Fluorides, the atomic bomb, and fake news
Faced with toxic fluorides destroying food crops, animal and human life, and with law suits piling up, atomic scientists decided they could distract the nation by promoting fluorides as a beneficial tooth treatment.
Occasionally, I reprint this article. I wrote it some years ago, during research on toxic chemicals pervading the landscape. I used to send the piece to mainstream reporters, but I eventually gave that up as a bad bet.
They’re dedicated to fake news…and now they’re losing control over public consciousness. Losing badly. Independent media are in the ascendance, and rightly so.
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).
I want to go over some of the major points of the Griffiths-Bryson article.
Griffiths discovered hundreds of documents from the World War 2 era. These included papers from the Manhattan Project, launched to build the first A-bomb.
Griffiths/Bryson write: “Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production…millions of tons…were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War.”
The documents reveal that fluoride was the most significant health hazard in the US A-bomb program, for workers and for communities around the manufacturing facilities.
Griffiths/Bryson: “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.”
A-bomb scientists were told they had to do studies which would conclude that fluorides were safe.
The most wide-reaching study done was carried out in Newburgh, New York, between 1945 and 1956. This was a secret op called “Program F.” The researchers obtained blood and tissue samples from people who lived in Newburgh, through the good offices of the NY State Health Department.
Griffiths/Bryson found the original and secret version of this study. Comparing it to a different sanitized version, the reporters saw that evidence of adverse effects from fluorides had been suppressed by the US Atomic Energy Commission.
Other studies during the same period were conducted at the University of Rochester. Unwitting hospital patients were given fluorides to test out the results.
Flash forward. Enter Dr. Phyllis Mullenix (see also here), the head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston. In the 1990s, Mullenix did a series of animal studies which showed that, as Griffiths/Bryson write: “…fluoride was a powerful central nervous system (CNS) toxin…”
Mullenix applied for further grant monies from the National Institutes of Health. She was turned down. She was also told that fluorides do not have an effect on the CNS.
But Griffiths/Bryson uncovered a 1944 Manhattan Project memo which states: “Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect…it seems most likely that the F [fluoride] component rather than the [uranium] is the causative factor.”
The 1944 memo was sent to the head of the Manhattan Project Medical Section, Colonel Stafford Warren. Warren was asked to give his okay to do animal studies on fluorides’ effects on the CNS. He immediately did give his approval.
But records of the results of this approved project are missing. Most likely classified.
Who was the man who made that 1944 proposal for a rush-program to study the CNS effects of fluorides? Dr. Harold Hodge, who worked at the Manhattan Project.
Who was brought in to advise Mullenix 50 years later at the Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, as she studied the CNS effects of fluorides? Dr. Harold Hodge.
Who never told Mullenix of his work on fluoride toxicity for the Manhattan Project? Dr. Harold Hodge.
Was Hodge brought in to look over Mullenix’s shoulder and report on her discoveries? It turns out that Hodge, back in the 1940s, had made suggestions to do effective PR promoting fluoride as a dental treatment. So his presence by Mullenix’s side, all those years later, was quite possibly as an agent assigned to keep track of her efforts.
Getting the idea here? Build an A-bomb. Forget the toxic fluoride consequences. Bury the fluoride studies. Twist the studies.
More on Hodge. In 1944, “a severe pollution incident” occurred in New Jersey, near the Du Pont plant in Deepwater where the company was trying to build the first A-bomb. A fluoride incident. Farmers’ peach and tomato crops were destroyed. Horses and cows became crippled. Some cows had to graze on their bellies. Tomato crops (normally sold to the Campbell Company for soups) were contaminated with fluorides.
The people of the Manhattan Project were terrified of lawsuits and ensuing revelations about the toxic nature of their work. A heads-up memo was written on the subject. Its author? Harold Hodge. Among other issues, he reported on the huge fluoride content in vegetables growing in the polluted area.
Also the high fluoride levels in human blood.
The farmers began to bring lawsuits. Big PR problem.
The lawsuits were settled quietly, for pittances.
Harold Hodge wrote another memo. Get this quote: “Would there be any use in making attempts to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents [near the A-bomb facility]…through lectures on F [fluoride] toxicology and perhaps the usefulness of F in tooth health?”
Griffiths/Bryson write: “Such lectures were indeed given, not only to New Jersey citizens but to the rest of the nation throughout the Cold War.”
This was a launching pad for fluorides as “successful dental treatments.”
Now you know why promoting toxic fluorides as a dental treatment was so important to government officials.
Footnote: In Stanley Kubrick’s 1964 film, Dr. Strangelove, Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper rails about the destruction fluorides are wreaking on the “pure blood of pure Americans.” Of course, General Ripper is fleshed out as a crazy right-wing fanatic. He’s ready and willing to start a nuclear war. How odd. Apparently unknown to the Strangelove script writers, fluorides were, in fact, very toxic and were an integral part of the program that created atomic bombs in the first place…
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
Trackback from your site.
Robert Hanes
| #
Shall we not condemn fake news and promote chemical conspiracy theories through the use of lumping the properties of a highly toxic, fluorine gas with a sodium salt of fluoride ion. Sure, lets debate the efficacy of fluoride to strengthen enamel, but the author’s credibility is completely self destroyed by comparing two completely different chemicals with the intent of persuading the audience that all fluoride is the same as fluorine gas.
Reply
Squidly
| #
Agreed!
Reply
K. Kaiser
| #
Dear Mr. Rappoport,
Your missive makes for interesting reading, primarily because of the (unfortunately) widespread lack of understanding of even the most basic chemistry. I surmise that you never received that teaching.
Though Dr. Robert Hanes (also a chemist) has already commented on your fake news; I wish to add to that:
There is a vast difference between the “fluorides” (like in tooth pastes) and uranium hexafluoride. This space is insufficient to present years of chemistry teachings, so let me give you just a few pointers:
1) The fluoride “anion” is widespread in nature. It occurs in nature most commonly in the mineral “Fluorite” (CaF2, molecular weight 78). This is a salt of calcium (2+) cations with two fluoride (F-) anions. Such salts are typically crystalline substances of high melting (or decomposition) point, for Fluorite, that is 1403 F (~1000 C). Such salts cannot be turned into gas.
2) Uranium hexafluoride (UF6, molecular weight 352) does not occur in nature, it is strictly a synthetic compound. Despite its much higher molecular weight, it is melting at a comparatively low temperature (294 F) and (by heating) can easily be turned into a gas. In fact, it sublimes (turns into gas without first melting) at 134 F. This property of UF6 is used to enrich uranium isotopes.
Unfortunately, your problems of lack of basic knowledge and understanding do not appear to be limited to chemistry alone. In my perception, you do not understand the basic principles of toxicology either.
Fluorine (F2) and its next neighbor in the same group in the Periodic Table, chlorine (Cl2), are gaseous elements that are not normally found in nature (there may be small concentration in the mission from volcanos), simply for the reason that both are very reactive materials. For simplicity here, I’ll use the example of chlorine, respectively chlorides.
a) You certainly don’t want to breathe-in chlorine gas. It was used in WWI as a chemical weapon.
b) In contrast, you consume chloride (Cl-) anions every time you add some “table salt” from the salt shaker that you find on just about every restaurant table all around the world. Of course, as with all (even good) things, too much of it is bad. I understand that in ancient China, foes of the regime were made to eat a pound of table salt, resulting in subsequent painful death.
Reply
UarCOokoo
| #
There is the natural fluoride in nature, but what is the sodium fluoride that they use in tooth paste, is it derived straight from nature or perhaps its a poisonous side product of some industry? Cut the shit Fluoride they want us to use is bad for our brains same as the toxic vaccines. There is hell to pay if this ever gets into the mainstream.
Reply