Action Alert! Breaking News!
New Bill (HR2749) Gives FDA Unheard-of Power over Small Farmers, Food and Supplement Producers
Minor paperwork violations and violations completely unrelated to food safety could result in draconian penalties. Cite scientific research about food or supplements without FDA approval? You could go to jail for ten years. We need your help to amend or defeat this Orwellian bill that is currently on a fast track to passage. Because of the importance of this subject, it is the only subject in this week’s newsletter.
To be taken straight to our Action Alert and to let your Representative know you do not support his bill click here! Click here
People, we really need to be aware of what is going on in Washington and with the WHO. We can discuss all the intricacies of a raw diet until . . . BUT if there is no more quality to our food, our conversations will have been for naught. Here's another view on HR 2749. Please be an informed consumer and citizen. Let your representatives in government know were YOU stand. We voted them in . . . they work for US. Let's act more like employers and less like sheep.
If you really want to be informed, then don’t rely on 3rd party websites for your information. Go to the primary source of H.R. 2749 and read it and decide for yourself. It’s fairly short for a bill. http://thomas.loc.gov For even more fun, you can try to read the US Code 21, Chapter 9, “Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act” to see what the precisely bill is amending and in what context. Not nearly as amusing and not very user friendly. You can get at it here: http://uscode.house.gov/ or here http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/
I saw nothing in the bill that would strip small farmers of their rights, strip us of our rights, endanger our food supply, or stop the production of supplements. More paperwork, definitely, definitely, definitely.
Sec 101 further addresses that manufacturers of food are duly licensed and regulated. Among other things, it stops an unscrupulous manufacturer from doing business under another name after they’ve been found in violation.
Sec 102, among other things, requires the owner of a facility to monitor safety and hazards, correct such hazards, and keep records of their efforts. I would think this would make it easier to track e-coli outbreaks and such in fresh food.
Sec 103 deals with performance standards for minimizing and eliminating food-borne contaminants. I’m sure no one wants to go back to the days of The Jungle.
Sec 104 specifically addresses fresh produce and other raw agricultural commodities. It adds provisions to ensure that they are grown & handled in accordance with the already existing regulation at USC 21 ch 9 sec 419A. It talks about preventing intentionally and unintentionally introduced biohazards at any point in the processing food chain. Or in other words, adulteration.
Sec 105 makes provision a schedule of corrective inspections for those manufacturers found to be in violation of food safety regulations.
You can go through it yourself. There are also a few sections about tighter rules for import & export, country of origin labeling, which I think are needed.
Re: penalties, yes, in sec 135 the bill adds general civil penalties. It looks like it’s adding to those already listed in USC 21 9 and specifically moving these civil penalties up to the top of USC 21 9.
USC 21 9 subch 1 sec 333 lists specific civil penalties and criminal penalties.
Re: adulteration and misbranding of food. Read section USC 21 9, subch 4 section 342 for the definition of adulterated food and section USC 21 9 subch 4 sec 343 for the definition of misbranded food. They’re already part of the code. No new definitions are proposed in this amendment. HR 2749 does not address sec. 343-1 or 343-2, which cover Dietary Supplements.
I seriously doubt that, as the writers at AAHF aver, that this bill means you could not cite health benefits for, say, cherries related to consumption based on studies, such as ‘good source of anti-oxidants.’ But if you were foolish enough to promise that cherries cured some disease, then they could and should come after you. Because then you’re selling your cherries as a drug. (Remember the Airborne claim re: “curing” the common cold?) I hope the FDA continues to go after people who make false claims about supplements curing diseases, too. If some uninsured person decided to take inexpensive grapefruit extract to cure his/her colon cancer based on the claims on the bottle and then died, the maker of the extract needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent. (I just made that up about grapefruit extract; I have no idea what it may or may not be good for.) Seize their stuff, just like they do for drug dealers. They’re living on people’s hopes and fears and pain.
To me, it makes perfect sense to quarantine food to stop the spread of disease. You can’t bring any fresh fruit into California or Hawaii already because of quarantine. In fact, other than pre-inspected pineapple, you can’t take fresh fruits & vegetables out of Hawaii, period. Bill section 133 talks about food that present serious adverse health consequences or death to humans & animals. If something so deadly poisonous and easily communicable is running around, they jolly well better quarantine to stop the spread. We’re too mobile.