Dr. Paul Connett on the Top 7 Reasons to End Fluoride – Toronto

On Monday, April 22, 2013, I held an event at the North York Civic Centre hosting Dr. Paul Connett Ph.D on the artificial fluoridation of Toronto’s water supply. You can see the full video presentation on YouTube here.

Dr. Connett is a graduate of Cambridge University and holds a Ph.D. in chemistry from Dartmouth College. After teaching for 23 years in Canton NY at St. Lawrence University, he retired from his full professorship in chemistry in May 2006.  Dr. Connett was kind enough to grace Toronto with his presence before travelling on April 23rd to testify against the addition of hydrofluorosilicic acid (fluoride) to the water supply in various municipalities in Quebec. Quebec currently has one of the lowest rates of artificially fluoridated water in Canada at just 6.4% with their largest city Montreal, having never fluoridated their water supply.

After another incredibly informative presentation, Dr. Connett reviewed the top 7 reasons why the artificial fluoridation of any water supply is absurd, immoral, unethical, and goes against one of our most basic human rights which is our right to informed consent.

Here are the top 7 reasons to end the artificial fluoridation of any water supply as presented by Dr. Paul Connett:

1) The Results of the Largest Study Ever Conducted on Fluoride and Tooth Decay

In 1991, the largest study ever conducted on tooth decay was performed by Brunelle and Carlos at a cost of $3,600,000 examining over 39,000 children in 84 fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities. The results showed that out of the 128 tooth surfaces in the human mouth, 0.6/1 tooth surface may have been saved through fluoride ingestion. 

Under true informed consent where you the patient makes the choice of ingesting a medication based on the potential risk/reward analysis provided by your doctor, would you choose to ingest fluoride as a medication every single day for the rest of your life to save 0.6 of a single tooth surface in your mouth?

2) Fluoride Works Topically

In 1999, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the USA conducted a study with 30 scientists to review the literature on the intake of fluoride. The CDC, although a strong advocate for the addition of hydrofluorosilic acid to the water supply, determined “… laboratory and epidemiologic research suggests that fluoride prevents dental caries predominately after eruption of the tooth into the mouth, and its actions primarily are topical for both adults and children” citing the peer reviewed study from JD Featherstone.

The CDC themselves say that fluoride works topically, yet in the very same paper, they then advocate continuing the addition of fluoride to the water supply so that the population continues to ingest it… Something seem wrong here?

3) Population Overexposed to Toxic Fluoride

In 2006 the National Research Council of the National Academies of Science (NRC) released a 450 page review of fluoride toxicity titled Fluoride in Drinking Water – A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. The results of the 3 year study showed that fluoride at 4 ppm (4mg/liter of water) placed the target population at increased risk of teeth, bone and joint damage. This lead the NRC to recommend that the “safe” level of fluoride in drinking water be dropped.

4) Increased Risk of Bone Cancer

In 2001 a study was produced by Bassin et al.  from Harvard University “Age-specific fluoride exposure in drinking water and osteosarcoma.” The results showed that there was a statistically high correlation between increased fluoride intake in young males, and increased incidence of bone cancer later in life. The same finding was not true for females however Bassin acknowledged that more study was required either way.

The interesting point to acknowledge is that Bassin found a link between fluoride and osteosarcoma using the same data analysed from a previous study (McGuire, Douglass, et al. 1995) where no link was found. How could two separate researchers find different results when analysing the same data? The fact that Professor Douglass, who found no link to osteosarcoma from fluoride ingestion, also worked for Colgate and donated millions of dollars to Harvard, brought forward enough controversy for even Fox News to question.

5) Fluoride May Have Nothing At All to Do With Tooth Decay

In 2009 Warren et al. conducted a complete study on total fluoride exposure as it relates to tooth decay and dental fluorosis. Their findings suggested that “achieving a caries-free status may have relatively little to do with fluoride intake, while fluorosis is clearly more dependent on fluoride intake.” (Warren 2009).

As Health Canada’s dangerously outdated endorsement of fluoride is based on studies as old as the 1930’s studies conducted by Dr. H. Trendley Dean who observed a correlation between higher intakes of fluoride, less tooth decay, yet more dental fluorosis, the question remains… Would you risk increased dental fluorosis for decreased tooth decay?

6) 41% of the Population Now Has Dental Fluorosis

Dental fluorosis is a mottling and discolouration of the teeth and can be a very debilitating disease. Increased fluoride ingestion has been directly linked to this disease and was observed as far back as 1931 causing a “browning” of the teeth.

In 2010, the CDC reported that dental fluorosis affected 41% of the population as the following graph shows:

Note that an alarming 3.6% of the general US population are now diagnosed as having “moderate or severe” dental fluorosis. Dental fluorosis is highly problematic especially for those who consume a large amount of fluoridated water compared to the general population such as fire-fighters, athletes, diabetics etc… Hence the controversy of dose vs. dosage. Although the dose of fluoride added to water at 1 ppm is very accurate, the dosage is different for everyone depending on how much water they consume.

7) Fluoride Reduces IQ in Children

In India and China, where naturally occurring levels of fluoride are very high in some areas, numerous studies are being conducted to understand the effect of this poison on the human mind and body. The most concerning of which was the recently published 2012 Harvard School of Public Health study Developmental Fluoride Neurotoxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The results were repulsive.

Zhang et al. showed that those children who were exposed to high levels of fluoridation exhibited significantly lower IQs supporting the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride on children’s neurodevelopment.

This is an extremely important blog post for me this evening ladies and gentlemen. As I have gotten older in life I have come to realize certain facts about North American culture that are far different from the picture painted in our public schools.

One is that we are told to believe many things that simply aren’t true. I was one of the people who blindly followed the herd and said “fluoride is good for my teeth.” With time however, and with my own research, I have found that this could not be further from the truth. When we are told to blindly believe an idea without asking where that idea came from, and what scientific studies were conducted to back those ideas up, we become our own worst enemies.

Another point I have realized is that there are many people out there who know the truth however disturbing it may be, and yet, have allowed themselves to forget about it and merely brush the truth aside.

Don’t do that.

It is never too late to do the right thing. It is never too late to live, love and and to be human. To love people you don’t even know. To help humanity be stronger than we have ever been.

I challenge anyone to refute the studies cited above. I challenge any so-called public health figure to debate Dr. Connett on national television.

And the next time you think that fluoride is good for you ask yourself one question… Says who?

www.fluoridealert.org

How to Solve Toronto’s Traffic Congestion Problems: Top 5 Reasons Why We Need Subways

Toronto is growing fast. There are now over 55,000 condo units being built around the GTA landing it the number one spot in North America for new high rise construction. With massive growth happening in the outskirts as well, more people flock into and out of the city on a daily basis. So what does this mean for roads?

Things are about to get a whole lot worse.

If over 200 condos worth of new homes are to be built, the surrounding transit system has to handle the onslaught of new riders. Either public transit needs to cope with the new demand or 55,000 homes worth of new cars are about to riddle the streets. The hairy reality we face however is that our roads are already congested and our transit system so outdated that Toronto City Council is now forced to deal with years of neglect and pathetic transit planning.

This leaves only one option to solve Toronto`s transit problems:

Build subways.

Done.

We need subways, and we need them immediately.

Look at subway maps around the world:

New York Subway

Frankfurt Subway

Tokyo Subway

Toronto Subway

Does something seem wrong here?

On the international subway scale, Toronto is so barbaric… so out of touch with reality it is scary to think that politicians like Karen Stintz are in charge of something as important as transit infrastructure. Tell me something Karen, after the LRT is built and traffic builds up again to the point of deadlock, will subways suddenly make sense to you?

Here are the top 5 reasons why Toronto needs subways:

1) Time

As we get older we realize with more urgency perhaps that time is our most valuable resource. Having more time means having less stress, being more productive, and generally being happier. The simple expansion, for example, of the Sheppard line from Yonge to Downsview would result in millions of hours of individual time being saved over many years. The current set-up, where people have to take the Finch line south, all the way around and back North to Downsview, is not only ridiculous, it is a complete waste of time… Your time! One simple extension could save the average person over one hour a day resulting in giving them months of their life back. More subways means more time.

2) Safety

More subways below-ground means less TTC roadblock buses and LRT aboveground. As the roads become ever more congested the rate of car accidents also increases. As discussed in my previous blog post Why Speed Doesn’t Kill: Bad Drivers a Result of NO Government Training, it is even more concerning that Toronto has no formal driver training process leaving new drivers and immigrants to learn the rules of the road from people who may not be qualified. These very same people then drive alongside our bus drivers who are in charge of protecting the lives of their daily commuters.

Dealing with untrained, sometimes unlicensed drivers, puts bus drivers at increased accident risk.  This makes bus drivers just as susceptible to stress, carelessness or road rage as the rest of us. The impact of  bus driver carelessness can be felt as in this article posted by the Toronto Sun regarding the untimely death of a 43 year old Toronto woman killed on a TTC bus in 2011.

3) Efficiency

Subways are extremely efficient. They run directly off the power grid and transport a large number of people per watt of energy used. New methods are being continuously developed to make them even more efficient and harness the wasted power they produce. Since subways are underground, they are shielded from the majority of our harsh Canadian winters which is even more important in the long-run. Since they do not interfere with above ground road traffic, subways are also more efficient for drivers.

4) No Other Viable Alternative

The problem with Light Rail Transit (LRT) is simple… When the roads are congested to the point of standstill traffic, building a rail-road line right smack down the centre of it isn’t exactly going to make things speed up now is it? Since construction has to happen aboveground, the inconvenience to daily commuters is astonishing. Point and case as with the development of the new York Region LRT scam line from Warden to Yonge. Traffic has become disastrous along Highway 7 and its neighbouring streets as massive construction has been taking place since 2009 and may last until 2020! Notice how the construction crews have stopped at all the major bridges? Just wait until the “relocation” of those bridges begins. That is not only going to become a project in extreme patience for the everyday commuter, the estimated $2-3 BILLION budget will be easily burned.

As Toronto begs to expand its subways, York Region spends billions on an LRT while their buses are empty.

5) Cost

Yes subways are expensive… in the beginning. However other than the initial upfront costs of construction, the benefits begin to add up immediately after opening:

• Saving people time.
• Reduced aboveground traffic and accidents.
• Energy efficiency.
• Reduced impact on drivers.
• Ease of travel.
• Speed.
• Convenience.
• Stress reduction.

If a massive subway project were to begin in Toronto, the money spent would immediately be recirculated throughout the city. The all-Canadian subway workforce would need food, shelter, entertainment, transportation and more. “Made in Canada” regulations would benefit hundreds of Canadian businesses who supplied the expansion. What “cost” is there really when these points are factored into a subway expansion plan? When people have more time to pursue happiness on a daily basis?

Not only should the upfront costs of Toronto’s subway expansion be calculated, the resulting boom in the local economy and the freedom they create for the people must be taken into account so that 15 years into the future and beyond, our great City of Toronto is ready to handle the further population explosion and increasing need for speedy transit.

The World is our Teacher.

The Canadian Fight for GMO Labelling is Winning

Ladies and gentlemen, keep up the great work. We are wearing away at the deceitful, corporate controlled Canadian government who is not looking out for the health of you and your family but the health of big business bank accounts.

How do I know we are making progress? Simple. The single serve generic responses I have received back from Health Canada and the CFIA have changed over the past year to now mention that Organic Certification is the only way to ensure that the food you eat does not contain any Genetically Modified Ingredients whatsoever in Canada.

Here is the first response I received back from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency on July 7, 2012 when I asked why GMO labelling was not mandatory in Canada:

Hello,

The food safety evaluation of novel foods (including products of genetically modified foods) is the responsibility of Health Canada.

You can read about the review process that Health Canada uses at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/gmf-agm/index-eng.php

A list of approved products is on their site at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/gmf-agm/appro/index-eng.php

Mandatory labelling is required when genetically engineered products have a significant health, safety or compositional change (as determined by Health Canada). To date, no products approved for sale in Canada have triggered the need for mandatory labelling.

There is a standard in place for labelling of foods that are products of biotechnology and foods that want to make a claim in regard to being free of biotechnology. Information on the Standard for Voluntary Labelling and Advertising of Foods That Are and Are Not Products of Genetic Engineering can be found at:
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/labeti/novnou/voletie.shtml

At this time, no changes in labelling policy in regard to food products of biotechnology are anticipated.

For questions and comments about genetically modified (GM) foods and other novel foods, contact food-aliment@hc-sc.gc.ca.

Thank you for using the CFIA web site.

Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Web Inquiries Team

And almost a year later, here is the response I received back from Health Canada’s Novel Foods Section, Evaluation Division and the Bureau for Microbial Standards:

Thank you for your correspondence on May 31, 2013 regarding the safety and labelling of genetically-modified (GM) food in Canada.

The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring the safety of the Canadian food supply.  As part of this commitment, Health Canada conducts a rigorous and thorough science-based assessment of all GM food products before they are allowed to enter the Canadian food supply.  GM foods are considered “novel foods” and are regulated under Division 28 of the Food and Drug Regulations (F&DR), which prohibits manufacturers of these products from selling them in Canada until Health Canada has completed a full safety assessment and found them to be as safe and nutritious as conventional foods.  All novel foods approved for sale in Canada have undergone this thorough assessment to ensure that they are wholesome, nutritious, and safe to eat.

The full safety assessment of the product involves a rigorous scientific evaluation and GM foods are only approved after Health Canada’s scientists are satisfied that the data provided by the applicants addresses all health and safety concerns and meets regulatory requirements.  Companies are required to test their products according to the requirements and submit high calibre data demonstrating compliance.  In-depth analysis is conducted of the data and of the methods used to ensure validity of the results.  If the evaluators determine that the data is not sufficient, additional information and/or testing will be requested in order to fully demonstrate the safety of the product.  Evaluators may also supplement the information provided by the petitioner with any published data in Canada or internationally that is relevant to the product in question.  The scientific review involves how the food was developed, a comparison of the compositional and nutritional information with non-modified counterparts, and an examination of the food’s potential to be or to contain a toxin or allergen.

For more information regarding the scientific evaluation process and Health Canada’s policies regarding novel foods, please visit our website at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/gmf-agm/index-eng.php

Health Canada and the CFIA share the federal responsibility for food labelling policies under the Food and Drugs Act. In accordance with its mandate, Health Canada is responsible for food labelling policies with respect to health and safety. The Department requires mandatory labelling of all food products, including GM foods, where there are clear scientifically established health risks or significant nutritional changes, which can be mitigated through labelling. General provisions for food labelling to address non-health or safety considerations, such as how the food is produced, are the responsibility of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA).

The Government of Canada recognizes that the labelling of foods derived from biotechnology has become an important issue for Canadians. To this end, Health Canada worked actively with the Canadian Council of Grocery Distributors and the Canadian General Standards Board to develop a Canadian voluntary standard for labelling of genetically engineered foods.  Other partners in this process included consumer groups, food companies, producers, environmental groups, general interest groups and other government departments. The standard “Voluntary labelling and advertising of foods that are and are not products of Genetic Engineering” was adopted as a national standard by the Standards Council of Canada in April 2004.  It provides guidance to food companies to address the consumers demand for the labelling of genetically engineered foods in Canada.  More detail on this initiative is available on the Public Works and Government Services Canada website

http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/ongc-cgsb/programme-program/normes-standards/internet/032-0315/index-eng.html

If you choose to avoid consuming foods that may be derived from a GM food source, you may do so by consuming organic food products. Canada’s Organic Products Regulations (OPR), which came into force on June 30, 2009, set out rigorous standards for the certification of products as organic by accredited certification bodies. Organic products are determined in accordance with the “Organic Production Systems General Principles and Management Standards” released by the Canadian General Standards Board. The standard states that all materials and products produced from genetic engineering (i.e., GM foods) are not compatible with the general principles of organic production and therefore not accepted under the standard. Also, products that meet the production requirements and contain at least 95 per cent organic content may be labelled as “organic” and feature the new Biologique Canada Organic Logo. This provides Canadians with more choice when it comes to the food they purchase and consume.

If you feel that the current legislation concerning the labelling of GM foods (i.e., the standard for voluntary labelling) should be changed, please contact your local Member of Parliament (MP).

Thank you for writing.

Novel Foods Section/Section des Aliments Nouveaux
Evaluation Division/Division de l’évaluation
Bureau of Microbial Hazards/Bureau de Dangers Microbiens
Food Directorate/Direction des Aliments
Health Products and Food Branch/Direction Général des Produits de Santé et des Aliments
Health Canada/Santé Canada
251 Promenade Sir Frederick Banting Driveway
Centre de recherche Sir Frederick Banting Research Centre 2204E
4th Floor West, Tunney’s Pasture/ 4e etage, Pre Tunney
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9

Notice the length?

Not only does the second email from Health Canada go into more detail, a lot more detail, it  highlights an extremely important fact previously unseen in the first email from the CFIA – “If you choose to avoid consuming foods that may be derived from a GM food source, you may do so by consuming organic food products.”

Why should you be concerned about eating GMO foods and feeding them to your children in the first place?

• Possible Allergic Reactions as documented by the New England Journal of Medicine.
• Increased Risk of Cancer, Organ Damage and Tumours as reported by the Daily Mail.
• Increased Risk of Leaky Gut Syndrome or irritable bowel syndrome as reported by Jeffrey Smith, author, politician and consumer advocate.
• Increased Consumption of Cancer Causing Pesticides as whole crops are sprayed with ever increasing amounts of toxins to combat weeds and now superweeds.

So why the risk? Explaining how GMO strains have been engineered in the first place sheds light on how our food is being produced. There are two primary GMO technologies which Monsanto has introduced into corn and soy crops in North America:

1. The first technique inserts the DNA from bacteria into the target crop so that the crop will produce its own insecticide. The name given to the corn variety is Bt Corn. The result is vermin and insects will not feed on the plants. If that crop becomes poisonous to other animals should we believe that those same plants should not be poisonous to humans?
2. The second technique also mixes the DNA of a bacteria with that of the target crop this time however so that the crop can withstand what would otherwise be a lethal dose of herbicide. The most common form of this type of GMO crop is Roundup Ready Soy. The result is entire crops can be sprayed with an increased amount of Roundup (Glyphosphate) herbicide to kill the surrounding weeds yet the crop survives. Ready for a poison soaked corn on the cob?

So there you have it. The “safe” GMO that is on your plate has either been spewing out its own toxic pesticide or has been drenched with a larger dose than ever of a toxic herbicide.

Dinner is served…

The time to act is now. If our government officials feel that GMOs are safe, why not label them so that we the people may make our own decisions regardless? The Canadian Food Inspection Agency enforces rules and regulations stipulated by Health Canada therefore please contact Health Canada and your local MP should you feel the need to address your concerns regarding GMOs and the lack of transparency of labelling food products in Canada.

Policy change is slow. As great change is on the horizon, there are winners and losers. There are those who welcome it, and those who lament it. But as you can see from the standardized, nameless government responses above, change is occurring however slow it may be. The public awakening and pressure being exerted on our government officials is working. Let your voice be heard.

In the meantime, if you want to ensure the health of yourself and your family, eat organic. Here is a very helpful shopping resource as you begin your journey: http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/

Using Science to Prove Chemtrails Are Real

There is no need for war when you control the weather.

I don’t have to convince you that something very strange is happening. Simply look up at the sky… What do you see?

Now, more than likely, you will be witness to supposed commercial aircraft leaving behind massive white trails that linger and spread into clouds turning the whole sky gray. You will be witness to chemtrails.

Not contrails. Chemtrails. This is what a normal contrail looks like:

Unassuming enough, this image conjures up childhood memories reminding me of what our skies and planes used to look like. Compare this normal aircraft contrail with the following image of a chemtrail:

And when multiple chemtrails are sprayed at the same time, you get an image similar to this picture I took from a plane while landing in Houston, Texas:

What in the World are the spraying? Why in the World Are they Spraying?

These questions have come to haunt me. The implications of this type of project being carried out on such a large-scale by a business as heavily guarded as the airline industry means that its roots can only come from the very top.

Now there are many people who claim that chemtrails are not real. I have personally spoken with many pilots for example, about the phenomenon. There are some who spew out “facts” from corporate provided brochures. There are others however, whose eyes speak volumes of truth.

Similar to so-called conspiracy theorists who have used science to prove that 10 stories of a building are scientifically incapable of making 100 stories of building below it collapse into dust, luckily, there is no room for opinion in the World of science.

Now for the science:

Myth #1 – Chemtrails Are Persistent Contrails

False.

1) Almost 60 years ago in 1953, a man by the name of  H. Appleman devised a chart that can be used to determine when a contrail would become “persistent” in the hopes to help the military protect bombers from leaving a perfect target trail behind them. Here it is:

60 years later however, a lot has changed. Most new commercial jet airliners maintain a height of approximately 35,000 feet during travel. Some more. At 35,000 feet the average temperature is -65 degrees Fahrenheit (or -54 degrees Celsius) with an average air pressure of 250 Millibars (or 3.7 pounds per square inch). Based on Appleman’s chart, almost every new commercial aircraft should leave behind a persistent contrail, but they don’t.

2) Even when, as with the picture in Houston above, there are many “persistent” contrails in the sky, this would still not provide a scientific explanation as to why some planes leave these massive trails, while others do not at the exact same height, in the exact same sky at the exact same time. Or why some planes will suddenly start and stop making trails. How would the theory of temperature and pressure related persistent contrails explain this inconsistency?

3) Why, if the theory of temperature and humidity were true, do we never see “persistent contrails” at night?

Myth #2 – Weather Modification is Not Real

False.

1) In 1977, an international treaty banning the use of environmental modification techniques was opened for signature on May 18th and entered into force on October 5th, 1978.  This Environmental Modification Convention has now been ratified by 76 countries… Why would these many countries waste their time by not only discussing, but coming to agreement on banning the use of weather modification techniques if the threat of weather modification was not real?

2) There are now annual geo-engineering Climate Summits to discuss emergency measures to curb global warming. In 2010 the Telegraph reported that most techniques discussed were by using “high orbital mirrors or by spraying sulphur compounds into the high atmosphere to reflect sunlight away from the Earth.” Still not convinced?

3) The Guardian reported in 2002 on secret germ war tests being conducted on millions of uninformed people using mixtures of biological agents and heavy metals which have still not been completely uncovered by the public. The theory of weather modification may just be the start.

Myth #3 – Chemtrails Are a Conspiracy

False.

Interestingly enough, type “chemtrail” into Google and the 1st result you will see is not “chemtrail” but rather “Chemtrail Conspiracy Theory” from Wikipedia. As well, the “Contrail” page on Wikipedia now only shows pictures of chemtrails as examples of contrails.

Why the deflection? Who is being protected from disclosing the truth about this disgusting practice that is occurring everyday right above our heads without the public being told a thing?

As the Guardian pointed out, not only were human trials being conducted using biological and chemical warfare, the public was not informed about it. Do you think for a second that something has suddenly changed? That you are a not a lab rat in a science experiment? Think about it the next time you look up and make up your own mind when you see the trails for yourself.

Chemtrails Are Real

… and they are destroying your brain, your lungs, your children and our environment with every inhalation of the toxic spray that falls before us.

Want to do something about it?  Start by researching this subject yourself and then please email or call Environment Canada and ask why there are now criss-crosses of plane exhaust in the sky. Please comment below if you are satisfied with the copied and pasted response you will receive back.

Gas Crimes Against Humanity

Every time you fill up your gas tank, realize this… You are contributing to the largest pandemic to ever hit our planet.

The entire network, the very structure that has been built around gasoline, is as dirty and corrupt today as its deep, dark, slimy history. It is a history of greed, deceit, and profit put before everything and everyone outside of an elite circle.

The result is a world run on gas, and everyone is a culprit in keeping the disease alive and well.

To understand the influence of big oil, you have to understand how much money is involved. Lots. Tonnes. Tanker-loads. Exxon Mobil posted an almost record net income (profit) of $44,880,000,000 in 2012. Chevron was close behind with $26,200,000,000 in profit. Let me put it in layman’s terms:

1)      Exxon’s $44 billion in profit amounts to over $85,000 in profit every minute. We are not talking sales here. We are talking income after all expenses including marketing, drilling, operating, administration and the exorbitant salaries and bonuses received by the top guns.

2)      This amounts to $1,423 of profit per second.

3)      By the time you finish reading this line, Exxon would have profited by over $7,000.

4)      If the average person makes approximately $40,000 per year, Exxon’s annual profit could have paid for a workforce of 1,122,000 people in 2012.

5)      Exxon Mobil’s 2012 profit is larger than the entire Gross Domestic Product of more than 100 countries including Costa Rica, Kenya, and Lebanon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

In a corporate run world, where having is better than doing, having this much money means having just as much influence.

Political Influence

This past week, grand old Barack Hussein Obama began his latest fear mongering campaign regarding spending cuts before the next debt ceiling carousel comes spinning back around. He talked about longer lines at the airport because TSA staff are going to be cut. He talked about hospitals having longer wait times because fewer wait staff will be employed. He even threatened to furlough about 800,000 Department of Defense staff.

With all these cuts you would think that maybe be would look at big oil to help the cause for the people? After all Exxon paid only 13% tax last year.

Of course not. Not once did he mention the mega profits of big oil. Not a word. Not a peep. Nothing.

It appears as though big oil means much more to Barack than those who depend on wait staff, ambulance drivers and police officers. Remember, Exxon’s profit alone could hire an additional 1.122 million people full-time every year.

Are you kidding me?

Environmental Influence

What ever happened to global warming? At the top of the headlines for years, it is now a segment or two lost in the riffraff.

With CO2 being the largest man-made contributor to the greenhouse effect, and with the largest spiral cloud formations seen in recorded history, you be the judge if we should be worried  http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/GOES/globalir.html

Can’t forget those pesky oil spills either which have decimated local food supplies for millions. The Exxon Valdez, the Gulf of Mexico’s Deepwater Horizon, Kuwait… How many spills must occur until we finally change our ways?

Infrastructure Influence

There are many people who claim that electric cars are just as dirty, if not dirtier, than gasoline. This is an impossibility.

The infrastructure to supply electric fuel to the world is already built. It is already here. The electric gas station is your home.

Liquid gas requires drilling, pumping, refining, shipping, and fueling to work. Electricity stops at the refining part.

The problem with not having gas stations presents a big problem however… What are you going to do to fill the employment gap of the employees working at the over 140,000 convenience and gas stations across the US alone? And the truckers? And the food and beverage suppliers who provide them with product?

The big network and structure starting to become clearer now?

The Present

So here we are… Over a century of accumulated wealth on a mission to ensure the future survival of certain money, certain family and certain bloodline. With such a large and integrated network, it seems almost impossible to get away from this monstrosity of waste and determination to ensure things stay the same.

All I can hope for is that you think about where that next fill-up came from and who your hard-earned money is going to. The more light we shine on this purposely dark topic, the more we will open our eyes to the possibility of a clean energy future where compromise is no longer necessary.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/05/03/475693/private-empire-exxonmobil-and-american-power/?mobile=nc

Fluoride: There is Poison in the Tap Water

Please e-mail John Filion, Toronto Councillor Ward 23 and Chair of the Toronto Board of Health, at councillor_filion@toronto.ca or message him  directly through his website at http://www.johnfilion.ca/contact.php and demand the immediate removal of hydrofluorosilicic acid (fluoride) from Toronto’s water supply. Please feel free to use any piece of the following email I just sent to him:

Dear Councillor Filion,

If a Harvard study proving that there is a 7 point IQ reduction in children exposed to fluoride is not enough for you to call a meeting to reassess the addition of this toxic chemical to our water supply, then what is? Permanent brain damage?.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi.html

What are you thinking? If there is any doubt whatsoever that fluoride is potentially harmful, remove it! Immediately!

I feel you should be held personally liable for this intrusion of my rights. Experimenting with my health and the health of our children will not be tolerated.

I demand the immediate removal of this toxic chemical from our water supply.

Sincerely,

You

The anger I feel about being force-fed a drug I did not consent to ingesting is supernatural. John Filion would like to argue that the discontinuation of water fluoridation would result in more costly fluoride rinses in schools… Says who? Which scientist proved this? The simple answer… Nobody. Ask and find out for yourself.

Human beings have been drinking water for 100,000 years and have never needed to artificially increase fluoride levels. So what has changed? If this is such a righteous practice, why does Canada and the United States make up the majority of the world’s water fluoridation while over 94% of the entire world has rejected it? Countries such as China and India are even trying to remove fluoride from their water supplies to reduce the prevalence of harmful skeletal fluorosis which attacks the teeth and bones, let alone the host of other ailments which are now being brought to light from water fluoridation studies.

The bottom line is, I do not and cannot trust a dentist or a politician to recommend what I ingest in my body, especially to prevent a cavity or tooth decay. It is not their place to decide what I ingest and what our children ingest. As long as there is doubt, a person truly concerned about the safety of the public would discontinue the practice immediately until there was irrefutable evidence that there are no short or long term health effects associated with putting a toxic, industrial waste by-product into our drinking water.

Do Monsanto’s CEOs Eat Genetically Modified Food?

Growing up, my father would tell me stories about how genetic modification was the way of the future. Not just for plants or animals, but for all humanity as we extended our home across the Universe. I understood and agreed with him. If we were to inhabit an alien world, modifying our genetic structure seemed logical and magical.

This may be why my father seemed dumbfounded when two weeks ago, I told him I was against our family eating any GMOs whatsoever. Let me explain…

It’s not that GMO food is bad, it’s why we are genetically modifying our food that counts.

To this day, the main reason we genetically engineer food is to provide that food with resistance to what would otherwise be a deadly dose of chemical poison, usually Glyphosphate (Better known as Roundup), a highly toxic herbicide which has been found to kill human cells. This resistance is achieved by mixing the DNA of certain bacteria with that of the target crop, allowing whole fields to be sprayed but only the weeds die off.

Special “terminator” strains of corn and soy have also been genetically modified to be sterile and die after one growing season, ensuring farmers falling under the tentacles of Monsanto continue to purchase seeds exclusively from them, year after year. About half of Monsanto’s over $10 billion annual revenue now comes from the sale of Roundup Ready products and GMO seeds.

If the GMO strains being used can withstand a higher dose of this chemical, does it mean farmers are using less of it? No. Approximately 100 million pounds of this poison are now used on American farms and lawns every year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate. This number is sure to climb as recent studies show Roundup resistant superweeds are now a threat.

The fruits and vegetables that are sprayed with Roundup readily absorb it. These fruits and vegetables are then sent to supermarkets directly or refined into thousands of other products, until you and I ultimately purchase them, eat them, and feed them to our children. Remember, scientists have shown that this chemical kills human cells… Feel comfortable washing your food in the sink anymore?

With Proposition 37 in California underway, it has been interesting (and scary) to witness the grand lobby at its worst. Monsanto, Coca-Cola, Dupont, Bayer, Kelloggs, Campbells, Dole, Hersheys, Heinz, McCain, Nestle: the list goes on and on of companies opposing the right to know what is in the food we eat. As many of these opponents are well-educated it must be painstaking for some of them to stand against something as morally righteous as letting consumers know the source of their food. Some pundits have even gone so far as to claim there is no difference between Organic and “regular” food however while nutritional values may be the same, buying organic ensures you are not on the receiving end of a dose of Roundup herbicide (or antibiotics in the case of organic meat and eggs).

In Europe, Genetically Modified Food is labelled as such. The labels are not spectacular, they simply write that the source of a particular ingredient is genetically modified. That’s it. For example, whereas an American label would say “Vegetable Oil”, in Europe the same label would say “Vegetable Oil (Contains genetically modified Soybean Oil)”. Are you being led to believe that this is difficult to enact?

With the vote to take place November 6th, 2012, the opportunity to take our food back is now. My thoughts are with the people of California. I hope you can find the strength to do what is right, and demand proper food labeling for all.

To me, genetic modification is still the way of the future, but for now, we are a caveman playing with new-found fire in a very dry forest.