Pink Slime!

http://global.fncstatic.com/static/m...aum_030812.jpg

‘Pink slime:’ Combo of connective tissue, scraps hidden in your kids’ lunch | Fox News

Pink slime:’ Combo of connective tissue, scraps hidden in your kids’ lunch

Published March 08, 2012

FoxNews.com

Fast-food chains like McDonald’s and Taco Bell have recently dropped the ‘pink slime’ from their beef – but schools across the country are still serving it, The Daily reported.

The term ‘pink slime’ was first coined in 2002 by Food Safety Inspection Service microbiologist Gerald Zirnstein, who toured a Beef Products Inc. production facility. Zirnstein later emailed his colleagues and told them he did not “consider the stuff to be ground beef,” according to the online news site.

Pink slime is a mix of ground-up connective tissue and beef scraps that are normally meant for dog food. BPI’s Lean Beef Trimmings are then treated with ammonia hydroxide to kill salmonella and E. coli, and mixed into ground beef or hamburger.

“We originally called it soylent pink,” Carl Custer, another microbiologist with the Food Safety Inspection Service, told The Daily. “We looked at the product, and we objected to it because it used connective tissue instead of muscle. It was simply not nutrionally equivalent (to ground beef). My main objection was that it was not meat.”

When Custer expressed his concerns about pink slime, the USDA said it was safe. However, in 2005, it limited the amount of ammonia-treated LBT in one serving of ground beef to 15 percent. But by the way it is packaged – you’d never know whether it’s in there, or how much.

“Scientists in D.C. were pressured to approve this stuff with minimal safety approval,” Zirnstein said in The Daily.

Zirnstein and Custer said pink slime is “a high-risk product,” so they wrote their own report, looking at the safety of it.

This year, the USDA has plans to purchase 7 million pounds of Lean Beef Trimmings for the national school lunch program.

The USDA considers itself to “meet the highest standard for food safety,” according to its statement.

“They’ve taken a processed product, without labeling it, and added it to raw ground beef,” Zirnstein said. “Science is the truth, and pink slime at this point in time is a fraudulent lie.”

BPI did not respond to an inquiry for comment from The Daily.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/

Read more: ‘Pink slime:’ Combo of connective tissue, scraps hidden in your kids’ lunch | Fox News

Quote:

---

“Scientists in D.C. were pressured to approve this stuff with minimal safety approval,” Zirnstein said in The Daily.

When Custer expressed his concerns about pink slime, the USDA said it was safe. However, in 2005, it limited the amount of ammonia-treated LBT in one serving of ground beef to 15 percent. But by the way it is packaged – you’d never know whether it’s in there, or how much.

---

Hmmmm so good for the tummy. That is what we all used to call mystery meat at McDonalds, Burger King etc?? I still never eat at fast food places hated taking my kids there. I guess that would be about right for the US school system though... they are a bunch of slime balls to begin with..

Are we awake yet????

More information



Pink Slime For School Lunch


pink meatPink slime — that ammonia-treated meat in a bright Pepto-bismol shade — may have been rejected by fast food joints like McDonald’s, Taco Bell and Burger King, but is being brought in by the tons for the nation’s school lunch program.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is purchasing 7 million pounds of the “slime” for school lunches, The Daily reports. Officially termed “Lean Beef Trimmings,” the product is a ground-up combination of beef scraps, cow connective tissues and other beef trimmings that are treated with ammonium hydroxide to kill pathogens like salmonella and E. coli. It’s then blended into traditional meat products like ground beef and hamburger patties.

Post Continues on Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post

article from link above:


Pink slime -- that ammonia-treated meat in a bright Pepto-bismol shade -- may have been rejected by fast food joints like McDonald's, Taco Bell and Burger King, but is being brought in by the tons for the nation's school lunch program.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is purchasing 7 million pounds of the "slime" for school lunches, The Daily reports. Officially termed "Lean Beef Trimmings," the product is a ground-up combination of beef scraps, cow connective tissues and other beef trimmings that are treated with ammonium hydroxide to kill pathogens like salmonella and E. coli. It's then blended into traditional meat products like ground beef and hamburger patties.

"We originally called it soylent pink," microbiologist Carl Custer, who worked at the Food Safety Inspection Service for 35 years, told The Daily. "We looked at the product and we objected to it because it used connective tissues instead of muscle. It was simply not nutritionally equivalent [to ground beef]. My main objection was that it was not meat."

Custer and microbiologist Gerald Zernstein concluded in a study that the trimmings are a "high risk product," but Zernstein tells The Daily that "scientists in D.C. were pressured to approve this stuff with minimal safety approval" under President George H.W. Bush's administration. The USDA asserts that its ground beef purchases "meet the highest standard for food safety."

Controversy surrounding "pink slime" stems from various safety concerns, particularly dangers associated with ammonium hydroxide, which can both be harmful to eat and has potential to turn into ammonium nitrate -- a common component in homemade bombs, according to MSNBC. It's also used in household cleaners and fertilizers.

In 2009, The New York Times reported that despite the added ammonia, tests of Lean Beef Trimmings of schools across the country revealed dozens of instances of E. coli and salmonella pathogens.

Between 2005 and 2009, E. coli was found three times and salmonella 48 times, according to the Times, including two contaminated batches of 27,000 pounds of meat.

A public outcry against the "slime" is led perhaps most prominently by celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, who had also successfully waged war against flavored milk in Los Angeles schools and continues a crusade for healthier school lunches.

News of the USDA's plan to bring 7 million pounds of "pink slime" to school cafeterias nationwide comes just weeks after the government announced new guidelines to ensure students are given healthier options for school meals. The new standards call for more whole grains and produce as well as less sodium and fat in school meals. While the measures mark a step forward from previous years, they still compromise amid push-back from Congress to keep pizza and french fries on the menu -- counting both the tomato paste on pizza and the potatoes that make fries as vegetables.

Still, some schools -- like several in California -- have taken the matter into their own hands, and have found ways to profit from those efforts. Umpteen school districts have taken part in a decade-long initiative, supported by a philanthropic organization, that provides schools with equipments and chefs who teach cafeteria workers to cook from scratch and produce fresh meals.

A recent report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention revealed that more than a third of high school students were eating vegetables less than once a day -- "considerably below" recommended levels of intake for a healthy lifestyle that supports weight management and could reduce risks for chronic diseases and some cancers.




This needs to go viral..passing this crap as food is sickening..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=87uBMXdIyjo


U.S. defends treated meat dubbed "pink slime" in school meals

By Ian Simpson

Reuters


The Department of Agriculture is defending the use of ammonium-treated beef, dubbed "pink slime" by detractors, in meals destined for schoolchildren as part of the national school lunch program.

The Internet news source The Daily reported this week that 7 million pounds (3.2 million kg) of the product -- beef trimmings treated partly with ammonium hydroxide to fight contamination -- would appear in school lunches this spring.

"All USDA ground beef purchases must meet the highest standards for food safety," the agency said in a statement.

"USDA has strengthened ground beef food safety standards in recent years and only allows products into commerce that we have confidence are safe."

Fast-food chain McDonald's stopped putting the USDA-approved ammonium-treated meat into its hamburgers in August after a number of food activists, including celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, drew attention to the additive.

The USDA, schools and school districts plan to buy the treated meat, categorized as "lean fine textured beef," from South Dakota's Beef Products Inc for the national school lunch program.

The BPI product makes up about 6.5 percent of the 112 million pounds (51 million kg) of ground beef that has been contracted for the National School Lunch Program, the USDA said.

The department oversees the program, which buys about 20 percent of products served in U.S. schools. The rest is bought directly by schools or school districts.

Read original here:

U.S. defends treated meat dubbed pink slime in school meals | Reuters

http://grist.files.wordpress.com/201...phs_flickr.jpg


Let's put it this way, if they had been caught doing this in the
1980's they would have called it what it is, dog food, but because
the laws changed in the 1990's it is now called "filler".

This video exposes the details behind "pink slime" found in more
than 70% of USDA approved ground beef found on grocery store
shelves.

In the accompanying article, the Department of Agriculture is
defending the use of ammonium-treated filler in meals destined for
schoolchildren as part of the national school lunch program.

Good grief! I thought the chicken nuggets were bad...

Video:

Food What is REALLY in your hamburger

Goodman Green
- Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.

That's how we grow. Thanks.

Meat Industry to Retaliate for Pink Slime Exposure with Higher Prices; USDA and FDA Escape Scrutiny
image source
Heather Callaghan and Michael Edwards
Activist Post

Beef Products International (BPI) is facing their biggest public relations disaster yet.

The people have spoken and want nothing to do with their flowery sounding "lean finely textured beef." Kroger Co. chain has added itself to the growing "We do not carry Pink Slime" list as well as countless delis reassuring customers on their signs.

BPI is closing three out of their four branches in Amarillo, Texas; Garden City, Kansas; and Waterloo, Iowa -- South Sioux City, Nebraska will remain open. BPI has one month to placate customers or possibly vanish forever. One month to undue 20 years of silent profit. Profit from supermarkets, fast food chains, and school cafeterias.

But what about the real foxes in the hen house -- the USDA and FDA? And what will happen to the price of "healthy" meat?

America's food regulatory agencies approved, as safe, meat trimmings not fit for animal feed that will only preclude death by food poisoning if first soaked in ammonia -- which is poisonous and not effective against all pathogens, especially newer resistant ones.

Robert Menendez told Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, "The leftover scraps...come from parts of the cow with high exposure to fecal matter."


So the USDA graciously gives school lunch programs the option of not buying meat with filler that literally is not considered fit to feed dogs only after petitions with hundreds of thousands of signatures begged them to remove it. Unlike the producers of pink slime, the regulatory agencies themselves have escaped media scrutiny -- they aren't closing any branches. No PR disaster for them, even though they waved it in for school children as adequate for their nutritional guidelines.

But the truth is, it is not meant for human consumption. Period. And no amount of PR painting can undue the damage of people's trust in the current food industry.

The Threat

This exposure is already leading to higher meat prices, and there are signs that the beef industry is set to retaliate against an awakening public. A piece in USA Today entitled, "Beef Industry Braces for Loss of 'Pink Slime' Filler" reads more like a beef industry press release as it refers to the hazardous material as a "low-fat beef product" that has been essentially victimized by social media, as if there is not ample evidence to back up the public outcry. An inset image of a BPI worker and his family reads:

The Licons are just one of many families who face an uncertain future after Beef Products International suspended operations at its Holcomb, Kan., plant.

While this outcome is unfortunate, it is quite a bit more unfortunate that the product itself was ever allowed onto the table of countless millions without their knowledge about what they were actually eating.

The USA Today report goes on to emphasize that social media is the culprit in all of this, adding nothing factual to refute what the public has come to understand:

'This shows the impact of the social media,' said Kevin Concannon, former director of the Iowa Department of Human Services and now Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services. 'There is absolutely no evidence that this product is unsafe, and it is low-fat.'

Those comments are nothing more than a desperate attempt to redirect the argument as an appeal to people's programmed positive response toward anything deemed "low-fat," as if the poisonous ammonia bath it receives should be dismissed as a natural consequence of offering something that is ultimately healthy. Moreover, this refrain was echoed by the industry itself, giving further credence to "fat free" being a propaganda point:

'It’s crazy,' said Des Moines meat wholesale Phil Barber of Brewer Meats, which he said has not knowingly used meat with the filler. Barber nonetheless said of the fillings, 'they’re free of E. coli, and they’re 95 percent fat free.' (Source)

Beef prices are just coming off all-time highs, and it appears that the industry will use this scandal as justification for surging prices in its wake. According to a spokesperson for the Hy-Vee supermarket chain:

'The industry is telling us that the removal of this filler is the equivalent of losing 1.5 million head of cattle, and cattle already are in tight supply,' said Hy-Vee spokeswoman Ruth Comer. Hy-Vee is pulling ground beef with the 'lean finely textured trimmings,' also referred pejoratively as pink slime, from its shelves.

And, again, there is a thinly veiled condemnation of the now-educated consumer. But it certainly sounds like something positive for commodity traders such as Dennis Smith of Archer Financial Services in Chicago:

'Long term the refusal by consumers to use this product (lean finely textured beef) will make less beef available and force prices higher. If that’s what the consumer wants, that’s what they’ll get,' Smith said.

So, how many schools will actually opt out of buying pink slime in the face of rising prices? My best guess based on having worked in the public school system and viewing how schools go for the lowest bid on lunch foods -- most schools will not opt out if they have to pay one penny more for slimeless meat. Food quality is one of the first casualties of budget issues.

For the first year of this scandal, they will tell concerned parents that they've already ordered next year's food based on their allotted budget. The next year, if the buzz hasn't died down, they will wait until there is an outcry and then bemoan the higher meat prices.

A similar scenario played out in last season's Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution after he tirelessly overhauled a cafeteria with healthy fresh foods for the same price. He came back to find them serving garbage again. A school lunch program minion also forced him to serve french fries because his seven-veggie pasta only counted as one vegetable according to their guidelines!

Why We Should Laugh At Price Threats

Here's a thought: higher meat prices will put typical staph-infected, radiated hormone-pumped beef neck in neck with grass-fed organic beef prices -- that, amazingly, for all the care that goes into the real happy cows, has only cost a few dollars more per pound this whole time. Grass-fed producers will not be affected by these price hikes -- they've never used filler and their prices are based on the care that goes into their stock. So why pay more for less when the same dollar amount can bring real nutrition?

Our current food mafia is losing ground as the ugly truth continues to spread. If you watched, read, researched, talked about, signed petitions, or shared this food fiasco with anyone -- you're an activist, not a wet blanket! The agencies that take our money to give us poison and call it nutrition should be ashamed, not us.

We vote with our forks -- Decentralize!

Read other articles by Heather Callaghan and Michael Edwards here.

You can support this article by voting on Reddit: Meat Industry to Retaliate for Pink Slime Exposure with Higher Prices; USDA and FDA Escape Scrutiny : conspiracy

Activist Post: Meat Industry to Retaliate for Pink Slime Exposure with Higher Prices; USDA and FDA Escape Scrutiny



How about this idea, feed it to the politicians, EPA,FDA,and the other nefarious dubious jerks that make the laws, and allow these things to happen

http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources...=CBRE8331OD500

By Martinne Geller

New York | Wed Apr 4, 2012 6:37pm EDT

(Reuters) - Surprise rippled across America last month as a new wave of consumers discovered that hamburgers often contained ammonia-treated beef, or what critics dub "pink slime".

What they may not have known is that ammonia - often associated with cleaning products - was cleared by U.S. health officials nearly 40 years ago and is used in making many foods, including cheese. Related compounds have a role in baked goods and chocolate products.

Using small amounts of ammonia to make food is not unusual to those expert in high-tech food production. Now that little known world is coming under increasing pressure from concerned consumers who want to know more about what they are eating.

"I think we're seeing a sea change today in consumers' concerns about the presence of ingredients in foods, and this is just one example," said Michael Doyle, director of the University of Georgia's Center for Food Safety.

Ammonia, known for its noxious odor, became a hot topic last month with the uproar over what the meat industry calls "finely textured beef" and what a former U.S. government scientist first called "pink slime".

Used as a filler for ground beef, it is made from fatty trimmings that are more susceptible to contamination than other cuts of beef, and are therefore sprayed with ammonium hydroxide - ammonia mixed with water - to remove pathogens such as salmonella and E.coli.

After critics highlighted the product on social media websites and showed unappetizing photos on television, calling it "pink slime," the nation's leading fast-food chains and supermarkets spurned the product, even though U.S. public health officials deem it safe to eat. Hundreds of U.S. school districts also demanded it be removed from school lunch programs.

One producer, Beef Products Inc, has since idled three factories. Another, AFA Foods, filed for bankruptcy protection.

The outrage, which many experts say has been fueled by the term "pink slime," seems more about the unsavoriness of the product rather than its safety.

"This is not a health issue," said Bill Marler, a prominent food safety lawyer. "This is an 'I'm grossed out by this' issue."

Still, critics of so-called "Big Food" point out that while "pink slime" and the ammonia in it may not be harmful, consumer shock over their presence points to a wider issue.

"The food supply is full of all sorts of chemical additives that people don't know about," said Michele Simon, a public health lawyer and president of industry watchdog consulting firm Eat Drink Politics.

NOT AS BAD AS IT SOUNDS?

The meat industry has been trying to raise awareness of other foods that contain ammonia, in response to what it has characterized as an unfair attack on a safe and healthy product.

For example, ammonia compounds are used as leavening agents in baked goods and as an acidity controller in cheese and sometimes chocolate.

"Ammonia's not an unusual product to find added to food," Gary Acuff, director of Texas A&M University's Center for Food Safety, told a recent press conference hosted by Beef Products Inc. "We use ammonia in all kinds of foods in the food industry."

Kraft Foods Inc, whose brands include Chips Ahoy cookies and Velveeta cheese, is one company that uses very small amounts of ammonium compounds in some of its products. It declined to specify which products.

"Sometimes ingredient names sound more complicated than they are," said Kraft spokeswoman Angela Wiggins. She also pointed out that ammonia, made up of nitrogen and hydrogen, occurs naturally in plants, animals, water, air and in some foods, including milk.

Wiggins said that in turning milk to cheese, a tiny amount of ammonium hydroxide is added to a starter dairy culture to reduce the culture's acidity and encourage cheese cultures to grow.

"It is somewhat similar to activating yeast for dough by adding warm water, sugar and salt to create the proper environment for yeast growth," Wiggins said.

In the case of ammonium phosphate, used as a leavening agent in baking, she said the heat during baking causes the gas to evaporate so no ammonia is left in the product. "It is quite similar to adding wine to a sauce and cooking away the alcohol."

DON'T ALWAYS COUNT ON LABELS

Compounds such as ammonium hydroxide, ammonium phosphate and ammonium chloride are considered safe in small amounts.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted ammonium hydroxide status as a GRAS, or Generally Recognized as Safe, substance in 1974.

Ammonium hydroxide is also an acceptable ingredient under the conditions of "good manufacturing practices" in dozens of foods, from soft drinks to soups to canned vegetables, according to the General Standards for Food Additives set forth by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, a group funded by the World Health Organization and the United Nations' Food and Agricultural Organization.

A trip to the grocery store revealed ammonium chloride - a salt - present in Wonder Bread and Chef Boyardee Mini Ravioli, made by ConAgra Foods. Ammonium phosphate, another type of salt, is listed on Chips Ahoy cookies.

But ammonium hydroxide, the chemical often used to sanitize the "pink slime," was harder to find.

That is because it is often considered a "processing aid," which is not required by U.S. regulators to be included on food labels.

"If it helps facilitate a process, it's not required and (if) it's used at a percent less than 1 percent, it doesn't have to be declared on the label," said Roger Clemens, president of the Institute of Food Technologists and chief scientific officer of E.T. Horn Co, a private chemical and ingredient company.

He said ammonia in food is now being used less than before, as replacement products gain popularity.

When asked if their products were made with ammonium hydroxide, Sara Lee Corp, Hormel Foods, Kellogg and ConAgra said they were not.

Hershey said it uses "natural cocoa" in most of its chocolates, but in the few products that use "alkalized cocoa," it uses potassium carbonate, not ammonium hydroxide.

General Mills said the company does not discuss its production processes. Campbell Soup Co did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

(Additional reporting by Lisa Baertlein in Los Angeles and Ernest Scheyder in New York; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)


Ammonia used in many foods, not just pink slime | Reuters

http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources...=CBRE8331OD500

By Martinne Geller

New York | Wed Apr 4, 2012 6:37pm EDT

(Reuters) - Surprise rippled across America last month as a new wave of consumers discovered that hamburgers often contained ammonia-treated beef, or what critics dub "pink slime".

What they may not have known is that ammonia - often associated with cleaning products - was cleared by U.S. health officials nearly 40 years ago and is used in making many foods, including cheese. Related compounds have a role in baked goods and chocolate products.

Using small amounts of ammonia to make food is not unusual to those expert in high-tech food production. Now that little known world is coming under increasing pressure from concerned consumers who want to know more about what they are eating.

"I think we're seeing a sea change today in consumers' concerns about the presence of ingredients in foods, and this is just one example," said Michael Doyle, director of the University of Georgia's Center for Food Safety.

Ammonia, known for its noxious odor, became a hot topic last month with the uproar over what the meat industry calls "finely textured beef" and what a former U.S. government scientist first called "pink slime".

Used as a filler for ground beef, it is made from fatty trimmings that are more susceptible to contamination than other cuts of beef, and are therefore sprayed with ammonium hydroxide - ammonia mixed with water - to remove pathogens such as salmonella and E.coli.

After critics highlighted the product on social media websites and showed unappetizing photos on television, calling it "pink slime," the nation's leading fast-food chains and supermarkets spurned the product, even though U.S. public health officials deem it safe to eat. Hundreds of U.S. school districts also demanded it be removed from school lunch programs.

One producer, Beef Products Inc, has since idled three factories. Another, AFA Foods, filed for bankruptcy protection.

The outrage, which many experts say has been fueled by the term "pink slime," seems more about the unsavoriness of the product rather than its safety.

"This is not a health issue," said Bill Marler, a prominent food safety lawyer. "This is an 'I'm grossed out by this' issue."

Still, critics of so-called "Big Food" point out that while "pink slime" and the ammonia in it may not be harmful, consumer shock over their presence points to a wider issue.

"The food supply is full of all sorts of chemical additives that people don't know about," said Michele Simon, a public health lawyer and president of industry watchdog consulting firm Eat Drink Politics.

NOT AS BAD AS IT SOUNDS?

The meat industry has been trying to raise awareness of other foods that contain ammonia, in response to what it has characterized as an unfair attack on a safe and healthy product.

For example, ammonia compounds are used as leavening agents in baked goods and as an acidity controller in cheese and sometimes chocolate.

"Ammonia's not an unusual product to find added to food," Gary Acuff, director of Texas A&M University's Center for Food Safety, told a recent press conference hosted by Beef Products Inc. "We use ammonia in all kinds of foods in the food industry."

Kraft Foods Inc, whose brands include Chips Ahoy cookies and Velveeta cheese, is one company that uses very small amounts of ammonium compounds in some of its products. It declined to specify which products.

"Sometimes ingredient names sound more complicated than they are," said Kraft spokeswoman Angela Wiggins. She also pointed out that ammonia, made up of nitrogen and hydrogen, occurs naturally in plants, animals, water, air and in some foods, including milk.

Wiggins said that in turning milk to cheese, a tiny amount of ammonium hydroxide is added to a starter dairy culture to reduce the culture's acidity and encourage cheese cultures to grow.

"It is somewhat similar to activating yeast for dough by adding warm water, sugar and salt to create the proper environment for yeast growth," Wiggins said.

In the case of ammonium phosphate, used as a leavening agent in baking, she said the heat during baking causes the gas to evaporate so no ammonia is left in the product. "It is quite similar to adding wine to a sauce and cooking away the alcohol."

DON'T ALWAYS COUNT ON LABELS

Compounds such as ammonium hydroxide, ammonium phosphate and ammonium chloride are considered safe in small amounts.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted ammonium hydroxide status as a GRAS, or Generally Recognized as Safe, substance in 1974.

Ammonium hydroxide is also an acceptable ingredient under the conditions of "good manufacturing practices" in dozens of foods, from soft drinks to soups to canned vegetables, according to the General Standards for Food Additives set forth by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, a group funded by the World Health Organization and the United Nations' Food and Agricultural Organization.

A trip to the grocery store revealed ammonium chloride - a salt - present in Wonder Bread and Chef Boyardee Mini Ravioli, made by ConAgra Foods. Ammonium phosphate, another type of salt, is listed on Chips Ahoy cookies.

But ammonium hydroxide, the chemical often used to sanitize the "pink slime," was harder to find.

That is because it is often considered a "processing aid," which is not required by U.S. regulators to be included on food labels.

"If it helps facilitate a process, it's not required and (if) it's used at a percent less than 1 percent, it doesn't have to be declared on the label," said Roger Clemens, president of the Institute of Food Technologists and chief scientific officer of E.T. Horn Co, a private chemical and ingredient company.

He said ammonia in food is now being used less than before, as replacement products gain popularity.

When asked if their products were made with ammonium hydroxide, Sara Lee Corp, Hormel Foods, Kellogg and ConAgra said they were not.

Hershey said it uses "natural cocoa" in most of its chocolates, but in the few products that use "alkalized cocoa," it uses potassium carbonate, not ammonium hydroxide.

General Mills said the company does not discuss its production processes. Campbell Soup Co did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

(Additional reporting by Lisa Baertlein in Los Angeles and Ernest Scheyder in New York; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)

Ammonia used in many foods, not just pink slime | Reuters

General Standards for Food Additives set forth by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, a group funded by the World Health Organization and the United Nations' Food and Agricultural Organization.

Many of you might remember the movie I brought over a long time ago about "codex alimentarius" this is one group you need to beware of !!!!! Here is more information on this codex alimentarius...I did have the movie but not sure if it is still up for me to bring over if I find it I will bring it here again it was in some of our old links...


Codex Alimentarius - Dare you ignore it?

IMPORTANT
New video could reduce your chance of
getting cancer to ZERO
IMPORTANT
RemediesDirect.com

More and more people are becoming concerned about the shady, secretive organization that is Codex Alimentarius - the thinly-veiled propaganda arm of the international pharmaceutical industry that does everything it can to promote industry objectives whilst limiting individual options to maintain health (which would diminish mermbers profits).

Codex alimentarius is one of the major bodies behind the effort to limit access to nutritional products and information. Its motivation is not rocket science and neither is the source of its funding - money that somehow expected to return a profit to its members . . . Most of the information available regarding codex alimentarius refers to its role in the USA, but it is not a US-specific body. Far from it, Codex has wiggled its dirty little tentacles into just about every national or international body concerned with public health. Posing as a benefactor, it then uses its significant financial and political clout to do its masters bidding.

As you can read in the excellent article below, there is much to be concerned about when considering codex alimentarius - ignore it at your peril.

Codex Alimentarius - The Sinister Truth Behind Operation Cure-All
(From an original article by Ruth James)

What's really behind Operation Cure-All? Is it just the FDA and FTC taking their power too far? Or is there a deeper, more sinister purpose to this campaign? Who are Codex Alimentarius?

How could a country that prides itself in its freedom of speech, freedom of choice, and freedom of information be facing such severe restrictions in health freedom and dietary supplements? Haven't the people made their will known? Didn't our government pass the Dietary Supplement Health & Education Act of 1994 to insure our right to health supplements?

Indeed, our government did. But the FDA and FTC have found ways to get around that. The laws put in place to protect us are being ignored. And what's worse is that those laws are about to be superseded, if the powers that be have their way.

OPERATION CURE ALL IS JUST ONE MEANS TO AN END
You see, Operation Cure-All is just a tactic, a vehicle, in a much bigger overall plan. It is a result of "Codex Alimentarius" (meaning food code) -- a set of regulations that aim to outlaw any health information in connection with vitamins and limit free access to natural therapies on a worldwide scale.

WHAT'S BEHIND CODEX ALMENTARIUS?
Behind the Codex Alimentarius Commission is the United Nations and the World Health Organization working in conjunction with the multinational pharmaceutical cartel and international banks. Its initial efforts in the US with the FDA were defeated, so it found another ally in the FTC. Now Codex, with the FTC and the pharmaceutical cartel behind it, it threatens to become a trade issue, using the campaign of Operation Cure-All to advance its goals.

Codex began simply enough when the U.N. authorized the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization to develop a universal food code. Their purpose was to 'harmonize' regulations for dietary supplements worldwide and set international safety standards for the purposes of increased trade. Pharmaceutical interests stepped in and began exerting their influence. Instead of focusing on food safety, Codex is using its power to promote worldwide restrictions on vitamins and food supplements, severely limiting their availability and dosages.

REAL GOALS OF CODEX
This is to bring about international 'harmonization.' While global harmony sounds benign, is that the real purpose of this plan? While the stated goal of Codex is to establish unilateral regulations for dietary supplements in every country, the actual goal is to outlaw health products and information on vitamins and dietary supplements, except those under their direct control. These regulations would supersede United States domestic laws without the American people's voice or vote in the matter.

HOW CAN IT BE POSSIBLE?
Americans gasp at the thought. It goes against everything America stands for. Many believe this can't be possible. The truth is, it's not only possible, it's required by the Codex Alimentarius agreement.
In fact, under the terms of the Uruguay Round of GATT, which created the World Trade Organization, the United States agreed to harmonize its domestic laws to the international standards. This includes standards for dietary supplements being developed by the United Nation's Codex Alimentarius Commission's Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Use.

The Uruguay Round Agreements carry explicit language clearly indicating that the U.S. must harmonize to international standards:

"Members are fully responsible under this Agreement for the observance of all provisions.... members shall formulate and implement positive measures and mechanisms in support of the observance of the provisions.... by other than central government bodies." [WTO TBT Agreement at Article 3.5]"

In other words, the federal government must NOT ONLY CHANGE FEDERAL LAW, but must ALSO require state and local governments to change their laws as well to be in accordance with international law.

Not only that, but Codex Alimentarius is now enforceable through the World Trade Organization (WTO). If a country disagrees with or refuses to follow Codex standards, the WTO applies pressure by withdrawing trade privileges and imposing crippling trade sanctions. Congress has already bowed to this pressure several times and so have the governments of many countries.

While the exemption clause (USC 3512(a)(1) and (a)(2) was created to supposedly protect our laws from harmonization to international standards, it has proven to be totally ineffective. The United States has already lost seven trade disputes despite the exemption clause. Due to the enormous pressures put on them by lobbyists from multinational corporations (who contribute millions to congressional campaigns), Congress bowed to pressure and changed U.S. laws.

It appears our government (as well as al others) is being manipulated one way or another to serve the goals of the UN, the World Health Organization and the World Trade Organization. Food control equals people control -- and population control. Is this beginning to sound like world government and one-world order? Could this be the real goal behind Codex Alimentarius?

The United States, Canada, the Europeans, Japan, most of Asia, and South America have already signed agreements pledging total harmonization of their laws including food and drug laws to these international standards in the future.

WHAT CODEX WILL BRING
What can we expect under Codex? To give you an idea, here are some important points:

Dietary supplements could not be sold for preventive (prophylactic) or therapeutic use.
Potencies would be limited to extremely low dosages. Only the drug companies and the big phytopharmaceutical companies would have the right to produce and sell the higher potency products (at inflated prices).
Prescriptions would be required for anything above the extremely low doses allowed (such as 35 mg. on niacin).
Common foods such as garlic and peppermint would be classified as drugs or a third category (neither food nor drugs) that only big pharmaceutical companies could regulate and sell. Any food with any therapeutic effect can be considered a drug, even benign everyday substances like water.
Codex regulations for dietary supplements would become binding (escape clauses would be eliminated).
All new dietary supplements would be banned unless they go through Codex testing and approval.
Genetically altered food would be sold worldwide without labeling.

According to John Hammell, a legislative advocate and the founder of International Advocates for Health Freedom (IAHF), here is what we have to look forward to:

"If Codex Alimentarius has its way, then herbs, vitamins, minerals, homeopathic remedies, amino acids and other natural remedies you have taken for granted most of your life will be gone. The name of the game for Codex Alimentarius is to shift all remedies into the prescription category so they can be controlled exclusively by the medical monopoly and its bosses, the major pharmaceutical firms. Predictably, this scenario has been denied by both the Canadian Health Food Association and the Health Protection Branch of Canada (HPB).

The Codex Alimentarius proposals already exist as law in Norway and Germany where the entire health food industry has literally been taken over by the drug companies. In these countries, vitamin C above 200 mg is illegal as is vitamin E above 45 IU, vitamin B1 over 2.4 mg and so on. Shering-Plough, the Norway pharmaceutical giant, now controls an Echinacea tincture, which is being sold there as an over the counter drug at grossly inflated prices. The same is true of ginkgo and many other herbs, and only one government controlled pharmacy has the right to import supplements as medicines which they can sell to health food stores, convenience stores or pharmacies."

It is now a criminal offence in parts of Europe to sell herbs as foods. An agreement called EEC6565 equates selling herbs as foods to selling other illegal drugs. Action is being taken to accelerate other European countries into 'harmonization' as well.

Paul Hellyer in his book, "The Evil Empire," states: "Codex Alimentarius is supported by international banks and multinational corporations including some in Canada, and is in reality a bill of rights for these banks and the corporations they control. It will hand over our sovereign rights concerning who may or may not invest in our countries to an unelected world organization run by big business. The treaty would make it impossible for Canadian legislators either federal or provincial to alter or improve environmental standards for fear of being sued by multinational corporations whether operating in Canada or not.

This will create a world without borders ruled by a virtual dictatorship of the world's most powerful central banks and multinational companies. This world is an absolute certainty if we all sit on our hands and do nothing."

This is the future the FDA and FTC are striving to bring us via Codex harmonization. Is this a future we are going to willingly accept or prevent?

WHY TARGET THE INTERNET?
It is no accident that the FDA and FTC are targeting Internet health sites through Operation Cure-All. We are standing in the doorway of an unprecedented revolution -- the information revolution brought about by the Internet.

Now all people everywhere have the ability to learn about anything that interests them with just a few clicks. History has shown that informed, educated people change civilizations -- they change the flow of thought and they change the flow of money. They can even change the direction of a country. When similar transitions have happened in the past, the powers that existed did not give up willingly. The Catholic Church fiercely protected its practice of selling 'indulgences' as a forgiveness of sin. When the practice was abolished, the Catholic Church lost a great deal of power and money.

When the printing press was invented, books were banned and printers were imprisoned by the authorities, who feared an educated public could not be governed. In the same way, the medical monopoly (and the UN) now fears that a public educated in health and privy to the shortcomings of modern medicine could not be controlled. Loss of control means loss of revenue and loss of power. And they are doing everything they can to stop progress so they can contain their losses and strengthen their power.

The printing press changed the world. Can you imagine what life would be like today if the book banners had their way? But because the printing press won out, society progressed and freedom was embraced. The Internet is changing the world in an equally significant way. While the entire Internet can hardly be suppressed, the pharma-cartels and their backers are looking to protect their interests by restricting as much information as they can on the Internet.

Will we, the people, win out again -- or will the UN and the World Health Organization agenda and the pharmaceutical cartel change the course of history and take us back to the "dark ages" of medicine?

WHAT CAN WE DO?
Step number one is learn as much as possible about this issue. Here are some websites where you will find a great deal of information:

John Hammell's International Advocates for Health Freedom
website: Codex, health freedom, dietary supplement industry

"The Health Movement Against Codex Alimentarius" - article from Dr. Rath's website: The Health Movement against "Codex Alimentarius" | The Dr. Rath Health Foundation

'U.S. and European Leaders Agree on Principles to Harmonize Dietary Supplement Regulations: 'http://www.crnusa.org/shellnr112000.html

Federal Register where the FDA states its intention to harmonize with Codex standards: http://iahf.com/codx-fda.txt

Read, "WHOSE TRADE ORGANIZATION? Corporate Globalization and the Erosion of Democracy" by By Lori Wallach and Michelle Sforza,

Public Citizens Global Trade Watch:
http://www.tradewatch.org/publications/wtobook.htm

Sign the petition - Click on 'Sign Health Freedom Petition:'
International Advocates for Health Freedom idx

Also sign the European Anti-Codex petition at: La Leva di Archimede - Choose a language

Signing petitions is fine, but not nearly as effective as writing to your congressmen and congresswomen. Write to them insisting we hold a PROPER Oversight Hearing on Codex. An oversight hearing was held in March, but the truth was not allowed to come out. Witness who could have exposed what was going on, and who wanted to testify, were denied the opportunity to testify. Congress is strongly resisting another Codex hearing, telling their constituents it is not necessary. This could not be further from the truth.

Contact information for representatives: The United States House of Representatives · House.gov
Contact information for senators: U.S. Senate

Copyright 2001 Ruth James rjames@therealessentials.com
Essential oils and aromatherapy for natural health

CTM Comment: Codex is of course the single most virulent assault on human freedoms in recent times. The desire to control of vitamins, minerals, herbs and other nutritional factors has ironically come about as a result of the inability of orthodox medicine to destroy the practice of the public practicing health without drugs. Now government and the chemical industry will seek to control and profit from that which was available directly to the public in times gone by.

Overturning the Codex by a mass public backlash is CTM’s sworn goal. This can be accomplished only with large numbers of the public all committed to this endeavor. As the above article states, the Internet itself has been able to grant access to information freely to anyone seeking it, and this has destabilized the flow of money and profits to institutions which have traditionally believed their highly lucrative monopolies to be safe. There can be no more pressing reason to join the Campaign for Truth in Medicine for FREE than to assist us in pressuring for the scrapping of Codex.

For more information go to: CTM and CTE entry page

more info

Codex Alimentarius was created in 1962 as a trade Commission by the UN to control the international trade of food. Its initial intentions may have been altruistic but it has been taken over by corporate interests, most notably the pharmaceutical, pesticide, biotechnology and chemical industries.
Codex Alimentarius will go into global implementation by December 31, 2009, unless We, the People, avert it.
Health Freedom Threats: Codex, FDA, Vaccinations, GMOs :: HealthFreedomUSA.org
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS
Codex Alimentarius Commission
Page Not Found - DNRC
DIET, NUTRITION AND THE PREVENTION OF CHRONIC DISEASES
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_916.pdf
The Food Standards Agency represents the UK at Codex
Food Standards Agency - Codex
The WTO and the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius
WTO | The WTO and the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius
Category:








Codex Alimentarius - YouTube


Here is the movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RwVHeHhiLfU



Codex Alimentarius - the REAL threat to World health

Tell Vilsack No Pink Slime in School Lunches – Ever again!

In the past month, the American public has finally learned that for the past decade more than 70% of the hamburgers they eat contain a mysterious meat mixture called Pink Slime. Incredibly, USDA scientists originally called it “pink slime” and won’t eat it themselves. But three sitting U.S. governors and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack have decided that you and your children should be forced to eat Pink Slime, a goo-like substance that the Industrial Meat Factories deceptively call “lean, finely textured beef”.

While Industrial Meat proponents claim this mystery meat product in entirely safe, these same beef parts were once used sold to make dog food and cooking oil. Now those same scraps are going in our food and our children’s school lunches! As a result of the public outrage over Pink Slime, the USDA recently announced that it would give schools the option of not buying meat without it, but some schools can't afford to opt out. With USDA's recent plans to purchase more than 7 million pounds for the 2012 school year, this is not enough!

Tell Secretary Vilsack, it's time to: Get the Slime Out!


Go to link to sign petition




Food Democracy Now | Tell Vilsack No Pink Slime in School Lunches

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Cargill's New Announcement Reveals Much More About Pink Slime

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zWYMUO6aGT...Background.jpg

Andy Warhol 1966

Heather Callaghan
Activist Post

Cargill Inc., among the world's biggest beef processors, is taking the road less traveled and has decided to disclose ingredients for their version of what consumers and media call "pink slime."

Rival pink slime producer, Beef Products Inc., nearly shut down in 2012 after the media and consumer backlash caused such a dent that they had to close 3 of their 4 plants and lay off hundreds of employees. The media frenzy ball got rolling after a minor revelation in Food Inc., demonstrations by celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, and Diane Sawyer reporting for ABC News.

It turns out, Cargill has been using a similar product and process in their beef since 1993. It is likely that they escaped the avalanche because they use a different treatment for it; one that is likely to be welcomed by the public and overlooked, but could end up coming back to bite them in the near future if they do not learn more about the process. When dealing with Big AgriBiz, it is often Fool's Gold the consumer has actually purchased at great cost to their health and pockets.

Is Cargill's sensational new step something to get excited about? Or does it reveal something else?

BPI wound up on the butcher's block after consumers realized their product they called Lean Finely Textured Beef was actually a cheap filler made from unmarketable scraps and trimmings mechanically separated to remove the fat and then doused in ammonium hydroxide gas to kill deadly bacteria. And, of course, we were none the wiser because this chemically treated filler does not require labeling because it was called "beef" by the USDA. Manufacturers are now allowed to disclose it on packages if they choose since the pink slime debacle. The USDA continues to call this safe and nutritious - it remains in school lunches which might explain why BPI has one plant still open.

Cargill saw demand for its own version of the product, called finely textured beef, plummet by 80 percent. They surveyed over 3,000 consumers for a year-and-a-half to get insight about people's perception on ground beef and its process.

BPI blamed consumers for finding out. Unlike BPI, Cargill is not chastising their customers, which can make them seem more endearing. They did not get lambasted online, because they use a citric acid treatment to kill pathogens. Arguably, way better perceived by the public, or at least edible.

But they are banking on the fact that most people don't know what's involved in citric acid treatment. Perhaps their surveys helped them to proceed confidently.

Citric acid sounds really great, right? It's in the majority of food items at the grocery and conjures images of fresh lemons, vitamin C and all things natural. While citrus fruits are a great source for citric acid, this is not how Big Food is able to use it so cheaply in everything.

Most citric acid today is produced by corn (GMO) and sometimes by combining a mold with molasses (a byproduct of sugar cane). A majority of store-bought sugar comes from genetically modified sugar beets; so how likely is it for citric acid to come from molasses versus one of our largest crops - corn?

A report from Weston A. Price Foundation revealed why many people have an allergy to citric acid:

"Citric acid" is produced by fermentation of crude sugars. When "citric acid" is produced from corn, manufacturers do not take the time or undertake the expense to remove all corn protein. During processing, the remaining protein is hydrolyzed, resulting in some processed free glutamic acid (MSG). "Citric acid" may also interact with any protein in the food to which it is added, freeing up more glutamic acid.

[...]

Making it even more difficult for the MSG-sensitive individual, in February of this year [2000], the FDA approved Sanova, an antimicrobial rinse, for use on red meats. The product, composed of "sodium chloride" and "citric acid," is claimed by its manufacturer, the Alcide Corporation, to kill 99 percent of pathogens on carcasses. Sanova is also approved for use on poultry carcasses, fruits and vegetables. Efforts are underway by the manufacturer to approve the rinse for use on processed foods. Foods treated with Sanova are not required to disclose the fact that "sodium chloride" and "citric acid" were used on them.

And here's the question people forget when distracted by the shock of finding out about ammonium hydroxide gas and citric acid treatments - it is the reason for its necessity. One of the first questions from 2012 should have been..."Wait, there's e.coli and salmonella in my beef ?" And MRSA.

From confined animal feeding lots (CAFOs) and hurried, unsafe labor practices. Hard to deny that gem after watching Food Inc., which isn't the only source for that kind of information. Furthermore, food irradiation has been used for years to treat meat for "safety." The radiation stickers (radura symbol) are removed before they arrive at the store because it is not considered an ingredient or process. This deader-than-dead food product also contains zapped e.coli and presumably fecal matter. But it's safe and nutritious to feed school kids....

It is very likely that Cargill's version will end up in school cafeterias, nursing homes, and hospitals because it sounds better and schools are already clamoring for the cheaper filler, even BPI's gas-treated kind. Likewise, supermarket chains that dropped BPI's fare are likely to pick up Cargill's version because citric acid is ubiquitous in food already and they would reason that the disclosed ingredient would offer all the choice needed for consumers. Cargill has been doing the necessary prep work to reap the benefits of an upswing for the pink slime market. They plan to voluntarily label their beef with the words "finely textured beef" starting early 2014 for packaging to retailers and summer of 2014 for direct-to-costumer packaging.

While a step towards transparency is definitely admirable and what consumers want, it continues to reveal stomach-churning practices of the food industry that can lead to chronic health problems and higher healthcare costs down the road. The other question that remains is, "Why only now...after 20 years?"

For good reason: it is definitely easy to blame corporations for lack of transparency and crude, hidden ingredients. But the other big players that often escape scrutiny are the ones that approved them; the ones we pay big bucks to regulate: the FDA and mainly, the USDA which is already dropping standards for meat inspection.

Please beat the food system before it topples - by not partaking - find your healthy humane local meat sources here:

20 Places to Find Local Food and Family Farms Near You
Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...9A40XE20131105

Heather Callaghan is a natural health blogger and food freedom activist. You can see her work at NaturalBlaze.com and ActivistPost.com. Like at Facebook.

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/11/...eals-much.html