July 24, 2014

“Organic” Baby Food May Soon Contain Who-Knows-What

pin it button “Organic” Baby Food May Soon Contain Who Knows What

synthetic baby food 300x212 “Organic” Baby Food May Soon Contain Who Knows What

by Alliance for Natural Health

The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is even considering allowing genetically engineered vaccines for organic livestock. Action Alert!

The NOSB—a division of the USDA—is responsible for regulating all organic crops and determining what can be called “Certified Organic.” The board is meeting next week, and on the agenda will be whether to allow eight synthetic substances in organic baby food, primarily in organic infant formula.

The substances in question—ascorbyl palmitate, synthetic beta-carotene, a proprietary form of lutein, synthetic lycopene, synthetic l-carnitine, synthetic l-methionine, synthetic taurine, and nucleotides—all have organic alternatives, are not nutritionally necessary as additives, and might be difficult for the infant’s body to process.

In particular, ascorbyl palmitate (AP) and synthetic beta carotene are used as preservatives in infant formula to prevent them from oxidizing and becoming rancid. However,organic standards state that synthetic ingredients cannot qualify as organic if their primary purpose is as a preservative. The International Formula Council, which is trying to get them included, is hoping to sneak around the restriction by never using the word “preservative” in its justification, instead calling them “antioxidants” and saying they “prevent rancidity.” AP has no nutritional value; its sole purpose is to extend shelf life. This is the very definition of a preservative—and the opposite of an organic product. More to the point, organic alternatives exist for AP (such as rosemary extract and tocopherols) and also for synthetic beta carotene.

The NOSB background materials say “it remains inconclusive whether or not the body actually utilizes ascorbic acid that is metabolized from ascorbic palmitate,” which makes AP particularly unsuitable for infants.

A synthetic substance is never supposed to be in organic food unless (a) it is essential and (b) there is no organic alternative. None of the above substances qualify for either of the two requirements. Manufacture of this particular brand of lutein is a proprietary secret, so even the NOSB does not know if it is synthetic or not. They are thus hardly able to certify that the product is harmless!

This, however, may not mean much to the NOSB. As we reported last year, the NOSB approved synthetic ARA and DHA, both of which were genetically engineered and used toxic extraction methods.

At this board meeting, the NOSB will also discuss the use of GMO vaccines in livestock. For Certified Organic foods, GMO vaccines cannot be used unless they are specifically added to the approved list (and none has been added to date). However, there have been reports of organic farmers using them anyway, and the National Organic Program has so far been unwilling to enforce the law against them. The NOSB should demand compliance from the NOP, and ask them to review all information on vaccines to determine which are organic and which are prohibited because they are genetically engineered.

Why is the NOSB allowing such dilution of the organic standards? The New York Timesreports that more than 250 nonorganic substances have been added to the list of allowed substances in organic foods, up from 77 in 2002. Some of these substances are dubious, to say the least: besides the aforementioned GMO DHA, carrageenan—a frequently seen additive in organic foods—has no nutritional value and is only used as a thickening agent; it was approved as a food additive in 1995 based on a deficient technical review by scientists who had corporate ties.

The US Department of Agriculture, which took over organic standards in order to control them, is in actuality no fan of organic agriculture. But the department is very responsive to big food companies. And as we noted last month, the vast majority of organic brands are actually owned by Big Food companies, with only a limited number of independent organic brands still around. Some of these major corporations have seats on the NOSB—and they, of course, are the biggest advocates for allowing synthetics.

Take a look, for example, at General Mills. Last year, a General Mills exec was sitting on the NOSB when the inclusion of DHA was being decided. The company that manufactures DHA sometimes uses technology licensed from General Mills to make it. Coincidence? Of course not. Big Food has an interest in promoting genetic engineering and nanotechnology, since they have invested so much of their R&D budget into them.

Three seats on the board are designated for consumer advocates, but they have never been filled from traditional advocacy groups, instead going to corporate executives. SometimesBig Food execs are shoehorned into seats on the NOSB: an executive from Driscolls, the huge California berry producer, was given a seat that was supposed to be filled by someone who “owns or operates an organic farming operation.” She resigned after a major public outcry, but later rejoined board in a different capacity.

Action Alert! Please write to the National Organic Standards Board. Ask them to prohibit the use of synthetic substances in organic baby food—especially synthetic substances that are used as preservatives and have no nutritional value. Also ask the NOSB to strongly recommend that the National Organics Program exercise its oversight and prohibit GMO vaccines from being used on organic livestock.

Take Action “Organic” Baby Food May Soon Contain Who Knows What

Read the full article and comment here: http://www.anh-usa.org/organic-baby-food/

Baby designed by God
by Dr. Amanda Hess & Dr. Jeremy Hess

baby designed by god cover “Organic” Baby Food May Soon Contain Who Knows What

FREE Shipping Available!

More Info


0 commentsback to post

Other articlesgo to homepage

Salt is Good for You

Salt is Good for You

One of the most pervasive and stupid things that we are currently told to do is to reduce salt intake. This advice has never been based on controlled clinical studies, ever. Yet, as with the cholesterol myth, the dogma that we should all reduce salt intake has become impervious to facts.

Large Study Adds to Evidence that Organic Food Is Superior

Large Study Adds to Evidence that Organic Food Is Superior

A comprehensive new study published this week in the prestigious British Journal of Nutrition shows very clearly that how we grow our food has a huge impact. Organic food is superior to its conventional counterparts and is higher in antioxidants and lower in pesticide residues.

Processed Foods Hurt Your Immune System and Gut Health

Processed Foods Hurt Your Immune System and Gut Health

Diets loaded with processed foods are leading to increased inflammation, reduced control of infection, increased rates of cancer, and increased risk of allergic and auto-inflammatory diseases.

A poor diet causes shifts in your body’s microbiome that have lasting effects on your own health and the health of future generations. A mother’s diet may shape her child’s taste preferences in utero, skewing them toward vegetables or sweets, for instance.

There’s evidence that children inherit their microbiome from their mother, and part of this may be “seeded into the unborn fetus while still in the womb;” a father’s diet may also impact his child’s future health. Replacing processed foods with whole and fermented foods is crucial for optimal health.

U.S. Congress: Americans Are Too Stupid For GMO Labeling

U.S. Congress: Americans Are Too Stupid For GMO Labeling

The U.S. continues to be isolated around the world regarding their lax GMO labeling policy. We are losing millions of dollars in exports because countries such as China, Russian, Japan, Korea, and most of Europe will not buy our products if they are contaminated with GMOs.

A recent Congressional meeting, however, concluded that the push to label GMO products in the U.S. was due to the ignorance of the American consumer. One has to wonder where the ignorance actually resides?

Is the Best Honey Really “Local” Honey?

Is the Best Honey Really “Local” Honey?

John Thomas does an excellent job of addressing the common belief that healthy honey has to be “local” honey produced nearby where you live. Considering the fact that most honey bees in the United States today are transported all over the country to pollinate commercial agricultural crops dependent on the use of toxic herbicides and pesticides, it is obvious that simply being “local” is not a guarantee of a higher quality product. John investigates the current science on this topic of “local honey,” and discusses what issues are far more important in selecting a high quality honey.

read more


Get the news right in your inbox!