Most of this is easily verifiable, especially about the other countries that prohibit fluoridation of drinking water. The Nazi research might take some digging. Would appreciate a link from anyone who already has the sauce on the original (or even better, translated to English) research.
We can expect this to change whenever the new country is born (this Independence Day? 🤞!). But here's the brief summary of the fiendish fluoridation op that anyone without their own water well has been subjected to, designed to drive people to media-managed conformity.
https://sunnysjournal.com/2026/06/03/fluoride-isnt-for-teeth-its-for-your-obedience-mrkidpool17/
Which part: the purpose of fluoride, i.e. pineal gland calcification, or the Nazi origin? Or the whole thing?
I'm confident I don't need fluoride, and that the practice of fluoridating water is not performed in many other countries, so that part of the info is directly observable. But the rest of the post depends on either trust or research that I haven't personally done.
I agree we don't need fluoride.
Fluoride is an industrial waste product. Added to water, toothpaste, etc. on false pretenses to make money.
You and I will probably agree on that.
But the idea that the Germans were using it pacify the jews in the camps is a made-up bullshit story.
Most of the narrative from that era is made-up nonsense.
Even "Shindler's List," which is what a lot of people think is a documentary and they think it documents things that actually happened, is just fiction.
The book was originally titled "Shindler's Ark," and won the "Best Book of Fiction" by the LA Times -- before Spielberg made it into a movie.
The inside book cover even says that all events are a figment of the author's imagination.
Likewise, somebody just made up the story about the flouride in the German camps.
No evidence to support it.
Just like the ridiculous claims of the "rollercoaster of death" and the "Holocaust" itself.
All entirely fiction.
Fluoride to prisoners in concentration camps doesn't make sense even according to the author's premise: there is no need for psychological manipulation when the people you deal with are prisoners under direct physical control. Helpless prisoners under armed guard don't require pacification.
Reading the post quickly, I overlooked the camps and assumed the intent was to augment propaganda used on the German people, which would jive with the purported psychological manipulation angle.
I've never heard of the rollercoaster of death, and I'm glad I didn't: I might laugh at the wrong time. I'm okay being considered crazy, but try to be strategic about it.
I still don't like fluoridation, but I'll pull back on using this piece as an argument. Thanks.