FDA Found Glyphosate in Nearly All Foods Tested and Hid the Results

[dynamo]

by Jonathan Landsman

In an alarming revelation, it has come to light that government scientists at U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have found the weed killer ingredient glyphosate in many popular processed foods.

This information was in emails that were obtained through a freedom of information request (what they did with that ‘intelligence’ is SHOCKING!).

Glyphosate is perhaps best known as the main ingredient in the Roundup weed killer brand from the Monsanto company. And, the FDA has been testing foods for the presence of herbicides and pesticides including, this highly toxic substance glyphosate for two years – but had not released results. (Gee, I wonder why).

Glyphosate has been used in weed killer for the past 40 years

The leaked information shows that the organization has had trouble finding foods that do NOT contain traces of this harmful chemical. Corn meal, crackers, cereals and many other processed foods all show traces of glyphosate.

The internal FDA email is dated January 2017 and is a portion of many communications within the organization to determine just how much glyphosate is in our nation’s food supply. It is the first time the FDA has attempted to ascertain the levels and potential risks of glyphosate contamination.

As you may know, glyphosate has been used for the past 40 years. Yet, the FDA just recently begun testing for it. (not a comforting thought – if you think about their slow reaction time)

Demand for testing intensified in 2015 following the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classification of glyphosate as a ‘probable human carcinogen.’

FDA claims pesticide testing was on samples that were “not official”

Roundup and other pesticide brands are sprayed directly on to many crops such as corn, wheat, oats and soybeans. It is also used on fields before growing season on crops like spinach and almonds.

While the levels are low, some exceed accepted guidelines, including in corn, where “over tolerance” levels were detected. (The legal limit is 5.0 ppm, and 6.5 ppm was detected).

Of course, the FDA dismissed its findings, along with other information in the email, stating that the foods tested were not “official samples.”

The FDA says it will be releasing official findings in a report later in 2018 or early 2019. These types of reports are typically released around two to two and a half years after data has been collected.

In addition to glyphosate, the FDA has also been measuring for herbicide residues 2,4-D and dicamba. There has been an increase in the use of these weed killers on genetically engineered crops.

And, now, (finally) the FDA says they have expanded testing capacity to assess for these chemicals. How many more people need to be poisoned by these chemicals before government ‘health’ agencies sound the alarm?!

Action step: Eating organic reduces your glyphosate exposure

While regulators, agrochemical industry interests and the Monsanto company all claim that traces of these chemicals are ‘perfectly safe,’ many scientists – and the evidence – say quite the opposite (look up the work of MIT scientist, Stephanie Seneff, PhD).

Simply put, prolonged dietary exposure to pesticides can harm your health and has been linked to a higher risk of cancer and other chronic disease conditions like, autoimmune disorders. There’s no doubt, it’s the cumulative effect that causes so many problems.

Monsanto, often called “the most evil corporation” in the United States, has tried to block information regarding glyphosate food residue from being introduced as evidence in a court case regarding its Roundup products and their link with a higher risk of cancer.

Fortunately, the San Francisco superior court judge denied has already denied such a motion.

So, what can you do? Avoiding processed foods sold in most supermarkets. Start spending your money on locally grown (chemical free) organic foods.

Keep in mind, many local farmers markets don’t necessarily offer “certified organic” foods, but their non-toxic farming practices tend to offer much better produce – at very reasonable prices.

I have personally been blessed to (finally) meet an amazing couple of organic farmers – that supply almost 100% of my weekly produce needs. And, I hope to have more news about what they do (and how it can help you) in the near future.

Until then, shop wisely and stay well.

Reference: TheEventChronicle.com / Sources for this article include: TheGuardian.com; USRTK.org

[Cardillac]

now that Bayer has taken over Monsanto all living in Europe will soon be bombarded with GMOs- God help us all-

Larry

[onawah]

Save Organic Standards! from: Organic Consumers Association 6/29/18
https://action.organicconsumers.org/...st_KEY=1391316

"Organic standards are under attack in the 2018 Farm Bill.

TAKE ACTION TODAY! Tell Congress: Save Organic Standards! https://action.organicconsumers.org/...tion_KEY=21827

After voting it down last month, the U.S. House of Representatives on June 21 passed H.R.2, a Farm Bill that would cripple organic standards and severly undermine conservation programs that promote organic and regenerative agriculture practices.

The Senate passed its version of the Farm Bill, S.3042, on June 28.

The Senate’s Farm Bill isn’t nearly as bad as the House’s. It doesn’t contain the House’s changes to changes to SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or “food stamps”) that would leave 2 million people, including families with children, without food assistance. But the Senate version also doesn’t restore the $8.7 billion taken from SNAP in the 2014 Farm Bill.

The Senate Farm Bill contains promising soil health provisions, including a new pilot program within the existing Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) that would help farms increase soil carbon to offset greenhouse gas emissions and be more resilient to extreme weather resulting from climate change.

At the same time, it cuts funding to EQIP and slashes support for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), the most important program for transitioning farmers to organic and regenerative agriulture practices. (The House bill eliminates CSP altogether.)

As for organic standards, we were appalled, but not surprised to learn that the leaders of the Senate Agriculture Committee—Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and Ranking Member Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)—rejected our demands for a clean Farm Bill without any changes to the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB).

Changes to the NOSB proposed in the latest version of the Senate Farm Bill would pave the way for more synthetic chemicals to continue to be used in organic food and farming.

It looks as though Roberts is making good on his threat to use the Farm Bill to “reform” the NOSB—and by “reform,” he means “weaken.”

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) got its start defending organic standards, back in 1998, when we lobbied successfully against the USDA’s controversial proposal to allow genetic engineering, irradiation and toxic sewage sludge in organic production and products.

We’re not about to let Congress to use the Farm Bill to erode organic standards now! But we need your help.

TAKE ACTION TODAY! Tell Congress: Save Organic Standards!

Thank you!

Alexis, for the OCA team

P.S. Citizens Regeneration Lobby is the 501(c)(4) lobbying arm of the Organic Consumers Association. We rely on individuals like you to support our work. Please consider making a donation today, details here. Thank you!"

[Joe from the Carolinas]

Organic standards have been under attack since they were developed, and they're chipping away at them even more.

From the .gov

§205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) substances allowed as ingredients in or on processed products labeled as “organic” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s)).”
The following nonagricultural substances may be used as ingredients in or on processed products labeled as “organic” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))” only in accordance with any restrictions specified in this section.

(a) Nonsynthetics allowed:

Acids (Alginic; Citric—produced by microbial fermentation of carbohydrate substances; and Lactic).

Agar-agar.

Animal enzymes—(Rennet—animals derived; Catalase—bovine liver; Animal lipase; Pancreatin; Pepsin; and Trypsin).

Attapulgite—as a processing aid in the handling of plant and animal oils.

Bentonite.

Calcium carbonate.

Calcium chloride.

Calcium sulfate—mined.

Carrageenan.

Dairy cultures.

Diatomaceous earth—food filtering aid only.

Enzymes—must be derived from edible, nontoxic plants, nonpathogenic fungi, or nonpathogenic bacteria.

Flavors, nonsynthetic sources only and must not be produced using synthetic solvents and carrier systems or any artificial preservative.

Gellan gum (CAS # 71010-52-1)—high-acyl form only.

Glucono delta-lactone—production by the oxidation of D-glucose with bromine water is prohibited.

Kaolin.

L-Malic acid (CAS # 97-67-6).

Magnesium sulfate, nonsynthetic sources only.

Microorganisms—any food grade bacteria, fungi, and other microorganism.

Nitrogen—oil-free grades.

Oxygen—oil-free grades.

Perlite—for use only as a filter aid in food processing.

Potassium chloride.

Potassium iodide.

Sodium bicarbonate.

Sodium carbonate.

Tartaric acid—made from grape wine.

Waxes—nonsynthetic (Carnauba wax; and Wood resin).

Yeast—When used as food or a fermentation agent in products labeled as “organic,” yeast must be organic if its end use is for human consumption; nonorganic yeast may be used when organic yeast is not commercially available. Growth on petrochemical substrate and sulfite waste liquor is prohibited. For smoked yeast, nonsynthetic smoke flavoring process must be documented.

(b) Synthetics allowed:

Acidified sodium chlorite—Secondary direct antimicrobial food treatment and indirect food contact surface sanitizing. Acidified with citric acid only.

Activated charcoal (CAS #s 7440-44-0; 64365-11-3)—only from vegetative sources; for use only as a filtering aid.

Alginates.

Ammonium bicarbonate—for use only as a leavening agent.

Ammonium carbonate—for use only as a leavening agent.

Ascorbic acid.

Calcium citrate.

Calcium hydroxide.

Calcium phosphates (monobasic, dibasic, and tribasic).

Carbon dioxide.

Cellulose—for use in regenerative casings, as an anti-caking agent (non-chlorine bleached) and filtering aid.

Chlorine materials—disinfecting and sanitizing food contact surfaces, Except, That, residual chlorine levels in the water shall not exceed the maximum residual disinfectant limit under the Safe Drinking Water Act (Calcium hypochlorite; Chlorine dioxide; and Sodium hypochlorite).

Ethylene—allowed for postharvest ripening of tropical fruit and degreening of citrus.

Ferrous sulfate—for iron enrichment or fortification of foods when required by regulation or recommended (independent organization).

Glycerides (mono and di)—for use only in drum drying of food.

Glycerin—produced by hydrolysis of fats and oils.

Hydrogen peroxide.

Magnesium chloride—derived from sea water.

Magnesium stearate—for use only in agricultural products labeled “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s)),” prohibited in agricultural products labeled “organic”.

Nutrient vitamins and minerals, in accordance with 21 CFR 104.20, Nutritional Quality Guidelines For Foods.

Ozone.

Peracetic acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS # 79-21-0)—for use in wash and/or rinse water according to FDA limitations. For use as a sanitizer on food contact surfaces.

Phosphoric acid—cleaning of food-contact surfaces and equipment only.

Potassium acid tartrate.

Potassium carbonate.

Potassium citrate.

Potassium hydroxide—prohibited for use in lye peeling of fruits and vegetables except when used for peeling peaches.

Potassium phosphate—for use only in agricultural products labeled “made with organic (specific ingredients or food group(s)),” prohibited in agricultural products labeled “organic”.

Silicon dioxide—Permitted as a defoamer. Allowed for other uses when organic rice hulls are not commercially available.

Sodium acid pyrophosphate (CAS # 7758-16-9)—for use only as a leavening agent.

Sodium citrate.

Sodium hydroxide—prohibited for use in lye peeling of fruits and vegetables.

Sodium phosphates—for use only in dairy foods.

Sulfur dioxide—for use only in wine labeled “made with organic grapes,” Provided, That, total sulfite concentration does not exceed 100 ppm.

Tocopherols—derived from vegetable oil when rosemary extracts are not a suitable alternative.

Xanthan gum.

(c)-(z) [Reserved]

[68 FR 61993, Oct. 31, 2003, as amended as 68 FR 62217, Nov. 3, 2003; 71 FR 53302, Sept. 11, 2006; 72 FR 58473, Oct. 16, 2007; 73 FR 59481, Oct. 9, 2008; 75 FR 77524, Dec. 13, 2010; 77 FR 8092, Feb. 14, 2012; 77 FR 33298, June 6, 2012; 77 FR 45907, Aug. 2, 2012; 78 FR 31821, May 28, 2013; 78 FR 61161, Oct. 3, 2013; 81 FR 51709, Aug. 3, 2016; 82 FR 31244, July 6, 2017]

§205.606 Nonorganically produced agricultural products allowed as ingredients in or on processed products labeled as “organic.”
Only the following nonorganically produced agricultural products may be used as ingredients in or on processed products labeled as “organic,” only in accordance with any restrictions specified in this section, and only when the product is not commercially available in organic form.

(a) Casings, from processed intestines.

(b) Celery powder.

(c) Colors derived from agricultural products—Must not be produced using synthetic solvents and carrier systems or any artificial preservative.

(1) Beet juice extract color (pigment CAS #7659-95-2).

(2) Beta-carotene extract color—derived from carrots or algae (pigment CAS# 7235-40-7).

(3) Black currant juice color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(4) Black/Purple carrot juice color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(5) Blueberry juice color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(6) Carrot juice color (pigment CAS #1393-63-1).

(7) Cherry juice color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(8) Chokeberry—Aronia juice color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(9) Elderberry juice color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(10) Grape juice color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(11) Grape skin extract color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(12) Paprika color (CAS #68917-78-2)—dried, and oil extracted.

(13) Pumpkin juice color (pigment CAS #127-40-2).

(14) Purple potato juice (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(15) Red cabbage extract color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(16) Red radish extract color (pigment CAS #'s: 528-58-5, 528-53-0, 643-84-5, 134-01-0, 1429-30-7, and 134-04-3).

(17) Saffron extract color (pigment CAS #1393-63-1).

(18) Turmeric extract color (CAS #458-37-7).

(d) Fish oil (Fatty acid CAS #'s: 10417-94-4, and 25167-62-8)—stabilized with organic ingredients or only with ingredients on the National List, §§205.605 and 205.606.

(e) Fructooligosaccharides (CAS # 308066-66-2).

(f) Gelatin (CAS # 9000-70-8).

(g) Gums—water extracted only (Arabic; Guar; Locust bean; and Carob bean).

(h) Inulin-oligofructose enriched (CAS # 9005-80-5).

(i) Kelp—for use only as a thickener and dietary supplement.

(j) Konjac flour (CAS # 37220-17-0).

(k) Lecithin—de-oiled.

(l) Orange pulp, dried.

(m) Orange shellac-unbleached (CAS # 9000-59-3).

(n) Pectin (non-amidated forms only).

(o) Seaweed, Pacific kombu.

(p) Starches.

(1) Cornstarch (native).

(2) Sweet potato starch—for bean thread production only.

(q) Tragacanth gum (CAS #-9000-65-1).

(r) Turkish bay leaves.

(s) Wakame seaweed (Undaria pinnatifida).

(t) Whey protein concentrate.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...se7.3.205_1606

[onawah]

EWG Analysis: Loophole Could Exempt Over 10,000 GMO Foods from Disclosure Law
By Colin O’Neil, Legislative Director and Sean Perrone-Gray, Director of Consumer Database Architecture
FRIDAY, JUNE 29, 2018
https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/06/ew...7#.WzmNfdJKgdX

"Loopholes proposed by the Trump administration could exempt over 10,000 – or one out of six – genetically modified foods from a new GMO disclosure law, according to an EWG analysis.

The draft rule may exempt foods produced with GMOs if the food products contain highly refined GMO sugars and oils.

There is a high rate of adoption for many GMO crops like corn, soybeans, canola and sugar beets, meaning that ingredients derived from these crops have a high likelihood of being GMO. Based on an analysis of ingredient-level information for more than 105,000 food products in our Food Scores database, EWG estimated that roughly 67,111 food products contain at least one of these ingredients, which are likely produced with genetic engineering.

Out of that total, as many as 58,377 food products – or 87 percent – contain a highly refined sugar or oil that is likely produced with genetic engineering, like beet sugar or canola oil. And 10,889 – or one in six – possible GMO food products only contain a highly refined sugar or oil that is likely produced with genetic engineering and would therefore be exempt from the disclosure requirement.



But another loophole in the Trump administration’s proposal would exempt products from the disclosure requirement when the GMO ingredients make up less than 5 percent of the product by weight.If the product contains another GMO ingredient, it would still be subject to the new GMO disclosure requirement, which was created by Congress in 2016.

Among the other possible GMO ingredients EWG identified that are not highly refined sugars and oils, are dozens of ingredients used as thickening agents, colorants, flavorings, emulsifiers and binders that are derived from highly adopted GMO crops like corn and soybeans.

And many of these ingredients often appear in low levels at the bottom of ingredient lists, meaning that in combination, the GMO ingredients in thousands of foods could fall below a 5 percent exemption.

While EWG was unable to precisely calculate how both loopholes might work in combination, the likely effect would be even more products exempt from the disclosure requirement.

When Congress enacted the new GMO disclosure law in 2016, Congress intended that many more products would be subject to the national mandatory GMO disclosure law than were subject to Vermont’s GMO disclosure law. The 2016 law preempted all state GMO labeling laws.

In addition to these loopholes, the draft rule also proposes confusing new terminology and symbols for on-package GMO disclosures. The proposed rule sets up few limits for companies that choose to make digital disclosures, and it doesn’t provide practical solutions for consumers who need to scan a digital disclosure but don’t own smartphones or for those who have lousy cell service.

If companies choose to make an on-package GMO disclosure, the draft rule would require companies to use the words “bioengineered” or “bioengineered food ingredient,” instead of the widely known phrases “genetically modified” or “genetically engineered.” In addition, the proposal has few rules for companies that disclose GMOs through QR codes, adding to the risk that smartphones won’t read the digital codes consistently.

A recent study by Deloitte found that nearly one in four Americans don’t own a smartphone, but the new rule does not provide comparable options for poor or elderly Americans, such as making scanners available in grocery store aisles. Compounding the fact that many Americans still don’t have smartphones is problem of bad cell service that more than 20 million people face.

To learn more about the proposed rule click here. s://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/beThe Department of Agriculture will accept comments on the draft rule until July 3."