Codex Alimentarius and GM Food Guidelines, Pt. 6Updated excerpt from Codex Alimentarius The End of Health Freedom So, because the risk assessment for GM food based on substantial equivalence will inevitably determine the GM food itself to be safe, the problem then becomes the nutritional value within the food. While this might seem both improbable and impossible, it is, in fact, neither. The seeming improbability of a Codex declaration of nutrients as toxins has already been realized and the genetic manipulation of the nutritional properties of food is not an impossibility at all. While the cover story for the introduction of GM food often involves the alleged wish to bring about the end of malnutrition by increasing nutritional properties of the food genetically (a blatant contradiction if one accepts that nutrients should be treated as toxins), the ability to decrease nutrition through genetic modification is just as realistic. We then have a situation where nutritionally deficient GM food is not only allowed, but required due to the dangerous amount of vitamins and minerals that exist in the natural food. Codex even admits later on in the Guidelines that nutrients will be focused on rather than the dangers of the GM food. It says, To assess the safety of a food derived from a recombinant-DNA plant modified for a nutritional or health benefit, the estimated intake of the nutrient or related substance in the population(s) is compared with the nutritional or toxicological reference values, such as upper levels of intake, acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) for that nutrient or related substance.[1] The question then is not the safety of the GM food, but of the amount of vitamins and nutrients included in it. Continuing through the Guidelines, such a statement is cleverly made. It says, Rather than trying to identify every hazard associated with a particular food, the intention of a safety assessment of food derived from recombinant-DNA is the identification of new or altered hazards relative to the conventional counterpart.[2] Not only is this an extremely limiting set of standards for assessing the safety of the product, what is actually meant by hazard, although not explicitly stated, is nutrients. This is made even clearer in the next paragraph which states, Upper levels of intake for many nutrients that have been set out by some national, regional and international bodies may be considered, as appropriate. The basis for their derivation should also be considered in order to assess the public health implications of exceeding these levels.[3] Clearly, nutrients are the focus of much of the risk assessment methods applied to GM food. This may initially cause some GM food products to be rejected by Codex due to the higher level of nutritional properties being produced. That is, until the food is modified once again to have a lower nutritional value. When seen in this light, it becomes obvious that many of the Codex Guidelines are intertwined with one another. However, none are more important than those related to vitamins, minerals, and nutrients. Returning to the Codex Guidelines themselves, the organization leaves itself yet another loophole by claiming that, in a situation where even the unbelievably weak substantial equivalence method cannot allow the approval of a GM food, that the food used as a conventional counterpart may be changed in order to suit the GM product which is being evaluated. It says, When the modification results in a food product, such as vegetable oil, with a composition that is significantly different from its conventional counterpart, it may be appropriate to use additional conventional foods or food components (i.e. foods or food components whose nutritional composition is closer to that of the food derived from recombinant-DNA plant) as appropriate comparators to assess the nutritional impact of the food.[4] In this statement Codex is openly admitting that it will simply change the scientific process that we are supposed to put our faith in, in order to accommodate the GM substance being tested. Essentially, Codex is saying, If the conventional counterpart is not substantially equivalent, change the conventional counterpart to one that is. Clearly, inasmuch as Codex guidelines are accepted, Codex is exercising control over the food supply and the choice that every human being has a right to make on their own. Unfortunately, it is a very real possibility that if Codex Alimentarius is not stopped, we will live in a much smaller world where starvation, sickness, and hunger are rampant and where we must beg our multinational corporate masters for a bite of the toxic mass that we will have no choice but to eat. Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelors Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutionsand Dispatches From a Dissident.Turbeville has published over 190 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbevilles podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com. linkwithin_text=Related Articles: 