Oh, wait a minute, you're going to now say that there is good scientific research that says that the reason behind fluoridation is to control peoples' minds??? Nevermind that you and others are asserting that this is the sole purpose of fluoridation, and are implying with those assertions that the mind control tactics are working (why do people never give propaganda a chance? It works GREAT!).
First report.. Oh! a little biased are we? Sounds more like an op-ed piece than an actual article, but hey.
Starts off with this from the first link and tell me this isn't someone with an agenda...
Ok, fine, further reading into the article gives some links and citation of research. And what do they talk about? All articles and research papers are focusing on high concentrations of fluoride. Hmm... Lettuce continue.
Fluoride Action Network.. no agenda
there, eh?
Ok.. so, I've read the links, and the links presented within the links, and they ALL qualify their information with the phrase "high concentrations/levels of fluoride". Not a single one says ANYTHING about mind control, or utilization of fluoride to control the masses. Not even the article cited from SciAm gives anything resembling that impression. High quantities of fluoride appear to have statistically deleterious effects. As a matter of fact, I can find only one report that even suggests that low levels of fluoride have ANY deleterious effect. How does one move from "high fluoride MAY be dangerous or bad" to "ALL or ANY levels of fluoride are dangerous/bad"?
So, what do you propose we do with all those water sources that are naturally high in fluoride? And what's really amusing is how many people are going to say, "Oh, well I drink BOTTLED water because tap water is so nasty", not even realizing that bottled water is even less regulated than tap water, and that it can be far worse (and not for the packaging, either) for a person for that deficit.
Here's my thing, hit me with data, fully rounded data. Don't make an experiment that's designed to prove your ideas right, make an experiment simply to see what happens, THEN draw your conclusions. Don't add editorial-type opinions into it, that makes the author look like, you guessed it, someone with an agenda and when people have an agenda, they tend to gravitate towards anything that supports that. Add to that the idea that the purpose of municipalities' fluoridation programs are to control the minds of their constituents sends the whole thing right off the deep end for me.
The study I posted said nothing about weed being harmful... that is why I'm majoring in botany though, I will be on the forefront of this legalization effort proving it's not harmful.