Food Safety Program Needs Restructuring, Not Another Agency

In the wake of the recent salmonella outbreak that killed 9 people and sickened over 600 others, food safety concerns have become a pressing issue.

The Food and Drug Administration takes the brunt of the responsibility and is the most pressured to find the cause and correct it.

However, at least 15 agencies are involved in making sure food is safe under at least 30 different laws, some of which date back to the early 1900s. it doesn’t matter how old a law is as long as it works. And if those 30 laws work then they should remain in place. However, it seems there needs to be some re-thinking as to how often food gets inspected and by whom.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. and Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., have been proposing an overhaul of the nation's food safety structure for more than a decade. Food safety advocates agree.

I don’t believe we need another bureaucratic agency to add to the convoluted maze, just shore up practices already in place. The system will work if given enough inspectors with the proper guidelines and abilities.

The Department of Agriculture should inspect anything grown or raised on a farm, domestic and imported. The FDA should cover everything else that enters the human body (drugs, etc), domestic and imported. They need to agree on a schedule of inspections and they both need the ability to shutdown operations if a threat is discovered.

Obviously, an alert system needs to be in place to notify the general public of a possible contamination of food, possible source(s), and where the product was shipped. And this alert needs to take place within days of the discovery not months as is currently the case.

It seems reasonable that if any manufacturer has to face the possibility of a shutdown (cutting into their profits) then it would be in their best interest to ensure their product is safe.

Raw food inspections covered by USDA, this covers growers. Processed foods covered by FDA, this covers processors.

An additional safety net would be provided by the health department to inspect facilities and ensure workers are following safe food-handling procedures.

This means that some foods will be inspected more than once. The bottom line is that all possible sources of contamination needs to be inspected, as the source of all tainted food has come from mis-handling of food and/or contamination of facilities.

Toothless FDA is at the Root of Our Food Safety Problems

An Op-Ed in the Washington Post calls for more regulation to protect our food system. More regulation will not help.

The root of the problem, exemplified in the Peanut Corporation of America case, compares with the revolving-door-justice given to drunken drivers as they go through the legal system. They are continually allowed back on our roads until someone finally is killed due to their reckless irresponsibility.

In my opinion the last judge who set them free should be held responsible just as the bar tender who gave them the last drink is.

The FDA discovered that PCA shipped salmonella-tainted product 12 times in 2007 and 2008. PCA is the drunk driver in this case.

PCA was not required to report their positive findings to the FDA. Responsibility for this ‘oversight’ falls to the FDA. It is incumbent upon the FDA to ensure that no tainted food is released to the public. A few simple words on the part of FDA regulation would have prevented situation to escalate.

The FDA is supposed to be made up of a body of experts, hired to foresee any potential problem and regulate it out of existence. What we need to do is give the FDA some teeth and allow them to bring charges against any corporate or business entity that knowingly jeopardizes the public health or safety.

Why do we drag our feet on these blatant violations and then call for more of the same type of legislation that won’t get enforced. We do not need more regulation what we need is someone with the intestinal fortitude to punish these immoral characters for cocking a loading gun and aiming it at the general public.

SWAT action of Family Farm? Where Is the Media Coverage?

On December 1, 2008, a family-run food co-op in LaGrange Ohio, was the scene of a home invasion. These “home invaders” won’t match the images you may have of drug-crazed-addicts or some street gang bent on ripping-off the family of their possessions. No, this highly organized and heavily armed ‘gang’ was made up of police officers ordered to confiscate the livelihood and personal property of the family who runs Manna Storehouse by the Ohio Department of Agriculture.

I found this comment concerning the raid on a blog called The Complete Patient:
The family that runs the co-op tells me they were herded into the living room for 8 hours while the home and business was torn apart. They were not given reason, saying they were under investigation. All of their computers and phones, and customer information were taken, as well as $10,000 worth of beef. A ‘warrant’ which didn’t appear to be valid, showed the reason for investigation, was ‘beef’.

According to this second-hand information (neither police nor government officials deny or collaborate the story) our government, in full riot gear with semi-automatic weapons pointed at the heads of this family (children included) raided a family business who was providing grass-fed beef, lamb, pastured poultry and other Weston-Price-style foods.

There is no official story in the main stream media about this raid nor is there any official press release from Ohio Department of Agriculture, however, I did find one ‘sanitized’ report in a local paper, which is how many of the family’s neighbors heard of it. (Is the internet the last stand for true freedom of the press?). The lack of coverage, considering the level of force used in a raid of this sort, is disturbing at best. Normally, the news media is all over this type of raid. The family did say they are not talking to the press in order to protect themselves.

What little background information could be found regarding this situation still does not show that the SWAT action was warranted. It seems that the discovery of a bit of non-institutional beef in an Oberlin College food service freezer a year ago (November 2007) was tracked down by a county sanitation official to Manna Storehouse. Oberlin College’s student food coop is widely known for its strident ideological stance about eating organic foods. It seems that the Oberlin student food cooperative had joined the Manna Storehouse food cooperative in order to buy organic foods in bulk from the national organic food distributor United, which services buying clubs across the nation. The sanitation official, James Boddy, evidently contacted the Ohio Department of Agriculture. After the first contact by state ODA officials, Manna Storehouse reportedly wrote them a letter requesting assistance and guidelines for complying with the law. This letter was never answered. Rather, the ODA agent tried several times to infiltrate the coop. When his attempts failed, the SWAT team showed up!

As of December 9, the family has not been charged with any crime, nor have they been contacted by anyone concerning this raid. The speculation that the business was operating without a license is simply that, speculation. They have sent a plea for any information regarding the Ohio Department of Agriculture laws governing their enterprise and what they may have done to prompt such a raid.

Three important questions arising from this incident need to be addressed.
1: Did this SWAT action take place as reported, thus far by word of mouth, or is it a fabrication to garner sympathy for the plight of the ‘little guy’?
2: Is ODA guilty of participating in a nationwide attempt to discredit small-time local food groups in favor of corporate interests?
3: Where is the media coverage?

All three questions are disturbing.

Did this SWAT action take place?
Did SWAT swoop down and ‘terrorize’ this ‘innocent’ family as the commenter reported, or is this an exaggeration to garner sympathy for the plight of family-owned businesses who don’t want to be regulated by the government?

Whether the raid was conducted with weapons drawn or not, the raid did take place and this issue needs to be addressed. Since when does the enforcement of health and/or commerce policies warrant the use of SWAT? Why did the Health Department not simply conduct a health inspection? I am certain there are rules in place to cover this situation that are more in line with good public relations than involving law enforcement.

If the government did use such heavy-handed Gestapo-type tactics simply to confiscate this family’s business records and personal food items, then a complaint should be filed with their congressperson and violation of civil rights charges brought against ODA. Bringing such matters to light is the most obvious way of ensuring any wrongdoing by the government is exposed. However, if this family sensationalized their story simply to further their cause and attempt to manipulate public opinion, should we buy into it?

The use of a SWAT team indicates a belief that this family was “armed to the teeth” and therefore the use of such equipment was deemed necessary for the protection of team members. Absent any prior knowledge that they family was an outlaw gang, such use of law enforcement was not only irresponsible but a danger to the public.

Certainly, this alleged method belies the faith we have in our government officials to protect us from harm and they should therefore be made to pay.

At any rate, what psychological effect this raid will have on these children is anybody’s guess. And what did this experience teach them about their country, their leaders, their government, and their local law enforcement?

I realize the police are ordered from ‘on high’ to behave in the manner in which they do, but at some point the individual wearing the uniform has to take personal responsibility for his/her participation in these tyrannical methods. They must consult their moral conscience to face the fact that they can no longer shrug off their part in what they did to this family to “just doing my job”.

All of us who feel that our constitution, and the freedoms granted therein, is worth fighting for must, sooner or later, be moved to action against these atrocities, to voice our opinions and fight against this kind of tyranny.

Is there some diabolical master-plan to wipe out all corporate competition?
Why did the ODA feel it was necessary to raid a family owned and run business using law enforcement and the threat of violence instead of using a less oppressive method such as serving notice of an inspection for possible health or commerce violations?

Is the FDA and Department of Agriculture protecting us from the mean ole independent businesses promoting ‘bioterrorism’ or are they protecting a market for major corporations who only view consumers as open wallets for their own financial benefit? Keep in mind that these are the same corporations who reduce their product package size and claim to be helping the economy by not raising their prices.

The FDA has a history of conducting raids on business operations selling natural herbs and nutritional supplements with claims of promoting health. The 1990 raid on Highland Laboratories, a small vitamin company in rural Oregon; 1987 raid on Life Extension Foundation in Florida; 2007 raid of Fullife Natural Options; for a list of similar raids click here.

We are all aware of the downside of large corporations. Labor Unions have been fighting this beast on the side of the little guy for a very long time. Often times resorting to violence to get their voices heard over management for simple human rights such as a decent wage, safe working conditions, reasonable work day lengths, affordable health coverage, and other benefits that those without a union will never have. Corporations are in place to feed their financial bottom-line. And if they could cut costs like health insurance, safety procedures, and even salary, they would do it.

Wal-Mart is the poster child of ‘large corporation’ vs. the ‘little guy’ and has certainly done their part to wipe-out local businesses wherever they build their stores. Despite their initial claims to the community in which they choose to spread their empire, small businesses dry up. The resulting job gains for Wal-Mart never amount to the losses suffered from these closings. The vast majority of Wal-Mart employees are paid part time wages and work without sufficient benefits which forces taxpayers to subsidize them through food stamps and Medicaid. Money earned by Wal-Mart leaves the local economy and is pumped to its headquarters therefore local banks do not benefit from Wal-Marts’ presence. Wal-Mart buys its bulk of goods from China forcing American suppliers to cut approximately 17,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs between 2001 and 2006. In 2007, Wal-Mart brought $26.7 billion of Chinese goods into the United States and cost American workers more than 200,000 jobs.

It has taken laws to be passed to protect the interests of the worker and consumer, but now corporations have bought politicians through lobby groups and outright bribes to protect themselves against the worker and our economy is suffering for it.

Multinational corporations are taking control of seeds, animals, food, and all natural substances worldwide and the police are at their beck and call to enforce governments’ and corporations’ sway over the ‘little guy’.

The Community Alliance for Responsible Eco-farming (CARE), a private group of farmers and consumers in Pennsylvania, recently released a statement regarding the relationship between private citizens and constitutional government. Their position is basically that the government has a right to control and regulate what the government creates. If, for example, the government creates a corporation (essentially conferring “person” status to that entity) then it has every right, every duty even, to oversee it. But men are not artificial entities created by government. Men are natural, and when they act as private citizens, government must stay out of their way. In fact, government is supposed to protect citizens from the actions of any entity that might inhibit the free exercise of their natural rights. When government does otherwise it blurs the line between private and public, effectively deeming EVERYTHING public, and thus making constitutions irrelevant.

As for the ongoing attack on free enterprise, the general public does not know enough to know what is real and what is speculation because the press has yet to mount an investigation into what is happening.

Where is the media coverage?
Why is there no mainstream media coverage of how this and other family owned businesses across the country are being dealt with in such a Gestapo-like manner?

It isn’t just the local media that should be held to account, national media as well bear the blame. Blogs and word of mouth are doing what they can to get the word out but they are no real substitute for gaining national attention. We need a concerted effort along with main stream media to bring this situation into the main stream consciousness. This cannot continue to go on without public scrutiny.

The media did not cover the story of the tea man. What else are we not being told?

Summation:
We have a SWAT action on a family farm to confiscate all business-related property without revealing charges.
We have government officials imposing rules and regulations on individuals who want nothing to do with them.
We have a media that does not cover these actions.
We have a populace who looks the other way, some of which are members of law-enforcement, government and media.
These are the ingredients necessary to allow a corprafascist state to exist.
We all need to rise up against this trend before it is too late.
History is repeating itself.


Further Reading:
True history of FDA raids on healers, vitamin shops and supplement companies
Center for Micro Eco-Farming Movement
Whole Farm Coop, Local Harvest
Benefits of Healthy Whole Foods
Herbal Supplements Guide

Cloned steaks and burgers, is it worth it?

The FDA just announced that they will not require tracking of cloned beef and have approved its sale to consumers. They basically have washed their hands of the entire debate.

Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with eating cloned meat products. There are no new chemicals introduced into the food chain by cloning an animal and clones are produced from naturally existing genetic material (no additives or enhancements).

Those approximately 30 percent of U.S. adults who say they won’t eat cloned meat regardless of FDA approval are simply objecting to science getting involved with creating a living ‘something’ that only nature should be allowed to create.

No disrespect is intended regarding these people’s choice but, a cloned animal provides the same edible meat as its progenitor.

The question of finding cloned meat in our food supply may be moot anyway because food producers say the process of creating cloned animals is too expensive and inefficient. Of course, the cost may come down in the future much like electronic products seem to get cheaper over time. Due to some unforeseen event that adversely affects our ‘natural’ food supply, cloning may become the best alternative and we will end up eating cloned meat anyway.

Once an animal has been cloned it’s offspring are just as natural as those from non-cloned animals, so, again, where’s the problem?

A senior member of the agricultural advocacy group, Center for Food Safety, said there is no way for the consumer to know they’re getting cloned meat or their offspring.

The process involves removing the nucleus from an egg and inserting the nucleus from the egg of a more desirable animal. The desirability of the animal can be based on several factors. If, for instance, you have a race horse that consistently wins races or a stud animal that generates a hefty revenue stream for the purposes of artificial insemination then these animals would be worth cloning. In the food chain, the desirability would be for an animal that can produce heavier weight or more milk (therefore creating more financial benefit). Likewise, if you have a chicken that is a mega-producer of quality eggs then why not make several hundred or several thousand of them?

Cloning came about to improve the chances over the old methods of selective breeding and artificial insemination.

The process, however, is far from perfect. The road from freshly cloned embryo to birth is fraught with errors. That's why so few implanted cloned embryos are actually born, and why so many of those end up dying young.

Dolly, for example, lasted just six years before dying from a progressive lung disease. Cloned pigs have a nasty habit of dropping dead from heart attacks. Cloned cows sometimes die shortly after birth -- and those are the lucky ones.

Washington Post's Rick Weiss described the outtakes of livestock clones this way:
Many are monstrously overweight -- several times their normal size -- and filled with fluids to the point of looking like they're about to burst. Others are born with normal bodies but big, hideous, so-called ‘bull heads.' Others look okay on the outside but have peculiar abnormalities of the heart, lungs or other organs -- including livers that are mysteriously filled with fat -- or defective thymus glands that blunt normal development of the animals' immune systems.

Those animals that are the result of successful cloning will not pass any genetic alterations to their offspring. So the question arises, why bother? Aside from show animals and fast horses there really isn’t any economical benefit for cloning. This is simply another aspect of science that some scientist feel the need to conquer. In other words, because we can do it, let’s perfect it. Perfection has not yet been achieved and it doesn’t look like it will be in the near future.

The biggest concern I have in creating herds of cloned, genetically identical cattle, or any other animal, is that any disease can wipe out an entire herd. Nature has many fail safe mechanisms in place to prevent the domination of one species over another and we, with our limited understanding of these natural rules, cannot begin to understand how and when a disease becomes ‘necessary’ from nature’s viewpoint.

This whole process subverts natural selection. Mankind has now stepped in and declared himself as the authority on which genetic material best suits our needs. In doing so, we are diluting the genetic diversity that is natures realm.

Cloning may have its place in reproducing show animals and sports animals, but it will never equal in-vitro fertilization for producing a better quality food product.