Friday, February 29, 2008

Friday 29 February 2008

The latest NO2ID news

  • The right of the police to keep DNA records of individuals who have been proved innocent has been challenged in the EU Court of Human Rights by two such gentlemen. They rightly contend that is a breach of their right to privacy.
  • Out of the 4 million people whose DNA is held on the government’s database, 550,000 samples have been found to have the wrong individual’s attached to them or that they are misspelt.
  • Despite this blunder and countless others regarding the lack of security employed in keeping citizens’ personal details secure, Home Office minister Meg Hillier has stated that there will be stringent security and no risks of ‘disks flying round’ when the National Identity Register comes into being. Oh yes!
  • Medical professionals have been raising concern that the government will profit by allowing pharmaceutical and insurance companies access to 60 million patients’ health records. According to one Labour MP, Kevin Baron, this view is ‘palpable nonsense’. With the government continuously lobbied by big pharma, who knows what kick-backs there might be. But that doesn’t get away from the fact that in a moral sense, releasing confidential patient records to commercial organisations is wholly wrong.
  • Biometric ID is to start in earnest in Britain with airport workers. Unite union members are asking for full consultation with the airport group BAA after it was found out that BAA was quietly in talks with the Home Office over the plan.
  • Students may be forced to hold ID cards if they want to apply for a student loan - and just how many students don’t?

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

The ongoing fluoridation saga

I have received a reply - if a rather predictable one - from the Department of Health in response to my letter to Alan Johnson on the 5th of February on the fluoridation of public water supplies in England, reproduced below.

Here is my response. The link to the critique mentioned in the letter can be found at

Alex Demitris
Customer Service Directorate
The Department of Health
Richmond House
79 Whitehall

21 February 2008

Dear Mr Demitris

Fluoridation of water supplies

Many thanks for your reply to my letter dated 5 February in which you state your department’s position regarding the fluoridation of water in England.

Unfortunately, your comments in no way ameliorate my concerns regarding this initiative.

Although you say that no ill-effects of water fluoridation have been identified in the UK, using the University of York’s review to substantiate that assertion, I would like to draw your attention to the enclosed critique of that review by Paul Connett, PhD which highlights that review's many shortfalls and its exclusion of animal and toxicological studies in its compilation of evidence. (See item 2.8 in that critique).

It is the wider implications and dangers of water fluoridation that concerns me most and appears to be largely absent from the York review. Although the maintenance of 1ppm of fluoride in our drinking water is to be the applied benchmark, its introduction and maintenance at that level will filter through into all our beverages and processed foodstuffs and it is this multiplier effect that is most worrying. 1ppm may not effect those who drink little but will have a much greater effect on those who habitually drink more - tea (which already includes natural levels of fluoride) and beer drinkers for example, or those in heavy manual jobs that need to re-hydrate themselves on a regular basis. Why should they necessarily have to incur the cost of buying bottled water to avoid running the risk of imbibing higher amounts of fluoride?

Since your department’s whole premise for the introduction of fluoride in water supplies is to combat the reduction in tooth decay, then why, as suggested by Nobel Laureate, Dr. Arvid Carlsson, cannot topical treatment be provided. Teeth are easily accessible to such treatment.

I also find it quite amazing that you are pressing ahead with such an initiative when your department admits that it is still instigating further research into the effects of fluoridation. Surely this is the wrong way round. (See 2.5 - 2.7 in critique).

Let me conclude by listing just a few of the scientific developments that have been noted in 2007 regarding concerns over the collateral damage that water fluoridation may and is believed to be responsible for.

1. Impairment of brain development
In 2007 research was conducted in Brazil, China, India, Italy, Mexico and the US all of which strengthened concern previously raised by the US National Research Council the previous year. According to the authors “We found that exposure to F (fluoride) in urine was associated with reduced Performance, Verbal, and Full IQ scores before and after adjusting for confounders. The same pattern was observed for models with F in water as the exposure variable.... The individual effect of F in urine indicated that for each mg increase of F in urine a decrease of 1.7 points in Full IQ might be expected”.

2. Links to skeletal fluorosis
Since the 1930s, the link between too much fluoride intake and stiff and painful joints has been known. Although the symptoms can mimic other forms of arthritis more research is required to establish the true source of such complaints in the knowledge that excess fluoride can be a cause. A lifetime’s intake of fluoridated water and other beverages could be problematic, particularly in the elderly. As one ages the ability of the liver to discharge toxins becomes impaired, thus their greater retention having an increasingly deleterious effect on bones.

3. Silicofluorides may increase lead exposure
Last year, scientists at the University of North Carolina demonstrated that when brass water pipes containing lead were submerged in water simultaneously containing chlorine and fluoride, the leeching effect of the pipe’s lead content was increased causing increased toxification of the water supply. Although the tests were conducted with fluoride added at 2ppm, even at 1ppm - the recommended level - the leeching effect would still be tangible.

4. Fluoridation linked to sperm damage
Subjecting rats to fluoride concentrations of 10ppm have shown to seriously effect their sperm levels. Since rats are particularly resilient to fluoride it is thought that an equivalent human concentration - 2ppm - may affect humans similarly.

5. Effects of fluoride on the pineal gland
Dr Jennifer Luke of the University of Surrey has discovered that the pineal gland is the primary target of fluoride accumulation. "In conclusion, the human pineal gland contains the highest concentration of fluoride in the body. Fluoride is associated with depressed pineal melatonin synthesis by prepubertal gerbils and an accelerated onset of sexual maturation in the female gerbil. The results strengthen the hypothesis that the pineal has a role in the timing of the onset of puberty. Whether or not fluoride interferes with pineal function in humans requires further investigation."

These are just some of the many areas in which further research is needed. Is it worth subjecting whole populations to these possible, and in some cases, very likely ill-effects for the sake of a small minority of society who cannot, or will not, engage in basic human hygiene?

I believe that it should be the responsibility of parents to ensure that their children look after their teeth without resorting to a state recommendation that everyone should have their water fluoridated.

Until there is a sound and honest verdict given, based on rational and scientific evaluation of the benefits and dis-benefits of fluoride in our water supplies, I believe that any further moves to fluoridate them should be suspended.

Yours sincerely

Friday, February 15, 2008

Friday 15 February 2008

Latest from the NO2ID

The number of people deeply troubled by the spectre of ID cards is rising. A Joseph Rowntree survey showed that those who are very concerned has grown from 17% last year to 25%. Overall, those who consider ID cards to be a bad idea now has just begun to outweigh those who are unconcerned.

Bridport Town Council in Dorset has passed a motion against the government’s ID scheme, agreeing not to take part in any pilot scheme or feasibility programme but would draw the line at unlawful un-cooperation. Not good enough!

The EU is looking at an entry-exit system using biometric identifiers, for each third-country national admitted to the Schengen area (those 25 countries within the EU where borders have been effectively eliminated). As the UK is outside of the Schengen area, implementation of this agreement could require all UK residents wishing to travel to mainland Europe to be subject to these biometric checks. Coercion into this scheme of biometric checks could start - according to the EU’s Justice Commissioner, Franco Frattini - on a ‘voluntary’ basis. But Frattini is believed to favour border surveillance levels to be at least equal to, if not in excess of those used in the US.

According to a poll conducted by the government’s Identity and Passport Service and reported by the Daily Mail shows that less than 25% of those questioned believe that the ID card scheme will work.

Every child in Britain is to have their exam results registered on a national database for life.

More evidence of official inability to safeguard confidential information. Now the NHS admits to having lost some four thousand smartcards which are used to access its computer systems.

The Guardian newspaper has published two articles within a week of each other over its acute concern of Britain repidly becoming a surveillance state and is calling for its halt. Over quarter of a million intrusions of private citizens were recorded last year. According to one correspondent “When the Stasi started spying on me, as I moved around East Germany 30 years ago, I travelled (to Britain) on the assumption that I was coming from one of the freest countries in the world to one of the least free. I don't think I was wrong then, but I would certainly be wrong now”. We are sleepwalking into a surveillance society, and we must wake up".

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Tuesday 12 February 2008

Reactionary police state news continues to roll in. The latest ‘initiative’ is the ‘mosquito’, a high-frequency sound device that creates discomfort to under 25s when used.

The idea is to use the device to break up anti-social behaviour, but, as always, when dealing with social disbehaviour, reactionary measures always predominate and no thought is given to attempting to solve the root of the problem. This indiscriminating device, although, I would suspect is highly directional, would, nevertheless unnecessarily cause discomfort to innocent children in the vicinity and I would also guess that its medical effects, especially if repeatedly used, just haven’t been considered.

Of course, it doesn’t take a PhD to realise that reactionary measures such as these only further alienate those who are targeted and drive larger wedges between elements of society instead of creating co-operation - more draconian doctrine from the divide and rule camp.

The Children's Commissioner for England and the civil liberties group Liberty, are calling for them to be scrapped. They are rightfully concerned that there is an increasingly negative attitude being adopted by authorities in dealing with social problems.

Michigan State Police have just released a preposterous video entitled ‘7 Signs of Terrorism’ to encourage ‘snitching’ upon those who may seems to be indulging in terrorist acts. This has all of the Orwellian hallmarks of the ‘Youth League’ doctrine of spying on those who don’t fall into line, and owes nothing to those who commit genuine terrorism like the CIA or FBI who stage such terrorist activities usually designed as a prelude to eventually usher in this very same Orwellian dictat. If taken seriously it could just about incriminate everyone. When I take my camera to the States in a few weeks time and decide to take a few photos in public places I may well be setting myself up for a bit of trouble!

Friday, February 08, 2008

Medicine - the number one killer?

In the current issue of Nexus magazine is a revealing article by biochemist and toxicologist, Walter Last. He shows how iatrogenic diseases (diseases caused by medical treatment) are the leading cause of death in the West. With an annual fatality rate in the US of 783,936 in 2001, caused by fatal drug reactions, medical errors or unnecessary medical and surgical procedures, this outstripped the death rate caused from heart disease and cancer in the same year.
Ironically, when doctors went on strike in Los Angeles county in 1976, the death rate fell by 18% and in 1973 in Israel a similar strike saw the number of deaths during that period reduce by a staggering 50%!

Last discusses the pioneering work done by Dr Orian Truss in the early 50s in which he saw a direct correlation between candisiasis - a fungal over-growth in the intestines that can cause food allergies, muscle aches and many other eventually fatal complications - and antibiotics.

Antibiotics are widely prescribed among the medical profession and aren’t the only ones to cause such problems. Drugs used in chemotherapy, anti-inflammatory steroidal and other long-term drug therapies can have an equally debilitating effect on patients which can also eventually result in death.

Last explains that under normal conditions the body produces natural amounts of intestinal flora, mainly based on lactobacteria, which helps in the digestion of food and at the same time protects the body from harmful bacteria, such as salmonella. This ability is severely compromised when these drugs are continually administered and candida establishes itself as a result. This process is known as dysbiosis. “With chronic dysbiosis, the intestinal wall becomes inflamed, causing ulcers, appendicitis, malabsorption and Crohn’s disease and as the intestinal membrane erodes, the patient develops multiple food allergies, arthritis and autoimmune diseases”, Last adds. The vicious cycle is exacerbated by the medical profession’s preference to administer more antibiotics in an erroneous attempt to treat these conditions.

The good old days

Although, back in the early 1900s, diets were often high in saturated fats, heart attacks were rare, contrary to present-day philosophy. The ascent of heart attacks and cardiovascular disease began with the pasteurisation of milk and the use of chlorine in water supplies to kill bacteria. It seems that these preventative measures to kill off natural bacteria in both milk and water had prevented a natural line of defence in our bodies derived from such bacteria. In countries such as Africa, China, Japan and other parts of Asia where the chlorination of water and pasteurising of milk were not introduced, heart attacks and cardiovascular diseases were unknown.

Also back in the last half of the nineteenth century, scarlet fever, diptheria, whooping cough and measles had declined by 90% following improvements in public health and before the introduction of vaccines. These very vaccines have, however, brought with them an increase in the death rate from the targeted diseases as well as some cot deaths with immunised babies. The presence of toxic heavy metals in vaccines have also been connected to the rise in autism and Attention Deficiency Disorders. The Amish in America, who refuse vaccinations, suffer from none of these.

Until 1980, the rates of type 2 diabetes and obesity were fairly uncommon and stable. But when health authorities started to advise against eating foods containing fats and cholesterol, recommending instead, a higher intake of carbohydrates - exacerbated by a food industry peddling such badies - obesity and associated type 2 diabetes increased from just 15% among the US population in 1980 to a chronically obese rate of 31% today, and if one adds the marginally obese, that figure rises to almost 65%.

Chemical cocktails

One of the main problems with the introduction of new drugs is that they are not tested for long enough. With continual administering the accumulative effect of many drugs can be devastating whereas their short-term use may be acceptable. Many people can find themselves prescribed a whole plethora of different drugs for different complaints and it is the mixing of such medications which is rarely, if ever, examined. Several years on a cocktail of drugs can create an entanglement of effects, almost impossible to unravel.

Natural is best

Many proven natural cancer treatments have been traditionally shunned by conventional medical science and alternative health practitioners who offer such remedies have often being brought before the courts and imprisoned.

The driving force behind this rejection of natural health remedies, not just with cancer but with many other diseases, is the drug cartel lobby that virtually runs our health services in the West. Not only do they have a strong influence in directing doctor’s to prescribe their, at best doubtful and at worst harmful wares but also direct and fund clinical research, whose reports weigh heavily in favour of their products while rubbishing the claims of alternative natural practitioners products and claims. This big pharma influence also begins in the medical schools whose students are unknowingly influenced with biased teaching.

The message one gleans from Last’s evidence is clear. Eat and live healthily, sourcing natural remedies wherever possible, rendering your GP and hospital as a last resort.

Further reading: ‘Heal Yourself and Healing Foods’ by Walter Last (Penguin Books)

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Letter to Alan Johnson

Alan Johnson
The Health Secretary
The House of Commons

5 February 2008

Dear Sir

Fluoridation of water supplies

It is with regret that I read in the press this week of the renewed intiative from your department to fluoridate mains water supplies in areas in England with the highest rates of tooth decay.

The reason given - that it would help safeguard the teeth of children who do not regularly brush their teeth - is the most disingenuous argument I have heard on any subject for many years and its naivety beggars belief. For decades now, a mass of evidence has existed in the public domain of the dangers of fluoridating water and the highly negative effects on the body that this poisonous toxin has when imbibed constantly over many years.

Must we all be subjected to its ill-effects on the basis that certain parents are incapable of ensuring that their children clean their teeth or that they cannot afford the price of a tooth brush! Extensive and proven research has shown that dental decay is more a matter of bad diet and fluoridating water supplies does nothing in arresting decay and in the long term poses far greater dangers to the well-being of those that are constantly subject to it.

I enclose just a mere fraction of the evidence posted on the Internet and also draw your attention to Christopher Bryson’s well-researched book on the subject ‘The Fluoride Deception’ published by the Seven Stories Press.

Such niave reasoning behind introducing fluoridation into England’s water supplies, only leads me to believe that there is another agenda at work here, either generated by the industries who benefit from the disposal of this toxic waste, or something more fearful. Was not the fluoridation of water first introduced to the inmates of Auschwitz by IG Farben. I’m sure that wasn’t for altruistic reasons!