Fluoride: Calcifier Of The Soul

The Discovery

Research published in 2001 showed that fluoride (F) deposits in the pineal gland with age and is associated with enhanced gland calcification. Eleven aged cadavares were dissected and their pineal glands assayed:

 “There was a positive correlation between pineal F and pineal Ca (r = 0.73, p<0.02) but no correlation between pineal F and bone F. By old age, the pineal gland has readily accumulated F and its F/Ca ratio is higher than bone.”

What Is The Pineal Gland?

The pineal gland is a small endocrine gland in the vertebrate brain, and is sometimes called the “third eye” as it is a light sensitive, centrally-located organ with cellular features resembling the human retina.

One article describes the role of the pineal gland in more technical terms here:

“The role of the nonvisual photoreception is to synchronise periodic functions of living organisms to the environmental light periods in order to help survival of various species in different biotopes.”  Source

The pineal gland is best known for its role in producing the hormone melatonin from serotonin (triggered by the absence of light) and affects wake/sleep patterns and seasonal/circadian rhythms. Like a tiny pea-sized pine cone it is located near the center of the brain, between the two hemispheres and is a unique brain structure insofar as it is not protected by the blood-brain-barrier. This may also explain why it is uniquely sensitive to calcification via fluoride exposure.

More Than An Endocrine Gland

Technically the mammalian pineal gland is neural tissue, and the cells within the pineal gland – the pinealocytes – have characteristics that resemble the photorecetpor cells in the retina.

This has given rise to the opinion that it should be reclassified:

“In our opinion, the main trend of today’s literature on pineal functions–only considering the organ as a common endocrine gland – deviates from this structural and histochemical basis.” Source

The pineal gland has been a subject of much interest since ancient times. Galen described it in the 3rd century, and the philosopher René Decartes (1596-1650) identified the pineal gland as the “seat of the soul.” His explanation for this conclusion is quite interesting:

“My view is that this gland is the principal seat of the soul, and the place in which all our thoughts are formed. The reason I believe this is that I cannot find any part of the brain, except this, which is not double. Since we see only one thing with two eyes, and hear only one voice with two ears, and in short have never more than one thought at a time, it must necessarily be the case that the impressions which enter by the two eyes or by the two ears, and so on, unite with each other in some part of the body before being considered by the soul. Now it is impossible to find any such place in the whole head except this gland; moreover it is situated in the most suitable possible place for this purpose, in the middle of all the concavities; and it is supported and surrounded by the little branches of the carotid arteries which bring the spirits into the brain.” Source: Wikipedia.

Decartes was one of the few philosophers who was experienced in vivisection and anatomy, and who righly pointed out the unique nature of the pineal gland’s location in the brain and blood supply.

The “third eye” is also a well known symbol in Eastern literature, and may be concretely grounded in the anatomical structure and function of the pineal gland.

Calcium Stones In the Brain

Pineal gland calcifications upon dissection resemble gravel, and are composed of calcite (calcium carbonate) and/or calcium hydroxylapatite, the latter of which is not unlike dentin or bone.  (Source)

Pineal gland calcification is associated with a number of diseases in the medical literature:

1. Alzheimer Disease


2. Bipolar Disease


3. Circadian Dysregulation


4. Hormone Imbalances: Low Melatonin


5. Insomnia


6. Low Back Pain


7. Parkinson Disease


8. Schizophrenia


9. Sleep Disorders


10. Stroke

Fluoride As A “Therapeutic” Neurotoxin?

Now that it has been established that fluoride (F) exposure contributes to the calcification of the pineal gland, the question remains: what are the subjective affects of these tissue changes to those who undergo them?

Prozac may represent an archetypal example of how fluoride affects the personality/soul. This drug (chemical name fluoxetine) is approximately 30% fluoride by weight and marketed as an “antidepressant,” even while a major side effect of its use and/or withdrawal is suicidal depression.  Modern psychiatry often treats depressive disorders – the “dark night of the soul” – as an organic disorder of the brain, targeting serotonin reuptake by any chemical means necessary. Fluoride and fluoxetine, in fact,  may accomplish their intended “therapeutic effects” by poisoning the pineal gland.  Animal studies confirm that when mice have their pineal glands removed they no longer respond to fluoxetine.  Source

Perhaps the primary reason why Prozac causes a favorable reaction in those who are treated (poisoned) with it, is that it disassociates that person from the psychospiritual conflicts that they must normally suppress in order to maintain the appearance of sanity and functionality in society, i.e. it is control and not health that is the goal of such “treatment.”

If Prozac and other sources of fluoride in our environment deposits within the pineal gland, accelerating the transformation of functional pineal tissue into calcification, is it possible that it works by dehumanizing and flattening the affect of those who are under its influence?

How Do We Prevent Pineal Gland Calcification?

Eliminating exposure to fluoride is the #1 priority.  We can start by being careful about surreptitious forms of fluoride in Teflon, foods and beverages produced with muncipal water, tap water, infant formula, fluoride containing drugs like Prozac, toothpaste, etc. We have collected a number of studies from the US National Library of Medicine on natural substances which mitigate fluoride toxicity.  We also have a section on our database dedicated to finding substances which prevent or reverse other forms of pathological calcification which may have relevance for pineal gland calcification, such as ectopic calcification. Lastly, there is research on the potential value of magnesium and phytate in reducing pineal gland calcification.

© March 31, 2018 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.

The post Fluoride: Calcifier Of The Soul appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Can Fluoride Lower Human Intelligence?

Is fluoride a potential cause of lowering of IQ in our children? Certainly those who advocate for consuming it therapeutically, without acknowledging its well-known adverse health effects, may themselves be suffering from a fluoride-induced deficiency of intelligence.

After all, is it intelligent to ignore the evidence supporting a hard and fast connection between increased fluoride exposure and lower IQ? For example…

The study, titled “Fluoride and children’s intelligence: a meta-analysis,” published in the journal Biological Trace Element Research in 2008, set out to determine” …whether fluoride exposure increases the risk of low intelligence quotient (IQ) in China over the past 20 years.”  They reported:

Sixteen case-control studies that assessed the development of low IQ in children who had been exposed to fluoride earlier in their life were included in this review. A qualitative review of the studies found a consistent and strong association between the exposure to fluoride and low IQ. The meta-analyses of the case-control studies estimated that the odds ratio of IQ in endemic fluoride areas compared with nonfluoride areas or slight fluoride areas. The summarized weighted mean difference is -4.97 (95%confidence interval [CI] = -5.58 to -4.36; p<0.01) using a fixed-effect model and -5.03 (95%CI = -6.51 to 3.55; p<0.01) using a random-effect model, which means that children who live in a fluorosis area have five times higher odds of developing low IQ than those who live in a nonfluorosis area or a slight fluorosis area.[1]

Again, areas with the highest levels of fluoride exposure resulted in children with 5 times higher odds of developing low IQ than those in non- or low fluoride areas.

Don’t trust the Chinese meta-analysis?  How about this Mexican study titled, “Decreased intelligence in children and exposure to fluoride and arsenic in drinking water,” published in 2007 in the journal Cadernos de saúde pública, which found even more dramatic drops in children’s IQ associated with higher urine concentrations of fluoride. [2]

Fluoride is not simply a toxic chemical, linked to over 30 adverse health effects.  It also has psychotropic properties, which is why it is used in psychiatric medications for “treating depression.” Case in point: fluoxetine, a fluoride-containing drug sold by the trade names Prozac, Sarafem and Symbyax.

Drugs.com lists the following possible adverse effects on the nervous system:

Nervous System — Frequent: emotional lability; Infrequent: akathisia, ataxia, balance disorder, bruxism, buccoglossal syndrome, depersonalization, euphoria, hypertonia, libido increased, myoclonus, paranoid reaction; Rare: delusions.

The common medical definition for “emotional lability,” also known  pseudobulbar affect (PBA),  is: “involuntary crying or uncontrollable episodes of crying and/or laughing, or other emotional displays” — ironic, isn’t it, that a chemical marketed as an antidepressant can cause involuntary crying? Also not exactly a rationality-promoting chemical either, is it?

Another “infrequent” side effect of this drug listed is as “depersonalization.” Since fluoride has been linked to the pathological calcification of the pineal gland, the traditional “seat of the soul,” the depersonalization noted as a side effect of fluoxetine exposure, e.g. “…periods of detachment from self or surrounding which may be experienced as “unreal” (lacking in control of or “outside of” self) while retaining awareness that this is only a feeling and not a reality,” could represent the general soul-dislocating effects of fluoride-containing drugs, and fluoride in general, on the pineal gland and other brain structures.

This is, of course, is not simply an academic question.  Companies market “Nursery Water” to new parents, designed to intentionally dose their infants with additional fluoride, even while it is well-known that many are already being overdosed with the stuff from infant formula, toothpaste, tap water-prepared food, etc. to the point that fluorosis, a fluoride-induced damage to and/or discoloration of the enamel of the teeth, can be detected in many of them.

Shouldn’t these manufacturers be obligated to provide a warning to consumers: “may reduce IQ”?  Or, perhaps I am thinking too much, having neglected to take my daily dose of FDA-, EPA-, ADA- approved fluoride.

---

[1] Fluoride and children’s intelligence: a meta-analysis. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2008;126(1-3):115-20. Epub 2008 Aug 10. PMID: 18695947

[2] Decreased intelligence in children and exposure to fluoride and arsenic in drinking water. Cad Saude Publica. 2007;23 Suppl 4:S579-87. PMID: 18038039

© February 25, 2018 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.

The post Can Fluoride Lower Human Intelligence? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

The TRUE History Of Fluoridation: Toxicity Was Hidden And LIED ABOUT By The Government

The true history of the fluoridation of water in the name of tooth decay prevention is coming out. As the mainstream media continues to lose its grip on the public’s throat with blatant and intentional fake news, the truth behind all of the lies touted are rising to the surface.

You’ve likely heard it before: “Just get the shot. Just take the medicine. It’s all in your best interest.” But some journalists are finally blowing holes in the government’s propaganda campaign and the media’s history of lying to us for profit. It isn’t just Mike Adams, the Health Ranger who has come out declaring the mainstream media nothing more than the propaganda arm of the deep state, but now John Rappaport is delivering evidence of the dishonesty behind the fluoridation campaign.

Joe Joseph, with The Daily Sheeple walks us through what Rappaport has repeatedly written about: the truth behind the fluoridation of our water.

In 1997, Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson, two respected mainstream journalists, peered into an abyss. They found a story about fluorides that was so chilling it had to be told.

The Christian Science Monitor, who had assigned the story, never published it.

Their ensuing article, “Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb,” has been posted on a number of websites.

Author Griffiths told me that researchers who study the effects of fluorides by homing in on communities with fluoridated drinking water, versus communities with unfluoridated water, miss a major point: studying the water is not enough; toxic fluorides are everywhere—they are used throughout the pharmaceutical industry in the manufacture of drugs, and also in many other industries (e.g., aluminum, pesticide). –John Rappaprot’s Blog

“Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses was generated by A-bomb program scientists, who had been secretly ordered to provide ‘evidence useful in litigation’ [against persons who had been poisoned by fluoride and would sue for damages]… The first lawsuits against the US A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the [government] documents show,” said the Griffiths/Bryson report. 

In order to stop lawsuits against damages done by the government with fluoride on unsuspecting Americans, a dishonesty campaign was set in full force. The government began lying to promote fluoride as a useful agent against tooth decay, even though it’s a powerful central nervous system damaging chemical.

This is something everyone should know. “Now you know why promoting toxic fluoride as a dental treatment was so important to government officials,” Joseph says. “A very interesting part of history that a lot of people don’t know. And, a lot of sound science to back up just how toxic fluoride can be. And here we have it, pervasive in our society, not just in the water that we drink, and the toothpaste that we use, but also, interestingly enough, the major ingredient in a lot of the serotonin reuptake inhibitors and the antidepressants that we see coming out of big pharma; fluoride is a major component of that. If you don’t believe me, check this study out,” Joseph says.

*Both reports are linked below*

Fluorides, the atomic bomb, and fake news

Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb

For the First Time, Lawsuit Forces US Court to Review Fluoride Toxicity, Could END Fluoridation

Despite the overwhelming mass of scientific literature and studies showing the harmful effects of ingesting fluoride, those who question it or advocate for the cessation of fluoridated water are labeled as kooks, conspiracy theorists, and shouted down by the mainstream. Even when the mainstream admits it — as in the case of the highly publicized Harvard Study — people remain in denial about this most horrific practice of mass medication without consent using the poisonous byproduct of fertilizer production.

However, all that appears to be changing. For the first time in US history, the courts will hear the evidence on the neurotoxicity of fluoridated water which could out an end to this practice once and for all.

Thanks to the vigilant work of the folks at the Fluoride Action Network, who’ve refused for years to be silenced, we are now witnessing an unprecedented move to stop this practice. Thousands of pages of research put together by dozens of scientists and doctors has been included in a lawsuit that could end water fluoridation in the United States.

Simply put, the evidence has reached critical mass and even the government can’t deny it.

Fluoridation, Americans are told, is necessary for the prevention of tooth decay. We must drink it and we must give our children fluoridated water in order for everyone to have a healthy smile — or so we have been advised for the last 60 years.

A whopping 43 studies have linked fluoride ingestion with a reduction in IQ. A study out of the Harvard School of public Health concluded, “children in high-fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low-fluoride areas.”

Even more independent studies have linked the associated health risks of fluoride to interfering with the endocrine system and increasing the risk of impaired brain function. Two studies in recent years, for example, have linked fluoridation to ADHD and underactive thyroid.

Dozens more studies show the ineffectiveness of fluoride ingestion in preventing dental caries; they actually show an increase in dental fluorosis instead of a reduction in decay.

Approximately 1.2 grams of sodium fluoride will kill an adult human being. That was the low estimate that Dominic Smith ingested when he died from an overdose of fluoridated water at Hooper Bay, Alaska on May 23, 1992. Approximately 200 mg will kill a small child.

READ MORE:  WikiLeaks Show Rothschilds Grooming Clinton for Presidency -- Months Before She Launched Candidacy

In spite of this evidence showing that the mass drugging of the American population is harmful, the CDC and the EPA maintain that it is 100% safe and that drinking the extremely deadly byproducts of fertilizer production is just fine and dandy.

It is because of the government’s continued denial and dismissal of scientific evidence that the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has filed this landmark lawsuit.

FAN is not some ragtag group of conspiracy theorists sitting around in their basements reading fake science on the internet. The group is comprised of dozens of medical doctors, dentists, PhDs, and scientists, who’ve joined forces to bring an end to this most unethical and dangerous practice.

Stuart Cooper, FAN’s Campaign Director issued an open letter this week, noting how the “Fluoride Action Network (FAN), along with a coalition of environmental and public health groups has filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to their denial of our petition under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) seeking a ban on water fluoridation.

“We believe this lawsuit is an unprecedented opportunity to end the practice once and for all in the U.S., and potentially throughout the world, based on the well-documented neurotoxicity of fluoride.” You may read the official complaint here. According to FAN’s attorney and adviser, Michael Connett:

“This case will present the first time a court will consider the neurotoxicity of fluoride and the question of whether fluoridation presents an unreasonable risk under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

And, in contrast to most other legal challenges of Agency actions, TSCA gives us the right to get the federal court to consider our evidence ‘de novo’ — meaning federal courts are to conduct their own independent review of the evidence without deference to the EPA’s judgment.”

According to FAN, the reason for the lawsuit was due to the fact that the EPA dismissed their massive cache of information submitted to them, via petition, last year.

On November 22, 2016, a coalition including FAN, Food & Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, Moms Against Fluoridation and several individual mothers, filed a petition calling on the EPA to ban the deliberate addition of fluoridating chemicals to the drinking water under provisions in the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The petition includes more than 2,500 pages of scientific documentation detailing the risks of water fluoridation to human health.

We presented the FDA with a large body of human and animal evidence demonstrating that fluoride is a neurotoxin at levels now ingested by many U.S. children and vulnerable populations. We also presented the agency with evidence showing that fluoride has little benefit when swallowed and, accordingly, any risks from exposing people to fluoride chemicals in water are unnecessary.

Despite this petition, the EPA, who illustrates through this move and many others that it is beholden to special interests only and not the people, denied it.

READ MORE:  Residents Concerned After Screams Of Starving Inmates were Captured on Video

There is now a significant consensus happening in the scientific community noting that fluoride is, indeed, neurotoxic. For the EPA to dismiss scientific facts is not only irresponsible but it is now proving to be criminal.

The question now is not if fluoride damages the brain — it is at what dose does fluoride damage the brain.

According to FAN, EPA’s own Guidelines for Neurotoxicity Risk Assessment highlights the importance of having a robust margin between the doses of a chemical that cause neurotoxic effects and the doses that humans receive. FAN presented the EPA with over 180 studies showing that fluoride causes neurotoxic harm (e.g., reduced IQ), pointing out that many of these studies found harm at levels within the range, or precariously close to, the levels millions of American children now receive.

Since the petition was submitted to the EPA in November and subsequently denied, more damning evidence has surfaced in the case against fluoride — and, this time, it’s from the EPA’s own scientist.

As FAN reports, some children in the U.S. may be consuming enough fluoridated water to reach doses of fluoride that have the potential to lower their IQ, according to a research team headed by William Hirzy, Ph.D., a former senior scientist at the EPA who specialized in risk assessment and published an important risk analysis in the journal Fluoride last year.

Hirzy explains the significance of this study:

“The significance of this peer reviewed risk analysis is that it indicates there may be no actual safe level of exposure to fluoride. Groups of children with lower exposures to fluoride were compared with groups having higher exposures. Those with higher exposures performed more poorly on IQ tests than those with lower exposures.

One well-conducted Chinese study indicated that children exposed to 1.4 mg/day had their IQ lowered by 5 IQ points. Current average mean daily intakes among children in the United States are estimated by EPA to range from about 0.80 mg/day to 1.65 mg/day. Fluoride may be similar to lead and mercury in having no threshold below which exposures may be considered safe.”

The fight against fluoride across the globe is winning. According to FAN, millions of citizens in hundreds of municipalities throughout the world have forced their governments to stop drugging them without consent using this toxic waste. This action is working and the lawsuit is proof of its effectiveness.

READ MORE:  Texas Judge Refuses to be a Part of Traffic Ticket Scheme, Blows the Whistle on Policing for Profit

For those who’d like to support the Fluoride Action Network or would like to know how you can get involved, there are some tips below. Please share this article with your friends and family to let them know that we the people are finally making progress when it comes to our health and the health of our children.