Following a trend in corporate naming, the New York Yankees have been renamed the New York Goldman Sachses after a corporate buyout from Goldman Sachs investment bank.

“After last quarter’s record profit, we just didn’t know what to do with all our money,” Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson explained at a press conference. “We saw what happened with Red Bull and the Metro Stars soccer team. So we bought and renamed what was then called the New York Yankees.”

“We had jokingly considered donating to charities that would help starving African majorities gain control over their local economies. Boy did we have a good laugh about that one. Let’s just say that buying and renaming the Yankees was a no-brainer.”

Yankees owner George Steinbrenner welcomed the move, citing “the profound importance of global marketing.” “We need to synergize our corporate interests to increase profitability and shareholder value,” he said.

But not everyone was happy with the name change. “This is really a shame,” said one analyst. “A more targeted name would have been better. Something like ‘The New York Goldman Sachs Trading and Principle Investments Divisions.’ The chosen name may increase brand awareness, but it may have a harder time reaching some of Goldman Sachs’s core clients.”

In a public battle revolving around the inherent obscenity of women’s breasts, Google today was ordered to give a list of 50,000 web sites to the Bush administration.

Google recently made headlines for refusing to give the U.S. government a random sampling of 1 million Internet addresses accessible through its search engine and a random sampling of 1 million search queries submitted over a one-week period. Google simultaneously created a censored version of Google for all Chinese viewers.¹

Media pundits were up in arms, confused about whether Google was a privacy rights hero or a capitulator to totalitarian repression. But the underlying issue wasn’t about privacy or free speech — it was, of course, about women’s breasts.

Bush’s demand relates to the so-called Child Online Protection Act (COPA), which requires restricted access (i.e. a login ID and password) for commercial sites not meeting “‘contemporary community standards’ … and that showed sexual acts or nudity (including female breasts).”² By getting a random sampling of Google’s search queries and sites, the administration wanted to demonstrate that the web was saturated with vile breasts, and that people under 18 — say, 17.5 — are seeing them.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, “The dispute drew considerable attention from … legal scholars, who alternatively praised Google for defending Internet privacy and accused it of protecting smut peddlers” — such as those who show breasts on their site. But along with misusing the word “alternatively,” the Chronicle offers no evidence of an even balance of opinion among so-called “scholars.”

It appears both the Bush Administration and Google have lost this battle. The judge drastically reduced what Google had to provide, but Google still may be seen as giving in on important privacy issues.

Ironically, even if COPA becomes permanent, it may still have a negligible effect on internet breast availability. The ruling will only apply to web sites hosted in the U.S.

The Child Online Protection Act is part of a long Bush administration tradition of Orwellian naming, including, notably, the Patriot Act, Healthy Forests Initiative, No Child Left Behind Act, and the Clear Skies Initiative.

Architect Richard Rogers was slated to design the absurdly expensive expansion of Manhattan’s Jacob Javitz convention center.

But then Rogers did the unthinkable.

According to Reuters, the architect hosted a meeting of Architects and Planners for Justice in Palestine, a newly formed group. The group later decided to call for a boycott of Israel. (Among other atrocities, Israel has been illegally occupying Palestine for nearly half a century, causing formal condemnation on several occasions by the UN General Assembly and the World Court.)

An architect with controversial political views was too much for NY politicians to handle, so they sought to remove him from the project.

However, all was resolved in the end. Rogers distanced himself from the justice organization during a meeting with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Democratic U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner. Now we can rest knowing Rogers doesn’t really want justice for Palestinians, and progress can continue on the $1.7 billion expansion of that Javitz center.

The College Of New Jersey Ayn Rand Society, dedicated to promoting the works of ultra-capitalist Ayn Rand, has an extensive web page. The site details information on the group and provides links to other ultra-capitalists.

But there’s just one problem: the organization has no members.

“I’d love to join the TCNJ Ayn Rand Society,” explained one student. “It’s just that I don’t have a psychotic political philosophy.”

Ayn Rand, the late author, is famous for her so-called “objectivist” philosophy, which scorns the poor and handicapped while praising the dollar above all else.

Others were also disappointed in the low membership levels. According to one Junior, “if building giant dollar signs and then passionately worshipping them were my bag, then I totally would have signed up Freshman year. As it stands, I think I’ll join the acting club instead.”

The impeachment of President Bush, followed by the election of Centrist Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2008, would create a near-perfect world, announced liberal elites today at a Yale University discussion forum.

“On matters of national security, global capitalism, torture, and increasing the unfathomably large military budget, Bush is spot on,” explained one Harvard Law professor. “It’s just that, well, he’s too damned barefaced in promoting the U.S. imperialist agenda.

“God I love torture,” the professor concluded.

“Subtlety is key,” added a former John Kerry campaign manager. “And frankly: Bush has none of it, particularly when it comes to suppressing the civil liberties of U.S. residents while exploiting the resources of the international community. We need a liberal Democrat who can perform these same tasks with more finesse.”

Other panelists had a similar take. One Yale University administrator explained that “Subtlety must be combined with moderation. Keep up the good fight to funnel money from the poor to the rich, but pace yourself. Give them small victories, that they might lose the Great War. Hillary Clinton would understand. Things are out of whack now, but a Clinton Administration in ‘08 would fix just about everything.”

“N-no no no no n-no!,” exclaimed a wealthy capitalist today at a New York social gathering. “You just don’t get it. Because without money and fierce competition, there’s no incentive to do anything. Society would collapse! What are you, nuts?”

The capitalist continued: “Anyway, can I get you something to drink? A beer? Oh, which reminds me — I’m having a party on my yacht next week. You’re welcome to come, and bring some friends. What? No, of course you don’t have to bring anything.

“What have I been up to? Well, I spend most of my time at the office. But let’s not talk about that, work sucks. I’ve been fixing up my house — I love it. I could have hired someone, you know, but it’s just so rewarding to do it myself. I love seeing the progress. And my family loves it too. I’d do anything for them.

“What’s that?” the capitalist concluded. “You need somebody to watch your kids this Sunday? Of course I’ll do it! Just do me a favor — don’t spew any more of that stupid crap about people working without a monetary profit motive. You’re really fuckin’ sick, you know that? Don’t you dare miss my yacht party!”

The Chinese public has begun to react to its government’s decision to ban “Memoirs of a Geisha” from the country’s cinemas.

“I was kind of annoyed. I heard ‘Memoirs’ was OK, I guess,” said one Beijing resident before being immediately hauled off to jail, charged with “unpatriotic speech.”

Others were less forthright. “I did a Google search about this censorship issue,” said a young woman, “but nothing came up because they censor everything here. But I heard it [the movie] was kind of bad in my local newspaper. Although, I’m not entirely sure, because as I was reading about it, the paper was seized by a government officer and burned in front of me. I was then beaten. The paper’s offices have since been raided and destroyed; the thought police are now attempting to erase all memories of the paper’s existence. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to return to my Wal-Mart sweatshop job — I only worked 17 hours so far today. U.S. consumers are depending on me.”

U.S. Government officials rigorously denounced the censorship. “This is a civil liberties nightmare,” remarked one senator. “I mean, censorship is a fundamental part of controlling the barbaric masses, but why do those Chinese have to be so blatant about it?”

Afghanistan — the “festering wound, with primitive warlords still dominant, an isolated capital with no control of the country side, no national infrastructure, and a once-again booming opium trade the country’s only economic bright spot”¹ — is a “wonderful success story,” according to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice today.

Meanwhile, U.S. puppet Afghan President Hamid Karzai has developed a new economic strategy destined to make all Afghans millionaires: “Come to Afghanistan, make money, take most of it home,” he said, addressing foreign investors. Just “leave a little with us.”²

Karzai has other revolutionary ideas, including on the topic of voting reform. Speaking before his U.S.-backed election victory, he stated: “If Afghans have two registration cards because they like to vote twice, well, welcome.”³

“For the safety of all passengers,” American Airlines now requests that passengers use the lavatory in their own cabin only.

U.S. Transportation Security Administration administrators hailed the decision as “an important step in the March of Freedom.”

“The War On Terror starts right here, in the bathroom,” said American Airlines CEO Gerard Arpey in a rare interview. “If the nice white folks in First Class had to share their bathroom with the vulgar masses … well … I can only imagine the terror I’d feel after seeing a negro had just used my toilet.”

Added Arpey: “Would I catch the black disease?”

But some detractors argue the measures don’t go far enough. One Republican Senator has called for “the total elimination” of coach class bathrooms. “When I see an Arab enter a bathroom, how can I be sure he’s not building a biological weapon from microbes in the aircraft’s tap water?”

Arpey offered no comment on the Senator’s request, but remarked that “bathroom safety issues should be a key component in any anti-terror legislation.”

In his first encyclical letter, released today, Pope Benedict XVI described the “inescapable sense of solidarity between all peoples.”

However, the Pope stated that governments, through “subsidies or tax relief,” show “significantly” more solidarity than individuals. (With such benevolent governments, one might wonder why anyone needs tax relief in the first place.)

The Pope recently bemoaned a lack of solidarity from media outlets, who he claimed “undervalue” religious belief.¹ However, a Google News search for “pope” returns over 15,000 articles.

Pope Benedict is a former member of the Nazi Hitler Youth Militia.²

Ford, the world’s third largest car company, hopes to “revive its business” by “slashing up to 30,000 jobs,” the BBC has reported.

“This is a great move for Ford,” said one analyst. “Having 30,000 fewer employees will breathe new life into the firm. You’ve seen the cars they make currently. Imagine how much better their cars would be if they had 30,000 fewer people making them.”

Employees were also elated. “It’s essential that Ford’s stock value continue to increase,” said one Ford factory worker, a struggling father of three. “If my job reduces corporate efficiency, then it’s my duty — and my honor — to be fired and let my family go hungry this year. It’s about efficiency, people. Glorious market efficiency!”

Stock brokers, recently rebranded as financial advisors, issued a joint statement to investors today, entitled “Our new plan will beat the market.”

“We first discuss your personal financial objectives,” the statement read. “Then we create a series of relevant action items before implementing broad-based, diversified portfolio solutions tailored to your specific needs. The net result of this process is beating the market.”

The statement concluded: “It’s value added.”

Some rogue FAs, defining themselves as “old school,” were skeptical about the statement’s claims. “Yes, of course every investor can beat the market,” said one broker. “That’s obvious. It’s just that these highfalutin poppycock terms like ‘action item’ give me the heebie-jeebies.”

But most brokers agreed fully with the statement. “In Communist countries,” said one FA, “they might tell you the market’s too complex to beat, or that insider trading laws make beating the market legally impossible. They might even go so far as to say that not everyone can beat the market for obvious logical reasons. Well, back in the real world, by assessing your long term needs and risk tolerance, we’ll develop a customized asset allocation plan that will outperform just about everyone. Now that’s value added.”

(For more information, visit Financial Sense)

In a recent interview with the New York Times, the chairman of Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A, Yukitoshi Funo, said American consumers are “really, really nice people.”

“American consumers,” declared Funo, “are more on the open-minded side, rather than closed minded. They are … they are … really, really nice people … nice customers.”

The Japanese car company sold roughly 7.5 million cars in 2004, 2 million of which were purchased by U.S. residents.¹ The Toyota Camry is the best-selling car in the US.²

Some Americans have recently expressed concern at the impact of Japanese cars on American companies like Ford and GM. The Times interviewer described the political situation as “touchy.” But Funo disagreed. “Each country have a different situation,” he said. “American consumers are more on the open-minded side. . . . That’s the reason we’re successful, and how much we are thankful to the American consumers.”

The U.S. contains 5% of the world’s population but accounts for 26% of the world’s oil consumption.³

BBC has thoroughly covered Toyota’s perspective on a recent auto worker strike in India. At one point, the BBC quotes Toyota’s general manager at the striking plant, saying: “We would like to restore normalcy as soon as possible, but at the same time we would not like to compromise on discipline.”

The perspective of the factory’s workers is not mentioned.

Quoting extensively from the Toyota manager, the BBC drew a comparison with a recent Honda strike — one that cost Honda millions of dollars. The BBC does not mention why the Honda workers were on strike.

(For more information, visit Indian Express)

In a move experts are calling “unsurprising” and “completely obvious,” corporations have resolved to increase the value of their stock shares for 2006.

For instance, Business Wire is reporting that “Allegheny Technologies Incorporated (NYSE:ATI) today announced actions designed to continue to increase shareholder value.”

One expert yawned while reading that Circuit City is committed to “upgrade, evolve and innovate our business and increase shareholder value.”¹ “I’m so bored by this topic that even the slightest discussion of anything else would, by comparison, be akin to sexual ecstasy,” he concluded.

“There’s really nothing to say,” noted one rhyming financial analyst. “Corporations exist to increase shareholder value, so this isn’t really news per se. Come what may, they’d do the same thing anyway. Have a nice day. OK?”

However, Chinese sweatshop laborers breathed a sigh of relief at the news. According to one Chinese labor representative, “If Wal-Mart had changed its mission to accommodate social concerns over profit, we might have some free time and spending money. Imagine our hopeless, desperate confusion as we tried manage our own affairs!”

Rapper 50 Cent issued a stern warning to listeners in his latest album, The Massacre: “You should take time to check that bitch.”

50 issued his statement after presenting several pieces of key supporting evidence. “I have ya ho, eyeballin’ at the light,” he said, alluding to the way your girlfriend has shown interest in 50 and his “big white [Mercedes] Benz.”

Added 50: “damn pimpin.”

50 Cent is a wholly owned subsidiary of Universal Music Group, which is in turn a wholly owned subsidiary of Vivendi Universal S.A.

Expressing concern about the current situation with your girlfriend, 50 Cent declared that he’s “tired of tellin’ niggas over and over I won’t hesitate to pop or shank ya.”

“You don’t listen you gon’ get ya ass hit,” 50 concluded.

Intel, the world’s largest computer chipmaker, will be upgrading its brand next week, BBC has reported. The company will have a slightly modified logo and a new slogan: “Leap Ahead.”

Intel’s products will remain exactly the same.

Intel, the company, is worth $150 billion. But its brand, one of the most highly marketed in the world, is worth $35 billion on its own.¹

Marketing experts hailed the decision. According to one researcher, “With a stronger brand, Intel can charge consumers more money for the same products, increasing profits. It will also help manipulate consumers’ ideas about what Intel is. This is a great move for America.”

Large corporations everywhere have a question: “Are you ready?”

Referring to a technology unlikely to hit the mainstream for at least ten years, CNN asks: “Are you ready for a hydrogen car?”

Urging Americans not to forget their primary directive — to consume — Florida’s Sun-Herald wants to know if you’re ready “for the last-week rush of holiday shopping.”

Dan Mabbutt of About.com — owned by The New York Times — wants to know: “Are you ready for the Complete VB.NET Tutorial?” Just give them your name, email address, and zip code, and you can become ready!

And Lifetime, Television for Women^TM, wants to know: “Are you ready to be loved?” “Yes, it’s likely that your soul mate is out there.” But you’ll never find him, ladies, if you’re not ready to be loved. Take Lifetime’s quiz to discover whether you’re ready — or a misanthrope loser.

Billionaire New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg today referred to striking transit workers as “selfish.”

Among other disagreements, transit workers have refused to allow the MTA to significantly worsen their retirement benefits.

Bloomberg himself is the sole private possessor of many things:

• a mansion on Manhattan’s upper east side.
• private homes in London’s Cadogan Square; Vail, Colorado; Bermuda; Armonk
• a farm in North Salem where his daughter keeps her horses¹.
• an 80% share of Bloomberg, Inc., the media megacorp that bares his name.
• $5 billion

New York State Governor George Pataki, a millionaire who indirectly controls the MTA through leadership appointments, has joined Bloomberg in harshly condemning the strikers. Pataki has continually decreased funding for the MTA, and he has clearly forced this strike into existence.

Pataki’s probable motive: showing business elites he’s tough on workers and “corporate friendly” as he prepares for a 2008 presidential run.

In 1892, super-rich Henry Frick cut impoverished steelworkers’ wages, so they went on strike. Frick hired armed mercenaries who protected strikebreakers and attacked the striking employees. The state government responded to this situation by bringing in the militia to protect strikebreakers — and then wrongfully charging union leaders with murder. If it were 1892 today, where would Bloomberg and Pataki stand?

Racists everywhere are scrambling to find new outlets for their unbridled hate, thanks to the recent identification of a skin color gene.

Scientists at Penn State recently published their findings in the prestigious journal Science. According to Scientific American, while searching zebrafish for cancer causing genes, the scientists ended up isolating the gene that makes European skin white.”¹

Faced with the overwhelming meaninglessness of skin color, racists are now hard-pressed to justify their malice. According to one racist, “Geneticist Kieth Chang and his team have shown that African-Americans are really just like me. I’m now faced with the formidable task of exploiting and dehumanizing a different subset of the population. Are Muslims still fair game?”

Other racists were even more affected.

“The entire fabric of this great nation is built on the profitable abuse of blacks, yellows, reds, and browns — domestically and internationally,” said one Republican state Governor. “With scientific support for our blind malevolence no longer a possibility, who will staff sweatshops, clean my house, work in poultry factories, or provide critical prison labor? Our whole economy will collapse!”

When thousandaire blue-collar transit workers want raises that match inflation, a humane retirement plan — and an end to draconian disciplinary actions — insiders know there’s only one man who can restore order: billionaire New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg.¹

As most local residents know, the NYC Transit Union began a partial strike today. The union threatens to call a general strike on Tuesday, bringing public transportation to a halt, unless the Metropolitan Transit Authority agrees to its demands.

The MTA had a $1 billion surplus this past year.

The average NYC transit worker earns $55,000 a year — which millionaire and billionaire experts agree is more than a fair share of the profits. Bloomberg issued a press release stating that a strike “would be more than just illegal and inconvenient; it will threaten public safety and severely disrupt our City and its economy.”

Analysts note that Bloomberg — whose $5 billion net worth exceeds the sum of all 33,000 transit workers’ 2005 incomes — “is the perfect man to stop the greedy workers from stealing hard-earned MTA money meant for millionaire executives.”

At Bloomberg’s side is New York State Governor George Pataki, with a net worth $2.35 million. He noted that strikers seeking better compensation will face “very, very severe consequences.”²

In a major speech yesterday, President Bush compared the struggle for democracy in Iraq to that of the 18th century United States.

Like Iraq’s new leaders, “Our founders faced many difficult challenges, they made mistakes, they learned from their experiences and they adjusted their approach.” said Bush.

Referring to U.S. history, Bush noted: “There were uprisings, with mobs attacking courthouses and government buildings. There was a planned military coup that was defused only by the personal intervention of George Washington.¹

“Also, like today’s Iraq, the United States was occupied by a foreign, nuclear-powered imperialist government bent on controlling America’s rich oil resources.”

Bush used these similarities to appeal to U.S. residents, most of whom no longer support the war on Iraq:

“In 1783, Congress was chased from [Philadelphia] by angry veterans demanding back pay, and they stayed on the run for six months. Then in 1784, a foreign military superpower killed tens of thousands of U.S. civilians while trying to secure oil fields and install a puppet U.S. government under a facade of democracy. They initially invaded us under the pretext of eliminating so-called ‘weapons of mass destruction,’ but as that lie began to crumple, they shamelessly fished for new justifications. Only the strength of the American People let our democracy flourish under such conditions.

“It is important to keep this history in mind as we look at the progress of freedom and democracy in Iraq.”

Bush concluded by remarking that any pullout of U.S. forces from Iraq would lead to civil war: “If only Britain hadn’t cut and run from the Revolutionary War, we’d never have had our own Civil War here at home.”

What do Sony, Bacardi, Playstation, and Telus have in common? “A properly structured and truly protected global trademark.” But a recent analysis by marketing expert Naseem Javed revealed that just one percent of corporations worldwide have proper unique global names with a matching dotcom.

This is “very disturbing,” alerts Javed. The fact that it is “so easy to create and build a proper global name” just adds insult to injury.

“To find a proper name identity,” he explains, “first you need a Five-Star Standard of Naming, this is a process designed to ensure the uniqueness of a candidate name with direct relativity to the business it represents while securing a position for a global trade marking with a matching dotcom.”

Added Javed: “Anything less will fail.”

What could be easier than that? Corporate marketing experts worldwide agree that unless major changes occur quickly, most corporations will continue to fail to “strike gold” by finding that “super shine” in their name identity.

The Bush Administration, along with a broad cross-section of Democrat and Republican congresspersons, is standing up in defense of Microsoft.

Microsoft Corporation, currently worth $295.2 billion,¹ has been fined by South Korea for violating its antitrust laws. According to experts, the $32 million fine — equal to 1/9218 of Microsoft’s value — is too much for the software giant to bear.

Microsoft has previously been deemed a monopoly by judicial bodies in the US and, more recently, the EU. According to ZDNet, “European Competition Commissioner Mario Monti ruled that Microsoft had failed to provide to rivals information that they needed to compete fairly in the market for server software and that the company has been offering Windows on the condition that it come bundled with Windows Media Player, stifling competition.”²

But Deputy Assistant Attorney General J. Bruce McDonald explained that “regulators should avoid substituting their judgment for the market’s.”³

Hebrew University professor Martin van Creveld, considered by some to be Israel’s most respected military historian, has presented his opinion on the Iraq war in this week’s issue of Forward. Calling the Bush administration’s war “the most foolish” war since 9 B.C., van Creveld declared that the “thing to do is to forget about face-saving and conduct a classic withdrawal.”

Van Creveld’s “classic withdrawal” entails a “continued [U.S.] military presence, made up of air, sea and a moderate number of ground forces.”

True, this sort of withdrawal is highly similar to what others might call “non-withdrawal.” But real withdrawal is simply not an option, he argues, because “the region, with its vast oil reserves, is simply too important for that.”

George Orwell’s 1984, a story about systems of control and propaganda, had some important mottos: “War Is Peace. Ignorance Is Strength. Freedom Is Slavery.”

Google, Inc. had a motto, too: “You can make money without doing evil.”

At times, it seemed Google, which revolutionized the internet, would stay true its word. But in a shocking joint announcement today, Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page radically changed course, proclaiming: “We’re Evil, Suckers!” Brin and Page pointed to an overwhelming heap of evidence to support their claim, including:

• Googling the phrase “google is evil” (in quotes) returns 12,400 hits, putting it between Wal-mart (18,400) and Halliburton (521).
• Google’s privacy policy is so bad and potentially dangerous that the New York Times wrote an angry editorial about it.
• Sergey Brin and Larry Page have a combined fortune of roughly $14 billion. Could any non-evil people possibly hoard that much money while billions of people worldwide are struggling for food?
• According to the New York Times, Google stores all its search data forever, meaning your searches can conceivably be traced to you and used against you in court.
• Google, Inc. is worth $121.5 billion. If money is power, and power corrupts, then by the logic law of syllogism, Google, Inc. must be entirely villainous by now.
• Gmail, Google, Inc.’s email program, reads the contents of its users’ private messages and targets them with relevant advertisements.

Faced with the reality of Google, Inc.’s evilness, the Bush Administration promised increased corporate tax cuts. “Without the burden of paying taxes, the ‘invisible hand’ of the free market will guide Google back to goodness.”

Why is fluoride in toothpaste and tap water? The American Dental Association calls the practice “safe and effective … for preventing tooth decay.” Then again, the ADA answers to the same government that promotes the anti-evolution “intelligent design” theory.

Does water fluoridation prevent tooth decay?
Probably. But how much prevention, and at what price? Tooth decay rates have gone down since the US started fluoridating water back in the 50s. But according to World Health Organization data, tooth decay rates decreased similarly for European countries not using fluoridation, during roughly the same period.

Even scouring the Center for Disease Control and the American Dental Association, one is hard-pressed to find convincing evidence of fluoride’s overall benefit.

Is fluoride safe?
Not for humans. Low doses of fluoride are not akin to low doses of, say, anthrax. However, according to salon.com, “Fluoride is, after all, an extremely toxic compound that originally was sold as a bug and rat poison. A growing body of scientific research suggests that long-term fluoride consumption may cause numerous health problems, ranging from cancer and impaired brain function to brittle bones and fluorosis (the white splotches on teeth that indicate weak enamel). An estimated 22 percent of American children have some form of fluorosis.”

Why is fluoride in toothpaste and tap water?
Fluoride has been a poisonous industrial waste product for well over a century. But during WWII, military aluminum production caused the quantity of fluoride waste — and lawsuits against Big Aluminum — to skyrocket. Fluoride desperately needed a makeover, so the industry trumpeted the compound’s alleged dental benefits. In 1945, despite any credible scientific evidence, several industries persuaded the government to run a 15-year water fluoridation experiment (on humans) in Michigan. But before this experiment had neared completion, it was expanded to 87 more cities. Meanwhile, Edward Bernays, known as the father of the public relations industry, spearheaded an intense pro-fluoride propaganda campaign — repeating dental health allegations while downplaying safety issues. The toothpaste industry signed on with P&G’s Crest in 1956, and without further delay, a toxic compound had been transformed into a dental miracle. For a fascinating history of American fluoridation, see the Earth Island Journal

Is there an alternative to fluoride?
Maybe. Xylitol is a naturally occurring sugar alcohol found in birch trees and some fruits. Studies are still ongoing, but many have shown that xylitol reduces cavities by preventing bacteria from attaching to teeth. Xylitol can be well applied in chewing gum form.