Fluoride derided
The article about the call for the use of fluoridated salt by the first Asian president of the Federation Dentaire Internationale, also known as the World Dental Association, and other people, was a great shock (“Global dental expert pushes fluoridated salt,” Aug. 5, page 3).
It is important to know that the federation is a private lobby group for more than 200 international dental associations. Its agenda, as it states, is to promote fluoridated products as a way to reduce dental caries by putting the substance in toothpaste, salt and water supplies. The trouble is, there is absolutely no proof that any of these practices are beneficial. A lot of credible research has showed just the opposite.
In Europe, where fluoride is not put into water supplies, studies have indicated over the past 50 years that the reduction of caries has dropped at the same rate, or even more, than in the US, where fluoride is added to the water supplies in many towns and cities. Halogen elements, like fluorine, bromine and chlorine, have faced restrictions in Europe since the end of World War I, after countless thousands of soldiers and civilians died horrible deaths from poison gas made with bromine and chlorine. Basic chemistry shows that fluorine is more potent than either of them.
So what do Europeans use to purify water supplies? They mainly use ozone in water treatment plants and swimming pools because it is less expensive, more effective, and healthier for humans and animals.
Why is there a push to use fluoridated products in Asia? The answer seems simple. Big tobacco companies lost revenue in the US in the 1970s when legislation forced them to labels packaging with cancer warnings so they went overseas to open new markets.
In Canada and the US, there is a huge movement to eliminate fluoride from water supplies, as people have discovered diseases and irreparable harm caused by its use. Concerned people need to investigate more. Getting fluoride into salt seems to be a backdoor approach to enter a new market.
Anyone can do an Internet search and find out about fluoride and its side effects, since so many articles have been written on both sides of this important question.
Children, pregnant women and elderly people seem to suffer the most in the initial stages when exposed to fluorine, so people must be careful about what they ingest. That is elementary. Good luck in your Internet search endeavors.
Mike C
Greater Tainan
Ignore ‘Journal’s’ advice
So the Wall Street Journal, the paper of record that advocates for the rich and super-rich alike, suggests that Taiwan should sign a free-trade agreement.
While the North American Free Trade Agreement and normalized trade agreements with China have been a windfall for US corporations, the average American considers these agreements the beginning of the end.
The Wall Street Journal, the definitive insider’s paper on matters of the economy and banking sector, failed to predict the 2008 economic collapse, but claims to be prescient of Taiwan’s future without a free-trade agreement.
The Journal also advocates that Washington stops US corporation inversions by basically giving the businesses whatever they want, including lower tax rates.
Here is a nickel’s worth of free advice: The Journal’s free advice isn’t worth a damn.
Aaron Andrews
Greater Taichung
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS