By Mike Adams
Natural News
After having their organic almond businesses devastated by the
USDA's bizarre decision requiring mandatory chemical fumigation of
almonds, the almond industry is fighting back. Fifteen American almond
growers have filed a lawsuit against the USDA in an attempt to repeal
the requirements that all almonds grown in California be fumigated or
pasteurized. (Virtually all almonds sold in the United States are grown
in California.)
Since the USDA's ruling in 2007, organic
almond growers in California have been economically devastated by the
mandatory fumigation of almonds.
Because USDA rules don't apply to almonds being imported from other
countries, however, the industry has seen a huge shift away from U.S.
growers and towards almond growers in Spain and other countries. Some
American almond farmers
have even called the USDA's decision "a plan to destroy the U.S. almond
industry and put small organic farmers out of business."
The USDA's plot to deceive consumers over "raw"
The mandatory almond fumigation requirement is seen by
health-conscious consumers as not merely bizarre, but downright
fraudulent. That's because the USDA's regulations allow fumigated and
pasteurized almonds to be labeled "raw," thereby intentionally
deceiving the consuming public and instantly destroying consumer trust
in the labeling of all almonds.
By any honest measure, the people making these decisions at the USDA can only be described as either idiotic or criminal. To enforce regulations requiring the intentional mislabeling of raw food seems more like the actions of a criminal racket than a government agency. While online pharmacies selling mislabeled pharmaceuticals
are routinely raided and shut down by U.S. authorities, when the
government itself engages in similar deceptions, it declares itself
above the law and immune to prosecution.
This lawsuit by U.S. almonds growers aims to overturn the USDA's deception. These fraudulent actions on the part of the USDA have generated an enormous amount of criticism from the raw food community, whose members depend on almonds to make raw almond milk, raw almond "burgers" and other raw foods preparations. As leaders of the raw foods movement rightly insist, fumigating or pasteurizing nuts
destroys as much as 90 percent of their original nutritional value,
altering proteins and destroying disease-fighting phytonutrients. The
USDA, however, remains remarkably illiterate on this topic, have never
made a single statement acknowledging any qualitative difference
between cooked foods and raw foods.
Is the USDA actually trying to destroy consumer health?
As the editor of NaturalNews.com, I find the USDA's ignorance on fundamental matters of nutrition to be nothing short of astonishing. As it is the U.S. government department responsible for much of the food supply,
it should be on the leading edge of nutritional knowledge, not stuck in
the 1950's, before scientists knew about plant enzymes and
disease-fighting phytochemicals that are easily destroyed by heat or chemicals.
Notably, the USDA has also supported the FDA's plot to irradiate the
U.S. food supply while intentionally misleading consumers over the fact
that their foods have been irradiated. See my article, "FDA Plots to
Mislead Consumers Over Irradiated Foods" at http://www.naturalnews.com/023956.html
My only explanation for the USDA's insistence that the U.S. food supply
should be fumigated, irradiated and cooked to the point of nutrient
destruction is that the USDA is pursuing a campaign of intentional nutrient depletion
for the U.S. population. With Big Pharma now deciding key regulatory
decisions of the U.S. government, the USDA's actions seemed designed to
create a nation of health degenerates who will demand unprecedented
levels of pharmaceutical "treatments" that enrich the drug companies.
If that sounds a little too conspiratorial, rest assured that U.S.
corporations engage in conspiracies all the time: Conspiracies to hide
negative drug studies, conspiracies to influence the USDA's Food Guide
Pyramid to avoid saying things like "eat less meat," and conspiracies
to ensnare consumers in an endless cycle of consumption, disease and
debt.
In fact, most of what happens between government and private industry
today is founded on conspiracy -- which simply means two people sitting
in a room, plotting how to bilk consumers for the most profits.
Whether the USDA is openly conspiring to destroy the U.S. food supply
-- or is merely run by bumbling idiots who are nutritionally illiterate
-- is debatable. But the results of its actions are not. By destroying
the healing qualities of fresh produce
and nuts, the USDA is denying consumers access to the very plant-based
nutrients that are just barely keeping people from developing
full-blown cancer, diabetes and other serious medical conditions. As
more and more fresh foods are destroyed by USDA regulations, our
population will spiral downward into a state of degenerative disease
and misery.
Why the USDA is more dangerous than terrorists
In doing so, the USDA will have accomplished what all the terrorists
in the world could not do: Destroying the U.S. food supply and leaving
its population to rot.
It is unimaginable to think that this
could be happening accidentally. For government agencies like the USDA
and FDA to put such policies into place, somebody at the top must be calling the shots.
In other words, somebody wants to deny consumers access to raw food.
They want everything to be dead, processed, fumigated, homogenized,
pasteurized, irradiated or otherwise destroyed. This is most likely
being pursued solely for corporate profits (a diseased population is
not only easier to control, it also spends a lot more money on
pharmaceuticals and medical services).
I've said it before, but it's worth repeating: No nation that destroys the nutritive value of its food supply has any real future. If such policies are allowed to continue, you can kiss the United States
of America goodbye. It will never survive the disease, death and
financial bankruptcy that's sure to follow such assaults on its food
supply.
That's why this lawsuit by California almond growers
is so important: It may allow us to free almonds from the destructive
designs of the USDA, restoring the integrity of this important source
of nutrients.
Of course, suing the USDA is hardly the correct response to such
terrorism assaults on our national food supply. If we actually lived in
a country that sought to protect its population, the Pentagon would
send a team of Navy Seals into the offices of the USDA (and the Almond
Board of California) with flashbangs and assault rifles, and they'd
arrest these criminals for their attempts to threaten the U.S. food
supply. After sentencing, they could be shackled and lined up in a
California park where consumers could throw -- what else? -- irradiated
rotten tomatoes at them.
What follows is yesterday's press release on this issue from the Cornucopia Institute:
Almond Growers and Handlers File Federal Lawsuit - Seeking to End "Adulteration" of Raw Nuts
Lawsuit Would Halt Treatment of Almonds with Toxic Fumigant or Steam Heat
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A group of fifteen American almond growers and
wholesale nut handlers filed a lawsuit in the Washington, D.C. federal
court on Tuesday, September 9 seeking to repeal a controversial
USDA-mandated treatment program for California-grown raw almonds.
The almond farmers and handlers contend that their businesses have been
seriously damaged and their futures jeopardized by a requirement that
raw almonds be treated with propylene oxide (a toxic fumigant
recognized as a carcinogen by the EPA) or steam-heated before they can
be sold to American consumers. Foreign-grown almonds are exempt from
the treatment scheme and are rapidly displacing raw domestic nuts in
the marketplace.
Tens of thousands of angry consumers have contacted the USDA to protest
the compulsory almond treatment since the agency's new regulation went
into effect one year ago. Some have expressed outrage that even though
the nuts have been processed with a fumigant, or heat, they will still
be labeled as "raw."
"The USDA's raw almond treatment mandate has been economically
devastating to many family-scale and organic almond farmers in
California," said Will Fantle, the research director for the
Wisconsin-based Cornucopia Institute. Cornucopia has been working with
almond farmers and handlers to address the negative impacts of the USDA
rule, including the loss of markets to foreign nuts.
The USDA, in consultation with the Almond Board of California, invoked
its treatment plan on September 1, 2007 alleging that it was a
necessary food safety requirement. Salmonella-tainted almonds twice
this decade caused outbreaks of food related illnesses. USDA
investigators were never able to determine how salmonella
bacteria somehow contaminated the raw almonds that caused the food
illnesses but they were able to trace back one of the contaminations,
in part, to the country's largest "factory farm," growing almonds and
pistachios on over 9000 acres.
Instead of insisting that
giant growers reduce risky practices, the USDA invoked a rule that
requires the gassing or steam-heating of California raw almonds in a
way that many consumers have found unacceptable.
"For those of us who are interested in eating fresh and wholesome food
the USDA's plan, to protect the largest corporate agribusinesses
against liability, amounts to the adulteration of our food supply,"
said Jill Richardson, a consumer activist and blogger at: http://www.lavidalocavore.org/
"This ruling is a financial disaster and has closed a major customer
group that we have built up over the years," said Dan Hyman, an almond
grower and owner of D&S Ranches in Selma, CA. His almond business
relies on direct sales to consumers over the internet. Hyman notes that
his customers were never consulted by the USDA or the Almond Board
before they were denied "a healthy whole natural raw food that they
have eaten with confidence, enjoyment and benefit for decades."
The lawsuit contends that the USDA exceeded its authority, which is
narrowly limited to regulating quality concerns in almonds such as
dirt, appearance and mold. And even if the USDA sought to regulate
bacterial contamination, the questionable expansion of its authority
demanded a full evidentiary hearing and a producer referendum, to
garner public input – neither of which were undertaken by the USDA.
"The fact that almond growers were not permitted to fully participate
in developing and approving this rule undermines its legitimacy," said
Ryan Miltner, the attorney representing the almond growers. "Rather
than raising the level of income for farmers and providing handlers
with orderly marketing conditions," added Miltner, "this particular
regulation creates classes of economic winners and losers. That type of
discriminatory economic segregation is anathema to the intended purpose
of the federal marketing order system. "
Retailers of raw almonds have also been expressing their unhappiness,
based on feedback from their customers, with the raw almond treatment
rule. "We've been distributing almonds grown by family farmers in
California for over 30 years and we regard them as the common heritage
of the American people," said Dr. Jesse Schwartz, President of Living
Tree Community Foods in Berkeley, CA. "We can think of no reply more
fitting than to affirm our faith that ultimately the wisdom and good
sense of the American people will prevail in this lawsuit."
Barth Anderson, Research & Development Coordinator for The Wedge, a
Minneapolis-based grocery cooperative, noted that their mission has
always been to support family farmers. "We weren't surprised when Wedge
shoppers and members wrote nearly 500 individual letters expressing
disapproval of the USDA's mandatory fumigation law for domestic
almonds," Anderson said. "Our members especially did not like the idea
that fumigated almonds could be called 'raw.'"
According to the USDA, there is no requirement for retailers to alert
consumers to the toxic, propylene oxide fumigation or steam treatment
applied to raw almonds from California.
"This rule is killing the California Organic Almond business," said
Steve Koretoff, a plaintiff in the lawsuit and owner of Purity Organics
located in Kerman, CA. "Because foreign almonds do not have to be
pasteurized their price is going up while our price is going down
because of the rule. It makes no sense." Koretoff added.
Two groups of consumers that have been particularly vocal in their
opposition to the almond treatment rule are raw food enthusiasts and
vegans. These consumers may obtain as much as 30% of their daily
protein intake from raw almonds, after grinding them for flour and
other uses. Studies exploring nutritional impacts following fumigant
and steam treatment have yet to be publicly released. A Cornucopia
Institute freedom of information request for the documents is awaiting
a response from the USDA.
"We raw vegans believe raw foods, from non-animal sources, contains
valuable nutrients – some not yet well-understood by scientists,"
stated Joan Levin, a retired attorney living in Chicago. "These
nutrients can be destroyed by heat, radiation and toxic chemicals. We
support the continued availability of fresh produce free of industrial
age tampering," explained Levin.
Cornucopia's Fantle noted that the Washington, D.C. federal district
court has already assigned the almond lawsuit a case number, beginning
its move through the judicial system. "We believe this is a strong
legal case and hope for a favorable decision in time to protect this
year's almond harvest," Fantle said.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment