Very interesting paper. Just adds more proof to what most people know. Poison are bad...mkay. ALWAYS take the Organic and preferably non GMO. waiting for the shills to come out of the woodwork to vote brigade this one.

The paper is a catalog of correlations, so expect them to trot out "correlation != causation."

Regardless, this paper is the best one I've seen yet on the topic, and I really appreciate the biochemical mechanisms. I'll be forwarding this along. I'm surprised it has been around for a whole year before I saw it.

Glyphosate is the main ingredient in RoundUp, made by Monsanto, for those who don't know.

I think this is true. I think this is the exact reason everyone is suddenly allergic to wheat in the last 5-10 years. Because it's coated in roundup. The wheat is genetically modified to be resistant to it, but we are not, so we get sick.

The part you bolded at the end is why this has become epidemic so recently. All the spraying right before harvest used to not be done, but now it's done more and more.

This may already exist but does a list exist of foods known to be treated with roundup (i.e. corn) and those which may not (i.e. root vegetables)?

You may find this helpful

Labeled (‘L’) Uses of Glyphosate in Vegetable Crops

Problem: Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide - meaning that it is absorbed through leaves and other plant surfaces and enters the circulatory system of the plant, spreading from root to fruit.

GMO "Roundup-Ready" crops such as corn, soy cotton and others may receive multiple applications of glyphosate (to kill weeds) during their life cycle. The glyphosate will NOT kill the GMO crops - but it saturates all parts of the plant - including those that are used as food for humans or animals.

Enjoy!

Thanks, friend.

How does one go about making sure they avoid glyphosate?

Localvoring the best you can is the only way I've found so far.

Bonus! Stimulate local farmers/CSAs! Invest locally, baby.

The nutrients in farmed produce are vastly different from the nutrients in "produce" you can freely acquire in your local wooded areas.

I don't personally believe any kind of real "collapse" is imminent, as I used to. Back then, I was quite paranoid and took seriously the opinions of people who kept claiming that some kind of Apocalypse was around the corner. A person can only hear so many of these failed warnings until they finally realize it's likely all bullshit.

With that said, much good came from those restless nights when I wondered if I could find food next week. I became motivated in educating myself about finding food without purchasing it. I read a bunch of books on foraging for food, gardening, etc. I read about wild mushrooms, wild berries, nuts, homemade rodent traps, and so on.

Now, I have this hobby. I go out into the various trails and wooded areas and I have memorized many places where certain berry patches are, black walnuts trees, wild grapes, mulberry trees, apple trees, rosehip bushes, etc. I eat for free most hikes, and have memorized the fruiting seasons for many local edible plants. I also grow a lot of my herbs and make my own jelly. I get plenty of exercise and nutrition because of that paranoid delusion I used to live, so it wasn't all bad. Plus, if it wasn't a paranoid delusion and a collapse is right around the corner, I know how to take care of myself.

Fuck yeah man. I can't wait to hang out some day. It'll be fun.

Poison wheat, manufacture gluten-free fad = profit

Also sells heartburn pills like mad--Nexium, Prilosec, and the like are big, big business. And everyone I know is on them, then end up with joint pain and other "fibro-type" issues due to vitamin deficiencies¹ (this happened to me). I try to tell everyone, "cut out all wheat unless you can get organic, non-GMO kind and your heartburn will disappear, honest! Just try it!" Some don't even try, others try, find it to be true, but just can't get off the bread and end up back on the PPI inhibitors.

I think there's a cumulative effect to it, too, as if I know I can't avoid the stuff, I'll fast for a few days to ensure I don't get any in my system, then I can eat a normal American diet for two weeks or so without a heartburn attack.

¹ Many scholarly articles out there wrt PPI inhibitors' dangerous side effects, here's an overview the NY Times did: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/combating-acid-reflux-may-bring-host-of-ills/?_r=0

Great post, though saying 'PPI inhibitors' is like saying 'ATM machine' or 'PIN number', hehe.

I think that the entire 'gluten intolerance' thing is most assuredly caused by glyphosphate. Not a doubt in my mind.

Hah, that's karma. I was mocking someone in my head for writing "OS System" yesterday, only figures I'd do the same today. :)

RIP...in peace.

saying 'PPI inhibitors' is like saying 'ATM machine' or 'PIN number', hehe.

Consider the alternative: "PP inhibitors".

Say it out loud. ;-)

I know, I know. Was just a joke!

And yes, 'PP Inhibitor' sounds goofy.

66% upvoted... Monsanto shills are working their magic.

Kek

I can't believe we actually spray poisons on our food. It's worse than Idiocracy...at least they thought plants crave electrolytes.

Is there an expected corresponding lack of people with celiac disease in other countries where glyphosate-base pesticides are not used?

Who do you work for, anyhow? Seriously, I'm curious.

No one, you silly person.

all i know is 9 time out of 10 when i eat bread products i get a fit of serious sneezing. that never used to happen.

Been gluten free for 7 years, all my lifelong digestive pains went away magically a month after I started...

Facts:

"Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine) is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide used to kill weeds, especially annual broadleaf weeds and grasses known to compete with commercial crops grown around the globe. It was discovered to be a herbicide by Monsanto chemist John E. Franz in 1970.[3] Monsanto brought it to market in the 1970s under the trade name Roundup, and Monsanto's last commercially relevant United States patent expired in 2000."

"Glyphosate's mode of action is to inhibit an enzyme involved in the synthesis of the aromatic amino acids: tyrosine, tryptophan, and phenylalanine. It is absorbed through foliage and translocated to growing points. Because of this mode of action, it is only effective on actively growing plants; it is not effective as a pre-emergence herbicide."

"Glyphosate does not bioaccumulate in mammals; it is excreted in urine and feces.[20] It breaks down variably quickly depending on the particular environment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate

Ok, so it kills plants by blocking synthesis of three amino acids through transdermal absorption by the living plant. So what are these amino acids?

"Tyrosine (abbreviated as Tyr or Y)[1] or 4-hydroxyphenylalanine, is one of the 22 amino acids that are used by cells to synthesize proteins."

"Mammals synthesize tyrosine from the essential amino acid phenylalanine (phe), which is derived from food. The conversion of phe to tyr is catalyzed by the enzyme phenylalanine hydroxylase, a monooxygenase. This enzyme catalyzes the reaction causing the addition of a hydroxyl group to the end of the 6-carbon aromatic ring of phenylalanine, such that it becomes tyrosine."

"In dopaminergic cells in the brain, tyrosine is converted to l-dopa by the enzyme tyrosine hydroxylase (TH). TH is the rate-limiting enzyme involved in the synthesis of the neurotransmitter dopamine. Dopamine can then be converted into catecholamines, such as norepinephrine (noradrenaline) and epinephrine (adrenaline).

The thyroid hormones triiodothyronine (T3) and thyroxine (T4) in the colloid of the thyroid also are derived from tyrosine."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrosine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine

Key points: Tyrosine is used in the production of T3 and T4 by the thyroid. Tyrosine is synthesized from phenylalanine, which comes from food. in the brain tyrosine is converted to l-dopa by the enzyme tyrosine hydroxylase which is the rate-limiting enzyme involved in the synthesis of the neurotransmitter dopamine. In the brain, dopamine functions as a neurotransmitter—a chemical released by nerve cells to send signals to other nerve cells.

"Tryptophan (IUPAC-IUBMB abbreviation: Trp or W; IUPAC abbreviation: L-Trp or D-Trp; sold for medical use as Tryptan)[2] is one of the 22 standard amino acids and an essential amino acid in the human diet."

"For many organisms (including humans), tryptophan is an essential amino acid. This means that it is essential for human life, cannot be synthesized by the organism, and therefore must be part of our diet. Amino acids, including tryptophan, act as building blocks in protein biosynthesis. In addition, tryptophan functions as a biochemical precursor for the following compounds (see also figure to the right):

Serotonin (a neurotransmitter), synthesized via tryptophan hydroxylase.[10][11] Serotonin, in turn, can be converted to melatonin (a neurohormone), via N-acetyltransferase and 5-hydroxyindole-O-methyltransferase activities.[12] Niacin is synthesized from tryptophan via kynurenine and quinolinic acids as key biosynthetic intermediates.[13] Auxin (a phytohormone) when sieve tube elements undergo apoptosis.[14]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tryptophan

Key points: Tryptophan is an essential amino acid, and humans cannot produce it. Brain chemical Serotonin is synthesized from Tryptophan, and Melatonin (which regulates sleep) from Serotonin. Niacin is also synthesized from Tryptophan.

"Phenylalanine /ˌfɛn(ə)lˈæləˌniːn/ (abbreviated as Phe or F)[2] is an α-amino acid with the formula C6H5CH2CH(NH2)COOH. This essential amino acid is classified as nonpolar because of the hydrophobic nature of the benzyl side chain. L-Phenylalanine (LPA) is an electrically neutral amino acid used to biochemically form proteins, coded for by DNA. The codons for L-phenylalanine are UUU and UUC. Phenylalanine is a precursor for tyrosine, the monoamine signaling molecules dopamine, norepinephrine (noradrenaline), and epinephrine (adrenaline), and the skin pigment melanin."

"L-Phenylalanine is biologically converted into L-tyrosine, another one of the DNA-encoded amino acids. L-tyrosine in turn is converted into L-DOPA, which is further converted into dopamine, norepinephrine (noradrenaline), and epinephrine (adrenaline). The latter three are known as the catecholamines."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenylalanine

Key points: Phenylalanine is biologically converted into L-tyrosine which in turn is converted into L-DOPA, which is further converted into dopamine, norepinephrine (noradrenaline), and epinephrine (adrenaline) as we have previously seen.

Conclusion: Glyphosate's mode of action is to inhibit an enzyme involved in the synthesis of the aromatic amino acids: tyrosine, tryptophan, and phenylalanine. All three of these amino acids have a direct link to human brain chemicals Melatonin, Serotonin, Dopamine, and/or Adrenalin as well as T3/T4 Thyroxin production depending on amino acid. Traces of Glyphosate may remain on Roundup resistant crops and the exact nature of what is in GMO crops is largely unknown. US citizens since Roundup's discovery in 1970 have suffered from a number of afflictions related to sleep disorder, thyroid disorder, serotonin disorder, and general depression not recorded prior.

Thank you for this! I'm going to show it to my grandmother who recently told me I should try going gluten free, I about lost it and tried explaining to her that it's not the food it's the roundup that's sprayed on our foods that's causing the issues, as usual she thought I was crazy and doesn't understand why I want to feed myself and my daughter organic and non-gmo foods. Maybe this will help!

Unfortunately, nutrition being a massive topic (as is toxicology), the regulatory agencies being incompetent/coerced, and certain industries profiting from the naivety of the nation, it takes quite a while to dig through all the trash and come to a satisfactory conclusion about a proper human diet. The question of conventional vs organic isn't even the tip of the iceberg.

I'm thinking about making a subreddit for this topic. Would there be any interest in this? Otherwise, I suppose the next best thing would be continuing what I do here and sharing the lesser-known health studies that are out there.

Here's some more for you:

Higher antioxidant and lower cadmium concentrations and lower incidence of pesticide residues in organically grown crops: a systematic literature review and meta-analyses of 343 studies PDF

"Research spanning three decades suggests that grass-based diets can significantly improve the fatty acid (FA) composition and antioxidant content of beef, albeit with variable impacts on overall palatability."

Milk from grass fed cows may be nutritionally superior to milk from cows eating conserved grass.

Here's a bunch of studies on BPA

2ppm fluoride damages cerebralvascular integrity.

Full PDF of 2ppm fluoride study

Impact of fluoride on neurological development in children, Harvard meta-analysis of 27 studies

Tons of information I've collected on fluoride

Because of soil depletion and faster growth rates of crops, many foods today are much less nutritious.

Zinc deficiency mechanism linked to aging, multiple diseases

The multifaceted and widespread pathology of magnesium deficiency.

Eating 2 brazil nuts per day just as effective as taking selenium supplements (and much cheaper). http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/87/2/379.full

I appreciate all the information! I'll read it over the weekend. I think it would make a great subreddit, we already see some of it here so why not a place just for it!

Very good research OP! I'll look into this.

In my eyes ANYTHING that this monster company does is suspect. They are attempting to 'soft-kill' the entire world along with the Gates Foundation.

They are attempting to 'soft-kill' the entire world along with the Gates Foundation.

I don't think they are intentionally, that would reduce their customer base.

I think rather they're just obsessed with profit, and human health be damned. Just like any company. If they're soft-killing humans it's not intentionally, it's by negligence. At least that's what occam's razor implies.

It's much more efficient to brainwash persons responsible for the food production of the general population than it is to brainwash the entire population into consuming a detrimental product, although, I believe both methods are used, albeit they are concentrating on different areas for each approach. Convince the population that there is nothing wrong with the product, and convince the farmers to use the product in new, creative ways...perhaps through the use of targeted advertising and cool videos.

An historical example would be Edward Bernays. Sigmund Freud's nephew, Edward Bernays, the guy who convinced American women to smoke cigarettes and helped overthrow the democratically elected president of Guatemala on behalf of the United Fruit company (Chiquita), also helped the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa) find a market for Hexafluorosilicic-acid, a byproduct of aluminum production. Working on behalf of Alcoa and various special interest groups, he successfully convinced the American public that water fluoridation was safe and beneficial to human health. This was achieved by using the American Dental Association in a highly successful media campaign.

I really hope the thing about water fluoridation isn't true. It just seems too outlandish.

Chapter 12 of this book (PDF) is about Bernays and water fluoridation. Chapter 11 is about Hodge and the Manhattan project involvement.

Bernays admitted this information in a BBC interview.

So how much profit is this making the aluminum industry? Really how much money is this guy making from selling Hexafluorosilicic-acid? Ten million dollars a year? How much is being used and has that amount changed? Has there been lobbying to promote higher use of it in water? It seems like he would want to sell as much as possible. Are there any other industrial uses for it besides water fluoridation?

These are some questions that spring to mind when considering this. If I had fuller information on most of these questions I would feel in a much better position to judge the intended purpose of putting Hexafluorosilicic-acid in our water. Although according to the wiki page the LD50 is 70mg/kg and the suggested amount by the govt is 1g/L, so...

The fluoride today comes from fertilizer plants since it's cheaper, but it used to come from scrubbing smoke stacks at aluminum plants.

That isn't really what I want to concentrate on, though. First of all, any studies that had any connection to the government during that time period, especially connections to the Manhattan project, are immediately discredited due to conflicts of interest. Any studies after this that show any apparent "safety" of this highly reactive substance need to be scrutinized heavily.

Your point about the LD50- that has very little to do with the overall question of "is this a good idea to put in water?" The water in the US is typically 1-4 ppm fluoride.

2ppm fluoride damages cerebralvascular integrity.

Full PDF of 2ppm fluoride study

Water is not the only source of fluoride either. You get a dose of about 1 mg from brushing 2-3 times per day. It's used on crops (see cryolite), and therefore you eat it. Similarly, a sodium fluoride residue is left on produce in food warehouses from the use of sulfuryl fluoride. You breathe it if you live near any plants that emit fluoride. Green and black tea contains 5-9 ppm. (1 ppm is the same as 1mg/L, meaning every liter of water you drink has 1 mg of fluoride)

5 mg per day in individuals low in iodine results in major effects on the thyroid (used to be prescribed for hyperthyroidism). At about 10 mg, it causes brain damage according to a Harvard meta-analysis of 27 studies. That is just what is provable in humans. As you can see from the rat study I cited earlier, it's much easier to prove harm using animals because of the completely controlled environment. You have to look for effects at higher doses in humans because it's harder to prove anything from all of the variables.

Why would 2-5 ppm affect the thyroid and brain, but 1 ppm is safe? 1 ppm still probably affects the brain and thyroid, but it's too difficult to prove.

Have you ever seen pictures of dental fluorosis? Why would fluoride only target the teeth? It used to be said that drinking it is how you get the tooth effects. That is no longer the case. It's admitted that fluoride has a topical effect, not systemic. Why is it still in the water?

I was doing some reading and the bloodflow to the pineal gland is the second highest in the body, after the kidneys. And those are the 2 most likely organs to calcify. Especially considering many countries used to have it and then later banned it, it might be safe to say that it's not healthy. I still don't understand the motivation for putting it in the water then though. Is it profit, or is it simply a misguided attempt to improve dental health?

I'll offer my personal opinion, although I know I will regret it.

The "safety" of fluoride was a scientific sham. This is obviously a fact going by studies when fluoride was initially proposed safe for drinking water. The "safety" was a lawsuit deterrent many decades ago. The nuclear arms buildup of the US would have been obviously halted had the Fluoride authorities declared it unsafe, so they had to "put their money where their mouth is," so to speak. Declare it's good for children and add it to drinking water.

If the health establishment actually cared about the health of average Americans, they would be healthy. This is not the case. I can cite numerous examples unrelated to this discussion, but that is a waste of time.

This shit is unnecessary chemical warfare on the great unwashed. Anyone with half a brain is able to see the real purpose of these poisons being pushed on humanity by a military industrial complex semi-governmental war corporation.

Good stuff man. Lets also note here that glyphosate was created and is produced by Monsanto and is used to make Round-Up, which is then sprayed on all of their crops (which are designed specifically to be extra-resistant to this herbicide). Yet another reason why the company should be dismantled and its remains scattered to the wind.

Roundup is also used on crops just prior to harvest. This is known as crop dessication and crop-topping.

It's interesting that they call it "desiccation" - why not just dry the crops using conventional means? If the goal is simply to dehydrate completely, why is it necessary to achieve that using a known toxin that the crops have already been doused in long before being ready to harvest?

These are of course rhetorical questions but I still find the choice of words interesting.

I've posted this idea before and got completely and utterly berated after the Monsanto PR team came out to play. I don't know ANYONE in ANY social circles that are such supporters of GMO, let alone Monsanto products.

I've been told by alleged 'farmers' that this is bullshit because this roundup costs money and desiccation is essentially spraying money for nothing. I haven't ever farmed wheat, so I cannot say I am anywhere near a subject matter expert, but neither is some random anon internet user; even more so on the advertising base of reddit.

One of the "farmers" you're talking about showed up in this thread. Coincidentally, this person has a 26 day old account and tried using that stupid rebuttal you're referring to. I believe I thoroughly debunked this rebuttal if you'd like to take a look.

So, i'm a farmer who, like you, has concerns about gmo/pesticides/herbicides, but this article is BS. No one sprays anything on crops right b4 harvest because there is no benefit to do so. The crop has already been made at that point and any expenses incurred at that point just eat at your bottom line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_desiccation

Here's farmers talking about using roundup on crops just prior to harvest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEfbznelWs

Here's another one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNBo4C96Ju0

So, I've seen your argument all over the web by people claiming to be farmers as a response to this issue. Should I believe that everyone is ignorant of their own profession, which brings up even more questions, such as are you even following the legal guidelines for pesticide application, or should I believe that you're paid by pesticide manufacturers and you think everyone is simply too stupid to perform a simple google search? Both options are equally troubling.

I assure you i am a farmer, I grow soy and corn in the midwest, I know a lot about growing said crops in the midwest. I will allow that I do not know much about growing wheat in Canada, it's not my business, and i can also assure you that I am up to date on all chemical handling and application regulations that affect my farming operation. That being said, the evidence you provide does not do much to further your argument which i can only assume defends description of the article referenced above.

All of the features of celiac disease can be explained by glyphosate's known properties. The common practice of desiccation and/or ripening with glyphosate right before the harvest ensures that glyphosate residues are present in our food supply.

For your evidence you provide one Wikipedia page about crop dessication, and even casually reading it you can tell that whoever wrote the article has no idea what they are talking about. The article from wikipedia implies that glyphosate is used on apples, raspberries, and wine??? No one is going to spray glysophate on their apple orchard to make the fruit ripen faster, it would kill all the trees, no one is spraying it on the apples after harvest because that isn't how it works.

Your next evidence is a video from AgPhd where they are talking about how dumb of an idea it is to chemically kill your crop before it's ready. Dumb idea means not common practice.

Lastly you post a video where a Manitoba wheat agronimist talks about what works in Manitoba. Well maybe that's how they do it in manitoba, but it is, at best, a regional practice that is used only when the only other option is losing the crop.

This brings me back to my point that this is not by any means a common farming practice, and is uncommon enough that i have never seen or heard of it being done around where I farm ever.

It has exploded in use over the last 5 years. http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/real-reason-for-toxic-wheat-its-not-gluten/

I read the article you posted and if it is true to the extent that the author claims, then indeed I find that information somewhat disturbing. I did notice that the article mentioned that Roundup isn't licensed to be used as a dessicant, and im sure that it is illegal to apply roundup less than 2 weeks before harvest anyways. Also after doing a bit of reading in some farming blogs that cater to wheat farming, it sounds like it isn't very common practice at all, for the reasons I had guessed at b4, at least not in Kansas anyways. Their estimate was that 1% of the wheat crop in the largest wheat producing state was treated with roundup in that way. As a consumer of wheat, any being treated in that way is troubling to me, and i for one wouldn't be opposed to seeing that type of practice banned, mostly because such a ban wouldn;t negatively affect my operation at all and would probably help my bottom line as it would cause a decline in planted acres and would cause a rise in commodity prices

Kudos to you for having an open mind and not ignoring evidence. What you say about it just being 1% is interesting, I had not considered that before.

I used to live in Kansas about 15 years ago, a couple streets away from a huge gluten-processing factory. I also have a very serious wheat allergy, as does my dad (his is not as serious). I often wonder if they're related.

I am just another human on this rock same as anyone else, but i make my living in an occupation that not many people understand anymore. I am also a responsible landowner who doesn't automatically drink the kool aid that the monsanto rep is offering, but at the same time i don't drink the enviros kool aid either, not without something to back up the claims. And if i see an article with a sensational title/description about something that i do know something about, i am going to offer my opinion about it knowing that the average redditor most likely has never been to a real farm, or met a real farmer.

Sounds like a reasonable approach to me. You've got a good head on your shoulders.

Your next evidence is a video from AgPhd where they are talking about how dumb of an idea it is to chemically kill your crop before it's ready. Dumb idea means not common practice.

I appreciate that you've moved your position entirely and accept that round-up is used as a crop desiccant just prior to harvest. The part I highlighted is what I have a problem with. You simply didn't watch the video and/or didn't comprehend what they said. They have the opinion that crop dessication is not the best idea for seed harvest, but admit that many people do it, and mention that crop dessication is useful for many other purposes. Seed harvest is not the only reason for growing crops. Watch the 3 minute video.

Well, my position hasn't really changed, when i originally posted my thinking was "hey something about farming, and im a farmer, and ive never heard of this shit" Then I did a bit more research found about shit they do outside of the cornbelt, which is admittedly not something that i have spent alot of time thinking about. What caught my attention was the overly histrionic nature of the article that cartoonishly portrays farmers as some kind of comic book villian types scheming to pour roundup into your cheerios.

but this article is BS. No one sprays anything on crops right b4 harvest because there is no benefit to do so. The crop has already been made at that point and any expenses incurred at that point just eat at your bottom line.

Remember that?

I do, and i explained my thinking at the moment i posted that, and technically i was wrong on the point that no one does that, i admit that. However i still call BS on the article that describes this as commonplace or common practice for the reasons ive already described.

Crop desiccation is real. It helps make swathing the wheat much easier, which is why they use it right before harvest. It kills the wheat, which is not GMO resistant to RoundUp, which makes harvest and post-processing easier. It's obviously bad for our health though.

I got a PM from someone and I would like to convey the additional information they gave me. This person is a farmer. They say:

"fyi wheat isnt modified to be resistant to glysophate, gly actually kills the wheat. its used a desiccant in order to harvest quicker and not have to swath it.. im a organic farmer so im not bashing you or anything. just wanted you to have the facts. cheers"

I found that very interesting so I wanted to share.

Hah, that's karma. I was mocking someone in my head for writing "OS System" yesterday, only figures I'd do the same today. :)

saying 'PPI inhibitors' is like saying 'ATM machine' or 'PIN number', hehe.

Consider the alternative: "PP inhibitors".

Say it out loud. ;-)

I'll offer my personal opinion, although I know I will regret it.

The "safety" of fluoride was a scientific sham. This is obviously a fact going by studies when fluoride was initially proposed safe for drinking water. The "safety" was a lawsuit deterrent many decades ago. The nuclear arms buildup of the US would have been obviously halted had the Fluoride authorities declared it unsafe, so they had to "put their money where their mouth is," so to speak. Declare it's good for children and add it to drinking water.

If the health establishment actually cared about the health of average Americans, they would be healthy. This is not the case. I can cite numerous examples unrelated to this discussion, but that is a waste of time.