 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / September 2005Infant formula, mass child abuse, EPA - and kids' teeth 'gross enough to gag a maggot'
INFANT FORMULA, MASS CHILD ABUSE, EPA - and KIDS¹ TEETH ³GROSS ENOUGH TO GAG A MAGGOT² PREGNANT WOMEN: Try to breastfeed. If you must formula feed - do NOT reconstitute infant formula with fluoridated water. See the "significant public health risk" warning below. To protest the ongoing fluoridation crime, go to the very end of this post. ATTENTION OREGON ATTY GEN¹L HARDY MYERS via hardy.myers@state.or.us Please immediately stop the injection of the cumulative poison fluoride into Oregon¹s water supply (euphemism ³water fluoridation²). CDC will help. See quote below. KIDS¹ TEETH ³GROSS ENOUGH TO GAG A MAGGOT² In April 1985 an EPA employee was being forced to write lies about the water poisoning euphemistically known as ³water fluoridation²... Carton and Hirzy [1998] write: ³When [Dr. Carton] saw him in the hallway, [the EPA employee] looked disgusted...He said he was writing the fluoride regulation and didn't believe a thing he was writing. He had to carry on, however, because it was his job. To put it another way, it was his duty to obey... ³When the fluoride regulation was published, [the EPA employee] did protest with an unsigned, tongue-in-cheek press release¹ that was circulated among the staff: "...Up to now EPA...has regulated fluoride in order to prevent children from having teeth which looked like they had been chewing brown shoe polish and rocks...EPA...has decided to...allow 40% of all children to have teeth gross enough to gag a maggot...² Carton and Hirzy [1998] concluded: ³...We are unable to present all the details of scientific fraud that occurred...² --Robert J. Carton, Ph.D. --J. William Hirzy, Ph.D. National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 280 Washington, D.C. June 1998 http://www.slweb.org/naep-code.html OREGON ATTY GEN¹L HARDY MYERS: MASS CHILD ABUSE See Why the EPA Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation By Dr. J. William Hirzy, 9/7/2005 10:47:21 AM http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?f1c0dff9-1842-4ccc-b8bf-81922a560d5 e See also: A dentist's child abuse crime (also: Pregnant citizens: URGENT) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/3859 As I¹ve previously noted... INFANT FORMULA DANGER (IN FLUORIDATED COMMUNITIES) PREGNANT WOMEN...and Oregon Atty Gen'l Hardy Myers via hardy.myers@state.or.us... ³Significant public health risk,² according to the Burlington, VT Board of Health (via Michael Connett): "[T]he entire Board holds serious concerns about the current fluoride exposure of infants between the ages of zero and six months. We deem this exposure to be a 'significant public health risk'... The Board assumes that once informed about the dangers of fluoride and when directed to or given alternative sources of non-fluoridated water, parents would gladly stop using tap water. It is our advice that Burlington immediately finds and uses all possible means to better educate parents of newborns and young infants about the hazard of fluoride. We also urge consideration of our suggestion to provide non-fluoridated water to parents who are currently receiving assistance from WIC or similar support services. This small but critical group of citizens deserves our help to avoid being harmed." --Board of Health, Burlington, VT via Michael Connett (See the BOH report at: <http://www.fluoridealert.org/burlington-boh2005.pdf>http://www.fluoridealer t.org/burlington-boh2005.pdf ) Michael Connett's Sept. 8, 2005 report came via Dr. Paul Connett's FAN Bulletin #335. NOTE: Anita Knight and George Glasser write about the added danger of SOY infant formula in ³Charlie¹s Story²: ³Journals regularly publish new findings about soy infant formula. It is now known that the product contains high concentrations of aluminum, an acknowledged neurotoxic substance. Current research links the aluminum/fluoride combination with neurotoxicity and kidney damage.² http://home.att.net/~gtigerclaw/Charlie.html ALSO... BONE CANCER IN BOYS AND FLUORIDATION Eleven EPA professional/employee unions representing 7,000 EPA employees were recently moved to ask Congress to stop fluoridation immediately because of recently revealed epidemiologic evidence that boys drinking water with the cumulative poison fluoride ("fluoridated" water) can suffer a 700% greater risk of osteosarcoma than boys not drinking water with the poison in it. THE KICKER: The fluoride poison works TOPICALLY (if at all); it doesn't even need to be in the water. People who want the poison for their teeth can brush with fluoridated/poisoned toothpaste. (Fluoridated toothpaste is indeed poisoned. There is a fluoride poison warning on every label. To read the warning, go to www.aquasafe.us.) ATTY GEN¹L HARDY: NO NEED TO PROSECUTE THE OBVIOUS WATER POISONING CRIME JUST STOP IT - WRITE A CEASE AND DESIST LETTER TO ALL OREGON MUNICIPALITIES THAT ARE POISONING PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES. CDC WILL HELP... TWO KEY FACTS: 1. CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ATSDR "work[s] with states and other federal agencies to prevent exposure to hazardous substances from waste sites." http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/DRO/r 1.html 2. Hazardous substances (hydrofluorosilicic acid, arsenic and lead) - derived from waste sites (phosphate fertilizer pollution scrubbers) - are being injected into America's water supply. (Some municipalities are using "pure" poison - sodium fluoride.) Hardy, please alert attorney generals in every state to the ongoing scientific fraud/mass child abuse. As usual, I must note that stopping the water poisoning crime is not my focus. My focus is stopping obstetricians from closing birth canals up to 30% and from robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. See Arresting obstetricians - Lt. Bill Hunt: 11165PC Suspected (Mass) Child Abuse Report http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/3848 Please stop those massive crimes too, Hardy. Thanks, Sincerely, Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon todd@chiromotion.com PS USENET READERS: Sign the petition at: http://www.powalliance.org/petition/index.html Please leave a comment urging Members of Congress to demand that **state attorney generals** stop the mass water poisoning crime so Congress doesn¹t need to get involved. This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet archive. Search http://groups.google.com for ³Infant formula, mass child abuse, EPA - and kids¹ teeth gross enough to gag a maggot¹² "!STOP !Nursing! !Home! !Abuse! TOO, ~ Folly C-SECTION DOESN'T PREVENT URINARY INCONTINENCE? See the very end of this post... EPA vs. THE ELDERLY... Many people are in nursing homes in part because of urinary and/or fecal incontinence... Some people might be in nursing homes in part because of EPA scientific fraud that kept their drinking water poisoned.... Carton and Hirzy [1998] write: "[T]here is every reason to believe that the increasing numbers of people with carpal-tunnel syndrome and arthritic-like pains are due to the mass fluoridation of drinking water..." --Robert J. Carton, Ph.D. --J. William Hirzy, Ph.D. National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 280 Washington, D.C. June 1998 http://www.slweb.org/naep-code.html This notion that some people might be in nursing homes in part because EPA poisoned their drinking water occurred to me after I wrote: Infant formula, mass child abuse, EPA - and kids' teeth 'gross enough to gag a maggot' http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/3864 TWITTERING ONE at twitteringone@aol.com replied: > "!STOP > > !Nursing! !Home! !Abuse! > > TOO, > ~ Folly Twittering One's point is well taken. One indirect way to stop nursing home abuse is to prevent for as long as possible any elder abuse which puts people in nursing homes in the first place. Forcing people to take medication all their lives - medication which may be causing musculoskeletal problems - might be considered a form of early elder abuse. Interestingly, the common law doctrine of informed consent indicates that even if fluoridation PREVENTS musculoskeletal problems - it is assault and battery to give it without consent. LOOK WHAT EPA DID... SCIENTIFIC FRAUD... FULLER EXCERPT OF CARTON AND HIRZY [1998]: ...Like dental fluorosis, skeletal fluorosis is the result of fluoride interfering with the normal production and remineralization of collagen. When discussing this disease, experts inevitably refer back to the classic 1937 study by Dr. Kaj Roholm on Danish cryolite workers. 21 Summarizing Roholm's work, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) described three progressive stages of the disease. 22 In Phase 1, X-rays begin to show changes in the bones of the pelvis and vertebrae. By the time Phase 3 (CSF) is reached, all bones are affected, particularly cancellous bones, and the bones in the extremities are thickened. There is also considerable calcification of the ligaments of neck and vertebral column. In some cases, the vertebrae in the spine are actually fused. Phase 1 is not just a subclinical stage of the disease seen on X-rays. Roholm found that 10 of 26 workers with Phase 1 had rheumatic pains compared to 1 of 11 workers with no sign of osteosclerosis in their x-rays. Half of all workers with Phase 1 and 2 had a reduced ability to rotate their upper torso. Workers exposed for as little as 2.4 years had Phase 1 of the disease, exposure for 4.8 years for Phase 2, and 11.2 years for Phase 3. EPA inexplicably set the standard based only on the third Phase, CSF. From a professional health point of view, it is impossible to claim that arthritic pains and reduced body flexibility are not adverse health effects. One can only conclude that not considering Phases 1 and 2 skeletal fluorosis was done to avoid a conflict with current health policy, i.e. its unequivocal pronouncement of safety for water fluoridation. The Daily Dose and Time Required to Cause CSF In his letter transmitting the final report of the Committee to EPA, Surgeon General Koop said that arthritis and CSF both begin to occur simultaneously, when fluoride consumption exceeds 20 mg/day. He also added the caveat that it takes more than 20 years to cause these effects. His assertion differed from the conclusion of the National Academy of Science, which also was a source of advice to EPA on this matter. The NAS, according to EPA in the proposed regulation, reported that it takes only 10 years to cause CSF at a dose of 20 mg/day. EPA, however, decided in the proposed regulation to use Dr. Koop's numbers: ". . .EPA agrees with the Surgeon General that crippling skeletal fluorosis is an adverse health effect which results from intakes of fluoride of 20 mg/day over periods of 20 years or more." Two concerned citizens have identified some serious problems with both the NAS and EPA claims of the dose/time necessary to cause CSF. Ms. Martha Bevis of the Safe Water Foundation of Texas could not find where the 20 mg/day was actually derived. Going back to the original work by Roholm she found that he mentioned a figure of 0.2 mg per kg of body weight, which for the standard 70 kg man would translate into 14 mg. Ms. Darlene Sherrell went further and found that, in 1979, Dr. Hodge had changed his much quoted dose/time figures to a minimum of 10 mg/day for 10-20 years. 23 (emphasis added) EPA referenced the 1979 paper, but used the Surgeon General's figures which were higher for reasons that can only be considered suspect. (Note: While EPA has not yet corrected its figures to correspond to Hodge's reduced figures, the NAS did so in 199324.) There is another serious deficiency with the dose/time figures used by EPA. The Act requires the regulations to protect everyone, not just 20-year-olds. The Committee stated in its final report that "Fluoride in bone increase with age and linearly in relation to fluoride intake." Therefore, it would seem logical to conclude that if 20 mg caused CSF in 20 years, then 10 mg would cause CSF in 40 years. Simple arithmetic tells you that only 5.7 mg a day for a lifetime of 70 years could cause CSF. This calculation was never done. If it were done (starting with the correct figures of 10 mg/day for 10 years) fluoridation would be stopped today. Fluoride Dose from Current Standard of 4 mg/l. In proposing the RMCL of 4 mg/l, EPA noted that 1% of the population drink more than 5.5 liters/day. This means these individuals could be ingesting 22 mg/day or more from drinking water alone. Since EPA stated unequivocally that 20 mg/day for 20 or more years caused CSF (forgetting for a moment that these figures are incorrect), EPA admitted to violating the Act which requires the standard to be set so that no one is at risk of an adverse health effect, in this case CSF. Although the raw data about water consumption were contained in the proposed regulation, the simple calculation presented here was nowhere to be found. In reality, most water supplies that are not contaminated with industrial pollution, have low levels of naturally occurring fluoride. Surface waters generally average about 0.2 mg/l. Where fluoride is added to water (which is 65% of the country), the level is raised to approximately 1.0 mg/l. Based on Roholms' work and other recent studies, there is every reason to believe that the increasing numbers of people with carpal-tunnel syndrome and arthritic-like pains are due to the mass fluoridation of drinking water... ...We are unable to present all the details of scientific fraud that occurred... >>>>>>END excerpt of Carton and Hirzy [1998] TO END FLUORIDATION... TWO KEY FACTS... 1. CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ATSDR "work[s] with states and other federal agencies to prevent exposure to hazardous substances from waste sites." http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/DRO/r 1.html 2. Hazardous substances (hydrofluorosilicic acid, arsenic and lead) - derived from waste sites (phosphate fertilizer pollution scrubbers) - are being injected into America's water supply. (Some municipalities are using "pure" poison - sodium fluoride.) State attorney generals should immediately begin working with CDC and end fluoridation immediately. USENET READERS: Please sign the petition at: http://www.powalliance.org/petition/index.html Please leave a comment urging Members of Congress to demand that **state attorney generals** stop the mass water poisoning crime so Congress doesn¹t need to get involved. BACK TO NURSING HOMES... Some elderly develop incontinence in nursing homes... Wisconsin researchers recently found that the use of patient restraints in nursing homes is the most significant cause for the development of incontinence in nursing homes... --Maturitas. 2005 Sep 16;52(1):26-31. Epub 2005 Jan 19. PubMed abstract The development of incontinence is a factor that sends some women TO nursing homes... As some readers may be aware, my focus is stopping obstetricians from closing birth canals up to 30% and from robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. See Arresting obstetricians - Lt. Bill Hunt: 11165PC Suspected (Mass) Child Abuse Report http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/3848 Just now when I went to look for evidence that vaginal birth increased the prevalence of urinary incontinence, I found evidence that it doesn't, as in, "Cesarean section does not decrease the risk of urinary or fecal incontinence compared to pregnancy with a vaginal delivery." Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Aug;193(2):512-7; discussion 517-8. McKinnie V, Swift SE, Wang W, Woodman P, O'Boyle A, Kahn M, Valley M, Bland D, Schaffer J. Korean nurses [Oh and Kim, 2005] recently indicated that severity of urinary incontinence is increased with multiple experiences of vaginal delivery... "In women above 60 years old, multiparity, and multiple experiences of vaginal delivery tended to present a higher level of severity of urinary incontinence." Oh HS, Kim MK. Taehan Kanho Hakhoe Chi. 2005 Jun;35(3):469-77. PubMed abstract Klein et al. [2005] reported: "Primiparous women reported unspecified UI at 3 months postpartum more often (17.9%) in the VB group than in the CS group (6.4%). This difference remained significant whether or not there was a prior history of UI. Multiparous women showed no difference in rates of UI (VB 17.1% vs. CS 16.0%), whether there was a prior history of UI or not. Stress incontinence was greater among primiparous women in the VB group (VB 34.5% vs. CS 12.8%) regardless of prior UI history, but the proportion of women whose UI was severe enough to wear a pad was similar in primiparous women (VB 16.0%, CS 15.4%) and multiparous women (VB 23.8%, CS 25.0%)..." Klein et al. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2005 Apr;27(4):332-9. PubMed abstract Whatever the cause of incontinence - it makes NO sense for obstetricians to close birth canals the "extra" up to 30%. See again: Arresting obstetricians - Lt. Bill Hunt: 11165PC Suspected (Mass) Child Abuse Report http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/3848 Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon I'll copy the Korean nurses (Oh et al.) via hsoh@inha.ac.kr This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "C-section doesn't prevent urinary incontinence (also: EPA vs. the elderly)" todd@chiromotion.com > C-SECTION DOESN'T PREVENT URINARY INCONTINENCE? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Many people are in nursing homes in part because of urinary and/or fecal > incontinence... Don't forget about the women who are in nursing homes because they have urinary & fecal incontinence from episiotomies performed because their birth canals were closed by up to 30%.  SignatureAmy Mum to Carlos born sleeping 20/11/02, & Ana born screaming 30/06/04 http://www.freewebs.com/carlos2002/ http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/ana%5Fj%5F2004/ My blog: http://spaces.msn.com/members/querer-hijo-querer-hija/ >> C-SECTION DOESN'T PREVENT URINARY INCONTINENCE? >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > urinary & fecal incontinence from episiotomies performed because their birth > canals were closed by up to 30%. Amy, Fecal incontinence is likely associated with episiotomy and urinary incontinence with forceps use. But both of these interventions are senselessly applied with birth canals closed the "extra" up to 30%. Todd In misc.kids.pregnancy Todd Gastaldo <tgastaldo@earthlink.net> wrote: : Amy, : Fecal incontinence is likely associated with episiotomy and urinary : incontinence with forceps use. : But both of these interventions are senselessly applied with birth canals : closed the "extra" up to 30%. : Todd And for thsoe of you who are wise enough to avoid these thing, there is still more that you can do to avoid or even stop ongoing urinary incontinence. Kegels! This is one of the more effective things you can do to strengthen the pelvic floor! Larry |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.