Sodium fluoride is distinct from naturally occuring calcium fluoride. It is an industrial waste product that is used in the nuclear, aluminum and phosphate industries. The CDC even admitted that it needed to reduce fluoride levels in the water supply as 2 out of 5 children showed signs of fluoride poisoning, though this was only attributed to dental fluorosis and not the other health concerns.

Fluoride accumulates in tissues, bones and teeth, and also forms a layer of calcification over the pineal gland in the brain. This suppresses melatonin production, which is responsible for the regulation of the circadian clock that governs the sleep/wake cycle. On a higher level, a calcified pineal supresses consciousness and access to higher sensory perception. The pineal gland is speculated to be the master gland responsible for DMT production in humans.

Fluoride is particularly problematic for the developing brain, and a scientific review from Harvard University School of Public Health and China Medical University found a strong indication that fluoride could adversely affect cognitive development and brain formation. The implications of brain damage include Alzheimers and potential neurological impacts. Children living in areas where public water supplies are artificially fluoridated had far lower IQ levels overall, after accounting for confounding variables.

Even without clear correlation, there is enough skepticism to justify the cessation of fluoride use in the water supply and dental products. The proclaimed dental benefits do not outweigh the potential risks, and a healthy diet low in sugar is sufficient for healthy teeth. Switch to fluoride free toothpaste and mouthwash and eliminate from water supply through filtration, if present.

You can check the fluoride levels in your water supply through citing your postcode to your local water supplier. This information must be provided under the Freedom of Information Act. Raising awareness about the dangers of fluoride to friends and family is wise.

Distillation removes 100% of impurities from water. It is also the easiest way to ensure the removal of fluoride in the water, which is difficult using normal filtration means. However, the contention lies as to whether the lack of minerals in distilled water could be potentially harmful. It is advisable not to drink distilled water when fasting due to the loss of electrolytes (sodium, potassium, chloride) and trace minerals like magnesium. It may be useful to ozonate distilled water to restore alkalinity, as it tends to come out slightly acidic on the ph spectrum. Bottling the water in glass bottles soon after distillation would help ensure that less carbon dioxide is absorbed from the air into the distilled water.

As a primary water source distilled water tastes flat and does not feel as hydrating and replenishing as mineralised water. These minerals can, however, be obtained in sufficient amount through a healthy organic diet, rich in fruits and vegetables. Sadly, man-made interference has leached the soil of vital nutrients, therefore depriving our body of essential trace minerals. This has led to an increase in disease. This can be offset somewhat by going organic, though avoiding all contamination is nigh on impossible.

Supplementation can be useful where a clear imbalance in certain minerals can be identified, perhaps through a blood sample, but natures composition always contains the sweet spot that the body needs. Sometimes supplements can exacerbate problems by contributing to that imbalance, especially considering the synthetic nature of many supplements on the market today, including toxic fillers such as titanium dioxide and GMO ingredients.

Distillation is probably best in conjunction with spring or mineral water, or when detoxing/flushing the body. Always listen to your body and if it feels it is lacking something, then it probably is. Mineral loss can lead to greater risk of osteoporosis, osteoarthritis, hypothyroidism, coronary artery disease, high blood pressure and a long list of degenerative diseases generally associated with premature aging. Minerals can be added to distilled water through mineral drops, or high quality salt (not refined), as well as citrus fruits or cucumber. This would at least ensure that other nasty contaminants are still removed.

A regular Brita style filter or Berkey will better retain beneficial minerals whilst selectively removing cetain impurities, but it is difficult to validate the efficiency of these, and so I prefer to source my water from unspoilt organic land free from the use of pesticides, fertilisers and animal waste, preferably in glass bottles. This is a natural filtration process through rocks. If there is a local spring, this is another good way to source water for free. Plastic bottles pose the risk of leaching, and are obviously not environmentally friendly.

In conclusion, a combination of bottled spring water, a Berkey filter (I prefer the travel Berkey for space efficiency and portability) and a distiller is ideal. I would use each of them roughly equally, so a third each.

Water impurities are also present in shower water. At higher temperatures the chlorine converts to gas form which is inhaled. Chlorine has been associated with a number of health issues, and may be absorbed to a lesser degree dermally. Chlorine exposure can also lead to dry and/or flaking skin, dry brittle hair and red irritated eyes. Filtering your shower water reduces these symptoms.

Berkey Shower Filters contain special KDF55 granules, which are extremely powerful for removing Chlorine, Hydrogen Sulfide, Micro-organisms, Scale, Iron, and Iron Oxide and also for killing and inhibiting the growth of bacteria in water. This filter also works at higher temperatures, unlike many regular filters on the market.

This one goes without saying. Sugar is a slow poison. It acts just like a drug on the body, and so should be classified as such. Continuous fluctuations in sugar levels knocks the body out of homeostasis. Carbonated sodas are the worst culprits, containing many teaspoons of refined, bleached sugar per bottle.

Sugar is a major contibutor to heart disease and acquired diabetes, as well as tooth decay and gum disease. It also feeds parasites in the gut and wreaks havoc on the digestive system.

The US in particular has a huge sugar problem, particularly concerning high fructose-corn syrup, an artifical additive added to many processed foods, not to mention the majority of corn is genetically modified. This is responsible for the high levels of obesity in the United States. Fructose corn syrup has been rebranded as ‘fructose’ or ‘fructose syrup’ to bury the negative association through growing publicity.

Refined sugar can be substituted for naturally occuring sugars found in fruit, or from organic honey or maple syrup. This will satiate sugar cravings. It’s a case of substituting synthetic addiction for natural replenishment from nature. Whole leaf stevia extract is another option. Drinking smoothies/fruit juices through a straw minimises sugar in mouth. Always check sugar content on food packaging and ensure consumption is much lower than the RDA, which tends to be inflated to serve vested industry interests. We have to take health into our own hands.

Sweeteners have their own set of health concerns so are not a good alternative to sugar. Almost all ‘diet’ drinks, especially sodas and ‘zero calorie’ beverages, replace sugar with synthetic sweeteners. Always read the label and avoid any chemical name such as aspartame, sucralose, or acesulfame. Most studies promoting the safety of sweeteners are funded by those with a conflict of interest, and the science can be manipulated to produce desired results. The best research concerning safety should come from independent sources.

Milk: Non-organic milk contains hormones and antibiotics used on sick animals, and to help stimulate milk production. The milk is also heat treated through the pasteurisation process, which increases shelf life but destroys beneficial bacteria.

Raw milk will ensure the benefits are retained. This can be sourced from local farms, though it is illegal in most instances to sell them in regular retailers – a purposeful move under the guise of protecting against liability from potential bacterial illnesses. 

Many cows are reared in very unfavourable conditions and face continuous artificial insemination to increase economic yield. This puts the cows through a life of stress and trauma, and this transfers to the milk which we consume. Ask your supplier where they source their dairy and contact the farm to get information about welfare practices.

It is important we have a connection to where our food comes from and offer gratitude for all energy received from other lifeforms. Moderation is always best, and there are many healthy milk alternatives on the market to help supplement. There is a strong push for milk alternatives at the moment as a part of the climate green propaganda, which aims to eliminate beneficial animal products from our diet. Research carefully into which brands you are investing in, and always opt for organic where possible. Keep it simple. No need for additives such as synthetic vitamins.

Eggs: Baby male chicks are killed for egg production because they serve no purpose in the industry. This discarding process occurs through gassing or through the extremely unethical macerator machines. If possible, try to source fresh eggs laid in a family farm, or even better, farm your own chickens if you own the land. At the least organic eggs will ensure better welfare standards for the hens with free roaming and non-GM feed.

Energy is transferred between species. An animal reared in confinement will develop stress and disease, which can result in low quality meat and cancers, which are often not cut from the meat before consumption. This transfers an extremely low density into our bodies.

Packaged meat is often treated with the extremely harmful carbon monoxide gas, which is used to extend shelf life, by bringing back the red colour to decaying meat. This ocurs when the carbon monoxide reacts with the myoglobin. The low oxygen mixture artificially limits the growth of spoilage organisms that are more prevalent in higher temperatures, such as through artificial UV radiation used in retailer display cases, which heats the surface of the meat.

Check your country’s policy as to see whether this process is prohibited. Enquire with retailers through email, and opt for vacuum packaging where possible. This may give the meat a more purple appearance, but that does not indicate the meat is any less fresh than the alternative. Meat is best consumed as close to slaughter as possible.

As well as higher welfare for the animals, organic meat is not pumped with water to increase weight, is fed with non-GM feed, prohibits the use of antibiotics and hormones, and has lower levels of adrenaline released when an animal is in fear.

Grass fed meat is the closest to nature. When consuming organic produce, the nutritional density is higher, so less meat is required to get the same nutritional benefit, which compensates for the higher cost.

Meat of the highest welfare can be eaten in moderation, according to the body’s needs. We should always trust our bodies to signal what nourishment we need. Whilst some individuals may thrive on a plant based diet, there are many variables to consider, including genetics and blood type, as well as protein requirements.

Meat consumption should be considered on a case by case basis, with the aim to limit the amount of energy we consume from other lifeforms. All farming practices come at the cost to life, and our primary motivation should be to limit harm whilst maintaining balanced health. As we become healthier physically, mentally and emotionally, we can draw and maintain energy more efficiently internally and from the sun. This way we can gradually reduce the amount of animal produce we consume.

The genetic modification of foods involves tampering with the genome of a plant using molecular biology techniques. A foreign gene from another plant is inserted on the basis that these can enhance desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides and improved nutritional content. Biologically engineered seeds now account for 82 percent of the world’s commercial seed market. Monsanto, the industry leader, according to the ETC Group, directly accounts for 23 percent of the world’s seed sales alone, and together with DuPont and Syngenta, sell almost half. 

Besides the health concerns of genetic manipulation, the biotech industry is also responsible for pesticide poisoning and cross contamination. Most GM crops are engineered to be “herbicide tolerant”. Monsanto, for example, sells their crops, designed to survive applications of their ‘Roundup’ herbicide. Between 1996 and 2008, US farmers sprayed an extra 383 million pounds of herbicide on GMOs. Overuse of herbicides results in “superweeds,” resistant to the herbicide. This leads farmers to use even more toxic herbicides every year. Not only does this create environmental harm, GM foods contain higher residues of toxic herbicides. Monsanto’s ‘Roundup’ herbicide, for example, is linked with sterility, hormone disruption, birth defects and cancer.

Genetically engineered food has shown no increase in yield, and Monsanto themselves have now even agreed that their crops yield less than conventional farming: The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) report, authored by more than 400 scientists and backed by 58 governments, stated that GM crop yields were “highly variable” and in some cases, “yields declined.” The report noted:

“Assessment of the technology lags behind its development, information is anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty about possible benefits and damage is unavoidable.”

They determined that the current GMOs have nothing to offer the goals of reducing hunger and poverty, improving nutrition, health and rural livelihoods, and facilitating social and environmental sustainability. Furthermore, biotech firms are selling sterile seeds to African farmers that are not sustainable for more than one season. Farmers then have to buy new seeds each year as opposed to using the previous years yield. 

No convincing evidence has ever been released to confirm the claims the genetically modified organisms are safe at all for human consumption. A long-term study, published in The Food & Chemical Toxicology Journal, examined the effects of eating GMOs on rats. Up to 50% of males and 70% of females suffered premature death. Rats that drank trace amounts of Roundup (at levels legally allowed in the water supply) had a 200% to 300% increase in large tumours. Rats fed GM corn and traces of Roundup suffered severe organ damage including liver damage and kidney damage. The study fed these rats NK603, the Monsanto variety of GM corn that’s grown across North America and widely fed to animals and humans.

This study was later retracted by the journal without the authors consent on the ground of ‘inconclusiveness’, which is not a valid justification for the withdrawal of a publication that has been peer-reviewed and has merit to be released to the public. This is one of many examples of attack on scientific integrity by those with conflicts of interest, trying to bury important research findings to serve special interests .

The Daily Mail briefly reported on some of the reaction to the findings. France’s Jose Bove, vice-chairman of the European Parliament’s commission for agriculture and known as a fierce opponent of GM, called for an immediate suspension of all EU cultivation and import authorisations of GM crops:

‘This study finally shows we are right and that it is urgent to quickly review all GMO evaluation processes. National and European food security agencies must carry out new studies financed by public funding to guarantee healthy food for European consumers.’

This study alone should be enough to constitute thorough scrutiny and halt the genetic engineering program. However Monsanto employees also occupy many elite bureaucratic roles, as well as positions in other major corporations. Through centralisation of power, fewer individuals are able to fill and control all the major sectors of industry and thus dictate every aspect of our lives, working together to deceive us in to believing that our needs are being met.

Secret agency memos, made public by a lawsuit, showed that the overwhelming consensus, even among the Food and Drug administrations own scientists, was that GMOs can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects. They urged long-term safety studies. Despite this, the White House instructed the FDA to promote biotechnology. The agency official in charge of the policy, was Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s very own former attorney and later vice president. He is now deputy commissioner for foods at the Food and Drug Administration.

Anyone who challenges the system with scientific evidence is ignored, silenced or discredited. Arpad Pusztai, who is considered to be one of the world’s most respected and well-learned biochemists, had for three years led a team of researchers from Scotland’s prestigious Rowett Research Institute (RRI) in studying the health effects of a novel GM potato with built-in Bt toxin. Much to the surprise of many, the team discovered that, contrary to industry rhetoric, Bt potato was responsible for causing severe health damage in test rats, a fact that was quickly relayed to the media out of concern for public health.

Rather than praised for their honest assessment into this genetically-tampered potato, Pusztai and his colleagues were chastised by industry-backed government authorities, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, whose office was discovered to have secretly contacted RRI just hours after Pusztai and his team announced the results of their study on television. For speaking the truth, Pusztai was immediately fired from his position, and his team dismissed from their positions at the school.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued rulings in 1980 and 2001 allowing living organisms, including plants, to be patented, opening the floodgates to current corporate practices. A frenzy of acquisition of seed companies and a rapid expansion of patents on seeds and plants ensued. The report by Center For Food Safety and Save Our Seeds summarises what these changes have wrought:

“As a consequence, what was once a freely exchanged, renewable resource is now privatised and monopolised. Current judicial interpretations have allowed utility patents on products of nature, plants, and seeds, without exceptions for research and seed saving. This revolutionary change is contrary to centuries of traditional seed breeding based on collective community knowledge and established in the public domain and for the public good.” [page 5]

The ETC Group, in its 2008 report, “Who Owns Nature?” also highlights the privatisation of a commons:

“In the first half of the 20th century, seeds were overwhelmingly in the hands of farmers and public-sector plant breeders. In the decades since, [biotechnology companies] have used intellectual property laws to commodify the world seed supply — a strategy that aims to control plant germplasm and maximize profits by eliminating farmers’ rights. … In less than three decades, a handful of multinational corporations have engineered a fast and furious corporate enclosure of the first link in the food chain.” [page 11]

In 1999 revealed Friends of The Earth exposed biotech company Monsanto was refusing to serve to its own staff the very same genetically engineered food that it incessantly foists upon impoverished nations on the premise that it will save populations from starvation. Although it has never been proved, Monsanto constantly claims that GE food is harmless – so why wasn’t it serving it in its own office?

In one canteen, run by external provider, Sutcliffe Catering, a notice read that a decision has been taken to remove, as far as practicable, GM soya and maize from all food products served in the canteen:

“We have taken the above steps to ensure that you, the customer, can feel confident in the food we serve”, the provider said. “We believe in choice”, said Monsanto, while the company actually made sure that by not serving GE food in its canteens they did not give staff the opportunity to ‘choose’ whether or not to eat GE food as they de facto ensure that the staff did not get to eat GE food. Yet the same choice isn’t available to farmers around the world, who most of the time have no choice but to plant GE crops, thanks to a seed market that is often dominated by Monsanto.’

Furthermore, companies that use Monsanto produce are lobbying to prevent the labelling of ingredients in their products which contain genetically modified ingredients. Monsanto spent, approximately, a staggering 12 million dollars campaigning to prevent GMO labelling in Washington DC and California with PepsiCo, Coca Cola, Nestle and General Mills plunging millions in also. It raises the question why companies work tirelessly to prevent labelling if the products are safe for human consumption.

With these serious concerns surrounding genetically modified organisms, precautions should be taken to boycott companies that advocate for and/or participate in creating or funding research in the use of GMOs. Although this may limit our options, the benefits this will provide are invaluable and alternatives plentiful. Under current EU legislation, The Food Standard’s Agency requires the labelling of all ingredients, including GMOs. However there is no inclusion of products such as meat, milk and eggs from animals fed on GM animal feed. Cows for example are fed the bovine growth hormone to stimulate the increased production of milk. There is a current debate as to whether this can be transferred to humans, and until resolved any use should be immediately halted.

The Institute for Responsible Technology is ‘a world leader in educating the public and change-makers about the health risks and environmental dangers of GMOs and associated pesticides. They empower consumers to lead an organic lifestyle and shape the changing marketplace to reject GMOs from the food supply and environment.’

Their mission:

‘To protect the genetic integrity and nature’s biological evolution by preventing the outdoor release of genetically modified organisms, and to protect human and animal health by preventing the use of GMOs in the food and feed supply. In addition, they seek to stop the use of toxic agricultural chemicals associated with GMOs, such as Roundup.’