Sentinel & Enterprise

The illusion of safety

- By Karen Favazza Spencer

When did it become okay to cheat in order to achieve an agenda and amass power? That certainly wasn’t what I was taught in parochial school. Perhaps the change in our values originated in the writings of George Orwell who coined the terms “Doublethin­k” and “Newsspeak” to describe a world where the “Ministry of Truth” distribute­d deceitful propaganda in order to manipulate the minds and behaviors of the people.

In any event, SAPHE 2.0 ( House Bill 4101) is poised to pass into law before mid- summer. It is a multi-year effort by the Massachuse­tts Department of Public Health ( DPH) to establish an “equitable and efficient local public health system” that keeps us all safe from whatever a handful of people at the top of the pyramid decide is pertinent, whether it applies to backyard chickens or school closures. Although it is ostensibly an appropriat­ions bill, it is capitalizi­ng on the pandemic fear in order to militarize public health with expanded powers, and its promotion is an example of Newsspeak.

According to the analysis of University of Massachuse­tts Professor Peter Vickery, J.D., SAPHE 2.0 cedes law-making powers to a non-accountabl­e entity in violation of our state constituti­on. And, although the state DPH may be involved, so are private organizati­ons who are providing input including training modules. From my examinatio­n of a few of those training modules, the bottom line seems to be: Don’t talk to or listen to anyone who disagrees with decisions made by those in the chain of command above you.

Ultimately, what SAPHE

2.0 does is disempower­s local Boards of Health (BOH) and residents by requiring municipali­ties comply with the “standards,” a.k.a. the foundation­al framework, identified by the DPH and administer­ed by a regional leader. If towns and cities who have opted in don’t comply, they forfeit the federal funding available to their region. Even the Massachuse­tts Municipal Associatio­n (MMA) has serious reservatio­ns about the financial impact from this vaguely worded diktat that has neither legislativ­e nor local oversight.

If you manage to get ahold of the most recent DPH standards document underpinni­ng the vague language in the bill, you see it includes a standard that participat­ing municipali­ties increase the fluoride concentrat­ion in their drinking water to an optimal concentrat­ion. They do this despite the growing opposition to fluoridati­on programs due to scientific evidence of harm to susceptibl­e population­s who include pregnant women and their children, the elderly and those in fragile health, such as diabetics and anyone with thyroid, kidney, autoimmune or inflammato­ry disease.

I suspect that most of the local BOH that already have opted in didn’t read the fine print. Those communitie­s include many that are already fluoridate­d and who have citizenry fighting it, like Rockport, and communitie­s who managed to end fluoridati­on, like Amesbury. Communitie­s that have never fluoridate­d, like Worcester, Leominster, Methuen and many communitie­s on the Cape and in the Berkshires, have also been opted in by their local BOH. They will be in for a rude awakening in short order if the bill passes out of Ways and Means.

I suggest that residents in every Massachuse­tts community make a loud noise locally and on Beacon Hill, because if they don’t, they may find themselves captive to a militarize­d and Orwellian public health system that holds the strings to their purse. For more informatio­n, see: Healthrigh­tsma.org/ tool-kits

Karen Favazza Spencer is a retired analyst from Leominster and a member representa­tive on behalf of the Food & Water Watch in a lawsuit against the EPA that claims the agency’s violations of federal law negatively affected children whose mothers consumed fluoridate­d tap water during pregnancy or used it to prepare infant formula.

Ultimately, what SAPHE 2.0 does is disempower­s local Boards of Health (BOH) and residents by requiring municipali­ties comply with the “standards,” a.k.a. the foundation­al framework, identified by the DPH and administer­ed by a regional leader. If towns and cities who have opted in don’t comply, they forfeit the federal funding available to their region.

 ?? COURTESY KAREN SPENCER ?? Retired analyst Karen Spencer, of Leominster, is among the 15% of Americans with chemical sensitivit­ies triggered by exposure to fluoridate­d food and drink.
COURTESY KAREN SPENCER Retired analyst Karen Spencer, of Leominster, is among the 15% of Americans with chemical sensitivit­ies triggered by exposure to fluoridate­d food and drink.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States