By Anna Von Reitz
I think we are all familiar with the idea of “Robber Barons” — they used to build castles and block passes through the mountains, forcing merchants and other travelers to pay tolls and protection fees, etc.
These early racketeers feeding off the merchant class were reprised in the 19th Century, but now instead of blocking mountain passes, the Robber Barons set their sites on creating monopolies and commodity rigging schemes, obstructive transfer schemes and “beneficial public and private partnerships”.
These Robber Barons wore really nice suits, were often affable, and highly educated. They used their money and social positions to gain access to public opinion-makers, whether that meant newspapers or professional organizations, and from within these organizations by means of bribes of various kinds, were able to twist both public and professional “opinion” to their benefit.
As someone once put it, “Training the American Bar Association to commit crimes was as easy as training dogs to beg for treats.”
And here thanks to a soul doing actual investigative journalism, we have a very enlightening example from Professor of Dentistry P.P. Hujoel who published a paper exposing exactly how the American Dental Association was effortlessly misled into reversing its position on Fluoridation and the use of Fluoride in dental products, with nothing but spending influence and banal conversation.
What is so damning about this discovery is that the source documents, 1940’s era meeting minutes and documents of the American Dental Association, show the seduction of reason by self-interest, in appalling detail. The end result has been exposing generations of Americans to an active biological poison — fluoride, and that exposure is still routine and ongoing based on nothing more than casual observations having nothing to do with science.
Read this commentary and shake your head. After reading this synopsis, one can easily imagine a Bill Gates or other Billionaire reading “The Population Bomb”, being scared silly by this quasi-scientific tripe written by a man who obviously wasn’t a scientist — but was a “Professor at Stanford” — and, by talking it up with other billionaires, creating the whole cruel idiocy of “depopulation planning” based on nothing but already disproven and decidedly non-scientific nonsense.
And the same kind of self-interested influence peddling could easily account for the politicization of science that has been going on ever since.
That’s what turned a poisonous by-product of Aluminum processing into a viable and profitable side product and got it into our mouths and adrenal glands. Wouldn’t it be interesting to research whether or not Kellogg had investments in Aluminum mining and processing — that were perhaps in a slump after losing war time demand for new airplanes and bombs?
I am reposting this from a dentist friend who is also an inventor of dental products that actually do help people.
1940s Documents Show Sugar Industry Captured Dentistry, Pushed Fluoride
Culling truth from History…
An examination of the records of the American Dental Association has revealed the key role of business interests in converting dentistry from a guild that opposed fluoride and a diet rich in refined carbohydrates to one that favored both, according to a new paper by University of Washington Dental School Professor P.P. Hujoel in the Nutrients journal.
Hujoel ties the promotion of water fluoridation and fluoride pills to an alignment of dentistry with the cereal industry, with the result that “Leading global organizations currently recommend fluoride supplementation because they recommend high carbohydrate diets which can cause dental caries. Low-carbohydrate diets prevent dental caries making such fluoride recommendations largely unnecessary.”
Hujoel reports that key personnel and management changes in the dental guild, influenced by the cereal industry, including the replacement of editor of the Journal of the American Dental Association, coincided with the complete reversal of dentistry’s opposition to fluoride.
“Internal documents show that private interests motivated the events which led these expert panels to engage in pivotal scientific reversals. These private interests biased scientific processes and these reversals occurred largely in an absence of supporting evidence,” he wrote.
He highlights a change in the ADA’s view of the safety of topical fluoride applications as a crucial development in the acceptance of the toxin.
“A pivotal reversal which helped to open the gates to the fluoride-supplemented high carbohydrate dietary guidelines occurred in 1947. In 1944, 1945 and 1946, the ADA’s official policy as published yearly in the Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA) was to discourage topical fluorides because in part “the full extent of their possible harmful effects” were not known.
In 1947, the ADA CDT [Council on Dental Therapeutics]—as will now be shown—reversed on their position on fluorides in the absence of apparent new data on safety. The new position became– that topical fluoride applied by dentists had “relative safety”, was effective, and could be recommended for a “highly susceptible population.” It was a watershed moment for fluoride as a universal therapeutic,” he wrote.
Hujoel highlights the role of the president of the Kellogg Foundation, who became the first chairman of the guild’s new Council on Dental Health in1942.
“This Kellogg president was not an insignificant person; he supervised 2.2 billion dollars inflation-adjusted donations from Kellogg (reported as 290 million dollars in 1970) during his subsequent 27-year tenure as president of the Kellogg Foundation….In an ADA Council on Dental Health meeting, the Kellogg president commented in a fluoride-related discussion how “the thyroid problem in Michigan has been almost completely overcome by compulsory addition of iodine to salt”, to which a committee member replied “that would solve the problem (i.e., dental caries)—compulsion”.
It is one of the early references to the view that dental caries could be the result of a fluoride deficiency, just like thyroid problems could be the result of an iodine deficiency, and that dental caries could be solved “with compulsory addition” of fluoride to the diet. One member of the ADA Research Committee wondered whether the introduction of fluoride in the water would “initiate any diseases” to which another committee member replied: “The beneficence is sufficient to warrant the chance.”
Has anyone checked the correlation between the addition of Fluoride to the nation’s drinking water in the 1940’s to the meteoric increase in cancer cases ever since?
It is certain that cancer was relatively unknown in this country prior to the First World War and as our diet and toxin exposure parameters have changed due to the vast increase of unnatural chemicals in our food, water, and environment caused by the use of chemicals like Fluoride in our drinking water, petroleum-based fungicides and insecticides and herbicides, petroleum-based fertilizers, the ubiquitous use of plastics, etc., we have experienced a phenomenal and inexplicable increase in cancer statistics.
The vectors causing the cancer phenomenon may be too varied and numerous to easily correlate, but then again, it could be just one “added factor” like Fluoride added to drinking water, that makes the rest of the chemical cocktail so deadly.
In science as in history, you never know until you start looking and thinking.