What #ThanksMichelleObama Can Teach Us About Obesity

What if I told you that fat people are actually starving to death? That the obesity epidemic is actually a mind-boggling symptom of mass-starvation, rather than gluttony? Read on copper-top, if you want to have your mind blown about what is really happening in this country when it comes to our health and what we eat.

The #ThanksMichelleObama campaign by teens on social media is quite revealing as to the state of health and nutrition in this country, but in ways that may not be quite so obvious at first glance.

If you puke, save it,
someone else will have it

The campaign has students posting pictures of all sorts of disgusting concoctions and meager servings not even fit for a snack, much less a meal. School lunches have never been especially popular, standing alongside hospital food, non-premium airline meals, and so forth. But taking a look at some of these pictures, it seems like even county jail inmates are fed better than students. I feel lucky now, for the slop we were fed at school when I was a kid.

Click here for a sampling from BuzzFeed.

Should these hot messes really be blamed on Michelle Obama though? Now granted, it was her initiatives for policy change and regulations on school lunches that cut down your portion of processed meat-paste nuggets from six to three, but we have to take a step back for a moment and take a look at the bigger picture here in what she was hoping to achieve.

The USDA guidelines, implemented over the last few years, include limits on calories, fat, sugar, and sodium for all food and drinks sold during the school day for 100,000 schools across the country.

That doesn't sound like a bad idea at all actually. The obesity epidemic is now costing the world over $2 trillion annually, not to mention other health concerns from poor nutrition and eating habits, or the countless lives that are being lost. So how do we make sure that students (and people in general even) are eating better to cut down their risk of obesity and illness? Cutting out the "bad" stuff sounds like a good start. Of course there is even debate as to what is actually bad for you. Some say there is really nothing wrong with salt, sugar and fats, but we can save that debate for later.

Where's the beef?

If we are cutting out a portion of our diet, it has to be replaced with something else, or we are running the risk of actual starvation. And that certainly is not a healthy alternative. So, new school food rules set by Congress also require more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains in school cafeterias. Then again, fruits are actually very high in sugars that they are trying to cut out for one thing, and these "good" foods wind up being as debatable as the "bad" foods. Fresh fruits, vegetables, and whole grains along with lean meats and healthy proteins are also expensive, but more on that in a moment.

When you look at these trays, it seems pretty clear that these students have been put on what is basically a starvation diet. While a mystery meat nugget on a bun and some applesauce might meet daily guidelines for fat, calorie and salt intake, while providing a balance of meat, grain and fruit, that tray is clearly not a proper meal. Especially for growing kids. That is not going to be enough to sustain you through that mile run in gym class and four more periods of what should be intense brain activity. It's little wonder why kids aren't focused, and don't have the energy to get out of their own way. The lack of energy, of course, will only wind up setting the stage for obesity all over again too.

Despite the First Lady's best intentions, those lunch trays are clearly not a path to better health for America's youth, or a lesson in healthy eating for the rest of us to follow. While that tray may meet "healthy" guidelines set by the FDA, it is missing one very critical component. Nutrition. The actual reason we eat in the first place. Now that really comes to the crux of the whole obesity issue, nutrition, or a lack thereof.

That chicken patty and applesauce tray does not provide real nutrition. Hyper-processed breaded meat paste and flour may fill your stomach for the moment, but it won't sustain you. The apple-flavored corn syrup mush is loaded with calories, but again, has no real vitamins, minerals, or proteins. It just looks healthy because it tells your brain "apple." So despite the fact that you got recommended levels of meat, grain fruit and calories, you still didn't get what you actually needed, nutrition. Now you have two choices. Starvation or obesity. That is basically what the Michelle Obama initiative has brought to light, looking at these trays. You can go hungry, or you can steal that patty bun from the kid sitting next to you violating the FDA "healthy" guidelines. You can starve, or you can over-eat and get fat.

Even with a second sandwich, that is probably not enough real nutrition for a person. So now they have over-eaten and "feel" full, but will still wind up foggy-headed and lethargic from lack of nutrition. Rinse and repeat, and there you have it folks. Fat people who are starving to death. You could eat all the Crisco-covered cardboard and boot leather in the world, but that won't keep you from starving to death. While we blame obesity for the gambit of health problems and diseases, we overlook the fact that being fat is not really a cause at all, but rather an effect of poor nutrition. 

So what should we actually see on that Obama-lunch tray? Well, by cutting out that corn-syrup re-branded as applesauce, that would cut out a lot of calories right off the bat, which could be used by more nutrient dense foods. Home-made applesauce would be a much better choice, or perhaps even some sauteed apple slices with a few raisins and a little bit of unrefined brown sugar. Fewer calories, more nutrition. But we don't really have to put a dessert on a lunch tray anyway, and try to call it "healthy fruit." A small, fresh salad or vegetable might be a better option at lunch time.

How about that main entree? Instead of a hyper-processed breaded meat-paste puck on a hyper-refined white flour bun which offer essentially zero nutrition, an actual chicken sandwich on a whole grain bun would be a far better option. Free-range organic chicken having the most nutrients of course. (And less chance of chemical poisoning than the ammonia-soaked meat from and tortured, electrocuted birds.) A little bit of lettuce and a slice of tomato on there would be a tasty, healthy addition too. Since we have saved calories now by replacing overly refined and processed products, we can either serve a larger portion, or perhaps a second side dish such as a handful of mixed nuts, some yogurt perhaps with a bit of fruit, something actually healthy and nutrient rich while being much more filling as well.

So we see here that it's not really about cutting out fats or sugars, it is about choosing more nutrient-dense foods instead. Our bodies need fats, sugar, and salt just as much as vitamins minerals and protein. Cutting out certain components and simply feeding kids less is not a solution. It is starvation. Instead of taking things away, we need to add more nutrient-dense foods to the lunch menu.

This presents another problem though. School lunch programs run on a strict budget and have to put out whatever they can with the budget they have, and now too within the constraints of these FDA guidelines. So in Michelle Obama's attack on obesity, and within those budget constraints, this is the best that the schools could come up with. A starvation diet, as we can plainly see. Schools simply cannot afford to put out free-range grilled chicken sandwiches with a fresh garden salad and sauteed apples. They can't afford to serve a nice piece of balsamic-glazed salmon with some wild rice and roasted brussels sprouts salad. Or even if the schools could afford it, a lot of students would not be able to afford to pay what they would have to charge. Not in public schools anyway.

Now we see too, why not just young people are increasingly being swallowed up by this obesity epidemic, but the poor as well. What we are seeing here dispels the ignorant myth of poor people being gluttons, who "should stop eating so much if they are so poor." People living in poverty are living on a steady diet of nutritionally void foods like ramen, dollar store packs of hot dogs, and 3-liter bottles of generic soda-pop. This is why they are fat and have heart-disease, not because they are gorging themselves on Lindor truffles foie-gras.

And again, all of this exposes the fact that obesity is really masking a horrible truth about the world today. We are, quite literally, starving to death. Obesity is just a mask for mass starvation, on a core nutritional level. We just don't think of it this way. We don't see it, because of the incongruous nature of what we think about starvation historically, compared with a fat person in front of us on line at the supermarket. We imagine starving people to be war prisoners in death camps, or the bony little beggar children on the streets of India. There is one constant though, the poor and the voiceless are always first in line to starve. We see that here too with the obesity epidemic. The poor are the most likely to fall prey to this insidious and historically unprecedented cycle of nutritional starvation. while also taking the blame at the same time.

You can read more on obesity and what we eat at the following links, where some of my older material has been hosted:

Let Them Eat Cake: The Tale of American Nutricide

Fat Tax: The Socio-Economics of Obesity

Fascist Food and Nutrition Nazis
















Tweet

6 Ways the Food Industry Tricks You Into Eating Garbage (VIDEO)

6 Ways the Food Industry Tricks You Into Eating Garbage -- powered by Cracked.com

Supermarket of The Beast, Sponsored by IBM

The mark of the beast is the sign of the Antichrist, and is mentioned in Revelation 13:15-18:

The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

Also see:

Take the Mark of The Beast or Don't Eat

And let's make sure your Obamacare is valid.

Bonus video:








Tweet

Housing Authority Bans Little Girl's Garden

4 Year Old’s Veggie Garden Must Go Says USDA Subcontractor

by Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist
(Be sure to follow link to source for more info and updates.)

With each passing day, it seems the United States of America, “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave” is becoming more and more like the Communist Russia I learned about in elementary school where people weren’t allowed to grow their own food unless the State “allowed” it.

In this latest crackdown on citizens simply trying to provide for themselves using the most basic of skills – gardening – the USDA’s Rural Development Agency is forbidding Rosie, an industrious 4-year old girl in South Dakota from using a small, unused area outside her subsidized housing unit to grow green vegetables.

Rosie’s mother, Mary (names changed to protect the child’s identity), is single and severely disabled. She and her daughter live on a fixed income disability payment of $628/month. The garden vegetables growing just outside her backdoor lovingly tended by Rosie provide a fresh and healthy addition to their diet that they could not otherwise easily afford.

Rosie started the garden in May 2013, but now the property management company has ordered the garden be removed this week!

The reason?

The property management company claims that gardening goes against the rules set by the USDA’s Rural Development Agency which forbids residents to have structures of any kind within landscaped areas. It seems to me that the practice of growing vegetables by the most needy in our society would take precedence over landscaping, wouldn’t you agree?

I wonder if the USDA plans to establish “rules” about breathing air in subsidized areas too?

The Federal bureaucracy seems to think that it owns those individuals who receive any sort of government assistance and that their behavior is completely within its jurisdiction to control no matter how ridiculous or blatantly un-American the power-tripping “rules” they decide to put in place may be.

Think this is an isolated case?  It’s not.  I write regularly on this blog about these outrageous situations where ordinary citizens are bullied by out of control bureaucrats, the most recent being a Mother in Maine who was harassed and threatened by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) for feeding her healthy, robust 3 month old son homemade goat milk formula instead of horribly unhealthy commercial formula from the store laced with rancid vegetable oils and GMOs!

What You Can Do Now to Help Rosie

It is truly unfathomable that our country has degenerated to the point where a person can no longer garden without permission from bureaucratic thugs who get paid with our hard earned tax dollars to think up these rules –  not laws - rules that have never been voted on by the elected representatives of the citizens expected to abide by those rules.

If you recall, this is exactly the sort of authoritarian insanity that started the American Revolutionary War (tea party anyone?).

Tell the USDA where it can put its “rules” against gardening by those living in rural, subsidized areas.
You can either sign the petition to save Rosie’s garden by clicking here or send an outraged letter directly to Elsie Meeks, State Director for South Dakota, USDA Rural Development Agency.

Sample Email to USDA

You can copy/paste the email template below to send directly from your email provider. Template provided courtesy of Kitchen Gardeners International, the source of this story.

To: elsie.meeks@sd.usda.gov
Cc: kevin.strickler@sd.usda.gov, trace.davids@sd.usda.gov

Subject: Allow USDA-subsidized housing residents to grow vegetable gardens

Message body:

Dear Director Meeks,
I urge you to make a loud and clear statement to all the property management companies your agency contracts that USDA-subsidized residents have the right to keep their own vegetable gardens provided that these gardens are actively maintained. Vegetable gardens grow healthy and affordable foods as well as a sense of community. Rather than preventing low-income and disabled residents from providing for themselves, we should be doing everything we can to encourage them. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely yours,
(Your name, your town, your state)


Also see:

Fat Tax: The Socio-Economics of Obesity


Tweet

The Half-Ton Woman Accused of Murder (Documentary)

On 18 March 2008 a two-year-old boy was beaten to death in a Texan border town. His aunt, Mayra Rosales, was the only one with him at the time and was charged with his murder. But was this really possible?

Mayra weighed nearly 500 kg, was bed-ridden and totally immobile. So why was she confessing to a heinous crime she seemingly could not have committed?

This incredible film follows the many twists and turns in the case with intimate interviews with Mayra, her family, and the investigators, lawyers and doctors involved.

Caution. Some viewers may find the imagery in this video disturbing.

Tweet

McDonald's and Visa Team Up to Budget Slave-Wage

This article courtesy Minimum Wage Workers Union of America


McDonald's and Visa have come together in a new initiative which purports to show low-wage workers how to survive, and even thrive financially on their meager earnings.

At their new Practical Money Skills for Life™ website you can find a pdf file sample budget, ostensibly designed to be a framework for workers to use in order to successfully manage their income while working at McDonald's.


It is certainly a good idea to have a budget, to practice good financial techniques, to minimize spending and the like, but no budget will solve the problem of not having enough money to meet the most basic living expenses. This core truth is completely overlooked by McDonald's and their collaborator. This then sets the stage for victim-blaming, rather than making a factual presentation. The premise they present here, is that if a worker is having financial troubles it is the worker's own fault.

The introductory video is immediately condescending to the viewer/worker and assumes that you lack the elementary concepts of basic addition and subtraction arithmetic, or even common sense. While some workers may be woefully uneducated and lacking in life experience, it appears that the true ignorance here rests with the creators of the fast-food giant's presentation.

As an example, almost any worker knows full well that taking a pay-day loan is financially unsound, being both risky and costly. What the creators of the video ignore is that a worker does not need to be taught this point as a lesson, as if it were some great revelation bestowed by a benevolent corporation out of sheer good will. The worker who does take such a costly risk by taking out a pay-day loan does it out of necessity, not stupidity. The payday loan industry thrives on the desperation of the poor, not on people who ant some extra spending money.

The video also encourages the viewer to get direct-deposit for their paycheck, and to have a bank account, in order to save on check-cashing fees. But again we see that the creators have ignored the reality of the situation for many of their workers. Some financial institutions will not let a person with poor credit have an account. Low-wage workers are, of course, more likely than most to have a poor credit rating. In other instances, a bank or credit union may not be easily accessible in their neighborhood or along their travel routes. Banks often require a large minimum balance, leaving substantial funds inaccessible to the depositor.
But most important of all perhaps, is that bank accounts are riddled with costly pitfalls. Visa check-cards exacerbate those dangers to workers who are subject to an array of hidden maintenance, access, and penalty fees.

For many people it is not only easier, but actually wiser to just spend a few dollars to cash their paycheck at a local supermarket, or check-cashing store. In this instance, a former McDonald's worker has been forced to sue for her right to be paid in legal tender, after her employer refused to pay her in any form other than a fee-laden debit card like those issued by Visa.



Even with the best financial practices, no human mistakes, and no unforeseen emergencies, a person still needs enough money to meet basic expenses. A sound budget will never work without enough money to put into that budget in the first place. So let's have a look at what McDonald's sees as a reasonable budget for a worker to, as they put it, "have almost anything you want as long as you plan ahead and save for it."

Right at the start, McDonald's is admitting that a full-time worker at one of their restaurants does not earn enough to support themselves. Their budget demands from you that you get a second job, if you are lucky enough to find one at all, much less one that is compatible with your full-time and often irregular hours at one of their establishments. If you can't get a second job, for whatever reason, the full-time low-wage worker will be forced to go on welfare, or get at least some sort of public assistance.

What this means is that taxpayers are subsidizing the labor expenses of major corporations like McDonald's. We the taxpayers are now forced to pay a contribution in order to make sure that McDonald's workers actually show up for work in the first place, and that the worker is fed, clothed and healthy enough to perform their task. While these corporations reap billion dollar profits, and the CEO of McDonald's makes about $5,000 an hour, the taxpayers are forced to pay a share of their business expenses. In 2012, Wal-Mart workers were forced to rely on $2.6 billion in taxpayer relief. That directly translates into $2.6B in additional profits for the Walton family, who are more wealthy then the bottom 40% of all Americans combined.

Now let's go ahead and take a look at the person who winds up actually being lucky enough to have two jobs, and is in turn forced to pay taxes to help support the worker standing next to them who works only one full-time job. This budget projects a net monthly income of $2,060. Based on the 2012 IRS tax liability tables, a minimum wage worker earning $7.25 an hour would have to work 76 hours per week in order to have a net monthly income of $2,060. So much for the notion that poor people are lazy. This is essentially two full-time jobs, especially since employers won't usually let a worker hit the 40 hour mark in a week, for fear of having to pay an overtime wage.

This obviously leaves no time for continuing education, and precious few hours to spend with family or trying to raise your children. Contrary to the popular notion, teens do not make up the majority of minimum-wage workers. Roughly 90% are over the age of 20, and about 30% of minimum wage workers are trying to raise a family on that budget. 

But surely a person working two full time jobs, nearly 80 hours a week, must be living fairly well, right? Well, let's have a look at budgeted expenses.

The first line item in that section is savings. Anyone who can afford to save, must actually have an income that exceeds the rest of their expenses. Saving for the future is not only good advice, but absolutely necessary in order to build any sort of future It is even necessary to simply offset an array of inflationary factors which have undermined the American worker since our heydey in the 1950's.

90% of Americans Earn Less Than 1950 Minimum Wage Standard

Unfortunately, this budget is actually completely impractical and that $100 figure is completely unrealistic.

Looking at the next item we see how unrealistic it actually is. $600 for rent is unheard of in most parts of the country. The average rent last year in the US was $1,048 monthly. In New York, it is over $3,000 a month. One might suggest getting a roommate to split the rent, but then again we might also assume that this budget is actually written out for two people working at McDonald's full time, and who decided to move in together to share the bills because they couldn't find a second full-time job for themselves. So even with a roomate or spouse also working full time, this budget is still not practical, as we shall further see. 

(It could also be noted here that forced cohabitation can set someone up for all sorts of costly and life-damaging problems. Roomates can be an annoyance when they interfere with necessary sleep, but you are also vulnerable to thievery, fraud, and even being named as a criminal conspirator if they use the residence as part of an illicit enterprise. This socioeconomic dynamic has also pushed unwed couples to cohabitate prematurely, leaving them trying to force a frustrating and volatile relationship work out of simple economic necessity. This of course, is at the root of so many instances of domestic violence. Problems like these can wind up costing a worker for court fees, time missed from work, and more.)

Their budget does account for a car payment, but that figure is unrealistically low for the actual cost of operating a car. Insurance alone would easily double that figure, not to mention gasoline, maintenance, and repairs. Our own research has shown that the expense for basic auto transportation is roughly $500 a month. Public transportation may not give a significant reduction in transportation costs, and is not often available in many areas.

The next item combines home and car insurance into one item. Renters insurance is an excellent idea, and protects against all sorts of mishaps, like losing everything you own in a fire, or to a break in, but it is not really something that most low-wage workers can actually afford. Insurance for a homeowner is far more expensive than their figure, but we can assume that most people who work at McDonald's do not, and probably never will own their own home. They should not have even included car insurance there, but even for liability only that figure is very low, especially for younger drivers, or someone who may have had an accident. If you are making payments though, you need full coverage, which would be many time more per month than what they have calculated for.

For health insurance they have posted an absolutely absurd figure of $20 per month. Over-the-counter medicine to treat the flu would cost you more than that. McDonald's own basic plan for a single person with no children is $61 a month, with a maximum annual payout of $2000. (See: pdf) The plan also requires you pay a deductible and a single co-pay is $20. That $20 is, as you see, all they have budget for here, but not the actual cost of the insurance. Hardly sound financial advice from these supposed experts who worked on this project with them.

They must also assume that you live in Hawaii where it is practically 75-degrees year-round, because this budget allot for $0 in heating (or air-conditioning) expenses.

Cable and phone at $100 a month. This is possible, but you would not be able to afford a cellphone which is a nice convenience that can actually save you money and is indispensable in an emergency. Someone who is working 76 hours a week would probably choose to have a cellphone and eliminate television entertainment for the few hours that they are actually at home. They can just sit and stare at a wall until they fall asleep.

Their calculation for electric is not entirely unreasonable, but will vary widely from region to region and in different rental units. If there is electric heating for example, that figure could easily be two or three times as much per month. That would obviously wipe out their "other" category instantly. 

At the end of the McDonald's budget we see they have allotted for $27 a day in spending money. Perhaps they expect workers to take all of their meals where they work, as the budget has not accounted for any food or grocery expenses. The health consequences alone would be devastating for a worker who made fast-food the staple of their diet, but $27 a day is not really enough for that anyway. The average cost in the US for a Big Mac value meal is $6.64, though it is often several dollars more in metro areas like NY. This would leave you with about $7 for gas, and nothing to feed your family. You also wouldn't have money for garbage bags, light bulbs, toothpaste, aspirin, haircuts, deodorant. You also wouldn't have money to do laundry, but you don't have a budget to buy clothes anyway, so go ahead an just wear that stinky McDonald's uniform without any underwear on, every single day.

For a much more practical and realistic budget, please see:

Analyzing a Practical Minimum Wage

You can sign a petition at:

Low Pay Is Not Okay









Tweet

American Manufacturing Replaced by Eating and Drinking

With socioeconomic trends such as this, it is little wonder why the American obesity epidemic shows no signs of slowing no matter what deluded programs are put in place to curb our expanding waistlines. From incessant commercial brainwashing, to denial of access to healthy products, to making you sick for profit, to a global population control program, it is little wonder why Americans are in such poor health. Not just physically, but economically as well.

In the 1950's, the heydey of American capitalism, manufacturing was the backbone of our economic vitality. These blue-collar jobs paid well, and provided the benefits that raised our quality of life to be the most superior in human history. As you can see from this chart below, those jobs have all been replaced by a service industry specifically designed to profit from obesity and drunkenness. The jobs in bars and restaurants are low-wage and usually provide no worker-benefits of any kind.

When factoring for worker productivity overall, 90% of Americans now make less than the minimum wage standard in 1950. This is at a time when American poverty has reached unprecedented proportions, and more people than ever are relying on government subsidies for the very basic necessities of life. If today's SNAP benefit (foodstamps) was measured as a bread-line like we saw during the Great Depression, there would be a line 7 miles long at every single Wal-Mart in America. Then to add insult to injury, even these low-paying obesity-industry jobs are being eliminated through technology.

This chart plots the collision course explaining why we are so physically sick at the same time our economic vitality has gone stale.

The source of this chart's information is the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, but was first seen at: Zero Hedge






Tweet

Burger King Introduces Hands-Free Gluttony With New Feeding Device

handsfreewhopper.com

Also see:

Fat Tax: The Socioeconomic of Obesity

Fascist Food and Nutrition Nazis

Codex Alimentarius and 'Soft Kill' Eugenics





Tweet

Homeless Shelter Venison Destroyed by Health Department

EXCERPT:

The Shreveport-Bossier Rescue Mission (SBRM) in Louisiana has been serving specially-prepared venison, or deer meat, to hungry folks throughout the region for many years. The state's deer management program actually encourages hunters to donate their extra venison to this and other non-profit endeavors, as deer meat is high in protein, full of nutrients and best of all, clean and untainted by concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs).

The program has been so successful, in fact, that many state representatives routinely donate money and other resources to the deer processors that volunteer their own time and resources to prepare the meat and ensure its safety before shipping it out to local food kitchens like SBRM. What better way to salvage all that deer meat that would otherwise go to waste as a result of deer population control than to donate it to people with no other food to eat?

The Louisiana Department of Health & Hospitals (DHH), however, has a different opinion on the matter. After catching wind of the program, DHH took swift action to completely destroy it, claiming it violates state law. Even though SBRM receives absolutely no funding or support from the state, DHH basically assumed the authority to declare that serving venison to hungry people in need is off limits.

According to officials from DHH, deer meat is apparently "not permitted to be served in a shelter, restaurant or any other public eating establishment in Louisiana." So, without a second thought, the soulless agency swooped in like a vulture and demanded that the program end immediately. DHH even went so far as to declare that the 1,600 pounds of deer meat in SBRM's possession be immediately thrown into a dumpster, and have bleach poured all over it in order to ensure that nobody ate it.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039827_government_food_charity_oppression.html#ixzz2Ptv4tRNs



Tweet

Pepsi Replaces Sugar With Aborted Fetuses

So what exactly is this magic ingredient that will be appearing in a new version of Pepsi, and how is it made? Unfortunately, those questions are hard to answer. Senomyx... refers to them only as 'enhancers' or 'ingredients'... The products work by triggering receptors on the tongue and tricking your taste buds into sensing sweetness — or saltiness or coolness, in the case of the company's other programs...

So are Senomyx's covert ingredients safe? That, too, is anyone's guess... many of its enhancers have 'been granted'GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status, but all that means is that the company did its own assessment and then concluded everything was fine. We don't know whether Senomyx did any testing since the company isn't required to submit anything to the FDA.

There's no reason to think that Senomyx's products will cause harm, but until or unless Pepsi decides to share details about how exactly it's achieving a 60 percent reduction in sugar while keeping the taste the same, customers will be drinking their 'scientifically advantaged' sodas completely in the dark.”

The lack of labeling requirements is particularly troublesome and will probably become an issue in the future. Since these compounds (whatever they are) are used in such minute quantities, they don’t have to be listed on the label. They’ll simply fall under the generic category of artificial and/or natural flavors. What this means is that the product will appear to be much “healthier” than it might otherwise be, were a flavor enhancer not used.

According to a 2010 CBS report, Senomyx’s flavor enhancers were already being sold outside the US at that time. For example, Nestle was by 2010 using an MSG flavor enhancer in its Maggi brand soups, sauces, condiments and instant noodles, and Ajinomoto was also using a similar ingredient in products for the Chinese market. This means less of the artificial sweetener is needed to create the same sweet taste as before, but while one could argue that this is a good thing, I suspect we will ultimately learn that this flavor enhancement method has multiple unforeseen adverse consequences — metabolically, and biologically.
Consequences of Food Alteration are More the Rule than the Exception...

There are many reasons why you're better off choosing natural whole foods in lieu of processed alternatives, but one of the primary ones is that junk foods contain additives that increase your toxic load, which in turn may increase your tendency to develop cancer. As of yet, there is NO medical research to back up the assertion that manipulating your taste buds in the way Senomyx’ products do is safe and healthy in the long term. As an example, I would point to the evidence now available showing that one of the reasons why artificial sweeteners do not work as advertised is because the taste of sweet itself is tied into your metabolic functioning in a way that we still do not fully understand... As a result, artificially sweetened products, oftentimes boasting zero calories, actually result in greater weight gain than sweetened products when used “in the real world.”

It's easy to forget that the processed, pre-packaged foods and fast food restaurants of today are actually a radical change in terms of the history of food production. Much of what we eat today bears very little resemblance of real food. Many products are loaded with non-nutritive fillers — purposely designed to just “take up space” to make you think you’re getting more than you really are — along with any number of additives. Many additives have been shown to have harmful effects on mood, behavior, metabolic functioning and biochemistry.

Now, with the introduction of untested engineered flavor enhancers, you’re left wondering whether processed foods with “cleaner” labels really are safer and healthier or not...

Remember, because Senomyx’ flavor enhancers are used in such low concentrations they are not required to undergo the FDA's usual safety approval process for food additives.
 
The disease trends we're now seeing are only going to get worse as much of the processed foods consumed today are not even food-based. Who knows what kind of genetic mutations and malfunctions we're creating for ourselves and future generations when a MAJORITY of our diet consists of highly processed and artificial foods that contain substances never before consumed by humans in all of history.

Read more at the original source:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/03/17/senomyx-flavor-enhancers.aspx?e_cid=20130317_SNL_Art_1&utm_source=snl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20130317

Also see:

Tastes Like Baby

You Ate Beaver Ass Juice

11 Disgusting Ingredients You Eat Every Day That Food Companies Don't Talk About

Tweet

You Ate Beaver Ass Juice

Ever eat anything that tasted like vanilla, strawberry or raspberry? Chances are you have eaten the juice secreted from the anal gland of a beaver. It is commonly used as a flavoring additive in foods like ice cream, soda, and chewing gum, and labeled as "natural flavoring."
 

Castoreum (pronunciation: /kæsˈtɔriəm/) is the exudate from the castor sacs of the mature North American Beaver (Castor canadensis) and the European Beaver (Castor fiber). Within the zoological realm, castoreum is the yellowish secretion of the castor sac in combination with the beaver's urine, used during scent marking of territory.^[1][2] Both male and female beavers possess a pair of castor sacs and a pair of anal glands located in two cavities under the skin between the pelvis and the base of the tail.^[3] The castor sacs are not true glands (endocrine or exocrine) on a cellular level, hence references to these structures as preputial glands or castor glands are misnomers.<sup>[4]

-SOURCE</sup>

Tweet

Globesity: Bigger, Rounder and Still Going!

Excerpt from  Globesity: How Globalists Are Feeding Off the Obesity Crisis

The USDA’s Pyramid Scheme

The government’s dietary recommendations also contribute to the obesity problem.

“The USDA has two mandates, and they are conflicting,” Bowden maintained. “The first is to get the people of the United States good information about nutrition. The second mandate is to build markets and to build business for the agricultural industry. Well, if you’re putting out crap, and you’ve got to build markets for that, you can’t very well tell the people that you’re supposed to be informing that this is crap.”

Political influence has plagued the Department of Agriculture’s dietary advice for well over a century. In his book Bully Boy: The Truth About Theodore Roosevelt’s Legacy, Jim Powell notes that Harvey Washington Wiley, the chief chemist at the USDA’s Bureau of Chemistry from 1882 to 1912, “encouraged Americans to consume more sugar, which he considered the hallmark of an advanced civilization. ‘Childhood without candy,’ he remarked, ‘would be Heaven without harps.’” Wiley, as it happens, was tight with the sugar industry. He lobbied for high sugar tariffs, and sugar producers helped protect him from political enemies.

The food pyramid, which the USDA introduced in 1992, was greatly influenced by politics. The pyramid recommended six to 11 servings of grains daily — more than any other food group, and more than vegetables and fruits combined.

“While the government has stood by this regimen for 11 years,” the Wall Street Journal reported in 2002, “some critics say it’s no coincidence that the number of overweight Americans has risen 61% since the pyramid was introduced — and almost instantaneously appeared on the sides of pasta boxes, bread wrappers and packages of other food products in the pyramid’s six-to-11-servings category.”

At that time the USDA’s dietary guidelines were up for review, “an exercise that attracts not only critics from the world of medicine but industry lobbyists and those promoting the virtues of various food groups and diets,” the Journal observed. The lobbying should not be surprising given that, as the same newspaper reported in 2004, “the tiniest change to the guidelines or pyramid can swing food companies’ sales by millions of dollars.”

“Every aisle of the supermarket has a lobbyist in town,” food-industry consultant Jeff Nedelman told the Journal.

Some industry groups, such as the National Dairy Council, sought increases in the number of recommended servings of their products. Others sought merely to retain their prominence in the pyramid: “There is no doubt that the Food Guide Pyramid in 1992 was a big boost to the baking industry,” Sara Lee Corp. baking division spokesman Matt Hall told the paper.

The resulting guidelines were anything but impartial and scientific.

In 2011, the USDA replaced the food pyramid with MyPlate. Most pyramid critics agree that the new guide is an improvement over the old one. Fruits and vegetables now occupy a larger part of the recommended diet, though grains still constitute a sizable portion of it, and dairy — not necessarily harmful but certainly not essential — remains in the recommendations, no doubt reflecting continued industry pressure. And whereas the food pyramid suggested using fats “sparingly,” MyPlate fails to address the issue at all, despite research showing that some fats are actually beneficial.

Now, after all these years of subsidizing and recommending poor diets, the government, led by the UN, wants people to trust it to help them shrink their waistlines. Yet who doubts that, just as in the past, policies implemented in the future will not be governed solely by disinterested scientists but also by lobbyists, politicians beholden to special interests, and researchers pushing an agenda?

Still, even if disinterested individuals were given a free hand to solve the obesity dilemma, what, exactly, would they do?

“If the president called and said, ‘You’re going to be an advisor [on obesity]. Fix it any way that you want,’ I would just run from the room screaming because I wouldn’t even know where to start,” Bowden said.

While diet and exercise certainly play a role, “there are enormous genetic, metabolic, biochemical, [and] environmental factors that work together in some manner, shape, or form that is virtually impossible to study because you’ve got too many factors,” he averred. “I have talked to obesity researchers who have said, ‘We’ve been studying this stuff for 20 years, and we still do not understand it.’”

This constitutes yet another parallel between “global warming” and the obesity “crisis.” No one doubts that the Earth’s climate has changed over time — not just seasonally but over centuries and millennia — and that even now it is changing in observable ways. Likewise, everyone can see with his own eyes — or bathroom scale — that humans are becoming heavier by the day. In both cases, neither the underlying causes of the changes nor their ultimate repercussions are fully understood, but the solutions proposed by those claiming to know the answers are the same: global governance; a larger, more intrusive state; and a surrender of our liberties.

Tweet






 

Working Class Will Lose $9 Billion to Fast-Food Robot

Excerpt:

The start-up robot firm Momentum Machines is one. Funded by San Francisco's Lemnos Labs, it has developed a robot designed to take the place of humans in burger restaurants. Its creators believe their patty-flipping Alpha robot could save the fast-food industry in the United States about US$9 billion (Dh33.05bn) a year. Designed to entirely replace two to three full-time kitchen staff, it can grill a beef patty, layer it with lettuce, tomatoes, pickles and onions, put it in a bun, and wrap it up to go - no less than 360 times an hour. Momentum believes kitchen robots are not only more cost-effective than human staff, they are also more hygienic.

Silicon Valley technology industry watchers believe businesses will be early adopters of 21st-Century robotics technology.

"Like PCs, we'll likely see the first wave in business because it can handle the costs more readily and then move to the high end of the consumer market," says the Rob Enderle, the principal analyst at the Enderle Group, based in Silicon Valley.

He adds the robotics industry is at about the same early stage in its evolution as the personal computing industry was in the 1980s but believes it will mature more quickly.

See the full article at The National

Also check out:

Half of New Jobs Last Month Came From McD's Hiring Blitz

McDonald's To Replace Workers with Touch-Screens

Get a Job You Bum!


Tweet







 

Codex Alimentarius and 'Soft Kill' Eugenics

 via: theintelhub.com

Codex Alimentarius: An Introduction to Soft Kill Eugenics

 By Daisy Luther
The Organic Prepper

The world as we once knew it is gone.  The rosy cheeked children, bursting with energy, that once climbed trees and got up to mischief, are extinct.  
The people are still here, but they are pale, lethargic and slowly dying. 

Every bite of food provided to these people is the product of a laboratory – the genetically modified spawn of Big Agri and Big Pharma.  
The food looks incredible – huge, radiant tomatoes such a vivid red that one would think the lycopene was virtually emanating from the skin of the fruit.  Inside that appealing package is a food-like substance, utterly raped of nutrients.

The people are unable to go to a health-food store and purchase vitamins or an herbal tonic to put the spring back in their step.
  Herbs, vitamins and nutrients in general have been labeled “toxins” and are only available via prescription at high prices and low doses.

If the people are caught hoarding treasured fertile heirloom seeds, and heaven forbid, planting them to grow their own food, punishment is swift and sure. The bounty is taken and the people starve again.

Amidst the abundance of burgeoning supermarket shelves, the majority of the world’s population is slowly starving to death.

The world according to Codex Alimentarius looks grim indeed.  Codex Alimentarius (Latin for “food code”) is a global set of standards created by the CA Commission, a body established by a branch or the United Nations back in 1963.

The CA Commission’s purported mission, like all Agenda 21 missions, sounds so wonderful that it might have been created by a committee from heaven above.

The main purposes of this Programme are protecting health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade

Don’t you wonder what could possibly be wrong with that? The UN wants us to be healthy and wants everyone to be paid fairly.
Codex Alimentarius sounds great!  Let’s institute these standards right away!
As with all globally stated agendas, however, CA’s darker purpose is shielded by the feel-good words.

Global committees have been established to regulate the following topics, to name a few.

· fruits and vegetables
· fruit and vegetable juices
· fats and oils
· meat, poultry and fish
· cereals, pulses (used for food and animal feed) and legumes
· milk and milk products
· natural mineral waters
· sugars
· cocoa products and chocolate
· food hygiene
· food labeling (as a way not to disclose GMO foods and ingredients)
· pesticide residues;
· residues of veterinary drugs found in foods
· food additives
The unfortunate thing is, the regulations ensure money, not safety. They guarantee profit, not health benefits.

“Codex Alimentarius is a dark marriage between pharmaceutical and chemical industries and the WTO, conceived to exact complete and regimented control over all food products and nutrients worldwide.” ~ writes Chantal Boccaccio of The People’s Voice.

Follow the Money

So if all of these regulations don’t benefit the consumers, who do they benefit?  Dr. Rima Laibow, of Health Freedom USA estimated that for every dollar spent on natural health solutions and supplements, Big Pharma loses $40.  Therefore, if people have the option to chose vitamins over valium, Big Pharma loses billions per year.

The medical establishment benefits.  When people are able to manage chronic conditions and avoid surgery through carefully choosing what they eat or what supplements they take, the medical establishment loses out on those costly visits that people must undertake in order to “manage” their conditions.

Pesticide manufacturers benefit.  GMO foods require greater pesticide use, thus manufacturers of pesticides like Round-up (Monsanto) reap the financial rewards while being allowed to poison the environment.

Food processors benefit.  CA requires food to be irradiated, a low cost (and nutrient-destroying) practice to require lower standards of hygiene and sanitation.

Big Pharma benefits.  CA mandates that nutrients be classified as drugs; therefore the purchase of vitamins will eventually require a prescription. Prescription drugs, of course, are monitored by the FDA, which means only the Big Pharma companies will be able to manufacture and supply them.

Maybe, then, the United States should just refuse to take part in CA.
That’s not going to happen, because all members of the World Trade Organization are legally bound under global guidelines, including CA standards.  CA standards override all national laws.
Lack of compliance to these standards may result in fines and/or crippling trade sanctions.  If a country wants to play the global trading game, that country has no option whatsoever but to comply with CA.
Those who do not comply automatically forfeit the judgment in any global trade dispute regarding food or nutrients.

It’s Already Here

In 2010, during the distraction of the BP Oil Spill, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order (#13544) to implement CA in the US over the course of the next few years.
More akin to a royal decree than a constitutionally acceptable legislation, Obama proved his arrogance once again: he does NOT require the approval of Congress to make sweeping legislation’s.

In the United States, the FDA is in charge of implementing the standards. Over the next two years, with the Food Safety Modernization Act, they will be doing just that.
According to a Natural News article by Dr. Gregory D’Amato, these irrevocable standards are on their way of being implemented to allow the US to “harmonize” with Codex.

* 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 [2].

* 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 [3].

* All advice on nutrition (including written online or journal articles or oral advice to a friend, family member or anyone) will be illegal.

* 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 [4].

* 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.

We’ve already seen incidences of health food stores being raided as though they were selling crystal meth instead of Vitamin C and organic vegetables.
Family farms are being driven out of business because they can’t afford to keep up with the ever-increasing regulations.
Natural healers have been criminalized throughout Europe, and that criminalization is on its way to North American shores.

Death by Codex

If it was only about the almighty dollar and the building of monopolies, one could almost comprehend the corporate greed behind Codex Alimentarius.  The plot is more sinister than even greed could create.

Codex Alimentarius, quite simply, is an instrument of depopulation and control. 

Many prominent eugenicists, such as Bill Gates and David Rockefeller have openly promoted depopulation as a positive goal for the future.
Sickly people die off at a faster rate, dropping health care costs.  Dwindling populations consume fewer resources and leaving more for the Elite.
Morally, this soft kill approach is more palatable than outright attacks, like the release of viruses.  There is the risk that biological attacks could also affect the Elite.
Military attacks, like nuclear war, could have a devastating effect on the environment, which would also negatively affect the elite. Subtly starving the masses, without them even realizing it, is the simplest method, and also the least likely to harm the NWO puppet masters that are in control of the United Nations.

As the attack on the world’s people becomes more obvious, the decision makers also risk being the victims of violent revolution.  Codex also helps to cover that aspect.
If people are malnourished, they are unable to resist tyranny with the same enthusiasm as a healthy population.  They are also far more susceptible to disease, should biological warfare be one day in the best interests of the Elite.

It’s win-win, if you happen to be a member of the Elite.  The outcome doesn’t look so great for the rest of us.

Henry Kissinger, the eugenicist poster child for the NWO, said it best.

If you control food, you control the population.

SOURCES:

Codex Alimentarius: Rated Rx
Health Freedom USA
Official Codex Alimentarius website
Codex Alimentarius: Population Control Under the Guise of Consumer Protection

This article has been copied in full from another source, for archival, educational and conversational purposes, and in order to maintain the integrity of inline links and redirects embedded within the article itself. It is also being included as part of a compilation presentation of related material as follows. Readers are encouraged to visit the original source of this material. 

Click here to see the full video

Also see:

"Let them eat cake" or The Tale of American Nutricide

Evil Ingredients In Your Food, A to Z

Fat Tax: The Socio-Ecoonomics of Obesity

Fascist Food and Nutrition Nazis

FDA to Ban Dietary Supplements Formulated After 1994

Government Subsidized Obesity, You Betcha!

And finally, see how all this plays into an even bigger picture with:

Agenda 21, A Real Conspiracy

Georgia Guidestones Revisited






Tweet

Japanese Strawberry Dessert Madness (Video)

Tweet

NYC Mayor Bans Food Donations to Homeless Shelters

Although this policy was actually instituted earlier this year, it has had a critical negative impact in the wake of disastrous hurricane Sandy. The hurricane left thousands of New Yorkers homeless, and now starving to death thanks to Mayor Bloomberg.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg in March instituted a ban on food donations to homeless shelters. No, not because of food contamination, but because the city can’t properly assess salt, fat and fiber in donated food and thereby ensure starving people are getting the optimal levels of nutrition. Can’t have dumpy-looking homeless people on the streets! We knew Bloomberg was a health nut, but maybe he’s just anti-food? Maybe put this one to a vote — it’s hard to imagine what harm fresh soup and bagels (two items that have already been turned away) could do to a hungry person. 

Source

So much for serving the homeless.

The Bloomberg administration is now taking the term “food police” to new depths, blocking food donations to all government-run facilities that serve the city’s homeless.

In conjunction with a mayoral task force and the Health Department, the Department of Homeless Services recently started enforcing new nutritional rules for food served at city shelters. Since DHS can’t assess the nutritional content of donated food, shelters have to turn away good Samaritans.

For over a decade, Glenn Richter and his wife, Lenore, have led a team of food-delivery volunteers from Ohab Zedek, the Upper West Side Orthodox congregation.

They’ve brought freshly cooked, nutrient-rich surplus foods from synagogue events to homeless facilities in the neighborhood. (Disclosure: I know the food is so tasty because I’ve eaten it — I’m an OZ member.) The practice of donating such surplus food to homeless shelters is common among houses of worship in the city.
DHS Commissioner Seth Diamond says the ban on food donations is consistent with Mayor Bloomberg’s emphasis on improving nutrition for all New Yorkers. A new interagency document controls what can be served at facilities — dictating serving sizes as well as salt, fat and calorie contents, plus fiber minimums and condiment recommendations.

The city also cites food-safety issues with donations, but it’s clear that the real driver behind the ban is the Bloomberg dietary diktats.

Source

Also be sure to check out:

Fascist Food and Nutrition Nazis

Fat Tax: The Socio-Economics of Obesity

















Tweet

Underwear Goes Inside the Pants

Why is marijuana not legal? Why is marijuana not legal?

It's a natural plant that grows in the dirt.

Do you know what's not natural?

80 year old dudes with hard-ons. That's not natural.

But we got pills for that.

We're dedicating all our medical resources to keeping the old guys erect,

but we're putting people in jail for something that grows in the dirt?

You know we have more prescription drugs now.

Every commercial that comes on TV is a prescription drug ad.

I can't watch TV for four minutes without thinking I have five serious diseases.

Like: "Do you ever wake up tired in the morning?"

Oh my god I have this, write this down. Whatever it is, I have it.

Half the time I don't even know what the commercial is:

people running in fields or flying kites or swimming in the ocean.

I'm like that is the greatest disease ever. How do you get that?

That disease comes with a hot chick and a puppy.

The schools now: It is all about self-esteem in the schools now.

Build the kids' self-esteem, make them feel good about themselves.

If everybody grows up with high self-esteem, who is going to dance in our strip clubs?

What's going to happen to our porno industry?

These women don't just grown on trees.

It takes lots of drunk dads missing dance recitals before you decide to blow a goat on the internet for fifty bucks.

And if that disappears, where does that leave me on a Friday night with my new high speed connection?

Masterminds are another word that comes up all the time.

You keep hearing about these terrorists masterminds that get killed in the middle east.

Terrorists masterminds.

Mastermind is sort of a lofty way to describe what these guys do, don't you think?

They're not masterminds.

"OK, you take bomb, right? And you put in your backpack. And you get on bus and you blow yourself up. Alright?"

"Why do I have to blow myself up? Why can't I just:"

"Who's the fucking mastermind here? Me or you?"

Americans, let's face it: We've been a spoiled country for a long time.

Do you know what the number one health risk in America is?

Obesity. They say we're in the middle of an obesity epidemic.

An epidemic like it is polio. Like we'll be telling our grand kids about it one day.

The Great Obesity Epidemic of 2004.

"How'd you get through it grandpa?"

"Oh, it was horrible Johnny, there was cheesecake and pork chops everywhere."

Nobody knows why were getting fatter? Look at our lifestyle.

I'll sit at a drive thru.

I'll sit there behind fifteen other cars instead of getting up to make the eight foot walk to the totally empty counter.

Everything is mega meal, super sized. Want biggie fries, super sized, want to go large.

You want to have thirty burgers for a nickel you fat mother fucker. There's room in the bag. Take it!

Want a 55 gallon drum of Coke with that? It's only three more cents.

Sometimes you have to suffer a little bit in your youth to motivate yourself to succeed in later life.

Do you think if Bill Gates got laid in high school, do you think there'd be a Microsoft?

Of course not.

You got to spend a long time in your own locker with your underwear shoved up your ass before you start to think,

"You'll see. I'm going to take of the world of computers! I'll show them."

We're in one of the richest countries in the world,

but the minimum wage is lower than it was thirty five years ago.

There are homeless people everywhere.

This homeless guy asked me for money the other day.

I was about to give it to him and then I thought he was going to use it on drugs or alcohol.

And then I thought, that's what I'm going to use it on.

Why am I judging this poor bastard.

People love to judge homeless guys. Like if you give them money they're just going to waste it.

Well, he lives in a box, what do you want him to do? Save it up and buy a wall unit?

Take a little run to the store for a throw rug and a CD rack? He's homeless.

I walked behind this guy the other day.

A homeless guy asked him for money.

He looks right at the homeless guy and says why don't you go get a job you bum.

People always say that to homeless guys like it is so easy.

This homeless guy was wearing his underwear outside his pants.

Outside his pants. I'm guessing his resume isn't all up to date.

I'm predicting some problems during the interview process.

I'm pretty sure even McDonalds has a "underwear goes inside the pants" policy.

Not that they enforce it really strictly, but technically I'm sure it is on the books.

Tweet