Irony! Food Poisoning Strikes Diners at Govt Food Safety SummitMelissa Melton Apparently, and sadly so, that snarky bit of sarcasm isnt all that far off the mark. Food served at a Food Safety Summit held earlier this month between several of our federal agencies including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Big Food industry giants the likes of Tyson, ConAgra and McDonalds, actually gave some of the people who attended food poisoning. At least four people called the Baltimore City Health Department this week to report that they developed diarrhea, nausea and other symptoms about 12 hours after eating a meal April 9 during the conference at the Baltimore Convention Center. (source) That was halfway through the conference, which transpired April 8-10. More than 1,500 food safety professionals were in attendance. An investigation by the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygienes outbreak response unit is ongoing, and officials have yet to determine how many of those 1,500 people became ill during the summit. Several officials with the federal Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attended the gathering and may have been affected. A couple of our folks indicated that they had experienced symptoms associated with food poisoning after the summit, said Juli Putnam, an FDA spokeswoman. (source) They arent the only ones. A lot of people are getting sick from what were eating in this country these days. Food allergies, auto-immune disorders, obesity and diabetes are skyrocketing. Yeah, I said it. Here are the first three reasons (of many) that come to mind. 1. Genetically modified crops are basically self-regulated. Im not going to get into a debate over the science here (because we all know who funds what, and how that funding determines what the science ultimately determines). Just read these two quotes and let them sink in for a moment: Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDAs job. Philip Angell, Monsantos director of corporate communications (Playing God in the Garden by Michael Pollan, Published Oct. 25, 1998 in The New York Times) and Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA Federal Register Volume 57 1992, Published May 29, 1992) So, again, who is actually making sure this stuff is safe? Because, based on those two quotes, it sounds a lot like GMO food safety is just a can that got kicked down the road and forgotten about a long time ago. There is no mandatory FDA GMO food safety assessment process. It simply does not exist. As Earth Open Source illustrates, the whole thing is based on a voluntary program involving claims of substantial equivalence: The outcome of the FDAs voluntary assessment is not a conclusion, underwritten by the FDA, that the GMO is safe. Instead, the FDA sends the company a letter to the effect that: Clearly, this process does not guarantee or even attempt to investigate the safety of GM foods. While it does not protect the public, it may protect the FDA from legal liability in the event that harm is caused by a GM food. Clearly. Its not like we can easily avoid GMO if we want to anyway. The majority of two of the three top subsidized crops grown in this country, corn and soy, are genetically modified at around 90% each. Estimates also show that over 80% of our grocery stores are filled with GMO-tainted foods and Big Agra continues to spending millions to defeat every labeling law consumers try to get passed in this country. If their food is so great, why dont they even want us to know its in there anyway? We have the right to know what were eating, and Ive never heard one single valid argument that makes any logical sense why we dont. Oh and it turns out that whole substantial equivalence deal is a bit of a sham as well: When claims of substantial equivalence have been independently tested, they have been found to be untrue. Using the latest molecular analytical methods, GM crops have been shown to have a different composition to their non-GM counterparts. This is true even when the two crops are grown under the same conditions, at the same time and in the same location meaning that the changes are not due to different environmental factors but to the genetic modification. Examples include: (source) 2. GRAS, or Generally Recognized as Safe, doesnt really mean anything. How many times have you heard someone say that all those crazy chemical substances you cant even pronounce on our food labels are just fine because the FDA has determined that they are all GRAS? Theyve probably heard the phrase generally recognized as safe so many times, they generally believe it without actually knowing what it means or where it truly comes from. I didnt reallyuntil I looked it up. GRAS is another member of the FDAs honor system family. When it comes to who designates safety, Food companies independently determine whether or not their own additives are GRAS not the FDA. Once a company has made this determination using its own scientists that yes, its product is fine, the company then notifies the FDA Not the other way around. Here are a few tidbits straight from the FDAs own GRAS webpage: The GRAS notification program provides a voluntary mechanism whereby a person may inform FDA of a determination that the use of a substance is GRAS, rather than petition FDA to affirm that the use of a substance is GRAS. [emphasis added] For a food additive, privately held data and information about the use of a substance are sent by the sponsor to FDA, which evaluates those data and information to determine whether they establish that the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use (21 CFR 171.1). I also like this sentence under the pages GRAS Affirmation section: By 1997 FDA had tentatively concluded that it could no longer devote substantial resources to the GRAS affirmation petition process. Just the blas attitude oozing out of that one line: We can no longer devote substantial resources The FDAs FY2014 budget is a whopping $4,653,657,000 for crying out loud! So an agency with a multi-billion operation budget with the tagline protecting and promoting your health (their emphasis, not mine) is saying they cant devote substantial resources toensuring our food ingredients are actually safe??? Further research into the continually degraded GRAS process and I came across more info on what went down in 1997 in A Threat to Scientific Integrity, by Marion Nestle, PhD, MPH: In 1997, the FDA responded to the Clinton administrations Reinventing Food Regulation initiative by announcing that it planned to streamline the GRAS process as an incentive for manufacturers to inform the FDA about new additives. The agency proposed to replace the petition system with a simple notification process. Food companies couldat their own discretionnotify the FDA that experts generally agreed that a new additive was safe. Color additives were an exception; manufacturers would still have to submit them to the FDA for premarket approval and provide evidence for safety. It is astonishing that these rules, proposed 16 years ago, have never been issued in final form and are still pending. Sixteen years ago?! But no worries, right? An honor system between profit-hungry mega food industries and the government seems totally legit. First thing I think of is safe Oh, and these food companies arent even legally required to notify the FDA of anything unless they feel like it. That means there is likely stuff floating around in the food supply right now and the FDA has never even heard of it: The problems created by conflicts of interest for the FDA go well beyond those related to food additives and GRAS exemptions. A recent analysis of requests for waivers by people serving on FDA advisory committees views conflicts of interest as a severe threat to scientific integrity.8 As Neltner et al5 argue, the lack of independent review in GRAS determinations raises serious questions about the public health implications of unregulated additives in the food supply, particularly the additives that the FDA does not even know about. It also raises questions about conflicts of interest in other regulatory matters. [emphasis added] Then again, if you think about what GRAS means on a literal level, we never shouldve put much stock in it in the first place. Generally recognized? Something is either safe or it isnt. If Im hanging off the side of a building by a rope, I want to know that rope is sturdy and going to hold me because it could mean the difference between life and death; what I dont want is someone to say, Well, I generally recognize that rope youre hanging on by is safe. What the hell? Oh, and thats the other thing 3. If there was a Conflict of Interest Prom, our so-called food safety agencies and mega food industries/Big Ag would be crowned king and queen every year for decades now. Click on this freakin ginormous Venn Diagram of the revolving door between Monsanto and our government to enlarge it: No need to even vote, is there? Dont even get me started on how only 1-2% of food shipments from China are even ever inspected, or how the 1958 Delaney Clause, which had previously prohibited potentially carcinogenic chemicals from being added to processed foods, was altered to be interpreted in a de minimis fashion as argued by none other than Michael Taylor, our current FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods (who used to be Monsantos VP for Public Policy). Every day millions of people walk into grocery stores putting all their faith and trust plus their health and their families health in a corrupt system that provides little more than the illusion of safety, nothing more. So back to the food summit and the food poisoning. Its not like I would ever wish anything horrible like food poisoning on anyone ever, but its just begging the question. Is it really even irony? Or is karma more appropriate Contributed by Melissa Melton of Nutritional Anarchy. 