devanshoom wrote:federal reserve being a private bank (look it up). This is becoming common knowledge for people who have an interest in corperate-political affairs and seek their info outside the mainstream media.
Sigh. It's a private bank in the same sense that the USPS is a "private shipping company": it has some autonomy, but is still decidedly a government organization.
It was created by an Act of Congress (the Federal Reserve Act, see 12 USC ch. 3). Its board of governors (i.e. the Federal Reserve Board) is appointed by the president, and exists as an independent government agency. It is, simply put, part of the government.
Fluoride being added to water to dumb people down...there is now a huge backlash against fluoridation, esp in the Uk...its been proven beyond doubt that fluoride in water was hitlers preferred method for subduing people in prison camps...also used by stalin in the gulags..its also a fact that fluoride is the main ingredient in prozac, which basically renders people brain dead.
I think this basically speaks for its self. The use of widespread fluoridation has proved effective at reducing dental caries. The CDC has published a substantial amount of information on the justification for and safety of fluoridation, and such material provides an excellent starting point for anyone looking to research the matter themselves.
As far as the Nazi connection... well... I don't really know what to say. I suppose you're referring to the use of sodium fluoride in prison camp drinking water, but surely you realize how it sounds to make such a reference, right? It seems like something of an appeal to emotion...
But I digress. I've heard the claims about sodium fluoride being used as a form of behavior control by the Nazis. My knowledge of World War II history is, I'm afraid, too sparse to say whether or not that was tried by the Third Reich. My knowledge of pharmacology, while basic, is sufficient for me to address the "connection" with Prozac.
<pharma_geek_digression>
First, let's start with some basic pharmacology.
Fluoxetine (aka. Prozac, Sarafem) is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (or SSRI for short). It, like all SSRIs, achieves it anti-depressent effect by preventing the neurotransmitter serotonin from being reabsorbed, thereby increasing the levels of the compound available for binding to the appropriate receptor.
I am not intimately familiar with the full mechanism -- neuropharmacology is still a developing field -- but that's basically how SSRIs work. In layman's terms, they allow your brain to keep more of one of the chemicals that makes you happy "on hand".
Now then, on to your connection between water fluoridation to Prozac by way of fluoride. Simply put: it's bunk.
Fluorine is a naturally-occurring element. Fluorides (i.e. compounds containing fluorine) are found in everything from non-stick pans (in the form of fluoropolymers) to the insulation in electrical transformers. They're even found in high-end camera lenses (in the form of fluorite).
In short, there are a whole bunch of compounds including fluorine which, despite similarities in naming, are totally unrelated to one another in use.
With that in mind, let's look at fluoxetine. The name certainly reminds one of fluoride. Heck, if you look at the chemical structure, you'll spot some more familiar letters: "trifluoromethyl"! Prozac certainly has gotten a bit of infamy for "dumbing down" or "making zombies of" patients. Whether or not clinicial use produces facsimiles of living dead I cannot say -- I am neither a clinician nor a zombie-hunter -- but I can say that I am aware that the drug has gotten a good bit of bad press.
So it looks bad for Prozac, huh? It's got "fluoride" (quoted, so as to distinguish between "a fluoride" and the anion of fluorine) in it, it's got a rep for making people zombies... it's pretty clear that it's due to the "fluoride", right?
Well... no. You see, there are a lot of SSRIs out there, and virtually *all* of them have a public image of "zombifying" patients. The problem is, not all of them have fluorophenyl compounds in them. Yes, some SSRIs include fluorophenyl compounds (IIRC they're included to reduce metabolism, as the covalent carbon-flouride bond's strength helps it get through first-pass metabolism -- but don't quote me on that), but not all of them do. In fact, if you look at the chemical structure of other drugs such as sertraline (aka. Zoloft), you'll note that the conspicuous absence of fluorine. Yet Zoloft has the same rep for "dumbing down" or pacifying its patients. Clearly the presence of fluorine can't be responsible...
</pharma_geek_digression>
On a slightly more cynical level, I understand why this sort of thinking is popular. The logic is pretty easy to understand, although I'm not sure it's always consciously applied:
1) _________ produced by "Big Pharma/Food/Government" makes people stupid. There is a conspiracy to do this for (economic/social/political/religious) reasons.
2) I know about the conspiracy (see #1), therefore I will not consume such products.
3) I do not consume such products (see #2), thus I have not been affected by _________.
4) As I am not affected by _________, I am superior to others who have been. This is supported by the fact that I know about the conspiracy (see #1), and that I have chosen to avoid such products (see #2).
I can certainly understand the appeal of being "in the know" and "above all those poor saps who _________".
Of course back in the 1950's,
fluoridation was a Communist plot, so what do I know?
In my humble opinion, "conspiracy theorists" are often well read on a wide variety of subjects, have a good grasp of esoteric matters/knowledge about ancient wisdom/native cultures.are for the most part non-violent, eat healthy, know a great deal about natural remedies and alternative therapies, respect animals and nature, dont watch TV.....
It is not how much you read that's the issue -- it's *what* you read.
I don't think there's a way I can address the latter part of that quote without starting a flame-war, so we'll just leave the thread's readers to draw their own conclusions...
Homepage
Forum
Drivers
HMM
MTM
Feed
Keira Knightley, Kate Winslet, & Elton John have all successfully sued the DM for libel recently. I think Wikipedia is more accurate than the Mail ... and that is saying something. 
