The History and Practice of Eugenics, PT 9

The Codex Alimentarius

http://www.codexalimentarius.org/

The altruistic purpose of this commission is in "protecting health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade, and promoting coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations".

It is run jointly by the Food and Agricultural Organization and the World Health Organization. What actually happens through them is that corporations make more money off of food and control us through food. Obviously, if you control the food, you control the people. The Us is the chair of Codex.

The Codex organization is working toward regulating everything we eat and drink including water. They will implement their regulations in every country that belongs to the World Trade Organization. If these countries do not follow them, then they will face trade sanctions.

Regulations as of December 2009:

* All nutrients (vitamins and minerals) are to be considered toxins/poisons and are to be removed from all food because Codex prohibits the use of nutrients to "prevent, treat or cure any condition or disease"

* All food (including organic) is to be irradiated, removing all toxic nutrients from food (unless eaten locally and raw).

* Nutrients allowed will be limited to a Positive List developed by Codex which will include such beneficial nutrients like Fluoride (3.8 mg daily) developed from environmental waste. All other nutrients will be prohibited nationally and internationally to all Codex-compliant countries .

* All nutrients (e.g., CoQ10, Vitamins A, B, C, D, Zinc and Magnesium) that have any positive health impact on the body will be deemed illegal under Codex and are to be reduced to amounts negligible to humans' health .

* You will not even be able to obtain these anywhere in the world even with a prescription.

* All advice on nutrition (including written online or journal articles or oral advice to a friend, family member or anyone) will be illegal. This includes naturalnews.com reports on vitamins and minerals and all nutritionist's consultations.

* All dairy cows are to be treated with Monsanto's recombinant bovine growth hormone.

* All animals used for food are to be treated with potent antibiotics and exogenous growth hormones.

* The reintroduction of deadly and carcinogenic organic pesticides that in 1991, 176 countries (including the U.S.) have banned worldwide including 7 of the 12 worst at the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pesticides (e.g., Hexachlorobenzene, Toxaphene, and Aldrin) will be allowed back into food at elevated levels .

* Dangerous and toxic levels (0.5 ppb) of aflotoxin in milk produced from moldy storage conditions of animal feed will be allowed. Aflotoxin is the second most potent (non-radiation) carcinogenic compound known to man.

* Mandatory use of growth hormones and antibiotics on all food herds, fish and flocks

* Worldwide implementation of unlabeled GMOs into crops, animals, fish and trees.

* Elevated levels of residue from pesticides and insecticides that are toxic to humans and animals.

Some examples of potential permissible safe levels of nutrients under Codex include :

* Niacin - upper limits of 34 mcg daily (effective daily doses include 2000 to 3000 mcgs).

* Vitamin C - upper limits of 65 to 225 mcg daily (effective daily doses include 6000 to 10000 mcgs).

* Vitamin D - upper limits of 5 μg daily (effective daily doses include 6000 to 10000 μg).

* Vitamin E - upper limits of 15 IU of alpha tocopherol only per day, even though alpha tocopherol by itself has been implicated in cell damage and is toxic to the body (effective daily doses of mixed tocopherols include 10000 to 12000 IU).

In 1995, the Food and Drug Administration changed their policy and it stated that international standards, i.e. Codex, would supercede US laws, if US laws were incomplete. This is essentially illegal to make some other governing body superior to US law. But in 2004, the US passed the Central American Free Trade Agreement, which required US regulations to meet Codex standards by 2009.

Effectively, we cannot get rid of these regulations as long as we belong to the WTO. It is believed that the purpose of this, is to control population, through food, with the aid of Big Pharma and the US government. The FAO and WHO estimate that the vitamin regulation will reduce popularized by 3 million.

The more natural things we eat for health or take for health, the more we cut into Big Pharma's profits.

IF proper science were being used, biochemistry would be used to assess nutrients. Instead, Codex uses Risk Assessment, which is a branch of toxicology. Because they want us to view nutrients as toxins.

The Codex Alimentarius Vitamin and Mineral Guideline, can ban high potency vitamins, by setting standards for dosages or supplements added to food extremely low.

The DSHEA, Dietary Supplement Health Education Act of 1994 classifed supplements as food. But Codex supercedes that and calls supplements a drug or toxins, by referring to levels of them as dosages.

So Codex violates a US law with an international law.

I looked around to see what kind of news stories I could find on Codex. I found one that says Argentina joined the International Olive Oil Commission in order to prove that their olive oil was authentic, even though it is different that the oils from Mediterranean countries. The information was found in Codex documents. Things like that are important because the prices of olive oil are down right now.http://www.oliveoiltimes.com/olive-oil-business/olive-oil-prices-lowest-since-2009/27024

Despite the fact that Codex has regulations about putting things like GMO's on the market without testing them, that is exactly what happened in the US. And Codex has done nothing about it. So obviously, they are not really out for our best interests, and someone else is calling the shots, like maybe Monsanto. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-murphy/dan-quayle-and-michael-ta_b_1551732.html

Greenpeace did a study on the vegetables in our grocery stores and found levels of toxins and chemicals at seven times what Codex allows. Yet where is Codex when they could be useful?http://asiancorrespondent.com/82758/contaminated-veggies-switch-organic-produce/

I looked around for some of the more recent videos on Codex alimentarius, so I could post them here.

In 2009, in the mother of all conflicts of interest, Obama appointed Michael Taylor as a senior advisor for the FDA. He had previously served as vice president at Monsanto. Among other things that they do, Monsanto in a leader in GMO, genetically modified foods. He was also the food Czar at the FDA when GMO's were first allowed onto the market, without any testing at all to determine their safety.

Monsanto markets genetically modified corn that is insect resistant. In Europe, six countries from the EU refuse to allow it to be grown in their countries. The EU has been highly resistant towards any GMO's. Corn or corn products are in everything. The Monsanto corn has pesticide in the seeds, and now there are indications that bugs are becoming resistant to the pesticides, so why keep them in there if they don't work or are starting to fail? It is estimated that before they started making this modified corn, it cost farmers about $1 million a year in damaged crops and pesticide costs.

Monsanto's corn is engineered to produce the Cry3Bb1 protein from Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt, a natural insecticide. There is also SmartStax corn that has an additional chemical from Dow Chemical and Dupont. SmartStax corn has eight different genetically modified traits in it. Prior to it's development, the most any other product had was three. The corn produces six insecticide toxins and is tolerant to 2 herbicides.

Monsanto also makes seeds for corn, soybeans and cotton, that have Round Up in them. But weeds are becoming resistant to that also.http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-06-15/monsanto-corn-injured-by-early-rootworm-feeding-in-illinois

One of their newer products is GMO drought resistant corn. They developed it in partnership with BASF. It was approved earlier this year. The USDA said, "corn and progeny derived from it are unlikely to pose plant pest risks and is no longer to be considered regulated article under APHIS’ Biotechnology Regulations." and "would have no significant impacts, individually or collectively, on the quality of the human environment and will have no effect on federally listed threatened or endangered species, species proposed for listing, or their designated or proposed critical habitats."

The Cornucopia Institute reported that the USDA received almost 45,000 public comments opposed to MON 87460, with only 23 comments in favor. Apparently, this had little or no impact on Obama or Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack.

Now they are wanting to sell corn that is resistant to 2, 4-D, which was the primary ingredient in Agent Orange. If that doesn't sit well with you, the USDA is taking public comments on it, but whether or not your comment will matter is unlikely, given that they didn't listen to people opposed to MON 87460.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2010-0103-0001http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2010-0103-0001

When I was growing up, my Grandmother told me how they had a cow that was solely to provide my Dad milk. This would be unpasteurized and unprocessed milk. But the FDA is conducting armed raids on farmers who produce and sell unpasteurized milk. Michael Taylor is responsible for these raids.http://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-dump-former-monsanto-lobbyist-as-fda-food-safety-czarhttp://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-dump-former-monsanto-lobbyist-as-fda-food-safety-czar

Taylor's job at the FDA has been on again off again, because part of the time he works for companies like Monsanto. In1994, he wrote the labeling guidelines for dairy products that have the hormone rBGH in them. So that these products wouldn't be stigmatized, he forced companies that make products without rBGH state on their labels that rGBH wasn't any different than the naturally occurring hormone, so people would think that their product wasn't any better because it didn't contain it.

Before he was able to do this, as a lawyer for Monsanto, he advised them on whether or not it would be legal for states to institute such labeling regulations, and whether or not Monsanto would be able to sue

other companies for telling people that their products were rGBH free. So while in the private sector, he worked out the legalities, and through his public position he worked out the logistics and implemented the program.

Taylor is not the only person who goes in and out the revolving doors between Monsanto, the FDA, and the EPAhttp://www.rense.com/general33/fd.htmhttp://www.rense.com/general33/fd.htm

Both of my children had trouble tolerating infant formula, so they had to be switched to soy formula. Now soybeans are GMO's and soy allergies went up by 50% when GMO soy products were introduced to the UK. So, if your child is lactose intolerant, or allergic to dairy, and they are allergic to soy, what are you to do, especially if breast feeding wasn't an option. In my case I was on massive doses of antibiotics for a year after my son was born, and the medicine would have passed into breast milk.

One of the types of genetic modifications in food, is antibiotics. We hear all sorts of statements that germs are antibiotic resistant due to doctors over prescribing antibiotics. But is more likely, that the antibiotics in our food cause it. For one thing if those genes transfer to bacteria in your digestive tract, then it would modify the bacteria and make it resistant. Now with the idea that gene transfer is possible, what happens if GMO pesticides in corn transfer within our digestive tract, we would be turning the bacteria inside us into pesticide factories. No tests have been done to see if these GMO genes do transfer, but it is scientifically possible. The American Academy of Environment Sciences doesn't think GMO's are safe. “Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food,” including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. The AAEM asked physicians to advise patients to avoid GM foods."

It sounds to me like a good way to lower the population, to make people infertile, vulnerable to disease because of damaged immune systems, increase their risk of diabetes, cause organ damage, and cause them to die early.

At least sugar, fat and salt in food makes it taste better, the GMO's usually don't unless you count the new ones that are specifically made for that out of fetal cells. If someone handed you two boxes, one that contained an all natural herbicide and one that contained an all natural pesticide, would you eat them?

Here's a link to a current news story about people signing petitions to get rid of Michael Taylor. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/monsanto-petition-tells-obama-cease-fda-ties-to-monsanto/2012/01/30/gIQAA9dZcQ_blog.html

Here's the petition if you would like to sign ithttp://signon.org/sign/tell-obama-to-cease-fda

One of the most telling things I found out about Monsanto GMO's was that they had been busted on the fact that they don't serve them to their employees in their cafeterias. Bill Gates follows the same practice. And so do the Rockefellershttp://templestream.xanga.com/759470927/gates-and-rockefeller-cafeterias-reject-monsanto-ge-foods/

This brings us around to David Rockefeller, and good old Bill and Melinda Gates again. In February 2012, he was at a press conference hyping up his digital revolution of the food supply in Rome. The reporters asked him about GMO's and he replied,"You should go out and talk to people growing rice and say do they mind that it was created in a laboratory when their child has enough to eat?” I suppose right at the moment they were filling their children's bellies, they might not mind, but if you gave them a choice between GMO's and organic food, they wouldn't opt for the GMO's. Their cafeterias are organic too.

AGRA or the Alliance for A Green Revolution in Africa, is jointly funded by the Rockefeller and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations. Thanks to them, cassava, which is a staple food in Africa, is now GMO cassava. Monsanto also introduced GMO corn into Africa through the WEMA or Water Efficient Maize for Africa program. The Bill Gates Foundation and Warren Buffet both supported it. Rockefeller University's website says it only serves rGBH free milk, cage free eggs and organic food. The Gates Foundation owns stock in Monsantohttp://templestream.xanga.com/759470927/gates-and-rockefeller-cafeterias-reject-monsanto-ge-foods/

They are all members of the so called Doomsday Seed Vault in the Arctic. This is a stash of unmodified seeds, ostensibly just in case of some environment catastrophe. But the reality is that they don't want seeds to be sold or grown that they don't have the patents on. http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=10300

In India, it is being reported that there is an epidemic of suicide among farmers. These farmers are told that they will become rich if they switch to growing GMO crops. But when droughts and other things cause their crops to fail, they are deeply in dept because they have to borrow money to buy these seeds from Monsanto. Their government has encouraged these farmers to opt into GMO crops, because in return for doing so, India received International Money Fund loans back in the eighties and nineties. These loans helped the economy of the cities at the expense of lives.

They were told that they wouldn't have to use pesticides, but instead, their cotton crops were ravaged by boll worms. They were not told that these crops require more water, and then they were hit with droughts.

All through history, farmers have saved seeds to replant next year, but with GMO seeds, they don't produce seeds that can be planted. So, the farmers have to buy new seeds every year. As a result of the plight of these poor Indian farmers, Prince Charles is setting up the Bhumi Vardaan Foundation. It will promote organic crops.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1082559/The-GM-genocide-Thousands-Indian-farmers-committing-suicide-using-genetically-modified-crops.html

In the US, Monsanto even made sure that farmers who tried to grow crops that would allow them to save seeds for the next year would be penalized for doing so. In 2011, they won a court case that was begun back in 2007 against an Indiana farmer named, Vernon Bowman. They said he infringed on their patent by saving seeds that had some of the Monsanto seeds mixed in with them for replanting. Bowman said he bought the seeds in part of some mixed commodity seeds. Commodity seeds are not required to differentiate between GMO and non GMO seeds.

The court ruled that Monsanto's agreement with farmers prohibits them from selling the progeny of Round Up Ready seeds, that it didn't prohibit the sale of second generation seeds. But farmers are not allowed to plant those same seeds in the ground in order to grow more seeds to sell. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/21/us-monsanto-lawsuit-idUSTRE78K79O20110921

Monsanto has been tracking down farmers all over the Midwest and suing them for saving seeds. They have a toll free hotline where people can make anonymous tips about farmers who are cleaning and saving seeds. The farmers have to sign a contract that says they won't do that, but instead buy new seeds every year from Monsanto. These contracts say how much GMO Round Up Ready acres they plant. Monsanto also runs television and radio adds to encourage people to turn in their neighbors. When they get a tip, they send out detectives to go through the farmers records and over their farms looking for evidence. They look to see how much seed they bought and how much they sold. Monsanto sues the farmers that if feels it can prove have saved seeds. They say the money they will goes to American Farm Bureau for scholarships.

Monsanto says that they are just trying to protect the millions of dollars that they have invested in the research and development of their products. But the National Family Farm Coalition filed a suit, that claims that they are just trying to monopolize the sale of seeds, and that they fix prices so that they can create and maintain this monopoly.

Some of the court cases have claimed that after the second generation of seeds, the patent exhausts itself. Others have claimed that Monsanto cannot patent plants, which self replicate in the first place; saying that patent law was established for machines and things that someone invented.

In 1970, Congress enacted the Plant Variety Protection Act. Under that act, farmers could save seeds. But a Supreme Court case said that companies like Monsanto could patent GMO'shttp://www.organicconsumers.org/Monsanto/farmerssued.cfm

Monsanto is following the lead of Big Pharma with regard to patents. It's patent on the Round Up Ready soy beans is due to run out in 2014. Under normal circumstances, that would allow competition from other companies. But rather than allow that to happen, they have already come up with Round Up Ready 2 and are forcing it on the market, so that the Round Up Ready 1 seed will be obsolete, and they will maintain their monopoly. This is the tactic that pharmaceutical companies use. They will modify an existing medicine slightly, give it a new name and extend their time before the patent runs out. This makes the consumer have to wait years before there is an affordable generic available.

Farmers would like to be able to start saving their seeds when the patent runs out, but it will be difficult to find seeds that only contain Round Up Ready 1, so that they won't violate the patent. Cross pollination is a very real possibility, because even Monsanto can't control the wind, or contamination that occurs via animals. In a bit of false magnanimity, Monsanto says it won't try to keep farmers from saving seed. But they know how hard it will be to find only Round Up Ready 1 seeds, which is why, Monsanto is trying to get the new Round Up Ready on the market now. They also didn't start saying that until the Justice Department started investigating them for antitrust law violation. It has been reported that they were not going to re-license companies to use the RoundUp Ready 1 gene, which will force them to buy the Round Up Ready 2 gene. But with the Justice Department looking at them, they backed down on that, but only in the U.S.

There are farmers who need to be able to establish that their crops are organic, because they sell to companies like Whole Food Market. And they are suing Monsanto, because their GMO's are contaminating their crops, and they say, that Monsanto can then claim their crops are GMO's. So, far they have been unsuccessful, because they have been unable to prove in court that Monsanto threatened them. But if they had gone about it, just by saying that Monsanto had contaminated their crops they might have won. Either way, it is highly doubtful that Monsanto ever intended for their product not to cross pollinate with non GMO fields. And that is significant when you realize that it is not just soy beans, but corn and cotton that they are monopolizing.

Other countries require GMO patents to be renewed periodically, and Monsanto intends to maintain those licenses until 2017. American farmers would not be allowed to sell seeds to those countries, which would probably cause them not to want to grow crops that they can't export.

In 2005, the Brazilian government made GMO soybeans legal. But they did this because it was shown that about 75% of the crops were grown from Round Up Ready seeds, made by Monsanto. Round Up ready crops have been modified so that it can be sprayed on them without hurting the plants.

Since the crops were now legal, Monsanto started charging the farmers 2% of the sales of the soy beans. The amount of farmers growing these GMO soybeans was now up to 85%. And they test all of the crops to make sure who is growing them. If the farmer claims that his crops are not the Round Up Ready soy beans, and they prove that they are, he has to pay 3% of his profits.

Monsanto says that the farmers are getting the Round Up Ready seeds illegally. The Brazilian Association of Seeds and Seedlings, says they are not. In April, the Brazilian courts said that they were charging this 2-3 percent illegally, and ordered them to pay it back. Right now, it is in appealhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/18/monsanto-brazil-soybean-farmers_n_1606267.html

Monsanto does not want us using bio-fuels like hemp and sugarcane. Hemp doesn't require insecticides, or phosphate fertilizer. So that would cut down on their profits. Instead, they prefer that we grow their corn, which requires their pesticide.

Whether or not you believe in legalized marijuana/hemp. The reason it is not already legal, may not have anything to do with drug usage. It is estimated that 1 acre of hemp could yield more paper than 2-4 acres of trees. Even though we are living in the digital age, we still need paper, and the demand for it will continue to grow. If we don't find another source for it, we will have massive deforestation. This in turn will have environment results, which ultimately will cause declines in population.

Even cars can and have been made from hemp based plastic. Ford made one in 1941. This hemp plastic is supposed to be 10 times stronger than steel. Only half of the oil we import is for fuel. The other half is for plastic manufacturing. It is ironic that organizations like PETA want us to use pleather, without realizing that by using something that is a petroleum product, we injure far more animals than those who might lose their fur on a farm. And what about the children who starve or get cancer. But save the animals?

Viscoloid Corporation was established in 1900 to make celluloid which was basically plastic. About 25 years later Dupont bought it. Another company that made celluloid was Fiberloid, which was bought out by Monsanto. I.F. Farben's Hoechst-Celanese, also makes plastic. And everyone know that plastic is related to petroleum and therefore the Rockefellers. Round Up is made with Rockefeller fossil fuels, as evidenced by it's chemical name, glyphosate.

I am not sure if I mentioned this before, but Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas used to be a lawyer for Monsanto in the 1970's. He wrote the majority opinion that Monsanto's GMO's were patentable under U.S. patent law.

Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone or rBGH is the Monsanto growth hormone that causes cows to produce more milk. It was approved by the FDA in 1993. The EU, and Canada, as well as other countries have banned it's use. The American Cancer Society says that it is not the rGBH that we should be concerned with but IGF-1, insulin-like growth factor, which is linked to all sorts of cancer. They say it is also in soy milk. This brings up an interesting point, is IGF-1 in Monsantos soy products? It would seem so. IGF-1 is not destroyed by pasteurization.

The FDA prohibits dairies from claiming that milk with rGBH is different than any other milk. Because rGBH injected cows get more mastitis, they have to be given antibiotics. Monsanto was accused of trying to bribe scientists in order to get rBGH milk approved in Canada. http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/news/10009.htm Kroger and Walmart have chosen not to sell store brands of milk with rGBH in it.