|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
July 26th 05, 09:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
The F Crime (#9): F dominoes finally falling?
THE F CRIME (#9): F DOMINOES FINALLY FALLING?
Paul Connett, PhD (www.fluoridealert.org) asks in today's FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin (#275): "Are the dominoes beginning to fall?" Paul quotes THE SUN CHRONICLE (Attelboro-North Attleboro, Massachusetts): "The board of health delivered an order to halt fluoridation of the town's water supply to the department of public works on Monday...Health board Chairwoman Diane Battistello drafted and hand-delivered the cease and desist order, which demands that fluoridation be stopped immediately..." http://www.thesunchronicle.com/artic...city/city2.txt (Paul Connett, PhD: Please see my note to you at the very end of this post.) THE F DOMINOES COULD SOON FALL FASTER... The F dominoes could soon fall faster as municipal chemotherapists (city, county and state elected officials) realize that **state attorney generals** could start issuing the cease and desist orders because it is a CRIME for MDs to force people to take medicine - even GOOD medicine (see THOR below). (Of course, administering medicine is the practice of medicine and most municipal chemotherapists aren't MDs - so they are illegally practicing medicine right out of the gate.) I don't want anyone prosecuted - I just want the mass water poisoning to stop in America and around the world. Since America pioneered the mass poisoning, America should finally lead the world in ending it - IMMEDIATELY. Readers: Please forward this post to your local illegal municipal chemotherapists (city, county, state elected officials). Urge them to stop their illegal water poisoning before the state attorney general has to... MD CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED It's rare - but an MD was criminally prosecuted - after the NY medical board only slapped his wrist... See the EINAUGLER case discussed below... NOTE: I am in favor of pardons in advance for MDs for the reason given below. CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OF MDs IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE... MONEY! BILLIONS PER YEAR! State attorney generals could use this post to prosecute America's MDs and nearly INSTANTLY save America BILLIONS per year - and simultaneously make birth easier. OREGON ATTY GENL HARDY MYERS ): 1. Please prosecute MDs finally for what they are doing to mothers and babies. 2. Please join me in calling for pardons in advance for MDs. As medical students, MDs are TRAINED to perform obvious felonies. See the obstetric baby strangling discussion below. IT'S INCREDIBLE what MDs are getting away with. 3. Please stop the injection of the cumulative poison fluoride into Oregon's water supply. THE F CRIME: Dentists are urging generally unlicensed municipal chemotherapists (city, county and state elected official) to commit the crime of medication without consent... "TOTALLY CRIMINAL" Dr. Hardy Limeback head of preventive dentistry at the University of Toronto used to promote fluoridation. Then Dr. Limeback finally looked at the research and started calling it "totally criminal." (Limeback was so quoted in Chris Bryson's 2004 book The Fluoride Deception.) KEY POINT: Putting the cumulative poison fluoride into people's drinking water against their consent is not just totally criminal because fluoride is a cumulative poison... As I recently wrote to Barry at www.polisource.com, Even were the cumulative poison fluoride to be demonstrated to be a GOOD medicine, it would still be a crime (battery) to administer it without consent. See again: The F Crime (#7): EPA's J. William Hirzy, PhD http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3750 Barry at www.polisource.com replied: Get one of your followers to take this to court and try to get a Cease and Desist themselves. There must be some anti-fluoride organization that has the money to assist someone in that, but they probably know they will lose. Barry, Wife-beating was obvious crime - but it generally wasn't being prosecuted. Some people demanded prosecution; some demanded legislative action. As with wife-beating, so too with the mass water poisoning called "fluoridation." Whereas other people are petitioning people to urge legislative branches of government to VOTE it out... I am petitioning people to urge law enforcement - the executive branch - to PROSECUTE the obvious crime. The crime is indeed obvious. 1. Municipal chemotherapists (city/county/state elected officials) usually do not have medical licenses; and 2. Municipal chemotherapists (city/county/state elected officials) are FORCIBLY medicating their many constituents who do not give consent. You mentioned money Barry. No money is necessary... JUST REMEMBER YOUR "ABC's"... A. People can report **A**ny crime FOR FREE to law enforcement. B. Medication without consent is a **B**attery - and battery is a reportable crime. C. Battery against children is **C**hild abuse - and child abuse is a reportable crime. Regarding "C" - child abuse - in the State of Oregon where I am, the state literally ENCOURAGES citizens to report battery against children - even when it is so much as SUSPECTED, as in, "ALL OREGON CITIZENS ARE ENCOURAGED TO REPORT SUSPECTED [CHILD ABUSE] TO DHS OR LAW ENFORCEMENT. Over 25 percent of the substantiated cases of child abuse are reported by concerned citizens who are not required to report. Failure to report is a violation and carries a maximum penalty of $1,000.00. Mandatory reporters have also been successfully sued for damages in civil court for failing to report.² http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/children/a...s/report.shtml ATTENTION Oregon anti-fluoride protesters: THINK ABOUT IT. With the recent revelation that Harvard's Chester Douglass, PhD concealed a possible link between fluoridation and osteosarcoma... If you were a boy about to have your limb amputated because of osteosarcoma... Wouldn't you want anti-fluoride protesters reporting the water poisoning crime? Here's the kicker again: Even were the cumulative poison fluoride to be demonstrated to be a GOOD medicine, it would still be a crime (battery) to administer it without consent. See again: The F Crime (#7): EPA's J. William Hirzy, PhD http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3750 Barry continued... Since you like these lists, you can try getting someone's legal opinion at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...egal.moderated . Barry, you're not paying attention. I already HAVE a legal opinion. The California Supreme Court wrote in THOR 93 C.D.O.S. 5658: "The common law has long recognized this principle: A physician who performs any medical procedure without the patient's consent commits a battery irrespective of the skill or care used." [Thor at 5659] If I remember correctly, the California Supreme Court was citing the Arizona Supreme Court. High courts hold such opinions because informed consent law DEVELOPED from the intentional tort of battery. The key word is INTENTIONAL - municipal chemotherapists are ignoring protests - failing to obtain the CONSENT of the governed. I will post this to misc.legal.moderated (assuming that is a legitimate newsgroup) and hope that the moderators let it through. "THE STRANGULATION STUFF"... Barry at www.polisource.com continued... I think you lack credibility too. I read just a little about the strangulation stuff, and it lacks clarity, at least in the beginning. You are talking about routine BABY strangling by obstetricians. I indicated (right at the beginning!) that obstetricians are robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. I don't know how I could have stated it more clearly. Oh wait - I think I see the problem - most people think of strangling the THROAT... I am talking about little people still breathing through their umbilical cords... Obstetricians are strangling umbilical cords immediately after birth - thereby strangling off/robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. Here again is my "strangulation stuff" discussion from my most recent response to you... NOTE: AMERICAN MEDICINE¹S **MOST** FREQUENT SURGICAL BEHAVIOR IS OBVIOUS CHILD ABUSE THE WAY OBSTETRICIANS PRACTICE IT... Retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG is recommending that his fellow obstetricians temporarily strangle babies - to help obstetricians learn why they should not immediately clamp/cut umbilical cords thereby PERMANENTLY strangling babies/robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley indicates that EVERY CESAREAN BABY is being robbed of up to 50% of his/her blood volume. HERE IS DR. MORLEY RECOMMENDING THE **TEMPORARY** BABY STRANGLING ON THE WEB... "[T]he umbilical cord [is] immediately closed between finger and thumb...The [fetal heart rate/FHR] will decelerate quickly to about 60 bpm...the color will change from purple-pink (normal at birth) to pallid blue (vaso-constriction and asphyxia.)...Few midwives or obstetricians will be able to observe, without interference, a deep, prolonged FHR deceleration on a non-breathing newborn for a period of 60 seconds.* Common sense will soon release the finger and thumb." http://www.cordclamping.com/acog-cp.htm Hardy [Oregon Atty Genl Hardy Myers], some OREGON obstetricians may be going to Dr. Morley's website and experimenting with his temporary baby strangling - as they engage in PERMANENT baby strangling - robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley MEANS well * but it is simply (obviously) illegal for him to encourage obstetricians to commit ³lesser² child abuse in order to encourage them to stop committing greater child abuse - robbing babies of up to 50% of babies¹ blood volume. See Michigan Baby Strangler George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3739 Again Hardy, I know that you may be unable to investigate MDs because you part of the medico-"legal" "just us" system... But at least offer assistance to pregnant women in your circle of family and friends, OK? END NECESSARY DIGRESSION... Barry, I think you are mistakenly equating "legal" with "law enforcement failure to prosecute obvious crime." Selective enforcement of criminal law makes our system the medico-"legal" "just us" system. Only rarely are MDs criminally prosecuted by those free attorneys who call themselves "the People." It happened in 1995... MD CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED... MDs "FRIGHTENED OUT OF THEIR WITS"... American Medical Association (AMA) executive vice-president, Dr. James S. Todd stated that doctors were "frightened out of their wits" because they now feared criminal prosecution for their medical decisions. [Nossiter A. A mistake, a rare prosecution, and a doctor is headed for jail. New York Times (Mar16)1995:front page] According to the New York Times article, the doctor in question, Einaugler, contended that he shouldn¹t be criminally prosecuted - in part because criminal prosecution of doctors is "unprecedented." Then-AMA general counsel Kirk Johnson echoed Einaugler's sentiment, telling the Times that physicians have "never before" been subject to criminal prosecution in New York; and that criminal prosecution is "extraordinarily uncommon" anywhere in the nation. AMA executive vice-president James Todd, MD chimed in, assuring the Times that "Society has been poorly served by this decision" - doctors "traditionally" handle such matters through "peer review and malpractice," he said. Why yes! *Doctors *have* been handling such matters! As the New York Times reported, traditional "peer review" resulted in NO Medical Board penalty for Einaugler, because the Medical Board found that his "clear and obvious" failure to act - after subjecting his patient to an "enormous anatomical insult" - was not a "flagrant or dramatic departure from standards." (!) The Times clearly noted that Dr. Einaugler was not prosecuted for "making a mistake," but rather for covering up his mistake and calling the cover-up medical decision-making. ATTENTION STATE ATTORNEY GENERALS (esp. Oregon Atty Genl Hardy Myers): Obstetricians are closing birth canals up to 30% - and covering up their mistake with The Four OB Lies - and calling the cover-up medical decision making. Here are the pertinent URLs for the Four OB Lies... See ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606 See also: RNs: 'Stitches, episiotomy, and postpartum complications' (Maternal care learning needs) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3725 More on the obvious birth-canal-closing crime below. Barry continued... You must have experience in the advertising business, because [baby strangling by obstetricians] certainly gets...attention, but it also sounds unlikely to have merit or to be taken seriously. Barry, you are mistakenly equating "legal" with "standard medical practice." While it is true that there is a "community norm" standard of medical practice... STEP ONE in that "community norm" standard is to OBTAIN INFORMED CONSENT. In the case of the routine baby strangling, step one would be to obtain informed consent from mothers before robbing their babies of up to 50% of blood volume. NOTE WELL BARRY: Even if robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume was GOOD medicine - it would still be totally criminal because obstetricians aren't obtaining informed consent from mothers. BIRTH-CANAL-CLOSING - MORE OBSTETRIC CHILD ABUSE As indicated above... There is also the matter of obstetricians closing birth canals up to 30% and failing to obtain informed consent for THAT - as they slice vaginas and abdomens en masse - and LIE to cover-up. As I noted in the post to which you responded... PS A NECESSARY DIGRESSION: MORE OBVIOUS MASS CHILD ABUSE Copied to: Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers via Hardy, as you may be aware from previous email suspected child abuse reports I've sent to you (search the Google usenet archive http://groups.google.com)... My primary focus is not ending the mass child abuse water poisoning. My primary focus is ending obvious mass child abuse by obstetricians. I know that you may be unable to investigate MDs (or fluoridation) because you are part of the medico-"legal" "just us" system... But if there are any pregnant women in your circle of family and friends, they may be interested in the fact that obstetricians are closing birth canals up to 30% - and how easy it is for them to allow their birth canals to OPEN the ³extra² up to 30%. Obstetricians are KEEPING birth canals closed as they slice vaginas and abdomens - as they pull with forceps - sometimes pulling so hard they rip spinal nerves out of tiny spinal cords. Many pregnant women may be able to avoid forceps, episiotomies and c-sections... See ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606 See also: RNs: 'Stitches, episiotomy, and postpartum complications' (Maternal care learning needs) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3725 (Note: If the URLs don't work, make sure there are no spaces.) Barry wrote: My best guess is that it's about abortion...oh, you say "robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume" so I guess it's not abortion. Closing the birth canal up to 30% can be LIKE abortion - i.e. - sometimees the baby is born DEAD - after being fine right before delivery. Australian obstetrician Norman Beischer, MD once guessed that 10-15% of stillbirths were just fine right before delivery! http://home1.gte.net/gastaldo/part2ftc.html Regarding abortion - it is legal now - but ONLY with the mother's consent. My recollection from reading about the racial hygiene/eugenics movement in America is that forced abortions and sterilizations used to be done on "mentally feeble" women - but that crime was stopped. Well, I have no interest in reading more at the moment. Thank you for taking the time to read what you did. Don't forget: As I noted in response to CDC's Annette Ashizawa, PhD ) at CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ATSDR CDC admits that the cumulative poison acts TOPICALLY - it doesn't even NEED to be in the water. It may not even prevent cavities - according to the best research, it saves less than 1 tooth surface in 128 at best! See www.fluoridealert.org. If people want the poison they can brush with poisoned toothpaste.(Fluoridated toothpaste is indeed poisoned. Each tube has a poison warning. See www.aquasafe.us.) I also noted for Annette that CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ATSDR "works with states and other federal agencies to prevent exposure to hazardous substances from waste sites." http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/DRO/r1.html I wrote: EMERGENCY: A hazardous substance (hydrofluorosilicic acid w/ arsenic and lead) from phosphate fertilizer waste sites/scrubbers is being injected into America's water supply. (Some municipalities are using "pure" poison - sodium fluoride.) CDC's ATSDR needs to simply DO ITS JOB and work with state attorney generals to stop/prevent this 60-year-old ongoing hazardous substance crime - NOW. I'll copy Annette again via . Sincerely, Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon Paul Connett, PhD, to get the F dominoes falling even faster, will you forward this email to your FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin list and urge people to contact their district attorneys and attorneys general and ask them to issue cease and desist orders to all the illegal municipal chemotherapists? Illegal municipal chemotherapists will hopefully act before district attorneys and attorneys general (Hi Jake : ) get a chance to... Remember: The MD was only criminally prosecuted because he tried to cover-up. See above. This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "The F Crime (#9): F dominoes finally falling?" 
|
|
#2
July 27th 05, 07:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Old news:
The board of health delivered an order to halt fluoridation of the town's water supply to the department of public works on Monday...Health board Chairwoman Diane Battistello drafted and hand-delivered the cease and desist order, which demands that fluoridation be stopped immediately... http://www.thesunchronicle.com/artic...city/city2.txt More recent news: NORTH ATTLEBORO -- The board of public works will await an opinion from town counsel before deciding whether to halt fluoridation of the town's water supply. http://www.thesunchronicle.com/artic...city/city6.txt KEY POINT: Putting the cumulative poison fluoride into people's drinking water against their consent is not just totally criminal because fluoride is a cumulative poison... In my previous reply in a related thread, I mentioned two actual studies that I found in my research, and one said "Abundant scientific data accumulated over the years have demonstrated that other than dental fluorosis, there are no known adverse effects of long-term fluoride ingestion for caries prevention." Even were the cumulative poison fluoride to be demonstrated to be a GOOD medicine, it would still be a crime (battery) to administer it without consent. I don't know if this matters legally, but it's fairly well known that fluoride is put in drinking water. Also, since it occurs naturally in some water and has been shown to be beneficial, wouldn't adding it to water be similar to fortifying cereal and other processed food with vitamins? The only difference is that there's no labeling, but an equivalent of labeling isn't as practical for tap water, which might be a legally acceptable excuse. I think you're more likely to have it required that people be better informed that there's fluoride in their water than to have it not added. I understand that you think this is criminal and there's no need for any "victim" to spend his or an organization's money to fight it in court in order for the "criminals" to be punished, but still, they could fight it in court themselves, and if what you say is true, it sounds like they would win and it would help your cause. Barry, you're not paying attention. I already HAVE a legal opinion. The California Supreme Court wrote in THOR 93 C.D.O.S. 5658: "The common law has long recognized this principle: A physician who performs any medical procedure without the patient's consent commits a battery irrespective of the skill or care used." [Thor at 5659] I don't think adding fluoride to drinking water is such a procedure. "THE STRANGULATION STUFF"...I indicated (right at the beginning!) that obstetricians are robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. I don't know how I could have stated it more clearly. You could have said: Obstetricians are strangling umbilical cords immediately after birth - thereby strangling off/robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume.
|
|
#3
July 27th 05, 06:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Paul Connett, PhD: Please see my note to you at the very end of this post.
THE F CRIME (#10): CAN CITIZENS VOTE TO MEDICATE THEIR NEIGHBORS? Of course not. Medication without consent - even with GOOD medicine - is a CRIME (battery). See THOR quoted below. EXCEPTION: Citizens have voted forced medication/vaccination of their neighbors - to prevent epidemics - but this mass medication is directly administered under the supervision of a medical doctor who may exempt certain persons if necessary. Also many (most?) states have religious and philosophical exemptions. With the "fluoridation" crime, mostly non-MDs illegally prescribe - and there are no exemptions - the cumulative poison fluoride is in everyone's water whether they want it or not. OPEN LETTER (archived for global access at http://groups.google.com North Attleboro (MA) Board of Health Diane Battistello, Chairwoman Donald Bates, Member Susan Shaw, Member 43 So. Washington Street North Attleboro, MA 02760 (508) 699-0103 (508) 643-1268 Via http://north-attleboro.ma.us/boh/default.htm Dear Board members: BRAVO! The SUN CHRONICLE reports that you have TWICE now voted to order to halt the injection of the cumulative poison fluoride into the North Attleboro (MA) water supply. See below. You obviously do not accept the North Attleboro Town Counsel's previous "reasoning" (in effect) that citizens can vote to forcibly medicate their neighbors. Please KEEP voting to order a halt to the mass medication until you are successful in getting it out of the water - or until 100% of North Attleboro citizens vote to take the cumulative poison fluoride. Since citizens voting to forcibly medicate their neighbors obviously violates the common law doctrine of informed consent, it may be necessary to petition for a Writ of Mandamus to compel the Massachussetts attorney general to stop the poisoning of Massachusetts' drinking water. I am assuming of course that Massachussetts common law doctrine of informed consent is similar to California's. See THOR below. Good luck. Sincerely, Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon Copied to: Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers via Copied to: Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly via (Hardy and Tom: Please issue "Cease and Desist" letters to stop the water poisoning in Oregon and Massachusetts. MORE URGENT: Please also stop the bizarre obstetric behaviors discussed below: Umbilical-cord-strangulating every cesarean baby thereby senselessly robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume and routinely closing birth canals up to 30% and keeping birth canals closed when babies get stuck. Tell pregnant women in your jurisdications that it easy for them to offer their babies these "extras." See below.) Copied to: Massachusetts Health Officers Association members with email addresses listed in The Official Roster of Boards of Health... http://www.mhoa.com/mhoa/roster.htm Copied to: Massachusetts' Eleven District Attorneys via and listed email addresses Attn especially: DA for North Attleboro - DA Paul Walsh, Jr. (Bristol County) PS1 FLORIDA FAUCET FRAUD: To get around the rather obvious fact that fluoridation is the crime of battery (medication without consent), the Florida Supreme Court in 2002 rubberstamped the QUILES decision - the fraudulent notion that fluoridation is not medication because Florida cities are fluoridating FAUCETS, not bloodstreams. See Florida fluoride is for faucets - not people! http://groups-beta.google.com/group/ misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/864b9d151f31e678 Alternate URL: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2667 PS2 WASHINGTION STATE DENTIST ASKS THE PERTINENT QUESTION... "The local government is about to mandate fluoridated water in Pierce County, a mass medication of people against their will. What about our rights to determine what medications we and our children will take? --Dr. Debra Hopkins http://www.noforcedfluoride.org/pages/1/index.html (via Paul Connett's FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin #277, July 27, 2005) Copied to: Debra B. Hopkins, DDS, PC 3516 South 47th Street, Suite 104 Tacoma, WA 98409 Also via PS3 BACK TO MASSACHUSETTS: I learned that this is the second time the North Attleboro (MA) Health Board voted to halt the water poisoning when I went to respond to Barry of www.polisource.com today. See below. [Barry] = Barry of www.polisource.com [Todd] = Todd D. Gastaldo, DC I have responded to Barry's replies in context.... THE F CRIME (#9): F DOMINOES FINALLY FALLING? Paul Connett, PhD (www.fluoridealert.org) asks in today's FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin (#275): "Are the dominoes beginning to fall?" Paul quotes THE SUN CHRONICLE (Attelboro-North Attleboro, Massachusetts): "The board of health delivered an order to halt fluoridation of the town's water supply to the department of public works on Monday...Health board Chairwoman Diane Battistello drafted and hand-delivered the cease and desist order, which demands that fluoridation be stopped immediately..." http://www.thesunchronicle.com/artic...city/city2.txt [Barry] More recent news: NORTH ATTLEBORO -- The board of public works will await an opinion from town counsel before deciding whether to halt fluoridation of the town's water supply. http://www.thesunchronicle.com/artic...city/city6.txt [Todd] It gets better Barry...I just found this. It's from the full article I originally posted - I didn't find the full article till today... "[T]he board did the same thing in March. It proved to be nothing more than a symbolic vote when public works refused to follow the order and Town Counsel Robert Bliss ruled the board could not overrule the town's voters, who, by a 59-41 percent margin, ordered fluoridation in a November 2000 referendum... The health board majority would be well within its rights to begin the process of putting a new referendum before the voters. Any other action is an insult to the town's voters -- that is, if it transcends the theater of the absurd played out Monday with the second vote on a stop order that is sure to be refused." http://www.thesunchronicle.com/artic...n/opinion1.txt [Todd] 41% of those who voted said NO. I say again: THINK ABOUT IT. Can a population VOTE to commit the (yet unprosecuted) crime of administering the cumulative poison fluoride without consent? OF COURSE NOT. (Paul Connett, PhD: Please see my note to you at the very end of this post.) THE F DOMINOES COULD SOON FALL FASTER... The F dominoes could soon fall faster as municipal chemotherapists (city, county and state elected officials) realize that **state attorney generals** could start issuing the cease and desist orders because it is a CRIME for MDs to force people to take medicine - even GOOD medicine (see THOR below). (Of course, administering medicine is the practice of medicine and most municipal chemotherapists aren't MDs - so they are illegally practicing medicine right out of the gate.) I don't want anyone prosecuted - I just want the mass water poisoning to stop in America and around the world. Since America pioneered the mass poisoning, America should finally lead the world in ending it - IMMEDIATELY. Readers: Please forward this post to your local illegal municipal chemotherapists (city, county, state elected officials). Urge them to stop their illegal water poisoning before the state attorney general has to... MD CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED It's rare - but an MD was criminally prosecuted - after the NY medical board only slapped his wrist... See the EINAUGLER case discussed below... NOTE: I am in favor of pardons in advance for MDs for the reason given below. CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OF MDs IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE... MONEY! BILLIONS PER YEAR! State attorney generals could use this post to prosecute America's MDs and nearly INSTANTLY save America BILLIONS per year - and simultaneously make birth easier. OREGON ATTY GENL HARDY MYERS ): 1. Please prosecute MDs finally for what they are doing to mothers and babies. 2. Please join me in calling for pardons in advance for MDs. As medical students, MDs are TRAINED to perform obvious felonies. See the obstetric baby strangling discussion below. IT'S INCREDIBLE what MDs are getting away with. 3. Please stop the injection of the cumulative poison fluoride into Oregon's water supply. THE F CRIME: Dentists are urging generally unlicensed municipal chemotherapists (city, county and state elected official) to commit the crime of medication without consent... "TOTALLY CRIMINAL" Dr. Hardy Limeback head of preventive dentistry at the University of Toronto used to promote fluoridation. Then Dr. Limeback finally looked at the research and started calling it "totally criminal." (Limeback was so quoted in Chris Bryson's 2004 book The Fluoride Deception.) KEY POINT: Putting the cumulative poison fluoride into people's drinking water against their consent is not just totally criminal because fluoride is a cumulative poison... As I recently wrote to Barry at www.polisource.com, Even were the cumulative poison fluoride to be demonstrated to be a GOOD medicine, it would still be a crime (battery) to administer it without consent. See again: The F Crime (#7): EPA's J. William Hirzy, PhD http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3750 [Barry] In my previous reply in a related thread, I mentioned two actual studies that I found in my research, and one said "Abundant scientific data accumulated over the years have demonstrated that other than dental fluorosis, there are no known adverse effects of long-term fluoride ingestion for caries prevention." [Todd] Barry - at least cite your studies - sort of like how they do at... http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/index.html [Barry] I don't know if this matters legally, but it's fairly well known that fluoride is put in drinking water. [Todd] Yes, illegal municipal chemotherapists (city, county and state officials) very publicly vote for the illegal chemotherapy and sometimes very publicly hold general elections to offer ordinary citizens the chance to engage in the obviously illegal chemotherapy. USUALLY, the citizens don't vote for it when given the chance - or so I've heard. [Barry] Also, since it occurs naturally in some water... [Todd] Yep, it occurs naturally in some water. [Barry] ...and has been shown to be beneficial, [Todd] BZZZZZZZZZZZT Check out the www.fluoridealert.org web page above. The cumulative poison fluoride is - well - a poison. Also, it was NOT shown to be beneficial in water before the crime was begun - and now both CDC and the American Dental Association concede that it works TOPICALLY. If people want the poison for their teeth they can brush with poisoned toothpaste. There is NO need to have it in the water. It may not even prevent cavities! The best research indicates that the poison only saves one tooth surface in 128 - if that. See www.fluoridealert.org. [Barry] wouldn't adding it to water be similar to fortifying cereal and other processed food with vitamins? [Todd] The American Dental Association has tried this gag, calling the cumulative poison fluoride a "nutrient" - likely to get around the embarrassing fact that the poison is being used as a MEDICATION - without consent - which is illegal. [Barry] The only difference is that there's no labeling, but an equivalent of labeling isn't as practical for tap water, which might be a legally acceptable excuse. [Todd] Nope. Medication without consent is a CRIME/battery, albeit yet unprosecuted. [Barry] I think you're more likely to have it required that people be better informed that there's fluoride in their water than to have it not added. [Todd] I think people are pretty well informed when their water is "fluoridated" - but they aren't told that fluoride is a cumulative poison and that it is a CRIME to medicate without consent. They aren't told that they CAN'T vote to medicate their neighbors. [Barry] I understand that you think this is criminal and there's no need for any "victim" to spend his or an organization's money to fight it in court in order for the "criminals" to be punished, but still, they could fight it in court themselves, and if what you say is true, it sounds like they would win and it would help your cause. [Todd] As more and more people realize that a crime is occurring, I think attorney generals will take action - that is - if municipal chemotherapists don't stop the crime first themselves. Writs of Mandamus may be necessary. See my Open Letter to the North Attleboro (MA) Health Board, above. Barry at www.polisource.com replied: Get one of your followers to take this to court and try to get a Cease and Desist themselves. There must be some anti-fluoride organization that has the money to assist someone in that, but they probably know they will lose. Barry, Wife-beating was obvious crime - but it generally wasn't being prosecuted. Some people demanded prosecution; some demanded legislative action. As with wife-beating, so too with the mass water poisoning called "fluoridation." Whereas other people are petitioning people to urge legislative branches of government to VOTE it out... I am petitioning people to urge law enforcement - the executive branch - to PROSECUTE the obvious crime. The crime is indeed obvious. 1. Municipal chemotherapists (city/county/state elected officials) usually do not have medical licenses; and 2. Municipal chemotherapists (city/county/state elected officials) are FORCIBLY medicating their many constituents who do not give consent. You mentioned money Barry. No money is necessary... JUST REMEMBER YOUR "ABC's"... A. People can report **A**ny crime FOR FREE to law enforcement. B. Medication without consent is a **B**attery - and battery is a reportable crime. C. Battery against children is **C**hild abuse - and child abuse is a reportable crime. Regarding "C" - child abuse - in the State of Oregon where I am, the state literally ENCOURAGES citizens to report battery against children - even when it is so much as SUSPECTED, as in, "ALL OREGON CITIZENS ARE ENCOURAGED TO REPORT SUSPECTED [CHILD ABUSE] TO DHS OR LAW ENFORCEMENT. Over 25 percent of the substantiated cases of child abuse are reported by concerned citizens who are not required to report. Failure to report is a violation and carries a maximum penalty of $1,000.00. Mandatory reporters have also been successfully sued for damages in civil court for failing to report.² http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/children/a...s/report.shtml ATTENTION Oregon anti-fluoride protesters: THINK ABOUT IT. With the recent revelation that Harvard's Chester Douglass, PhD concealed a possible link between fluoridation and osteosarcoma... If you were a boy about to have your limb amputated because of osteosarcoma... Wouldn't you want anti-fluoride protesters reporting the water poisoning crime? Here's the kicker again: Even were the cumulative poison fluoride to be demonstrated to be a GOOD medicine, it would still be a crime (battery) to administer it without consent. See again: The F Crime (#7): EPA's J. William Hirzy, PhD http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3750 Barry continued... Since you like these lists, you can try getting someone's legal opinion at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...egal.moderated . Barry, you're not paying attention. I already HAVE a legal opinion. The California Supreme Court wrote in THOR 93 C.D.O.S. 5658: "The common law has long recognized this principle: A physician who performs any medical procedure without the patient's consent commits a battery irrespective of the skill or care used." [Thor at 5659] [Barry] I don't think adding fluoride to drinking water is such a procedure. [Todd] The cumulative poison fluoride is injected into public drinking water for a medical reason - prevention of caries. It is a medication - and medication without consent is a battery. If I remember correctly, the California Supreme Court was citing the Arizona Supreme Court. High courts hold such opinions because informed consent law DEVELOPED from the intentional tort of battery. The key word is INTENTIONAL - municipal chemotherapists are ignoring protests - failing to obtain the CONSENT of the governed. I will post this to misc.legal.moderated (assuming that is a legitimate newsgroup) and hope that the moderators let it through. "THE STRANGULATION STUFF"... Barry at www.polisource.com continued... I think you lack credibility too. I read just a little about the strangulation stuff, and it lacks clarity, at least in the beginning. You are talking about routine BABY strangling by obstetricians. I indicated (right at the beginning!) that obstetricians are robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. I don't know how I could have stated it more clearly. [Barry] You could have said: Obstetricians are strangling umbilical cords immediately after birth - thereby strangling off/robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. [Todd] Yeah, that's why I said: Oh wait - I think I see the problem - most people think of strangling the THROAT... I am talking about little people still breathing through their umbilical cords... Obstetricians are strangling umbilical cords immediately after birth - thereby strangling off/robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. Here again is my "strangulation stuff" discussion from my most recent response to you... NOTE: AMERICAN MEDICINE¹S **MOST** FREQUENT SURGICAL BEHAVIOR IS OBVIOUS CHILD ABUSE THE WAY OBSTETRICIANS PRACTICE IT... Retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG is recommending that his fellow obstetricians temporarily strangle babies - to help obstetricians learn why they should not immediately clamp/cut umbilical cords thereby PERMANENTLY strangling babies/robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley indicates that EVERY CESAREAN BABY is being robbed of up to 50% of his/her blood volume. HERE IS DR. MORLEY RECOMMENDING THE **TEMPORARY** BABY STRANGLING ON THE WEB... "[T]he umbilical cord [is] immediately closed between finger and thumb...The [fetal heart rate/FHR] will decelerate quickly to about 60 bpm...the color will change from purple-pink (normal at birth) to pallid blue (vaso-constriction and asphyxia.)...Few midwives or obstetricians will be able to observe, without interference, a deep, prolonged FHR deceleration on a non-breathing newborn for a period of 60 seconds.* Common sense will soon release the finger and thumb." http://www.cordclamping.com/acog-cp.htm Hardy [Oregon Atty Genl Hardy Myers], some OREGON obstetricians may be going to Dr. Morley's website and experimenting with his temporary baby strangling - as they engage in PERMANENT baby strangling - robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley MEANS well * but it is simply (obviously) illegal for him to encourage obstetricians to commit ³lesser² child abuse in order to encourage them to stop committing greater child abuse - robbing babies of up to 50% of babies¹ blood volume. See Michigan Baby Strangler George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3739 Again Hardy, I know that you may be unable to investigate MDs because you part of the medico-"legal" "just us" system... But at least offer assistance to pregnant women in your circle of family and friends, OK? END NECESSARY DIGRESSION... Barry, I think you are mistakenly equating "legal" with "law enforcement failure to prosecute obvious crime." Selective enforcement of criminal law makes our system the medico-"legal" "just us" system. Only rarely are MDs criminally prosecuted by those free attorneys who call themselves "the People." It happened in 1995... MD CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED... MDs "FRIGHTENED OUT OF THEIR WITS"... American Medical Association (AMA) executive vice-president, Dr. James S. Todd stated that doctors were "frightened out of their wits" because they now feared criminal prosecution for their medical decisions. [Nossiter A. A mistake, a rare prosecution, and a doctor is headed for jail. New York Times (Mar16)1995:front page] According to the New York Times article, the doctor in question, Einaugler, contended that he shouldn¹t be criminally prosecuted - in part because criminal prosecution of doctors is "unprecedented." Then-AMA general counsel Kirk Johnson echoed Einaugler's sentiment, telling the Times that physicians have "never before" been subject to criminal prosecution in New York; and that criminal prosecution is "extraordinarily uncommon" anywhere in the nation. AMA executive vice-president James Todd, MD chimed in, assuring the Times that "Society has been poorly served by this decision" - doctors "traditionally" handle such matters through "peer review and malpractice," he said. Why yes! *Doctors *have* been handling such matters! As the New York Times reported, traditional "peer review" resulted in NO Medical Board penalty for Einaugler, because the Medical Board found that his "clear and obvious" failure to act - after subjecting his patient to an "enormous anatomical insult" - was not a "flagrant or dramatic departure from standards." (!) The Times clearly noted that Dr. Einaugler was not prosecuted for "making a mistake," but rather for covering up his mistake and calling the cover-up medical decision-making. ATTENTION STATE ATTORNEY GENERALS (esp. Oregon Atty Genl Hardy Myers): Obstetricians are closing birth canals up to 30% - and covering up their mistake with The Four OB Lies - and calling the cover-up medical decision making. Here are the pertinent URLs for the Four OB Lies... See ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606 See also: RNs: 'Stitches, episiotomy, and postpartum complications' (Maternal care learning needs) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3725 More on the obvious birth-canal-closing crime below. Barry continued... You must have experience in the advertising business, because [baby strangling by obstetricians] certainly gets...attention, but it also sounds unlikely to have merit or to be taken seriously. Barry, you are mistakenly equating "legal" with "standard medical practice." While it is true that there is a "community norm" standard of medical practice... STEP ONE in that "community norm" standard is to OBTAIN INFORMED CONSENT. In the case of the routine baby strangling, step one would be to obtain informed consent from mothers before robbing their babies of up to 50% of blood volume. NOTE WELL BARRY: Even if robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume was GOOD medicine - it would still be totally criminal because obstetricians aren't obtaining informed consent from mothers. BIRTH-CANAL-CLOSING - MORE OBSTETRIC CHILD ABUSE As indicated above... There is also the matter of obstetricians closing birth canals up to 30% and failing to obtain informed consent for THAT - as they slice vaginas and abdomens en masse - and LIE to cover-up. As I noted in the post to which you responded... PS A NECESSARY DIGRESSION: MORE OBVIOUS MASS CHILD ABUSE Copied to: Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers via Hardy, as you may be aware from previous email suspected child abuse reports I've sent to you (search the Google usenet archive http://groups.google.com)... My primary focus is not ending the mass child abuse water poisoning. My primary focus is ending obvious mass child abuse by obstetricians. I know that you may be unable to investigate MDs (or fluoridation) because you are part of the medico-"legal" "just us" system... But if there are any pregnant women in your circle of family and friends, they may be interested in the fact that obstetricians are closing birth canals up to 30% - and how easy it is for them to allow their birth canals to OPEN the ³extra² up to 30%. Obstetricians are KEEPING birth canals closed as they slice vaginas and abdomens - as they pull with forceps - sometimes pulling so hard they rip spinal nerves out of tiny spinal cords. Many pregnant women may be able to avoid forceps, episiotomies and c-sections... See ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606 See also: RNs: 'Stitches, episiotomy, and postpartum complications' (Maternal care learning needs) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3725 (Note: If the URLs don't work, make sure there are no spaces.) Barry wrote: My best guess is that it's about abortion...oh, you say "robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume" so I guess it's not abortion. Closing the birth canal up to 30% can be LIKE abortion - i.e. - sometimees the baby is born DEAD - after being fine right before delivery. Australian obstetrician Norman Beischer, MD once guessed that 10-15% of stillbirths were just fine right before delivery! http://home1.gte.net/gastaldo/part2ftc.html Regarding abortion - it is legal now - but ONLY with the mother's consent. My recollection from reading about the racial hygiene/eugenics movement in America is that forced abortions and sterilizations used to be done on "mentally feeble" women - but that crime was stopped. Well, I have no interest in reading more at the moment. Thank you for taking the time to read what you did. Don't forget: As I noted in response to CDC's Annette Ashizawa, PhD ) at CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ATSDR CDC admits that the cumulative poison acts TOPICALLY - it doesn't even NEED to be in the water. It may not even prevent cavities - according to the best research, it saves less than 1 tooth surface in 128 at best! See www.fluoridealert.org. If people want the poison they can brush with poisoned toothpaste.(Fluoridated toothpaste is indeed poisoned. Each tube has a poison warning. See www.aquasafe.us.) I also noted for Annette that CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ATSDR "works with states and other federal agencies to prevent exposure to hazardous substances from waste sites." http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/DRO/r1.html I wrote: EMERGENCY: A hazardous substance (hydrofluorosilicic acid w/ arsenic and lead) from phosphate fertilizer waste sites/scrubbers is being injected into America's water supply. (Some municipalities are using "pure" poison - sodium fluoride.) CDC's ATSDR needs to simply DO ITS JOB and work with state attorney generals to stop/prevent this 60-year-old ongoing hazardous substance crime - NOW. I'll copy Annette again via . Sincerely, Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon Paul Connett, PhD, to get the F dominoes falling even faster, will you forward this email to your FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin list and urge people to contact their district attorneys and attorneys general and ask them to issue cease and desist orders to all the illegal municipal chemotherapists? Illegal municipal chemotherapists will hopefully act before district attorneys and attorneys general (Hi Jake : ) get a chance to... Remember: The MD was only criminally prosecuted because he tried to cover-up. See above. This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "The F Crime (#9): F dominoes finally falling?"
|
|
#4
July 27th 05, 07:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
[Todd] It gets better Barry...I just found this. It's from the full
article I originally posted - I didn't find the full article till today... "[T]he board did the same thing in March. It proved to be nothing more than a symbolic vote when public works refused to follow the order and Town Counsel Robert Bliss ruled the board could not overrule the town's voters... I don't know about it being symbolic, but the refusal seemed to be for good reason. Robert Bliss had some support from Board of Selectmen Chairman Robert Fennessy. In contrast to their legal opinions, Mary Gibeault sounded pretty uncertain about what would happen (directly below). ---------------------------------- [From http://www.infowars.com/articles/sci...ote_debate.htm ] "But the question remains whether the North Attleboro board's 2-1 vote was legal; that town's attorney, Robert Bliss, maintains that the health board did not have the authority to overturn the 2000 North Attleboro ballot vote that put fluoridation in place. "I don't think, legally, they could do what they did," said Plainville Board of Selectmen Chairman Robert Fennessy this week; Fennessy works professionally as an attorney. Plainville Board of Health member Mary Gibeault, who has been a vocal opponent of fluoridation, said she is "personally thrilled" with the vote. "I really don't know how it's going to play out," she said... ---------------------------------- [Todd] 41% of those who voted said NO. I say again: THINK ABOUT IT. Can a population VOTE to commit the (yet unprosecuted) crime of administering the cumulative poison fluoride without consent? OF COURSE NOT. .... [Barry] In my previous reply in a related thread, I mentioned two actual studies that I found in my research, and one said "Abundant scientific data accumulated over the years have demonstrated that other than dental fluorosis, there are no known adverse effects of long-term fluoride ingestion for caries prevention." [Todd] Barry - at least cite your studies - sort of like how they do at... http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/index.html I cited it at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...504a546a4241a4 where I say: "I found the study 'Fluoride: safety issues' at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract "It says 'Abundant scientific data accumulated over the years have demonstrated that other than dental fluorosis, there are no known adverse effects of long-term fluoride ingestion for caries prevention.'" I went on to describe my search for research to the contrary, and just found lies or misleading information, as I described to you in another thread on this topic. I was turned off at that point and ended my research. [Todd] Nope. Medication without consent is a CRIME/battery, albeit yet unprosecuted. I thought you said that just goes for medical "procedures." Anyway, I questioned whether fluoride is a medicine. Nutrients can prevent illness too, but it's legal to say so and to put them in food. I think you said that some government agency has called fluoride a nutrient. So, what's the legal word on that? [Todd] As more and more people realize that a crime is occurring, I think attorney generals will take action Affected people can get a cease and desist themselves. Your problem would be solved without waiting for attorneys general to act. It wouldn't happen though.
|
|
#6
July 27th 05, 10:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
THE F CRIME (#11): HARVARD CRAP AND RAT POISON FOR KIDS
See below. in article , Barry at wrote on 7/27/05 11:43 AM: [Todd] It gets better Barry...I just found this. It's from the full article I originally posted - I didn't find the full article till today... "[T]he board did the same thing in March. It proved to be nothing more than a symbolic vote when public works refused to follow the order and Town Counsel Robert Bliss ruled the board could not overrule the town's voters... I don't know about it being symbolic, but the refusal seemed to be for good reason. Robert Bliss had some support from Board of Selectmen Chairman Robert Fennessy. In contrast to their legal opinions, Mary Gibeault sounded pretty uncertain about what would happen (directly below). ---------------------------------- [From http://www.infowars.com/articles/sci...ote_debate.htm ] "But the question remains whether the North Attleboro board's 2-1 vote was legal; that town's attorney, Robert Bliss, maintains that the health board did not have the authority to overturn the 2000 North Attleboro ballot vote that put fluoridation in place. "I don't think, legally, they could do what they did," said Plainville Board of Selectmen Chairman Robert Fennessy this week; Fennessy works professionally as an attorney. Plainville Board of Health member Mary Gibeault, who has been a vocal opponent of fluoridation, said she is "personally thrilled" with the vote. "I really don't know how it's going to play out," she said... ---------------------------------- [Todd] 41% of those who voted said NO. I say again: THINK ABOUT IT. Can a population VOTE to commit the (yet unprosecuted) crime of administering the cumulative poison fluoride without consent? OF COURSE NOT. ... [Barry] In my previous reply in a related thread, I mentioned two actual studies that I found in my research, and one said "Abundant scientific data accumulated over the years have demonstrated that other than dental fluorosis, there are no known adverse effects of long-term fluoride ingestion for caries prevention." [Todd] Barry - at least cite your studies - sort of like how they do at... http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/index.html I cited it at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...504a546a4241a4 where I say: "I found the study 'Fluoride: safety issues' at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...bMed&list_uids =8271098&dopt=Abstract "It says 'Abundant scientific data accumulated over the years have demonstrated that other than dental fluorosis, there are no known adverse effects of long-term fluoride ingestion for caries prevention.'" I went on to describe my search for research to the contrary, and just found lies or misleading information, as I described to you in another thread on this topic. I was turned off at that point and ended my research. Sorry. I should have remembered that you cited that study. The wealth of information gathered by toxicologist Paul Connett, PhD and others at www.fluoridealert.org is quite compelling. Why not pick a top pro-fluoridation scientist or dentist or MD who has run from debating Dr. Connett and urge him/her to debate finally? Since you are criticizing EPA scientist Bill Hirzy's union of 1500 EPA scientists and lawyers as "lacking credibility" - or words to that effect... Why not publicly join Fluoride Action Network/FAN executive director Paul Connett, PhD in calling attention to the lack of credibility of a Harvard professor who concealed an epidemiologic osteosarcoma/fluoride link? Here's the story - just out... HARVARD CRAP ---my title, not FAN's.... FAN calls on NIH to remove Harvard Professor from fluoride-cancer study http://www.fluoridealert.org/press/nih-douglass.html * Fluoride Action Network July 27, 2005 For immediate release: Group calls on NIH to remove Harvard Professor from fluoride-cancer study BURLINGTON VT - The Fluoride Action Network (FAN), today urged that a Harvard Professor be removed from a research group studying the association between fluoride and osteosarcoma because his objectivity and ethics are disputed and he has ties to a company that profits from fluoride. FAN also urges other steps be taken to ensure this study meets the highest standards of scientific integrity. In June, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) charged Chester Douglass, a professor at Harvard and editor of Colgate¹s oral health newsletter, with suppressing research linking fluoridation to osteosarcoma, a rare but frequently fatal form of bone cancer. (1) Douglass remains central to the ongoing project. In a letter sent today to Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni, the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), FAN requests that Douglass be replaced with a scientist who is independent of the fluoridation debate, and has no other conflict of interest. (2) FAN also requests the NIH make the data of the $1.3 million taxpayer-funded study freely available for full independent review. EWG recently issued an ethics complaint against Douglass for misrepresenting his doctoral student's successful dissertation linking fluoridation to osteosarcoma. (3) Elise Bassin, Douglass' doctoral student, analyzed data collected from U.S. hospitals in the early 1990s by a team of scientists led by Douglass and funded by NIH. In her case-control study, Bassin found that males exposed to fluoridated water during their "mid-childhood growth spurt" (ages 6 to 8) had a significantly increased risk of later developing osteosarcoma. Bassin described the findings as "remarkably robust." (4) Bassin's dissertation, completed in May 2001 but unpublished and unknown prior to FAN obtaining a copy earlier this year, was recently sent to several expert reviewers by a Wall Street Journal science writer. The reviewers found it to be of "publishable quality." The head of oral health at the CDC, and fluoridation supporter, William Maas said, "She did great shoe-leather epidemiology." (5) According to EWG, Bassin's work "is the most rigorous study of the link between bone cancer and fluoride in tap water ever conducted in the United States." (6) Prior to the discovery of Bassin's results, the only information available on Douglass' research was a very brief summary published in 1995 in the Journal of Dental Research where Douglass reported no link between fluoridation and bone cancer. (7) Despite assurances by Douglass that a more comprehensive analysis of his data would be forthcoming, Douglass never published the study. "It's been 10 years now, and Douglass has yet to publish the findings of his first study," states Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director of FAN. "Now that we know what his data showed, Douglass' failure to disclose these findings is deeply troubling. It will simply not be possible for us or the general public to have confidence in any further work he produces on this matter." Summarizing Connett says, ³With lives at risk and the public's trust at stake, the NIH cannot afford anything less than to secure scrupulous scientific integrity on this study. We are asking that NIH do three things: 1) remove Douglass from the study; 2) demonstrate that none of the other study members has any other conflict of interest or ties to the government's fluoridation program, and, 3) make the data of the study, not just the conclusions, available for independent analysis and review.² References: (1) Washington Post, "Professor at Harvard is Being Investigated," July 13, 2005. http://www.washingtonpost.com (2) http://www.fluoridealert.org/letter-to-NIH.htm (3) Environmental Working Group, "Harvard Fluoride Findings Misrepresented?" July 13, 2005. http://www.ewg.org/issues/fluoride/20050627/index.php (4) Bassin EB. (2001). Association Between Fluoride in Drinking Water During Growth and Development and the Incidence of Ostosarcoma for Children and Adolescents. Doctoral Thesis, Harvard School of Dental Medicine. http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/...assin-2001.pdf (5) Wall Street Journal, "Fluoridation, Cancer: Did Researchers Ask the Right Questions?", July 22, 2005. http://www.fluoridealert.org/news/2323.html (6) http://ewg.org/issues_content/fluoride/20050627/pdf/ ltr_strother_20050627.pdf (7) Journal of Dental Research 1995; Volume 74, Page 98. http://www.fluoridealert.org/images/douglass-1995.gif END FAN call for NIH to take Prof. Douglass off the osteosarcoma/fluoride study [Todd] Nope. Medication without consent is a CRIME/battery, albeit yet unprosecuted. I thought you said that just goes for medical "procedures." Medication is a medical procedure - which is likely part of the reason why the American Dental Association calls the cumulative poison fluoride a "nutrient." The cumulative poison fluoride is NOT a "nutrient." There are no known fluoride deficiency diseases. Anyway, I questioned whether fluoride is a medicine. Nutrients can prevent illness too, but it's legal to say so and to put them in food. I think you said that some government agency has called fluoride a nutrient. So, what's the legal word on that Let's pretend the cumulative poison fluoride is a "nutrient." Where are the studies showing that the current source of cumulative poison - hydrofluorosilicic acid - is safe and effective? Why isn't FDA stopping the dentists from calling hydrofluorosilicic acid a "nutrient" that prevents cavities? Where are the studies done to determine whether the ORIGINAL source of the poison "nutrient" - sodium fluoride - was safe and effective? Apparently, the FDA allowed the poison "nutrient" to be used in the water supply because it was already on the market as RAT POISON. RAT POISON FOR KIDS Sally Stride writes: Children¹s sodium fluoride anti-cavity supplements were never found safe or effective by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They were never even tested. And the reason will astound you. Sodium fluoride supplements are routinely fed to little children to prevent tooth decay. They are drugs requiring a dentist's or physician's prescription. The below e-mail correspondence between this writer and the FDA snipped shows that fluoride supplements were "grandfathered in" before the 1938 law was enacted requiring drug testing. So, products on the market before 1938 were presumed safe by the FDA who allowed grandfathered drugs to be sold without any testing. Once a drug is on the market for any reason, doctors can use them to treat any disease or condition. It gets even more incredulous [sic]. Sodium fluoride was on the market pre-1938, but not to stop cavities and not for any medical reason. Sodium fluoride sold as a rat poison. So, in effect, the FDA says - since sodium fluoride safely and effectively killed rats before 1938, the FDA considers it is safe to give to little children to prevent tooth decay. Over 91% of U.S. fluoridating communities now use cheaper silicofluorides - another chemical never FDA approved, or safety tested in animals or humans but recently found to increase children's blood lead levels. From a 1951 American Dental Association brochu "There is no proof that commercial preparations such as tablets, dentifrices, mouthwashes or chewing gum containing fluorides are effective in preventing dental decay. Unfortunately such preparations are being offered to the public without adequate scientific evidence of their value." The following is my correspondence with the FDA: SNIP END Sally Stride essay http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/11749/107324 [Todd] As more and more people realize that a crime is occurring, I think attorney generals will take action Affected people can get a cease and desist themselves. Your problem would be solved without waiting for attorneys general to act. It wouldn't happen though. I agree that attorney generals won't act - or rather - I agree that it won't likely happen SOON. As I've noted, attorney generals are ignoring obvious crimes and perpetuating a medico-"legal" "just us" system. In the meantime, calling the mass poisoning what it is finally - a crime - will help municipal chemotherapists (city, county and state elected officials) and citizens VOTE it out of the water - esp. now that the epidemiologic link between osteosarcoma and fluoride is getting so much media play. See FAN press release references above... Also, some people reading my F Crime series may also help pregnant women prevent crimes against themselves and their babies... American medicine's most frequent surgical behavior of all - immediate umbilical cord severing - is OBVIOUS crime. Severing the umbilical cord immediately strangulates the newborn's only source of oxygen and blood and robs the newborn of up to 50% of their blood volume. If attorney generals won't quickly act to stop obstetricians from temporarily asphyxiating babies to rob them of massive amounts of blood - they certainly aren't going to quickly end the mass water poisoning. Just in case there are any new readers.... NOTE: AMERICAN MEDICINE¹S **MOST** FREQUENT SURGICAL BEHAVIOR IS OBVIOUS CHILD ABUSE THE WAY OBSTETRICIANS PRACTICE IT... Retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG is recommending that his fellow obstetricians temporarily strangle babies - to help obstetricians learn why they should not immediately clamp/cut umbilical cords thereby PERMANENTLY strangling babies/robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley indicates that EVERY CESAREAN BABY is being robbed of up to 50% of his/her blood volume. HERE IS DR. MORLEY RECOMMENDING THE **TEMPORARY** BABY STRANGLING ON THE WEB... "[T]he umbilical cord [is] immediately closed between finger and thumb...The [fetal heart rate/FHR] will decelerate quickly to about 60 bpm...the color will change from purple-pink (normal at birth) to pallid blue (vaso-constriction and asphyxia.)...Few midwives or obstetricians will be able to observe, without interference, a deep, prolonged FHR deceleration on a non-breathing newborn for a period of 60 seconds.* Common sense will soon release the finger and thumb." http://www.cordclamping.com/acog-cp.htm Hardy [Oregon Atty Genl Hardy Myers], some OREGON obstetricians may be going to Dr. Morley's website and experimenting with his temporary baby strangling - as they engage in PERMANENT baby strangling - robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley MEANS well * but it is simply (obviously) illegal for him to encourage obstetricians to commit ³lesser² child abuse in order to encourage them to stop committing greater child abuse - robbing babies of up to 50% of babies¹ blood volume. See Michigan Baby Strangler George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3739 Again Hardy, I know that you may be unable to investigate MDs because you part of the medico-"legal" "just us" system... But at least offer assistance to pregnant women in your circle of family and friends, OK? END NECESSARY DIGRESSION... There is also the matter of obstetricians closing birth canal up to 30% and keeping birth canals closed the "extra" up to 30% as they pull with hands, forceps and vacuums - sometimes pulling so hard they rip spinal nerves out of tiny spinal cords. The fact that they are LYING to cover-up is perhaps the most obvious clue that they know they are committing massive crime. For the Four OB Lies... See ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606 See also: RNs: 'Stitches, episiotomy, and postpartum complications' (Maternal care learning needs) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3725 Thanks for reading everyone. Sincerely, Todd Dr. Gastaldo This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "The F Crime (#11): Harvard crap and rat poison for kids"
|
|
#7
July 27th 05, 11:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bassin's dissertation...was recently sent to
several expert reviewers by a Wall Street Journal science writer. The reviewers found it to be of "publishable quality." ..=2E. "It's been 10 years now, and Douglass has yet to publish the findings of = his first study," Sounds like there might be some useful information there and that Douglass should be replaced. About 10 years ago on Compuserve, I started a thread in support of requiring medical studies to be submitted for publication whether the researchers want them to or not. At around that same time (I wonder if I started it) it became an issue among the experts and I recently heard that there's finally regulation on this. Unfortunately, I don't remember much more than that. Let's pretend the cumulative poison fluoride is a "nutrient." Where are the studies showing that the current source of cumulative poiso= n - hydrofluorosilicic acid - is safe and effective? The source? I don't even know if that matters. Sally Stride writes: Children=B9s sodium fluoride anti-cavity supplements were never found saf= e or effective by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They were never even tested. Maybe not by the FDA, but I'm pretty sure there's a strong argument to be made for fluoride in drinking water being good, with studies to back it up. Too many health experts support it for there not to be evidence.
|
|
#8
July 27th 05, 11:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The cumulative poison fluoride is NOT a "nutrient."
There are no known fluoride deficiency diseases. From http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/cdic/cdcb/M...literature.htm Abuse of the Scientific Literature in an Antifluoridation Pamphlet .... Is Fluoride an Essential Nutrient? The question of the essentiality of fluoride is really one of semantics. Most researchers consider fluoride essential for proper development of bones and teeth. Whether it is essential for reproduction, growth, and other body functions has been difficult to determine because of the difficulties in developing a totally fluoride-free diet. Yiamouyiannis capitalizes on this dilemma by selectively interpreting a number of scientific articles as indicating that fluoride is not an essential nutrient. On reviewing the full texts of the reports cited in the "Lifesavers Guide" it is obvious that three of his nine citations actually confirm that fluoride is essential. Two of the references make no specific claims either way and methodological errors were obvious in another source listed.
|
|
#9
July 28th 05, 12:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
THE F CRIME (#12): THE OL' "TOO MANY HEALTH EXPERTS" GAG
Barry is funny! See below. in article , Barry at wrote on 7/27/05 3:06 PM: Bassin's dissertation...was recently sent to several expert reviewers by a Wall Street Journal science writer. The reviewers found it to be of "publishable quality." ... "It's been 10 years now, and Douglass has yet to publish the findings of his first study," Sounds like there might be some useful information there and that Douglass should be replaced. About 10 years ago on Compuserve, I started a thread in support of requiring medical studies to be submitted for publication whether the researchers want them to or not. At around that same time (I wonder if I started it) it became an issue among the experts and I recently heard that there's finally regulation on this. Unfortunately, I don't remember much more than that. Let's pretend the cumulative poison fluoride is a "nutrient." Where are the studies showing that the current source of cumulative poison - hydrofluorosilicic acid - is safe and effective? The source? I don't even know if that matters. Ummmm... Barry (www.polisource.com), The source of hydrofluorosilicic acid sort of does matter because its source is the pollution scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry. In addition to the cumulative poison fluoride, the toxic pollutant hydrofluorosilic acid also carries other poisons - including lead and arsenic. We are putting lead in our drinking water knowing that there is no safe low dose of lead. Masters and Coplan [2000?] reportedly offer evidence that hydrofluorosilic acid is harming people. See www.fluoridealert.org. Sally Stride writes: Children¹s sodium fluoride anti-cavity supplements were never found safe or effective by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They were never even tested. Maybe not by the FDA, but I'm pretty sure there's a strong argument to be made for fluoride in drinking water being good, with studies to back it up. Too many health experts support it for there not to be evidence. You're "pretty sure" there's a "strong" argument to be made because "too many health experts support it"? Don't forget that the dental and medical religions are branches of politics - and the fluoride polluters stood (and still stand) to lose huge damage awards. Chris Bryson [The Fluoride Deception 2004] - as I read his book - offers evidence that "fluoridation" was a "too many health experts" ignoring the LACK of science in a PAID rush to give the cumulative poison fluoride a pristine image. REMEMBER: Hydrofluorosilic acid was never tested for safety and effectiveness - when "too many health experts" used it to replace rat poison/sodium fluoride (also untested) in our drinking water. The ol' "too many health experts" gag worked for decades - then people started looking for research supporting fluoridation - and didn't find much of substance. Dr. Hardy Limeback, former fluoride supporter (and head of preventive dentistry at Univ. of Toronto) finally looked for himself - apologized for parroting the dental religion line - and now calls fluoridation "totally criminal." (Limeback was so quoted in Bryson's 2004 book The Fluoride Deception.) Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon
|
|
#10
July 28th 05, 01:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Attn: "Quackbuster" Steve Barrett, MD ): Please
change your discussions of fluoridation. See below. Steve, please "quackbust" the MOST obvious quackery. See the very end of this post. THE F CRIME (#13): "QUACKBUSTER" BARRETT PROMOTES THE F CRIME... "Quackbuster" Steve Barrett, MD wrote in the introduction to a 1988 article: "Fighting fluoridation is actually quite simple. Just claim that it causes cancer...Or suggest that it is a form of pollution..." http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/cdic/cdcb/M...e/html/abuse%2 0of%20literature.htm "Quackbuster" Barrett left the same sentence in a Feb. 2005 revision of his announcement of the passing in the year 2000 of Dr. John Yiamouyiannis... http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/yiamouyiannis.html The toxic chemical used most in "fluoridation" - hydrofluorosilic acid - IS a form of pollution. It is washed from the pollution scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry. Also, there is epidemiologic evidence that boys drinking water with the cumulative poison fluoride ("fluoridated" water) raise by 700% their risk of developing bone cancer/osteosarcoma. It was recently revealed that that epidemiological evidence was concealed by Harvard's Chester Douglass, PhD. See www.fluoridealert.org See also: The F Crime (#11): Harvard crap and rat poison for kids http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3755 "Quackbuster" Steve Barrett, MD also wrote in 1988: "...Dr. Yiamouyiannis...public health officials regard him as a terrorist..." http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/cdic/cdcb/M...e/html/abuse%2 0of%20literature.htm LOL! A terrorist would try to put toxic pollution INTO America's drinking water. Dr. Yiamouyiannis's worked like hell to get toxic pollution OUT of America's drinking water. "Quackbuster" Barrett is always entertaining. Thanks for the laugh, Barry! Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon in article , Barry at wrote on 7/27/05 3:39 PM: The cumulative poison fluoride is NOT a "nutrient." There are no known fluoride deficiency diseases. From http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/cdic/cdcb/M...html/abuse%20o f%20literature.htm Abuse of the Scientific Literature in an Antifluoridation Pamphlet ... Is Fluoride an Essential Nutrient? The question of the essentiality of fluoride is really one of semantics. Most researchers consider fluoride essential for proper development of bones and teeth. Whether it is essential for reproduction, growth, and other body functions has been difficult to determine because of the difficulties in developing a totally fluoride-free diet. Yiamouyiannis capitalizes on this dilemma by selectively interpreting a number of scientific articles as indicating that fluoride is not an essential nutrient. On reviewing the full texts of the reports cited in the "Lifesavers Guide" it is obvious that three of his nine citations actually confirm that fluoride is essential. Two of the references make no specific claims either way and methodological errors were obvious in another source listed. Barry, I'm pretty sure that "essential nutrient" means we have to have it. I don't think we have to have the cumulative poison fluoride - but I could be wrong. Michael Connett at www.fluoridealert.org wrote a great essay I seem to remember. I think he will likely answer your question authoritatively. Oh wait - the phrase was "essential for proper development of bones and teeth." I don't think the cumulative poison fluoride is essential for that either. You yourself alluded to the dental fluorosis epidemic - and it's hard to believe that bones are made stronger what with the increase in hip fractures in fluoridated areas - not to mention the recently revealed cover-up of the epidemiologic/possible link between osteosarcoma and fluoride. Again, Michael Connett will likely answer your question authoritatively. Todd Dr. Gastaldo Hillsboro, Oregon PS FOR "QUACKBUSTER" BARRETT... In addition to correcting your fluoridation info... Please "bust" this massive MD mass baby strangling/quackery for profit scheme... NOTE: AMERICAN MEDICINE¹S **MOST** FREQUENT SURGICAL BEHAVIOR IS OBVIOUS CHILD ABUSE THE WAY OBSTETRICIANS PRACTICE IT... Retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG is recommending that his fellow obstetricians temporarily strangle babies - to help obstetricians learn why they should not immediately clamp/cut umbilical cords thereby PERMANENTLY strangling babies/robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley indicates that EVERY CESAREAN BABY is being robbed of up to 50% of his/her blood volume. HERE IS DR. MORLEY RECOMMENDING THE **TEMPORARY** BABY STRANGLING ON THE WEB... "[T]he umbilical cord [is] immediately closed between finger and thumb...The [fetal heart rate/FHR] will decelerate quickly to about 60 bpm...the color will change from purple-pink (normal at birth) to pallid blue (vaso-constriction and asphyxia.)...Few midwives or obstetricians will be able to observe, without interference, a deep, prolonged FHR deceleration on a non-breathing newborn for a period of 60 seconds.* Common sense will soon release the finger and thumb." http://www.cordclamping.com/acog-cp.htm Hardy [Oregon Atty Genl Hardy Myers], some OREGON obstetricians may be going to Dr. Morley's website and experimenting with his temporary baby strangling - as they engage in PERMANENT baby strangling - robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume. Dr. Morley MEANS well * but it is simply (obviously) illegal for him to encourage obstetricians to commit ³lesser² child abuse in order to encourage them to stop committing greater child abuse - robbing babies of up to 50% of babies¹ blood volume. See Michigan Baby Strangler George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3739 Again Hardy, I know that you may be unable to investigate MDs because you part of the medico-"legal" "just us" system... But at least offer assistance to pregnant women in your circle of family and friends, OK? END NECESSARY DIGRESSION... There is also the matter of obstetricians closing birth canal up to 30% and keeping birth canals closed the "extra" up to 30% as they pull with hands, forceps and vacuums - sometimes pulling so hard they rip spinal nerves out of tiny spinal cords. The fact that they are LYING to cover-up is perhaps the most obvious clue that they know they are committing massive crime. For the Four OB Lies... See ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606 See also: RNs: 'Stitches, episiotomy, and postpartum complications' (Maternal care learning needs) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3725
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| The F Crime (#3): Fluoridation appears to cause osteosarcoma(bone cancer) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 20th 05 01:28 AM |
| Dr. Connett, CDC and the F crime | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 9th 05 09:31 PM |
| Babies, a massive slow chemical burn crime, QUILES faucet fraudand 'our National leader' Paul Connett, PhD (for anti-fluoride folks only) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | June 22nd 05 02:15 AM |
| Kids should work... | Doan | Spanking | 33 | December 10th 03 08:05 PM |
| Kids should work... | Doan | Foster Parents | 31 | December 7th 03 03:01 AM |
Linear Mode
