DERRICK BROZE: “Historical Court Case — The Fluoride Cover Up Will Soon Be Exposed”

A historical trial weighing the risks of water fluoridation is set to begin in San Francisco on Monday June 8.

For the last four years, attorneys with the Fluoride Action Network have been fighting a legal battle against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over whether water fluoridation violates the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). A recent ruling by the judge in the case has now set the stage for a federal trial which will include three international experts in neurotoxicity testifying on the dangers of water fluoridation.

The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) is set to argue that water fluoridation violates the TSCA provisions which prohibit the “particular use” of a chemical which has been found to present an unreasonable risk to the general public. Under section 21 of the TSCA citizens are allowed to petition the EPA to regulate or ban individual chemicals.

The FAN began their legal battle in November 2016 when they joined with five organizations and five individuals to present a Citizens’ Petition under Section 21 of TSCA to the EPA. The Citizens’ Petition calls on the EPA to prohibit the addition of fluoridation chemicals to U.S. water based on the growing body of evidence showing that fluoride is a neurotoxin at doses currently used in communities around the United States.

The plaintiffs in the case include: FAN, Moms Against Fluoridation, Food & Water Watch, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology and the Organic Consumers Association.

The plaintiffs’ have presented studies to the court detailing the evidence of neurotoxic harm as part of their Proposed Findings of Fact. Dr. Paul Connett, PhD, director of FAN, points to a number of recent studies detailing the affect of fluoridation on IQ levels.

“As of 2020 there have been 72 fluoride-IQ studies, of which 64 found a lower IQ among children with higher fluoride exposure,” Connett stated. “Many of the earlier studies were in places with elevated natural fluoride levels. There is now very strong evidence that fluoride damages both the fetal and infant brain at the levels used in artificially fluoridated areas.”

While the court will allow FAN to present evidence related to the harms caused by water fluoridation, the court has stated that the EPA cannot present information related to the purported benefits of fluoridation. The move was seen as a victory for FAN and opponents of fluoridation. The EPA also attempted to exclude three experts from speaking at the trial. However, the court over ruled the agency and will allow the expert testimony. Experts include Dr. Philippe Grandjean of Harvard and the University of Southern Denmark, Dr. Howard Hu of the University of Washington, and Dr. Bruce Lanphear of Simon Fraser University in British Columbia.

The trial is set to begin on June 8th via Zoom. I will be reporting on the trial for The Last American Vagabond. Stay tuned for daily video reports and articles.

What is Fluoride?

The substances added to municipal water supplies known by the name “fluoride” are actually a combination of unpurified byproducts of phosphate mining. In the United States thousands of tons of fluorosilicic acid is recovered from phosphoric acid plants and then used for water fluoridation. During this process the fluoride ion is created.

This process of taking waste from the phosphate industry and putting it into drinking water has long been criticized for its effects on human health and the environment. It is well known that water fluoridation has led to dental fluorosis for millions of children. This discoloring of the teeth was called “cosmetically objectionable” by the Centers for Disease Control.

Beyond the cosmetic effect there have been several studies indicating overwhelming health issues related to fluoride, especially for children. Another study found a connection between exposure to water fluoridated at relatively low concentrations and a reduced IQ among children.

As recent as September 2017 the journal Environmental Health Perspectives published the study “Prenatal Fluoride Exposure and Cognitive Outcomes in Children at 4 and 6–12 Years of Age in Mexico,” examining the results of prenatal exposure to fluoride and the potential health concerns. The researchers called the study “one of the first and largest longitudinal epidemiological studies to exist that either address the association of early life exposure to fluoride to childhood intelligence or study the association of fluoride and cognition using individual biomarker of fluoride exposure.” The study was funded in part by the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

The researchers found that higher prenatal fluoride exposure was associated with lower scores on tests for cognitive function at age four, and between ages six and twelve. The researchers acknowledge that their results are “somewhat consistent” with past ecological studies which indicate children living in areas of high fluoride exposure have lower IQ scores than those in low-exposure areas.

A study published in the journal General Dentistry warns that infants are at risk of dental fluorosis due to overexposure from fluoride in commercially available infant foods. The researchers analyzed 360 different samples of 20 different foods ranging from fruits and vegetables, chicken, turkey, beef, and vegetarian dinners. Chicken products had the highest concentrations of fluoride, followed by turkey. The New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF) reports that the fluoride levels were due to pesticides, fertilizers, soil, groundwater, and/or fluoridated water. The high levels found in the chicken and turkey can be attributed to “fluoride-saturated bone dust” involved in the process of mechanically separating the meat.

Another study published in Environmental Health found a potential connection between fluoride exposure and the prevalence of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children. The researchers studied data on ADHD among children age four to seventeen collected in 2003, 2007 and 2011 as part of the National Survey of Children’s Health, as well as state water fluoridation data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) collected between 1992 and 2008 . It is the first study to analyze the relationship between exposure to fluoridated water and ADHD prevalence.

The team discovered that children living in areas with a majority of the population receiving fluoridated water from public water systems “tended to have a greater proportion of children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD.” The researchers concluded that:

“this study has empirically demonstrated an association between more widespread exposure to fluoridated water and increased ADHD prevalence in U.S. children and adolescents, even after controlling for socioeconomic status (SES). The findings suggest that fluoridated water may be an environmental risk factor for ADHD.”

In addition to these studies related to fluoride and children, dozens of other studies have indicated a variety of health problems. A recent study published in the Journal of Analytical Chemistry indicates that fluoride ions found in fluoridated water and toothpaste may lead to an increase in Urinary Stone Disease (USD). The study was conducted by chemists from Russia and Australia, led by Pavel Nesterenko at the University of Tasmania. The team studied 20 urinary stones from patients at a Russian hospital and discovered fluoride ions in 80% of the stones. This could be due to high levels of fluoride in patients’ urine, possibly from drinking water containing fluorides and ingesting fluoride toothpaste.

A study published in the BMJ’s Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health confirmed fluoride’s negative effect on the thyroid gland and a possible connection to depression, weight gain, and other negative health effects. Researchers with the University of Kent in England examined thyroid activity for those in areas with fluoridated water and those without. The team examined 95 percent of the English population in 2012 and 2013 and found that high rates of underactive thyroid were 30% more likely in areas with high fluoride concentration. An underactive thyroid can lead to depression, weight gain, fatigue and aching muscles.

Question Everything, Come To Your Own Conclusions.

 

See source article for reference links

 

~via TheLastAmericanVagabond.com

‘CLIMATE’ CONTROLLED ~ “Elite-Owned ‘Time’ Names Elite-Stooge Greta Thunberg as 2019 Person of the Year — Which They Were Always Going to Do. YAWN.”

 

~via

Elite-Owned Time Names Elite-Stooge Greta Thunberg as 2019 Person of the Year Which They Were Always Going to Do. YAWN.

 

Mind-controlled psychopathy… set to music…

 

Related article:

‘ENVIRONMENTAL’ SHAM ~ Lisa Renee on the Chilling Agenda of the ‘Climate Change’ Movement

 

‘ENVIRONMENTAL’ SHAM ~ Lisa Renee on the Chilling Agenda of the ‘Climate Change’ Movement

“The use of inverted systems in the non-profit organizations and religious institutions that are set up as storefronts used for international money laundering or criminal activities under the guise of humanitarian causes or charities, when the funds are collected for the express purposes to continue to enforce human misery and human suffering. The Power Elite families have methodically and patiently grown their global agenda through specific objectives, which they sought to create through the use of Social Engineering and hidden technological Mind Control, along with gaining surveillance over our every move. What are the primary goals and methods used by the NAA and Power Elite in their quest to fulfill the Luciferian Covenant and install the New World Order, a totalitarian and dystopian nightmare of consciousness enslavement? Let’s review a brief summation of these goals. (1). Control the bio-neurology of the human population through electromagnetic signals, prescription drugs, medical devices, GMOs, and an assortment of toxins and poisons placed in the air, water and food supply that generate many human diseases, while ensuring that the knowledge to cure these diseases is made unavailable to the masses. (2). Control the weather and climate by intentionally poisoning and polluting the earth and natural resources through hidden technology and secret military agendas, in order to make these resources as scarce as possible, while spreading misinformation in the mainstream about environmentalism and climate changes. (3). Use people’s genuine concern about the environment as a way to manipulate the unaware population into approval for directing taxpayers’ dollars and massive funding into the Controllers’ inverted systems, via their organized institutions to launder money into approved projects like chemtrailing and gang stalking. (4). These schemes are designed to profit a few in order to protect the major industrial conglomerates, while actually enforcing and promoting policies that destroy the environment, rather than protect the earth’s environment.”

~Lisa Renee

~via

New World Order

“We’ll be watching you…”

~Greta Thunberg

 

“‘Thunberg’ only happens when it’s raining crocodile tears…” If you find yourself falling for the cabal’s mind-control propaganda bait… please… ‘Greta’ grip on reality…

~Ascension Avatar

 

 

ECOWATCH: “Trump’s EPA Won’t Ban Brain-Damaging Pesticide”

“Siding with pesticide corporations over the health and well-being of kids is the new normal at the EPA. Today’s decision underscores the sad truth that as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children’s safety.”

Ken Cook – President, Environmental Working Group

 

President Donald Trump‘s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will not ban the agricultural use of chlorpyrifos, a toxic pesticide that the EPA’s own scientists have linked to brain damage in children.

The decision, announced Thursday, was a response to a petition from public health and environmental groups who had pushed for a ban. The agency ruled that “critical questions remained regarding the significance of the data” on the pesticide’s health effects.

The ruling is the latest in a series of Trump EPA decisions that weaken chemical safety rules. In April, it opted against a full ban on asbestos in favor of restrictions that critics say could usher in new uses. Also this year, it issued restrictions on a paint-stripping chemical that were weaker than a ban proposed during the Obama years. Finally, just last week, it widely expanded the use of the pesticide sulfoxaflor, which its own scientists have shown can harm bees.

“Siding with pesticide corporations over the health and well-being of kids is the new normal at the EPA,” Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook said in a statement. “Today’s decision underscores the sad truth that as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children’s safety.”

The EPA’s decision came after a federal court ordered the agency to make a final call on the ban by mid-July. Chlorpyrifos has been banned for home use since 2000, but farmers have continued to spray it on crops like apples, strawberries, broccoli and corn. The Obama administration had initiated a ban on agricultural uses of the pesticide, but Trump’s EPA reversed it, setting off a legal battle with environmental advocates. In the absence of federal action, states have moved against the pesticide on their own. Hawaii became the first state to ban chlorpyrifos in 2018, and California announced it would ban the chemical in May. New York is also moving towards a ban.

Research has linked chlorpyrifos exposure to lower IQ, memory loss, breathing problems and increased risk of autism in babies born to mothers who lived near farms where it was sprayed.

“What we have with chlorpyrifos is multiple academic research projects that have shown that actual children who actually live in California are being harmed by this chemical,” said Center for Environmental Health senior scientist Caroline Cox. “It’s pretty rare that you have that kind of evidence for any toxic chemical.”

So how was the EPA able to decide that the science wasn’t conclusive? The ruling was a direct consequence of former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt‘s decision to limit the kinds of studies that regulators could use to make decisions.

Under Mr. Pruitt, the agency proposed a rule saying it could not consider scientific researchunless the raw data behind it was made public, saying the issue was a matter of transparency. Scientists argued that studies measuring human exposure to pesticides and other chemicals often rely on confidential health information and argued the E.P.A.’s real motivation was to restrict the ability to develop regulations.

In opting not to ban chlorpyrifos, the E.P.A. rejected a major study conducted by Columbia University on its effects on children in New York City. The E.P.A. said because it was unable to obtain the raw data and replicate that study, which linked the insecticide to developmental delays, it could not independently verify the conclusions.

The 12 groups who brought the petition against the EPA vowed to keep fighting.

“We will continue to fight until chlorpyrifos is banned and children and farmworkers are safe from this dangerous chemical,” they said in a joint statement reported by Earthjustice, the legal organization that represented the groups.

Former senior EPA attorney Kevin Minoli thought that federal courts would ultimately rule in favor of a ban.

“To me, this starts the clock on the use of chlorpyrifos on food crops in the US.”

 

~via EcoWatch.com