Archive for Cancer

Toxic Levels of Arsenic Found in Popular Juice Brands pt5

Posted in Attack on the Republic, Business, Cancer, Corruption, General, Life Improvement, Multi-National Corporations, News, Poison Foods and Products with tags , , , , , , , , on December 2, 2011 by truthwillrise


A Chronic Problem

Arsenic has been notoriously used as a poison since ancient times. A fatal poisoning would require a single dose of inorganic arsenic about the weight of a postage stamp. But chronic toxicity can result from long-term exposure to much lower levels in food, and even to water that meets the 10-ppb drinking-water limit.

A 2004 study of children in Bangladesh suggested diminished intelligence based on test scores in children exposed to arsenic in drinking water at levels above 5 ppb, says study author Joseph Graziano, Ph.D., a professor of environmental health sciences and pharmacology at Columbia University. He’s now conducting similar research with children living in New Hampshire and Maine, where arsenic levels of 10 to 100 ppb are commonly found in well water, to determine whether better nutrition in the United States affects the results.

People with private wells may face greater risks than those on public systems because they’re responsible for testing and treating their own water. In Maine, where almost half the population relies on private wells, the USGS found arsenic levels in well water as high as 3,100 ppb.

And a study published in 2011 in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health examined the long-term effects of low-level exposure on more than 300 rural Texans whose groundwater was estimated to have arsenic at median levels below the federal drinking-water standard. It found that exposure was related to poor scores in language, memory, and other brain functions.

“I suspect there is an awful lot of chronic, low-level arsenic poisoning going on that’s never properly diagnosed.”—Michael Harbut, M.D.

Toxic Levels of Arsenic Found in Popular Juice Brands pt4

Posted in Attack on the Republic, Business, Cancer, Corruption, Economy, General, Life Improvement, Multi-National Corporations, News, Poison Foods and Products, Truth/Freedom with tags , , , , , on December 2, 2011 by truthwillrise

Answering a Crucial Question

We also wanted to know whether people who drink juice end up being exposed to more arsenic than those who don’t.

So we commissioned an analysis of data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), conducted annually by the National Center for Health Statistics. Information is collected on the health and nutrition of a nationally representative sample of the U.S. population, based on interviews and physical exams that may include a blood or urine test. Officials and researchers often use the data to determine risk factors for major diseases and develop public health policy. In fact, data on lead in the blood of NHANES participants were instrumental in developing policies that have successfully resulted in lead being removed from gasoline.

Our analysis was led by Richard Stahlhut, M.D., M.P.H., an environmental health researcher at the University of Rochester with expertise in NHANES data, working with Consumer Reports statisticians. Ana Navas-Acien, M.D., Ph.D., a physician—epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health, also provided guidance. She was the lead author of a 2008 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association that first linked low-level arsenic exposure with the prevalence of type 2 diabetes in the United States.

Stahlhut reviewed NHANES data from 2003 through 2008 from participants tested for total urinary arsenic who reported their food and drink consumption for 24 hours the day before their NHANES visit. Because most ingested arsenic is excreted in urine, the best measure of recent exposure is a urine test.

Following Navas-Acien’s advice, we excluded from our NHANES analysis anyone with results showing detectable levels of arsenobetaine, the organic arsenic in seafood. That made the results we analyzed more likely to represent inorganic arsenic, of greatest concern in terms of potential health risks.

The resulting analysis of almost 3,000 study participants found that those reporting apple-juice consumption had on average 19 percent greater levels of total urinary arsenic than those subjects who did not, and those who reported drinking grape juice had 20 percent higher levels. The results might understate the correlation between juice consumption and urinary arsenic levels because NHANES urinary data exclude children younger than 6, who tend to be big juice drinkers.

“The current analysis suggests that these juices may be an important contributor to dietary arsenic exposure,” says Keeve Nachman, Ph.D., a risk scientist at the Center for a Livable Future and the Bloomberg School of Public Health, both at Johns Hopkins University. “It would be prudent to pursue measures to understand and limit young children’s exposures to arsenic in juice.”

Robert Wright, M.D., M.P.H., associate professor of pediatrics and environmental health at Harvard University who specializes in research on the effect of heavy-metals exposure in children, says that findings from our juice tests and database analysis concern him: “Because of their small size, a child drinking a box of juice would consume a larger per-body-weight dose of arsenic than an adult drinking the exact same box of juice. Those brands with elevated arsenic should investigate the source and eliminate it.”

Toxic Levels of Arsenic Found in Popular Juice Brands pt 2

Posted in Attack on the Republic, Business, Cancer, Corruption, Economy, General, News, Poison Foods and Products with tags , , , , , , , on December 2, 2011 by truthwillrise


Other Dietary Exposures

In addition to juice, foods including chicken, rice, and even baby food have been found to contain arsenic—sometimes at higher levels than the amounts found in juice. Brian Jackson, Ph.D., an analytical chemist and research associate professor at Dartmouth College, presented his findings at a June 2011 scientific conference in Aberdeen, Scotland. He reported finding up to 23 ppb of arsenic in lab tests of name-brand jars of baby food, with inorganic arsenic representing 70 to 90 percent of those total amounts.

Similar results turned up in a 2004 study conducted by FDA scientists in Cincinnati, who found arsenic levels of up to 24 ppb in baby food, with sweet potatoes, carrots, green beans, and peaches containing only the inorganic form. A United Kingdom study published in 2008 found that the levels of inorganic arsenic in 20-ounce packets of dried infant rice cereals ranged from 60 to 160 ppb. Rice-based infant cereals are often the first solid food that babies eat.

Rice frequently contains high levels of inorganic arsenic because it is among plants that are unusually efficient at taking up arsenic from the soil and incorporating it in the grains people eat. Moreover, much of the rice produced in the U.S. is grown in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Texas, on land formerly used to grow cotton, where arsenical pesticides were used for decades.

“Initially, in some regions rice planted there produced little grain due to these arsenical pesticides, but farmers then bred a type of rice specifically designed to produce high yields on the contaminated soil,” says Andrew Meharg, professor of biogeochemistry at the University of Aberdeen, in Scotland. Meharg studies human exposures to arsenic in the environment. His research over the past six years has shown that U.S. rice has among the highest average inorganic arsenic levels in the world—almost three times higher than levels in Basmati rice imported from low-arsenic areas of Nepal, India, and Pakistan. Rice from Egypt has the lowest levels of all.

Infant rice cereal for the U.S. market is generally made from U.S. rice, Meharg says, but labeling usually doesn’t specify country of origin. He says exposure to arsenic through infant rice cereals could be reduced greatly if cereal makers used techniques that don’t require growing rice in water-flooded paddies or if they obtained rice from low-arsenic areas. His 2007 study found that median arsenic levels in California rice were 41 percent lower than levels in rice from the south-central U.S.

Cancer: A Disease of Civilization

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on November 29, 2010 by truthwillrise

Cancer: A Disease of Civilization
October 19th, 2010
Posted in History . Medicine
By Daniel Castellano

The only thing surprising about the Villanova study indicating that “cancer-causing factors are limited to societies affected by modern industrialization” is that this is actually considered news. It has long been known that the incidence of cancer is extremely small in pre-industrial societies, nearly non-existent. In order to defend the current culture of emphasizing intervention over prevention, oncologists and others have argued that this is only an artifact of people living longer. The oft-repeated excuse that ancient people rarely lived to be more than 30 is profoundly ignorant and misleading.

When we say that ancient societies had life expectancies of 30 or so, this does not mean that people typically died around age 30. This is an average life expectancy at birth, a figure that is heavily skewed downward by a high infant mortality rate. Those who reached adulthood could reasonably expect to live into their 40s or 50s, and many lived to be over 70. This is why, when you read ancient Greek and Roman texts, such as the lives of the philosophers, there is nothing considered remarkable about living to eighty years old, and it is considered tragic if someone dies in their thirties. The “life expectancy” was much shorter, but the lifespan of man was just as long. People didn’t start having their bodies break down at age 45 just because the average life expectancy was shorter.

The same is true among Native Americans, for which we have a better record, since they lived in technologically primitive conditions until relatively recently. Nonetheless, they were noted for their health and longevity. Plenty of seventeenth century documents attest to the long lives of the Indians in Mexico, for example, where there were many who lived to well over eighty, including some reputed centenarians. The Inuit had no incidence of cancer whatsoever, despite living long enough to develop it (after all, we start screening for cancer at age 40, or 50 at the latest). It was only in the twentieth century that cancer became prevalent among the Inuit, when they adopted modern diet and a sedentary lifestyle.

In the mid-twentieth century, it used to be thought that men having heart attacks at 50 was just something that happens as part of the aging process, but now we know that early heart disease is fully preventable, being a consequence of behavior: diet and lack of exercise. Drug companies and doctors who advocate surgical interventions downplay prevention, since selling you the cure is much more lucrative. To this day, there is little emphasis on nutrition in medical school, and little serious research into the toxicity of processed food except in simplistic dose-response studies. Our bodies are complex organisms, and there are likely many interaction factors among substances that, by themselves, may appear harmless.

The Villanova researchers do not do themselves any favors when they make the excessive claim that “There is nothing in the natural environment that can cause cancer.” Still, the natural incidence of cancer among animals is astonishingly low, especially for a disease that is supposedly just a natural consequence of living long. Animals kept in captivity, protected from predation, can live their full natural lifespan, so we should certainly expect to see a significant incidence of cancer among them, but we do not. Up until the eighteenth century, cancer was comparably rare among humans. Indeed, when you read older documents mentioning a “cancer,” they are often referring to gangrene or some other degenerative growth. Cancer as we know it was extremely rare, though there were plenty of people who lived to old age.

The real turning point appears to have been in the last few centuries. The hallmarks of societies that have what we now consider “normal” cancer rates are consumption of refined sugars and carbohydrates (following the discovery of the Americas), tobacco use, giving first childbirth later in life, and universal use of toxic pesticides and other pollutants. The sheer abundance of toxins in our food makes it practically impossible to single out a cause in a simple dose-response relationship, which is why countless harmful things, each of which is minimally harmful, are allowed to remain on the market.

The embarrassing fact that many of the technological niceties which are forced upon us ostensibly to improve our lives (but in fact to reduce the cost of production and increase profit) are actually killing us makes a mockery of medical science’s posturing as a sort of earthly salvation. The scientific establishment expects to be praised for saving us from diseases they created through their own uncritical hubris (“Don’t be silly, this won’t hurt you, you Luddite”). For those who are hoping for salvation through medical science, I should remind you that researchers are just flesh-and-blood human beings, vulnerable to vanity and self-aggrandizement. They understand perfectly well that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, or ten pounds of “treatment”. Modern medicine has judged it is much more profitable to sell you the ten pounds, and it’s hard to argue with their math, as the cancer industry is currently worth over $200 billion.

Sodium Fluoride Material Safety Data Sheet

Posted in New World Order, News, Poison Foods and Products with tags , , , , on July 7, 2010 by truthwillrise

For those of you who still refuse to believe that the fluoride that is being put in the water is poisonous. Read this.


He a lt h 2

Fire 0

Re a c t iv it y 0

Personal P r o t e c t io n


0 30

Material Safety Data Sheet Sodium fluoride MSDS

Section 1: Chemical Product and Company Identification

Product Name: Sodium fluoride Catalog Codes: SLS2260, SLS3682 CAS#: 7681-49-4 RTECS: WB0350010 TSCA: TSCA 8(b) inventory: Sodium fluoride CI#: Not available.

Synonym: Sodium Fluoride Powder, Reagent ACS; Sodium Fluoride Powder, USP, EP, BP; Sodium Hydrofluoride; Sodium Monofluoride

Chemical Name: Sodium Fluoride Chemical Formula: NaF

Contact Information:, Inc.

14025 Smith Rd. Houston, Texas 77396

US Sales: 1-800-901-7247 International Sales: 1-281-441-4400

Order Online: CHEMTREC (24HR Emergency Telephone), call:

1-800-424-9300 International CHEMTREC, call: 1-703-527-3887 For non-emergency assistance, call: 1-281-441-4400

Section 2: Composition and Information on Ingredients


Toxicological Data on Ingredients: Sodium fluoride: ORAL (LD50): Acute: 52 mg/kg [Rat]. 57 mg/kg [Mouse].



% by Weight

Sodium fluoride



Section 3: Hazards Identification

Potential Acute Health Effects:

Hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye contact (irritant, corrosive), of ingestion, of inhalation. Slightly hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive). Severe over-exposure can result in death.

Potential Chronic Health Effects:

CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS: A4 (Not classifiable for human or animal.) by ACGIH, 3 (Not classifiable for human.) by IARC. MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for mammalian somatic cells. Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast. TERATOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available. DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY: Not available. The substance may be toxic to kidneys, lungs, the nervous system, heart, gastrointestinal tract, cardiovascular system, bones, teeth. Repeated or prolonged exposure

to the substance can produce target organs damage. Repeated exposure to a highly toxic material may produce general deterioration of health by an accumulation in one or many human organs.

Section 4: First Aid Measures

p. 1

Eye Contact:

Check for and remove any contact lenses. In case of contact, immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. Cold water may be used. Get medical attention immediately.

Skin Contact:

In case of contact, immediately flush skin with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes while removing contaminated clothing and shoes. Cover the irritated skin with an emollient. Cold water may be used.Wash clothing before reuse. Thoroughly clean shoes before reuse. Get medical attention immediately.

Serious Skin Contact:

Wash with a disinfectant soap and cover the contaminated skin with an anti-bacterial cream. Seek immediate medical attention.


If inhaled, remove to fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Get medical attention.

Serious Inhalation:

Evacuate the victim to a safe area as soon as possible. Loosen tight clothing such as a collar, tie, belt or waistband. If breathing is difficult, administer oxygen. If the victim is not breathing, perform mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. Seek medical attention.


If swallowed, do not induce vomiting unless directed to do so by medical personnel. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Loosen tight clothing such as a collar, tie, belt or waistband. Get medical attention immediately.

Serious Ingestion: Not available.

Section 5: Fire and Explosion Data

Flammability of the Product: Non-flammable. Auto-Ignition Temperature: Not applicable. Flash Points: Not applicable. Flammable Limits: Not applicable.

Products of Combustion: Not available. Fire Hazards in Presence of Various Substances: Not applicable.

Explosion Hazards in Presence of Various Substances:

Risks of explosion of the product in presence of static discharge: Not available. Slightly explosive in presence of heat. Non- explosive in presence of shocks.

Fire Fighting Media and Instructions: Not applicable. Special Remarks on Fire Hazards: Not available. Special Remarks on Explosion Hazards: Containers may explode when heated

Section 6: Accidental Release Measures

Small Spill: Use appropriate tools to put the spilled solid in a convenient waste disposal container.

Large Spill:

Poisonous solid. Stop leak if without risk. Do not get water inside container. Do not touch spilled material. Use water spray to reduce vapors. Prevent entry into sewers, basements or confined areas; dike if needed. Call for assistance on disposal. Be careful that the product is not present at a concentration level above TLV. Check TLV on the MSDS and with local authorities.

Section 7: Handling and Storage

p. 2


Do not ingest. Do not breathe dust. In case of insufficient ventilation, wear suitable respiratory equipment. If ingested, seek medical advice immediately and show the container or the label. Avoid contact with skin and eyes. Keep away from incompatibles such as oxidizing agents, metals, acids, alkalis.

Storage: Keep container tightly closed. Keep container in a cool, well-ventilated area.

Section 8: Exposure Controls/Personal Protection

Engineering Controls:

Use process enclosures, local exhaust ventilation, or other engineering controls to keep airborne levels below recommended exposure limits. If user operations generate dust, fume or mist, use ventilation to keep exposure to airborne contaminants below the exposure limit.

Personal Protection:

Splash goggles. Lab coat. Dust respirator. Be sure to use an approved/certified respirator or equivalent. Gloves.

Personal Protection in Case of a Large Spill:

Splash goggles. Full suit. Dust respirator. Boots. Gloves. A self contained breathing apparatus should be used to avoid inhalation of the product. Suggested protective clothing might not be sufficient; consult a specialist BEFORE handling this product.

Exposure Limits:

TWA: 2.5 (mg/m3) from NIOSH Consult local authorities for acceptable exposure limits.

Section 9: Physical and Chemical Properties

Physical state and appearance: Solid. (Crystals solid. crystalline powder.) Odor: Odorless. Taste: Salty Molecular Weight: 41.99 g/mole

Color: White. pH (1% soln/water): Not available. Boiling Point: 1704°C (3099.2°F) Melting Point: 993°C (1819.4°F) Critical Temperature: Not available. Specific Gravity: 2.78 (Water = 1) Vapor Pressure: Not applicable. Vapor Density: Not available. Volatility: Not available. Odor Threshold: Not available. Water/Oil Dist. Coeff.: Not available. Ionicity (in Water): Not available. Dispersion Properties: See solubility in water.


Soluble in cold water, hot water. Solubility in water: 5g/100 ml @ 100 deg. C, 4.3 g/100 @ 25 deg C, 4.0 g/100 ml @ 15 deg. C. Very slighly soluble in alcohol.

p. 3

Section 10: Stability and Reactivity Data

Stability: The product is stable. Instability Temperature: Not available. Conditions of Instability: Incompatible materials, dust generation, excess heat Incompatibility with various substances: Reactive with oxidizing agents, metals, acids, alkalis. Corrosivity: Not available.

Special Remarks on Reactivity:

Contact with metals may evolve flammable hydrogen gas. Sodium reacts with acids to form hydrogen fluoride. Alkali fluorides (except lithium salt) absorb Sodium Fluoride to form acid fluorides.

Special Remarks on Corrosivity: Not available. Polymerization: Will not occur.

Section 11: Toxicological Information

Routes of Entry: Inhalation. Ingestion. Toxicity to Animals: Acute oral toxicity (LD50): 52 mg/kg [Rat].

Chronic Effects on Humans:

CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS: A4 (Not classifiable for human or animal.) by ACGIH, 3 (Not classifiable for human.) by IARC. MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for mammalian somatic cells. Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast. May cause damage to the following organs: kidneys, lungs, the nervous system, heart, gastrointestinal tract, cardiovascular system, bones, teeth.

Other Toxic Effects on Humans:

Hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye contact (corrosive), of ingestion, of inhalation. Slightly hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive).

Special Remarks on Toxicity to Animals:

Lowest Published Lethal Dose: LDL [Human] – Route: Oral; Dose: 71 mg/kg LDL [Woman] – Route: Oral; Dose: 90 mg/kg LDL [Woman] – Route: Oral; Dose: 360 mg/kg LDL [Mouse] – Route: Skinl; Dose: 300 mg/kg

Special Remarks on Chronic Effects on Humans:

May cause adverse reproductive effects (fertililty, fetoxicity), and birth defects based on animal data. May cause cancer based on animal data. May cause genetic (mutagenic) and tumorigenic effects.

Special Remarks on other Toxic Effects on Humans:

Acute Potential Health Effects: Skin: Causes skin irritation and possible burns, especially if skin is wet or moist. Eyes: Causes eye irritation and burns. May cause chemical conjunctivitis and corneal damage. Ingestion: Harmful if swallowed. Causes digestive (gastrointestinal) tract irritation and burns. May cause severe and permanent damage to the digestive. Ingestion of large amounts may cause salivation, thirst, nausea, vomiting, hypermotility, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. May affect behavior/ central nervous system/nervous system (headache, nervousness, dizziness, seizures, convulsions, tremor, muscle weakness, somnolence), respiration (respiratory depression, dyspnea), cardiovascular system (weak pulse, hypotension, dysrhythmias, cardiac arrest), liver, urinary system (polyuria, polydypsia) brain, metabolism (loss of appetite, hypcalcemia, hyperkalemia, hypomagnesia, ), teeth, bones, and blood (changes in red and white blood cell count, interference in blood coagulation) Inhalation: Causes irritation and chemical burns of the respiratory tract with coughing, breathing difficulty and possibly nasal septum perforation and coma. May affect bones. Chronic Potential Heath Effects: Chronic ingestion may cause fluorosis. Effects of fluorisis may include joint pain, weakness, limited joint mobility, brittle bones, ossifications on x-ray, thickening

of long bone cortices, calcificaiton of ligaments, osteomalacia, osteosclerosis (skeletal (bone and teeth) abnormalties) and mottled tooth enamel. Other symptoms may include anemia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea or constipation, kidney damage and weight loss/anorexia. Chronic inhalation may cause bronchitis to develop with cough, phlegm, and/or shortness of breath. , liver (hepatic enzymes increased, jaundice), .

Section 12: Ecological Information

p. 4

Ecotoxicity: Not available. BOD5 and COD: Not available.

Products of Biodegradation:

Possibly hazardous short term degradation products are not likely. However, long term degradation products may arise. Toxicity of the Products of Biodegradation: The products of degradation are less toxic than the product itself. Special Remarks on the Products of Biodegradation: Not available.

Federal and State Regulations:

California prop. 65: This product contains the following ingredients for which the State of California has found to cause birth defects which would require a warning under the statute: No products were found. California prop. 65: This product contains the following ingredients for which the State of California has found to cause cancer which would require a warning under the statute: No products were found. Connecticut hazardous material survey.: Sodium fluoride Illinois chemical safety act: Sodium fluoride New York release reporting list: Sodium fluoride Rhode Island RTK hazardous substances: Sodium fluoride Pennsylvania RTK: Sodium fluoride Massachusetts RTK: Sodium fluoride Massachusetts spill list: Sodium fluoride New Jersey: Sodium fluoride New Jersey spill list: Sodium fluoride Louisiana spill reporting: Sodium fluoride California Director’s List of Hazardous Substances: Sodium fluoride TSCA 8(b) inventory: Sodium fluoride TSCA 8(a) PAIR: Sodium fluoride CERCLA: Hazardous substances.: Sodium fluoride: 1000 lbs. (453.6 kg)

Other Regulations:

OSHA: Hazardous by definition of Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200). EINECS: This product is on the European Inventory of Existing Commercial Chemical Substances.

Other Classifications:

WHMIS (Canada):

CLASS D-1B: Material causing immediate and serious toxic effects (TOXIC). CLASS D-2B: Material causing other toxic effects (TOXIC).


R25- Toxic if swallowed. R32- Contact with acids liberates very toxic gas. R36/38- Irritating to eyes and skin. S22- Do not breathe dust. S36- Wear suitable protective clothing. S45- In case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label where possible).

HMIS (U.S.A.): Health Hazard: 2 Fire Hazard: 0 Reactivity: 0

Section 13: Disposal Considerations

Waste Disposal:

Waste must be disposed of in accordance with federal, state and local environmental control regulations.

Section 14: Transport Information

DOT Classification: CLASS 6.1: Poisonous material. Identification: : Sodium fluoride UNNA: 1690 PG: III Special Provisions for Transport: Not available.

Section 15: Other Regulatory Information

p. 5

Personal Protection: E National Fire Protection Association (U.S.A.):

Health: 3 Flammability: 0 Reactivity: 0 Specific hazard:

Protective Equipment:

Gloves. Lab coat. Dust respirator. Be sure to use an approved/certified respirator or equivalent. Wear appropriate respirator when ventilation is inadequate. Splash goggles.

Section 16: Other Information

References: Not available. Other Special Considerations: Not available. Created: 10/11/2005 12:34 PM Last Updated: 11/06/2008 12:00 PM

The information above is believed to be accurate and represents the best information currently available to us. However, we make no warranty of merchantability or any other warranty, express or implied, with respect to such information, and we assume no liability resulting from its use. Users should make their own investigations to determine the suitability of the information for their particular purposes. In no event shall be liable for any claims, losses, or damages of any third party or for lost profits or any special, indirect, incidental, consequential or exemplary damages, howsoever arising, even if has been advised of the possibility of such damages.

p. 6

The Hidden Agenda: The Fluoride Deception

Posted in Attack on Freedom, Fiat Currency, International Bankers, Life Improvement, New World Order, Poison Foods and Products, Secret Societies, Shadow Government with tags , , , , , , , , on December 19, 2009 by truthwillrise

Dr. Stanley Monteith goes over the history of fluoride, its use, its dangers and its promotion over time. Why something that is rejected by so many nations is promoted here in the USA. Learn about the Hidden Agenda behind the use of Fluoride, who’s behind it and the real purpose behind its use. Shocking video.