New Zealand Government Preparing To Drown Whole Country In Fluorides

New Zealand Government Preparing To Drown Whole Country In Fluorides

The issue here is, who is going to decide whether the people of New Zealand are fluoridated? Who will be in charge? Communities, or the federal government?

From The New Zealand Herald, 3/13/16 – my comments are in CAPS:

Related: Fluoride Action Network: A Report From New Zealand

“MPs are expecting furious opposition to proposals on fluoridated drinking water as public hearings kick off this week.”

“The first select committee hearings will be held tomorrow on the Government’s plan to transfer the responsibility for fluoridating water from councils to district health boards (DHBs).”

[TRANSFER THE DECISION FROM LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO LARGER FEDERAL ENTITIES – A TAKEOVER.]

“In a rare move, Parliament’s Health Committee has agreed to hear from every individual or organisation that asked to make an oral submission.”

“In total, 60 organisations and 140 individuals are expected to give presentations, and the committee will be broken up into sub-committees in order to hear them all.”

[IN OTHER WORDS, THE FULL COMMITTEE WON’T HEAR ANY INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATION – A CLUE THAT THE “TOLERANCE” FOR EVERY POINT OF VIEW IS JUST A SHOW.]

“’The committee felt that hearing from everyone on this was important’, committee chairman and National MP Simon O’Connor said.”

“’It’s a passionate topic. People feel very strongly about it and we thought … the best way to manage that was to allow them to be heard’.”

[YES, HEARD, BEFORE BEING IGNORED. THE COMMITTEE HAS ALREADY MADE UP ITS MIND.]

“Most of the submissions to the committee were against the law change, O’Connor said.”

“At present, territorial authorities decide whether to fluoridate the local water supply.”

[JUST AS IT SHOULD BE.]

My further comments: right now, only 27 territories (out of a total of 67) in New Zealand have decided to fluoridate their water supplies.

The majority of territories understand the toxicity of fluorides.

The federal government wants to take over and fluoridate everybody. The feds consider anti-fluoride activists the enemy and bunch of crazies.

 Why Does NZ Still Fluoridate? TV Commercial FFNZ

I also suspect that money is an issue. Somebody close to the federal government is poised to make large profits from selling the chemicals, when the government decides the whole population should be toxified.

“Fluoride makes your body absorb extra aluminium, and where does the aluminium go? Your brain! And what metal shows up alarmingly in the brains of Alzheimer victims? You guessed it.”

– Dr William Douglass

For the edification of New Zealand’s feds, who believe “the science is settled” and opposing activists are anti-science, here is a famous bombshell letter, written by the head of the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) union of in-house scientists, William Hirzy.

Quoting from a May 1, 1999, statement –

“Why EPA’s Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation” – written by William Hirzy, PhD, [Union of Scientists] Senior Vice-President, Chapter 280:

“…our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion.

These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis.”

In support of this concern are results from two epidemiology studies from China that show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.”

Another troubling brain effect has recently surfaced: fluoride’s interference with the function of the brain’s pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body’s internal clock, doing such things as governing the onset of puberty.

Jennifer Luke has shown that fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin. She showed in test animals that this inhibition causes an earlier onset of sexual maturity, an effect reported in humans as well in 1956…”

EPA fired the Office of Drinking Water’s chief toxicologist, Dr. William Marcus, who also was our local union’s treasurer at the time, for refusing to remain silent on the cancer risk issue.

The judge who heard the lawsuit he [Marcus] brought against EPA over the firing made that finding – that EPA fired him over his fluoride work and not for the phony reason put forward by EPA management at his dismissal. Dr. Marcus won his lawsuit and is again at work at EPA.”

“…data showing increases in osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey, Washington and Iowa based on their drinking fluoridated water. It was his [Dr. Marcus’] analysis, repeated statements about all these and other incriminating cancer data, and his requests for an independent, unbiased evaluation of them that got Dr. Marcus fired.”

Regarding the effectiveness of fluoride in reducing dental cavities, there has not been any double-blind study of fluoride’s effectiveness as a caries preventative.

There have been many, many small scale, selective publications on this issue that proponents cite to justify fluoridation, but the largest and most comprehensive study, one done by dentists trained by the National Institute of Dental Research, on over 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years, shows no significant differences (in terms of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among caries [cavities] incidences in fluoridated, non-fluoridated and partially fluoridated communities.

The latest publication on the fifty-year fluoridation experiment in two New York cities, Newburgh and Kingston, shows the same thing.

The only significant difference in dental health between the two communities as a whole is that fluoridated Newburgh, N.Y. shows about twice the incidence of dental fluorosis (the first, visible sign of fluoride chronic toxicity) as seen in non-fluoridated Kingston.”

“John Colquhoun’s publication on this point of efficacy is especially important. Dr. Colquhoun was Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, the largest city in New Zealand, and a staunch supporter of fluoridation – until he was given the task of looking at the world-wide data on fluoridation’s effectiveness in preventing cavities.

The paper is titled, ‘Why I changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation.’ In it Colquhoun provides details on how data were manipulated to support fluoridation in English speaking countries, especially the U.S. and New Zealand. This paper explains why an ethical public health professional was compelled to do a 180 degree turn on fluoridation.”

“…mutation studies…show that fluoride can cause gene mutations in mammalian and lower order tissues at fluoride concentrations estimated to be present in the mouth from fluoridated tooth paste. Further, there were tumors of the oral cavity seen in the NTP cancer study…further strengthening concern over the toxicity of topically applied fluoride.”

So, in addition to our concern over the toxicity of fluoride, we note the uncontrolled – and apparently uncontrollable – exposures to fluoride that are occurring nationwide via drinking water, processed foods, fluoride pesticide residues and dental care products

For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.”

“We have also taken a direct step to protect the [EPA] employees we represent from the risks of drinking fluoridated water… the union filed a grievance, asking that EPA provide un-fluoridated drinking water to its employees.”

“The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear.

Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA’s standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry.”

That last sentence lets you know where the fluorides are coming from.

So… an employees’ union of scientists within the EPA has made its position clear. Quite clear.

 Fluorides, the atomic bomb, and fake news

The mainstream press has refused to cover this story in any significant way for 17 years. The federal government of New Zealand doesn’t care about any of this.

They just want to give the gift of poison to whole population of the country, and call it science.

Related Articles:

Fluoride & The Brain

The Spice That Prevents Fluoride From Destroying Your Brain

Former EPA Senior Scientist Confirms Fluoride Lowers Children’s IQ

Undeniable Evidence From Numerous Studies Proves That Fluoride Causes Cancer

Boycott Tourism In NZ: More Fluorides?

New Zealand Government Plans To Drown Its Citizens In Toxic Fluorides

Auckland: No Consultation Needed For Stopping Or Starting Fluoridation + Fluoridation Decision Is An Attack On
Democracy

Fluoride: Poison On Tap Official Trailer

The Fluoride Deception

New Zealand Fluoridation Review Unscientific And Intellectually Dishonest Say International Reviewers

Fluoride Free New Zealand: Dirty Science

Secret Fluoridation Review Totally One-Sided Admits Chair

New Zealand granted a river the same legal rights as a person, setting a precedent for globalists to grant “human rights” to inanimate objects to expand government power.

 In New Zealand, Lands and Rivers Can Be People (Legally Speaking)

The New Zealand parliament passed a bill recognizing the Whanganui River as a “living entity” with the same human rights enjoyed by citizens.

“I know the initial inclination of some people will say it’s pretty strange to give a natural resource a legal personality,” said Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson. “But it’s no stranger than family trusts, or companies or incorporated societies.”

Imagine the implications of this if global bodies start granting “human rights” to landmarks and other geographic features in an effort to expand their “global warming” agenda.

This would fall right in line with the “Problem – Reaction – Solution” playbook used by the UN and the EU: declare “global warming” as a threat to the “human rights” of, say, a beach, then declare it an “international humanitarian crisis” that can only be fixed with “solutions” which of course trample national sovereignty.

And if you honestly think politicians care about the “existential threat” of “man-made global warming,” then ask yourself, why do they keep attributing to the problem by flying private jets around the world to give speeches on climate change?

It’s pure hypocrisy – and textbook Machiavelli deception.

But it still works because a large portion of the population are still duped into thinking that government is always benevolent and exists to take care of you, which of course is another deception pushed by politicians who gain power only at the expense of individual rights, and I don’t mean the rights of a river, but of human beings.

“It seems that those who believe in global warming are more likely to trust government,” Zero Hedge once lamented. “What happens when they wake up and discover nothing is as they thought it would be?”“Meanwhile, the energy output of the sun is dropping faster than anyone expected. Snow has actually begun falling in Tokyo and other parts of eastern Japan.

[In 2016] Tokyo recorded its first November snowfall since 1875 when the government started collecting records. But hey. Now they want to call this climate change and somehow still attribute this to mankind.”

Related: Chinese Company Nongfu Spring Wants More New Zealand Water

From: JonRappoport