Fluorides, the atomic bomb, and fake news

Fluorides, the atomic bomb, and fake news

Faced with toxic fluorides destroying food crops, animal and human life, and with law suits piling up, atomic scientists decided they could distract the nation by promoting fluorides as a beneficial tooth treatment…

by Jon Rappoport

February 1, 2018

Occasionally, I reprint this article. I wrote it some years ago, during research on toxic chemicals pervading the landscape. I used to send the piece to mainstream reporters, but I eventually gave that up as a bad bet.

They’re dedicated to fake news…and now they’re losing control over public consciousness. Losing badly. Independent media are in the ascendance, and rightly so.

In 1997, Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson, two respected mainstream journalists, peered into an abyss. They found a story about fluorides that was so chilling it had to be told.

The Christian Science Monitor, who had assigned the story, never published it.

Their ensuing article, “Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb,” has been posted on a number of websites.

Author Griffiths told me that researchers who study the effects of fluorides by homing in on communities with fluoridated drinking water, versus communities with unfluoridated water, miss a major point: studying the water is not enough; toxic fluorides are everywhere—they are used throughout the pharmaceutical industry in the manufacture of drugs, and also in many other industries (e.g., aluminum, pesticide).

I want to go over some of the major points of the Griffiths-Bryson article.

Griffiths discovered hundreds of documents from the World War 2 era. These included papers from the Manhattan Project, launched to build the first A-bomb.

Griffiths/Bryson write: “Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production…millions of tons…were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War.”

The documents reveal that fluoride was the most significant health hazard in the US A-bomb program, for workers and for communities around the manufacturing facilities.

Griffiths/Bryson: “Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses was generated by A-bomb program scientists, who had been secretly ordered to provide ‘evidence useful in litigation’ [against persons who had been poisoned by fluoride and would sue for damages]… The first lawsuits against the US A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the [government] documents show.”

A-bomb scientists were told they had to do studies which would conclude that fluorides were safe.

The most wide-reaching study done was carried out in Newburgh, New York, between 1945 and 1956. This was a secret op called “Program F.” The researchers obtained blood and tissue samples from people who lived in Newburgh, through the good offices of the NY State Health Department.

Griffiths/Bryson found the original and secret version of this study. Comparing it to a different sanitized version, the reporters saw that evidence of adverse effects from fluorides had been suppressed by the US Atomic Energy Commission.

Other studies during the same period were conducted at the University of Rochester. Unwitting hospital patients were given fluorides to test out the results.

Flash forward. Enter Dr. Phyllis Mullenix (see also here), the head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston. In the 1990s, Mullenix did a series of animal studies which showed that, as Griffiths/Bryson write: “…fluoride was a powerful central nervous system (CNS) toxin…”

Mullenix applied for further grant monies from the National Institutes of Health. She was turned down. She was also told that fluorides do not have an effect on the CNS.

But Griffiths/Bryson uncovered a 1944 Manhattan Project memo which states: “Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect…it seems most likely that the F [fluoride] component rather than the [uranium] is the causative factor.”

The 1944 memo was sent to the head of the Manhattan Project Medical Section, Colonel Stafford Warren. Warren was asked to give his okay to do animal studies on fluorides’ effects on the CNS. He immediately did give his approval.

But records of the results of this approved project are missing. Most likely classified.

Who was the man who made that 1944 proposal for a rush-program to study the CNS effects of fluorides? Dr. Harold Hodge, who worked at the Manhattan Project.

Who was brought in to advise Mullenix 50 years later at the Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, as she studied the CNS effects of fluorides? Dr. Harold Hodge.

Who never told Mullenix of his work on fluoride toxicity for the Manhattan Project? Dr. Harold Hodge.

Was Hodge brought in to look over Mullenix’s shoulder and report on her discoveries? It turns out that Hodge, back in the 1940s, had made suggestions to do effective PR promoting fluoride as a dental treatment. So his presence by Mullenix’s side, all those years later, was quite possibly as an agent assigned to keep track of her efforts.

Getting the idea here? Build an A-bomb. Forget the toxic fluoride consequences. Bury the fluoride studies. Twist the studies.

More on Hodge. In 1944, “a severe pollution incident” occurred in New Jersey, near the Du Pont plant in Deepwater where the company was trying to build the first A-bomb. A fluoride incident. Farmers’ peach and tomato crops were destroyed. Horses and cows became crippled. Some cows had to graze on their bellies. Tomato crops (normally sold to the Campbell Company for soups) were contaminated with fluorides.

The people of the Manhattan Project were terrified of lawsuits and ensuing revelations about the toxic nature of their work. A heads-up memo was written on the subject. Its author? Harold Hodge. Among other issues, he reported on the huge fluoride content in vegetables growing in the polluted area.

Also the high fluoride levels in human blood.

The farmers began to bring lawsuits. Big PR problem.

The lawsuits were settled quietly, for pittances.

Harold Hodge wrote another memo. Get this quote: “Would there be any use in making attempts to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents [near the A-bomb facility]…through lectures on F [fluoride] toxicology and perhaps the usefulness of F in tooth health?”

Griffiths/Bryson write: “Such lectures were indeed given, not only to New Jersey citizens but to the rest of the nation throughout the Cold War.”

This was a launching pad for fluorides as “successful dental treatments.”

Now you know why promoting toxic fluorides as a dental treatment was so important to government officials.

Footnote: In Stanley Kubrick’s 1964 film, Dr. Strangelove, Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper rails about the destruction fluorides are wreaking on the “pure blood of pure Americans.” Of course, General Ripper is fleshed out as a crazy right-wing fanatic. He’s ready and willing to start a nuclear war. How odd. Apparently unknown to the Strangelove script writers, fluorides were, in fact, very toxic and were an integral part of the program that created atomic bombs in the first place…

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

13 comments on “Fluorides, the atomic bomb, and fake news

  1. Eliza Ayres says:

    Reblogged this on Blue Dragon Journal and commented:
    We can never repeat it enough… Fluoride is a POISON and doesn’t belong in ANYONE’s drinking water. Please share to “red pill” your friends and relatives.

  2. Reblogged this on amnesiaclinic and commented:
    The truth is stranger than fiction and, sadly, much more dangerous.

  3. From Quebec says:

    Who ever allowed their cities to fluoridate their water, should be sued. tried and jailed.

  4. As I pointed out in comments against your other article, Jon, fluorides “in context” are fairly obvious fake news. What kind of pollutions going into the water supply would need fluoride “smoke and mirrors”?


  5. Fluorine, atomic number 9 is the lightest Halogen and sixteenth most common element on Earth. It is the “F” in Teflon and in CFCs called Freon. Human Freon was blamed for causing the Ozone hole to create a new DuPont patent. Earth produces magnitudes more Flourine compounds than does man, see

    “Volcanic Halocarbons” by Timothy Casey at Geologist-1011 website

    Ozone is produced by lightning, with hundreds of strikes per second worldwide. Ozone is highly reactive with a half-life of thirty minutes. Ozone absorbs cancer causing UV rays and ground level Ozone is effective as Stratospheric Ozone at absorbing UV. EPA claims on asthma are concoctions for ‘benefit’ projections. Fluorine has no health benefit. Ozone has been used as effective, safer than Chlorine water treatment in Paris and two thousand other cities for over a century.

  6. JB says:

    Remember the previous blog not so long ago about certain words used in propaganda?

    “…Griffiths/Bryson uncovered a 1944 Manhattan Project memo which states: “Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect…it seems most likely that the F [fluoride] component rather than the [uranium] is the causative factor.”

    “evidence suggests”
    “May have”
    “Most likely”

    The tools of propaganda work for any objective. Their purpose is meant to incite, inflame, obfuscate, and discredit.

    As with all drugs, dose is essential in determining toxicity. Even with natural levels of hormones and other systems of the body, too much of an essential element tends to disrupt and eventually destroy the organic balance.

    We cannot live without radiation. UV radiation is essential for developing vitamin D in the skin for combating infections such as the flu. Too much radiation destroys cellular operation. Not enough and the motive energy necessary to produce chemical reaction is absent. Ever read up on the chlorophyll process? Chlorine+UV. Amazing stuff.

    There was a great crusade against CFCs, but what few people learned was that chlorinated fluoro-carbons were like a banquet to the mechanism of making chlorophyll.

    Too much salt (sodium chloride) causes problems; too little causes problems. The basic elements are toxic in their pure form (rare), but essential in their compound form. Iron, Copper, Zinc, Chromium, Calcium, Potassium, Silicon, Carbon, Phosphorous, Bromine, Chlorine, Iodine, and many other elements are essential building blocks for organic life.

    So when a study of toxicology SUGGESTS detrimental effects, dose, as well as other contextual parameters need to be defined. Rachel Carson went overboard with her Silent Spring book, mostly causing paranoia and senseless reactionism.

    Where are the parameters, the context, the summaries of processes used to establish toxicity of fluorine in this blog? What is scientific, and what is conjecture?

    • Greg C. says:

      Great comment, JB. Looking for context in facts is a sign of higher intelligence. Facts by themselves are meaningless. That said, the context of the genesis of the myth that fluoride fights cavities is alarming. We know that it is a myth – the data proves it, and the research shows who started it. And now we know the reason for the myth – to limit liabilities due to fluoride poisoning. Science got infected with this myth, because industry and government pays for science, and they needed scientific corroboration.

      So when you ask which facts are scientific, let’s start with the most basic one that is proven – the fluoride is not an essential nutrient. Humans derive no benefit from ingesting it. So right there, you have an argument against the enormous expense of fluoridating water. Second, many studies have proven a direct correlation between higher fluoride levels and lower IQ.

      So if you want to suggest that there is a safe and acceptable level of fluoride that most people can handle, fine. But you are the one that needs the scientific backing for your suggestion, because it supports something that is entirely unnecessary and that has been demonstrated to already causing real harm in real people.

    • honestliberty says:

      JB? Response? I see Greg responded politely and with a logical response?
      Do you have anything to say on the matter?

  7. Roy says:

    I had read the book you mention a number of years ago and have since pondered the rational for the big push for fluoridated water during that time period when the Manhattan project was in full swing. Along with the justifications noted in the book, my current assumption for the nuclear complex to promote Fluoride down our throats was to obscure the total amount of hydrofluoric acid being used during the cold war era. During that time period, if an unfriendly foreign national were to add up the amount of Fluoride sold every year, and then reverse engineer the amount needed for X amount of purified uranium, then the unfriendly foreign national could fairly accurately determine how much purified uranium was being produced by the US and available for WMD. This secret correlation would have justified officials to find alternative uses for fluoride to obscure the total amount of fluoride used for WMD production. The slogan would have been “It is everyones patriotic duty to take an equal share of the poison neccessary for our national security.” It makes sense to me and fills in the missing pieces of the nuclear flouride timeline.

    As for why fluoride is still being pushed down our throat today is a different situation. Why would a non nuclear country such as New Zealand be pushing fluoride down it’s citizens throats? Unless NZ is also trying to hide their nuclear grade uranium production? The same question goes to Australia.

    Another purpose for fluoridated water would be to lower the IQ of the populace. Citizens with a lower IQ are easier to manipulate to sway a desired election outcome. The same reason why only male landowners were alowed to vote during the birth of our country. Now with the votes of non landowners, women, and africans, it is now much more difficult to manipulate the outcome of elections.

    An alternative need for fluoride today would be to mask the illnesses caused by fluoride. What would happed if every water utility stopped adding fluoride and then all of the sudden chronic illnesses dramatically dropped, such as people’s vision would revert back to 20/20? It would bring evidence for a national tort recovery lawsuit that would make the asbestos tort recovery award look like a speck of sand on top of a bolder. It may likely force cities, counties, states, and the country who encouraged fluoridation into bankruptcy.

    Instead, the government would likely embrace the lie with full force and just give us national healthcare instead. Due to our lowered IQ, the government would easily sway us pay for it instead of healthcare being a free compensation for our injuries.

    Just thinking outside the box.

    • Theodore says:

      Hi Roy,

      ref: “the total amount of hydrofluoric acid being used during the cold war era. During that time period, if an unfriendly foreign national were to add up the amount of Fluoride sold every year, and then reverse engineer the amount needed for X amount of purified uranium, then the unfriendly foreign national could fairly accurately determine how much purified uranium was being produced by the US and available for WMD.”

      i thought the “Fluoride (acid) compounds” were waste product outputs — along with the enriched uranium output, not part of the chemical input needed to enrich the uranium.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s