The Codex Alimentarius Irradiated Food Cover-up

Radura symbol - Wiki Image

Updated excerpt from  
Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom

Brandon Turbeville

Activist Post 

In the last article, I briefly discussed a proposal made by the FDA which was very similar to one made by Congress five years earlier. This proposal would have allowed production companies to use terms such as “electronically pasteurized” instead of “irradiated” and, going further, simply allow the food to be categorized as “pasteurized” with no indication whatsoever that the food had been subject to radiation.

The proposal made by the FDA in April, 2007 is an interesting one indeed. In the opening summary of the text, the FDA states that one of the purposes of the proposal is to make it so that “only those irradiated foods in which the irradiation causes a material change in the food, or a material change in the consequences that may result from the use of the food, bear the radura logo and the term ‘irradiation,’ or a derivative thereof, in conjunction with explicit language describing the change in the food or its conditions of use.”[1] 

While this may seem like a strengthening of a rule, in reality it is not. This proposal is merely another cover mechanism for the pretense of protecting the consumer with strong regulation, while allowing industry to do just what it wants, i.e. produce high levels of irradiated food to cover up unsanitary manufacturing practices.

Food inspection is often flawed

Lena H. Sun
Washington Post 

The voluntary quality control system widely used in the nation's $1 trillion domestic food industry is rife with conflicts of interest, inexperienced auditors and cursory inspections that produce inflated ratings, according to food retail executives and other industry experts.

Recent outbreaks of salmonella illness tied to contaminated eggs and peanutshave focused new attention on weaknesses in the decades-old system, which relies on private-sector auditorshired by foodmakers.

With food-borne illness and recalls rising, the use of private inspectors has grown rapidly in the past decade as companies try to protect themselves from lawsuits and tainted products that can damage their brand names. But experts agree that the inspections often do not translate into safer products for consumers.

"It's a business strategy, not a public-health strategy," said David Acheson, former assistant commissioner for food protection at the Food and Drug Administration under President George W. Bush.

Read Full Article

RELATED ARTICLES:
Genetically Modified Foods and the Monsanto Initiative
7 Mega-Cartels that Kill the Free Market and Our Sovereignty
Food Fascism in the Land of the Free

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Print this page