost by 500 votes!

This immediately sent the opponents on a course to institute another referendum. The pure Water Committee of Western Maryland was formed, and the members worked to get sufficient signatures for another referendum. In the meantime, Cumberland was going ahead with building the proper buildings for hydrofluosilicic acid. Mayor Wyckoff opted not to wait for the referendum, and 58 days before the vote was taken, he turned on the fluoride. The Cumberland water supply turned brown as the corrosive hydrofluosilicic acid ate out all the gunk that had accumulated in the old pipes for the past hundred years; water leaks sprung up all over town; and when the referendum was held, the Pure Water Committee won overwhelmingly, defeating Mayor Wyckoff, installing Mayor Harry Stern and Councilman Joseph Freno, and Section 226 was placed back into the Charter reading exactly like the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act: "No substance shall be added to the municipal water supply (of the City of Cumberland) for preventive health care purposes, unrelated to contamination of drinking water." The Law goes on to read that no state shall have a law less stringent, so the State of Maryland cannot mandate fluoridation.

Pennsylvania has a policy, established years ago by a case in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, that once fluoride is added to a public water supply, it cannot be removed. When the Pure Water Committee asked for a written copy of this policy, they were informed that there is no written policy, that it is merely a "policy," and if anyone asks, the water company may be permitted to remove it. However, in practice, this isn't the way it works.

When Cumberland voted to put Section 226 back in the Charter, Pennsylvania said it couldn't take fluoride out of the water. Of course, Mayor Stern simply turned it off and that was that, but when he did this, Pennsylvania threatened daily fines, etc., etc. Cumberland had to spend thousands of dollars to defend itself, but in the end, Pennsylvania said if Maryland would offer free fluoride pills to anyone on the Pennsylvania side of the Evitts Creek Water Company, that would be sufficient. Cumberland did, (and of course, no one wanted them) but their obligation was fulfilled.

We believe such a policy is unconstitutional, but we are not in a constitutional fight right now. To continue our story, for ten years, Section 226 was back in the Charter; however, in the early months of this year, the area's local Dental Society instituted a postcard "petition," asking voters if they wanted to vote on Section 226. Sufficient postcards were returned, and City Solicitor Jack Price said that the postcards would act as a "petition," and a referendum would be held. The Pure Water Committee immediately filed suit in the Allegany County Circuit Court stating that postcards are not petitions. In checking signatures on a cross section of the postcards, the Pure Water Committee found that out of 2422 postcards, only 543 had signatures that would have been considered legitimate in any election, certainly not enough to force a referendum. However, in the politics of things, with the Pure Water Committee being more interested in the people than in the area politicians, Judge Sharer dismissed the suit stating that the Pure Water Committee had no standing to sue. The Committee immediately appealed, and THE CASE IS STILL ON APPEAL. The Secretary of the Pure Water Committee, Joyce Kenney, is a Cumberland homeowner and voter and is certainly eligible to sue.

Counsel for the Pure Water Committee, Trozzo, Lowery & Weston, LLC, has filed for injunctive relief with the Court of Special Appeals requesting that the city of Cumberland refrain from constructing any building or the addition of industrial grade hydrofluosilicic acid into the drinking water supply until the Appeal is heard. With Pennsylvania's "policy" of not permitting fluoride to be taken out of the water once it is in, and past experience showing that Pennsylvania does everything in its power to uphold this "policy," the Pure Water Committee feels that it is in the interest of everyone to hold up on granting any permit to the City of Cumberland for anything connected with fluoridation until a decision is made by the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland.

The Pure Water Committee has submitted to the City of Cumberland hundreds of signatures to be on record for a class action suit against the City should any one of those persons be harmed by being forced to ingest toxic industrial waste. According to the Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluoride and Fluorine published by the U. S. Department or Health & Human Services, "Those who are unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and its compounds include the elderly, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium, and/or Vitamin C, and people with cardiovascular and kidney problems." Dialysis patients are in particular danger since malfunction of fluoride equipment has caused the death of people all over these United States. But we are not asking that this permit be held up because of health reasons, but only because of legal reasons concerning what the Pure Water Committee alleges to be an illegal postcard referendum.

We are not asking that the permit be held up because of the pollution artificial fluoridation will engender. Maryland cities already dump 4,110,000 pounds or 2,055 tons of hydrofluosilicic acid into Maryland waters annually, which flows into the Chesapeake Bay. Since 1950, it adds up to 20,550,000 pounds, or 10,275.00 tons of toxic industrial waste going into the rivers and eventually the Bay. Much of which is imported from Japan, Belgium and China. These countries do not fluoridate, but sell their toxic waste to the United States to pollute our environment. According to the Bedford Gazette of February 18, 2000, Pennsylvania is a leader in pollution. All pollution going into Maryland's Chesapeake Bay is by permission and permits such as the one requested by Cumberland. But, as noted above, we are not asking that the permit be held up for pollution purposes, although it is certainly worth considering!

As any sensible person can see, this is not about children's teeth, but about politics and a group of people trying to override the will of the majority of the people in a political sense. The political situation in Cumberland is bad in that the smoke stack industries have been driven out for one reason or another, and with them go the young parents with the children most effected by fluoridation. The retirees who make up the vast majority of Cumberland's population certainly don't need fluoride for their false teeth, their arthritis, their Alzheimer's, their sugar diabetes, their cancer, etc., none of which is helped by adding industrial grade hydrofluosilicic acid from the scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry with its toxic bedfellows, lead, arsenic, mercury, chromium, silver, and other hazardous elements. Cumberland already has a lead problem and doesn't need any lead, no matter how small, added to its woes, as lead is cumulative in the human body.

It is unfortunate that the newly-elected politicians in Cumberland have not investigated all these things and are being influenced by government grants (our taxpayer's money), vested interest groups and local political favors, using Cumberland as a political stepping stone rather than worrying about the problems of their constituents. We are hoping that Pennsylvania politicians and environmental people have more years of experience with this corrosive chemical and will see fit to hold up any permits until the legal matters are settled in Maryland.

Update September 25, 2000

A LITTLE FLUORIDE COMMON SENSES!

THIS AND THAT IN THE NEWS

Population Shrinking

The Times-News reported that Allegany County's population is shrinking. 3,730 people were lost according to the last census. This was due to major plant closings in the 90's. Now, who are the 3,730 people lost due to plant closings? Young men and women who need jobs, and are the parents of the young children who are supposed to benefit from water fluoridation. With the young population decreasing and retirees building homes and moving into the area, what is the purpose of feeding all of them toxic industrial waste that the American Dental Association now says won't do them any good anyway! The ADA has now admitted that only topical fluoride treatments either in the dentist's office or with toothpaste will harden teeth. Ingested fluoride through drinking water does not help. But the ADA has not brought their dentists up to date. They are still feeding them 50-year-old data! Get with it, Dr. Tompkins!

Our Polluted Chesapeake Bay

In September, the Virginia Department of Health warned people not to expose an open cut or wound to the salty water of the Chesapeake Bay. It was reported that a half-dozen people have been attacked this year by a bacteria in the Bay that eats flesh and pumps toxins into its victim's body. Most people get Vibrio vulnificus through a scrape or a cut, but anyone with a compromised immune system can also contract it by eating raw oysters. All along the Bay's route, toxic industrial waste in the form of hydrofluosilicic acid goes into it because most cities along the waterways are fluoridated. Now, Cumberland and Frostburg want to add more toxic industrial waste to their drinking water so they can add the Bay's pollution! Of course, this is only one pollutant going into the Bay. But it is one that is not necessary and at this stage of pollution, no more industrial waste should be permitted instead of being encouraged by politicians who are illiterate concerning just what commercial fluoridation is all about!

Speaking of the Bay---

Environmentalists are demanding state regulators punish Baltimore for a spill that occurred this month that dumped 20.3 million gallons of sewage into a creek that feeds into the Chesapeake Bay. The spill occurred after a valve at a sewage pumping station broke. Environmentalists say the spill could result in algae and bacteria blooms. The state could fine the City up to $10,000 a day. The City said it has taken steps to prevent future spills from the pumping station.

Cumberland has a Lead problem now And will have more with fluoridation!

It's a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing. You've heard that old adage, or perhaps you're too young! Anyway, Cumberland has a problem with Lead because of the age of many of its homes. It's being blamed on lead paint instead of lead pipes through which the city's chemically treated water flows. Should the City be successful in adding hydrofluosilicic acid to its drinking water, this will increase its lead problems ten-fold! Hydrofluosilicic acid leaches lead from old pipes that are either lead pipes or lead solder was used with them. Every time you get a glass of water, you're getting a dose of lead. What does lead do to people? According to Paulette Kelly, a registered nurse who heads the county's Lead Awareness Program, lead-poisoned children don't show any symptoms. Behavioral problems and learning deficits may be the most obvious symptoms, but a child often can be misdiagnosed with attention deficit disorder. Other clues are lack of interest, sluggishness and irritability. The poison attacks the central nervous system and if it is undetected for several years, "a lot of the effects are irreversible," Ms Kelly said. But here is Mayor Fiedler and his Council people voting to put toxic industrial waste containing lead into Cumberland's water supply. Ms Kelly, why aren't you at City Council protesting the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid to the drinking water supply, adding to your lead problems?

President Clinton promised the U. S.Would be Totally Fluoridated by the year 2000.

Here's where this last push started, folks. And here may be why. In President Clinton's "Goals 2000," a 154 page bill signed in 1994 and already in effect, calls for the "Restructuring of American Society from Cradle to Grave." Goals 2000 is the culmination of Kempe's original plan and many of you may not be aware of just what this is all about. One newspaper quote said, "Clinton is just the patsy that signed it." Why don't you know much about it? Because Kempe stated that the plan "must be initiated with stealth." It was reported that Representative Henry Hyde (R-Ill) wrote a letter to every member of Congress urging them to stop the program. Hilliary's idea of "Restructuring" is "It takes a Village to raise a child," and the Home Visitation Program, now active in 42 states, makes it compulsory for all parents of newborns to have social workers visit their homes regularly. Fluoridation is just another "Restructuring" that takes away your individual rights as to what medication you wish to absorb. In this area, the "Patsies" who are going along are Mayor Fiedler, Councilmen Ed Hedrick, Terry Rephann, Harvey May and Butch Hendershot. In Frostburg, Mayor John Bambacus and his four "yes people" are the "Patsies." But maybe you don't care that we are being "Restructured," and losing our freedom as it happens!

U. S.A.TODAY RUNS SERIES OF ARTICLES ABOUT GOVERNMENT COVERUP OF TOXIC INDUSTRIAL WASTE INCLUDING FLUORIDE

According to a series of articles running Wednesday, Thursday and Friday in USA Today, back in the 1940's and 50's, during the Cold War, Nuclear weapons were being made at the expense of those who worked in the factories making parts for them. Following that time, the Environmental protective agency (EPA) made industry put scrubbers on the stacks to keep these toxic wastes from going out into the atmosphere becuase it has been proven by that time how dangerous they were and how they were killing people.

Today, they are recovering the same toxic industrial wastes from the scrubbers of the fertilizer and aluminum industries, selling them to politicians in cities like Cumberland and Frostburg, who refuse to learn what they are all about, and adding the same toxic industrial chemicals to your drinking water.

Chemicals are chemicals. How they get into your body doesn't matter. You breathe them or you drink them, either way they cause cancer, kidney disease, heart disease, all kinds of diseases and eventually, kill you!

The most frustrating thing about it all is that people you elect to office are forcing this on you in the guise of apple pie and mom and children's teeth! Those same children will grow up and have all the diseases their elders have now as a result of ingesting toxic industrial waste!

SO YOU THINK FLUORIDE IS SAFE?

All records of the fluoride spill in Annapolis, Maryland in 1982 have been conveniently "mislaid," but in the archives of the Pure Water Committee are the articles from the EVENING CAPITAL dated Saturday, October 30, 1982, with headlines stating "CITY SUED IN FLUORIDE SPILL." "Brain-injured man seeks $480 million." This suit resulted in an off-the-record settlement, along with over a million dollars paid to the Pepsi Cola Bottling Company and Coca Cola for ruining their products.

It is interesting to note that the Engineer, now in Frostburg, was in Annapolis at the time of the spill, and appears to be extra cautious about adding fluoride to Frostburg's water supply. We understand he insists on sodium fluoride instead of hydrofluosilicic acid as is proposed for Cumberland, and has ordered double protective mesures that, should one fail, the other takes over. The only question is, what if both of them fail? Look out, people on the Frostburg water supply.

Incidentally, sodium fluoride contains the same toxic waste that is in hydrofluosilicic acid. The only difference is that one is liquid and the other dry. Both Cumberland and Frostburg have to buy expensive equipment in order to add either of them to the drinking water. You, the taxpayers, are paying to poison yourself with toxic industrial waste!

FLUORIDE BLAMED IN DIALYSIS DEATHS

In the CHICAGO TRIBUNE of July 31, 1990, the deaths of three kidney dialysis patients who used the same dialysis center operated by the University of Chicago Hospitals on July 14 were caused by "acute exposure to excess fluoride in the water" used for the treatment.

Three women died and six other kidney patients suffered an allergic reaction after they underwent dialysis July 14 at the University of Chicago Dialysis Center. The levels of fluoride found in the dialysis water system at the center were "very high" and much higher than that found in Chicago's drinking water. They said the system used to filter fluoride out of the tap water used for dialysis apparently had failed.

The excess fluoride caused heart failure in the three who died because it interfered with the body's electrical system, which makes the heart beat, said Susan Phillips, hospital vice president.

DATELINE SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2000

1 DEAD, 17 TREATED AFTER DIALYSIS IN OHIO

The above headline appeared in the Youngstown newspaper and in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. At this point, the coverup is still on, but the symptoms are the same as all fluoride kills in dialysis: i.e., the filters fail and the people die.

We will follow up on this story and give you more details as soon as the newspapers are received from Youngstown.

Update September 8, 2000

According to the youngstown Vindicator newspaper, 17 dialysis patients remain in the hospital and investigators are testing equipment and blood and the cause of death is pending. Dr. Augustine Bascardi, medical director of the Youngstown center, said dialysis treatments were suspended after three patients experienced nausea, chills and vomiting. WATER TESTING. Bascardi said the water was tested Wednesday and investigators are testing it again for everything from chlorine to fluorine.

In Saturday's paper, Epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are assisting in the investigation and the paper says "Officials said water is the main thing the patients had in common with one another." (If one looks at what happened in Annapolis, Maryland and Chicago, Illinois where people died in dialysis after the fluoride filters failed, it is not too difficult to conclude that if water was the only thing they had in common, and the people had the same symptoms as those that were killed by fluoride, chances are that the same thing happened here. We'll see if they admit it or try to cover it up!)

Mayor Fiedler and the Cumberland City Council have no idea of the dangers to which they are subjecting the citizens of Cumberland!

FLUORIDE CANNOT BE USED IN DIALYSIS

Most people know very little about water fluoridation. They listen to some dentist who knows all about fluoride because the ADA has told him it's good for teeth and they should push it, and if they oppose it, they could lose their licenses. All they know about it is to cite a list of organizations that "endorse" water fluoridation. When one looks into the background of the whole thing, it all stems from one place and everyone else climbs on the bandwagon, not taking into consideration how dangerous it really is!

Do you realize that any government who forces fluoride on the citizens is obligated to furnish unfluoridated water to all patients on home kidney dialysis? There are a lot of people who do their own dialysis at home, and they cannot use spigot water or they would kill themselves. In the hospitals, fluoridated water cannot be used and must be filtered by reverse osmosis, which is the only way most of the fluoride can be removed. If the reverse osmosis fails, and it does periodically, people die.

Can the politicians and dentists who insisted on fluoridating the water be held accountable for murder? Unfortunately, no. However, they may not sleep so well! And the $settlements are more than the Cumberland taxpayers should be forced to pay!

COSMETIC DENTISTRY

Cosmetic Dentistry is the up and coming fad these days. People are paying from $500 to $1,000 and more per tooth to get rid of brown spots, yellow teeth, etc. Anyone familiar with fluorosis caused by years of using fluoride in one form or another, knows that teeth that look like those being worked on is caused by fluoride. Does it make sense to you to make teeth horrible looking with fluoride and then spend thousands of dollars in the dentist's office to correct something that could have been prevented in the first place? The question is often asked, "Why would a dentist want to push something that will keep teeth from getting cavities? Won't it hurt his business? Well, here is your answer. A dentist can make more fixing a tooth ruined by fluoride than they can filling a cavity caused by the wrong diet, which is what causes cavities in the first place. Dentists aren't dumb, you know! The unfortunate thing is, you can see what fluorosis does to your teeth, but you must remember, your bones look the same way. Bones become brittle, weak in spots, etc., and as you age, more and more people are suffering from broken hips, bad joints, etc. Why not avoid this in the first place by not making people drink toxic industrial waste to make money for industry instead of having industry spend money getting rid of their toxic waste some other way than by making you drink it? We would also like you to answer these questions for us if you can!

ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE AND DEMENTIA - IMPORTANT STUDY SHOWS GRAVE IMPLICATIONS FROM INTERACTION OF ALUMINUM AND LOW DOSE FLUORIDE.

The latest edition of the peer-reviewed medical journal, "Brain Research," (vol. 784:1998), reveals that aluminum-induced neural degeneration in rats is greatly enhanced when the animals were fed low doses of fluoride. The presence of fluoride enhanced the bio-availability of aluminum (Al) causing more aluminum to cross the blood-brain barrier and become deposited in the brain. The aluminum level in the brains of the fluoride-treated group was double that of the controls.

The pathological changes found in the brain tissue of the animals given fluoride and aluminum-fluoride were similar to the alterations found in the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia.

The authors stated that "While the small amount of AlF3 in the drinking water of rats required for neurotoxic effects is surprising, perhaps even more surprising are the neurotoxic resultrs of NaF (sodium fluoride) at the dose given in the present study (2.1 ppm NaF)." (2.1 parts per million NaF equals about 1.0 milligram fluoride ion per litre of water- the same level found in 1.0 ppm "optimally" fluoridated drinking water.)

This study confirms what the authors of a 1995 study, published in the Journal Neurotoxicology and Teratology, predicted when they found fluoride-induced behavioral disruptions (related to drug-induced hypeide-fed rats, damage could be expected in the hippocampus of the brain (central processor which integrates inputs from the environment, memory, etc.). The new study also confirms the work of scientists in China, publish3d in 1996, which showed fluoride to adversely affect children's IQ. (China does not mass medicate their people with fluoride.)

When contacted by phone, Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, one of the authors of the 1995 study, said that she is "not at all surprised" that the new study found pathological brain changes in fluoride-treated rats. She added: "They came up with the evidence which made our prediction come true."

The latest paper is yet another study which shows that even low levels of fluoride may have serious health implications for people and that the effect is enhanced in the presence of other neurotoxins like aluminum.

The formula for converting NaF to fluoride ion is ppm x 45%. Thus, 2.1 ppm x 45% = .95 ppm. (ppm=mgs/litre).

TITLE REFERENCE: Chronic administration of aluminum-fluoride or sodium-fluoride to rats in drinking water: alterations in neuronal and cerebrovascular integrity; Julie A. Verner, Karl F. Jensen, William Horvath, Robert L. Isaacson, "Brain Research," Vol. 784:1998, Elsevier Science.

This is the latest edition to the hundreds of studies showing the adverse effects of fluoride.

Recently declassified documents, obtained under the U.S. Freedom of Information legislation, show that central nervous system (CNS) effects caused by fluoride were known to, but concealed by, the US government during the 1940s.

Fluoride is a cumulative, protoplasmic poison, more toxic than lead. It is being deliberately added to the drinking water of MILLIONS of people in the United States, whether they want it or not - for the stated reason that "it can reduce tooth decay in children." Adverse health effects published over the decades are consistently DENIED by the government's advisers on water fluoridation.

DENTISTS GIVEN CONTINUING ED POINTS IF THEY LEARN LEGAL ISSUES OF FLUORIDATION

Dentists are required to continue their eduction in order to get their licenses renewed. We have just picked up one of their courses on the Internet, which is accepted by the American Dental Association for points for license renewal, and it is a course to teach dentists what they need to know to keep from being sued over fluoridatiion issues. The learning objectives are to understand the legal issues related to fluoridation of public water supplies; to understand the basis of constitutional court challenges to fluoridation; to be acquainted with pathologic conditions associated with excessive fluoride exposure/consumption/overdose; to review the possibly unnoticed sources of fluoride exposure in the environment and food chain; and to understand the many health issues involved. Health issues involve the Mullenix 1995 work with the pineal gland; lead informatin; total fluoride intake; and more.

We wonder why many of the local dentists don't read their own literature? If they did, they would have to agree with the Pure Water Committee. We suggest those dentists who push toxic industrial waste to be added to the water supply scurry to the Internet and get a little advanced education! They won't listen to our experts - maybe they will listen to the ADA.

FLUORIDATION MORATORIUM ASKED BY EPA SCIENTISTS

Dr. William Hirzy, representing the toxicologists, biologists, chemists, engineers, lawyers and others defined by law a "professionals," of the Environmental Protection Agency, asked for a moratorium on fluoridation until tests can be done on the toxic industrial waste used in water fluoridation, showing tht it is safe for human consumption.

Dr. Hirzy points out that there has never been a test on the toxic industrial waste used and there is no way anyone can say it is safe for human beings to drink. Dr. Hirzy's statement will be placed here in the next day or so.

WATER A COMMODITY

The Supreme Court has already declared water a commodity, which causes water to be subject to all laws concerning food.

EPA's ANSWER TO ARTIFICIAL FLUORIDATION

Why does the government insist on putting "fluoride" in your water? Because the EPA says it is the perfect solution to a bad environmental problemit cannot be permitted in the air, and it cannot be permitted to be diluted and put directly into streams because it kills the fish, but it can be diluted and put into your drinking water so that you can absorb part of it in your body before it goes out into the environment!

MOTHERS & FATHERS, GRANDMOTHERS & GRANDFATHERS

The Pure Water Committee has just been informed of the following information which was released March 3, 2000.

PLEASE READ THIS AND PASS THE INFORMATION ALONG!

Nicholas W. Hether, PhD, Manager of product Purity and Regulatory Sciences, Gerber Products Co., makers of Gerber Baby Food, revealed that

FLUORIDE IS NOT FOR INFANTS

Dr. Hether reports some startling revelations in an article presented in the Winter '98 issue of Pediatric Basics; THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION and the AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS now recommend infants avoid fluoridated water.

Following is part of Dr. Heather's report reprinted verbatim from PediatricBasics.

FLUORIDE AND DENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH

"In 1993 the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the National Research Council (NRC) reported that, in the absence of fluoride intake from other sources, fluoridation of municipal drinking water supplies at the recommended concentrations may result in mild to very mild dental fluorosis in about 10% of the population."

This means that in a city with a population of 100,000, 1 out of 10 or 10,000 people will experience damaged teeth due to fluoridation of the water supply. Will it be your neighbor, your brother, your wife or husband, your mother, your father or your children. For your baby, remember you have to buy unfluoridated bottled water, not only to drink with...but also cook with!

RECOMMENDATIONS

"The incidence of fluorosis has increased (more people are getting mottled teeth) in the U. S. over the last twenty years. This increased incidence, coupled with the widespread potential for multiple sources of fluoride in the diet, has prompted the AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION and the AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS to revise their recommendations for fluoride supplementation. Infants less than six months of age do not need fluoride supplementation of their diets."

LOCAL DENTISTS ARE NOT REPORTING THE TRUTH ABOUT FLUORIDE. CHECK IT OUT FOR YOURSELF!

http://www.nofluoride.com/nrc.htm.

http://www.fluoride/journal.com

http://www.penweb.org/issue/fluoride/

ALERT - ALERT - ALERT

In Harm's Way: Toxic Threats to Child Development

A report dated May, 2000 was released by the Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility, prepared for a Joint Project with Clean Water Fund. The principal Authors are Ted Schettler, MD, MPH; Jill Stein MD; Fay Reigh, PsyD; Maria Valenti, Contributing Author; and David Wallinga, MD. This report is available on-line and downloadable in PDF format at the Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility (GBPSR) WEB SITE. GBPSR grants permission to reprint properly credited excerpts from this book.

http://www.igc.org/psr/

This report talks of the increased risks of tooth staining



-- Y2K man (Y2Kman@aol.com), November 16, 2000


Moderation questions? read the FAQ