Originally published via Armageddon Prose:

Lawyers, second only to politicians on the moral degeneracy totem pole, don’t often do good work. But when they do, I celebrate it and wish them Godspeed.

Gift horses, mouths, etc.

Such is the case with Michael Connett.

Via FlourideAlert.org:

“The Lead attorney for the Plaintiffs is Michael Connett of the Law Firm Waters Kraus and Paul with offices across the country including Dallas, Texas.

Michael Connett says, ‘The court has one question before it, and that is: Does fluoridation present an unreasonable risk of neurodevelopmental effects? … If the court rules that it does, then the EPA will be mandated by law to take action to address that risk.’”

Related: Criminal FDA Declares Informed Consent Null and Void

The airtight gist of the lawsuit, near impossible to argue against — try as the government’s lawyers will to refute it anyway — goes like this:

·       Informed consent mandates that the patient (in this case, the public) be fully apprised of the drug or medical procedure on offer, including the relevant risks and benefits

·       Fluoridating the water supply is a de facto medication, administered with the alleged goal of promoting dental health

·       The government does not solicit informed consent from the patient (the public) prior to dumping fluoride into the water supply

·       The government is in violation of informed consent

The evidence that fluoride lowers IQ, among other detrimental effects, even in concentrations deemed “safe” by Public Health™ authorities, is robust and legion.

Via Environmental Health:

“Within the brain, fluoride appears to accumulate in regions responsible for memory and learning… The MCLG [maximum contaminant level goal] for fluoride (4 mg/L)… is clearly not protective of adverse effects on the brain, especially in regard to early-life exposures…

Out of the 18 studies that provided the water-fluoride concentrations, 13 found deficits at levels below the MCLG, with an average elevated level at 2.3 mg/L, the lowest being 0.8 mg/L [4]…. and extend the documentation of cognitive deficits associated with only slightly elevated exposures.”

Via The Journal of Neurosciences in Rural Practice:

“Exposure to fluoride is associated with reduced intelligence in children. We have found a significant inverse relationship between intelligence and the water fluoride level, and intelligence and the urinary fluoride level.”

The question must be asked: what interest would the government have in lowering the IQ of the public it oversees?

How would a lobotomized public serve its interests, in this, Our Sacred Democracy™?

Is the benefit merely limited to generating more MSNBC viewers?

Or might there be other utilities for dumbing down the rubes?

Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.

Follow his stuff Substack. Also, keep tabs via Twitter.

For hip Armageddon Prose t-shirts, hats, etc., peruse the merch store.

Support always welcome via insta-tip jar.