How Codex Alimentarius Promotes Pesticides

Instead of encouraging a move toward a sustainable, sane, economically viable, toxin-free, organic agricultural system, Codex Alimentarius says, in effect:

“Put more pesticides on crops along with more antibiotics in food animals. When you get sick from all the toxins you ingest, I won’t let you use nutrients to detoxify – I will force you to treat the symptoms of your pesticide-induced diseases with pharmaceutical drugs.”

Codex Alimentarius allows high levels of 7 of the 9 most toxic pesticides in the world, in our food. These compounds are so toxic that the Stockholm Convention (PDF) was created to eliminate them from the planet. Codex, however, allows them in your food along with 206 other toxic pesticides. The levels allowed are nothing short of disgraceful.

Hamster Wheel of Pesticide Intake & Pharmaceutical Drug Usage

Codex Alimentarius promotes a loop of pesticide intake and pharmaceutical drug usage. This will create and maintain a perpetual state of disease among the population since both pesticides and drugs are highly toxic to the liver, our primary organ of detoxification. And both poison enzyme systems which are essential to life. Such poisoning of organ and enzyme systems leads to side effects and illness.

If this pesticide-pharma connection sounds far-fetched, if you do not believe any corporation could ever plan for such a continuum of disease, then think again. It is well-known that drug companies fabricate illnesses for the sake of drug sales. Take the example of the “fabrication” of mental illness:

“Despite a nearly 500 percent increase in mental health drugs being prescribed to children in the previous six years, the NFC [New Freedom Commission on Mental Health] recommended a plan of mandatory mental health screening for all public school students and follow-up treatment with drugs when needed.

“The fact is, this is nothing more than another elaborate profiteering scheme hatched by Bush and the pharmaceutical industry to convert the millions of people in public systems into customers for new psychiatric drugs in order to funnel more tax dollars to Pharma.”

– Evelyn J. Pringle, Online Journal, March 28, 2005

And the same is sadly true for a host of profitable diseases “treated” with lots of poisonous drugs which have, I believe, virtually no place at all in dealing which health promotion, disease prevention or treatment of any chronic, degenerative condition.

The more pesticides we have in our bodies, the more ill we are. The more ill we are, the more drugs we will buy.

Codex Means More Pesticides on Crops, More Antibiotics and Hormones for Animals

Codex Alimentarius allows pesticides, veterinary drugs and other toxic residues in foods at levels much higher than even industry lobbyists have asked for!

In speaking only of current pesticide levels (Codex levels would be much higher), the Ontario College of Family Physicians noted:

“The Committee on Pesticides in the Diet of Infants and Children (CPDIC) concluded that the *population is at great risk from the existing allowable levels of pesticide residues* [Emphasis mine] and that the data strongly suggest that *exposure to these neurotoxic compounds at levels believed to be safe for adults could result in permanent loss of brain function* when it occurs during prenatal and early childhood periods of brain development. [20] Toxicologists agree that by extrapolation from hazard assessment studies conducted primarily in rodents, pesticides have the potential to produce toxicity in humans, a potential that includes many different toxic end points. Recent studies have investigated non-occupational human exposure, such as those presented by Leiss et al, who demonstrated an association between yard treatments and soft tissue sarcomas (odds ratio 4.0) and the use of pest strips and leukemias (OR 1.7-3.0) in children [21] . Similar findings have been reported by Gold et al, who report an association between exposure to insecticide extermination and brain tumors (OR 2.3) [22] ; Lowengart et al, who report an association between household pesticides and leukemia (OR 4.0) and garden pesticides and leukemia (OR 5.6) [23] and most recently Davis et al, who found odds ratios up to 6.2 for several pesticide specific exposures among children with brain cancer”.

How much worse will things get when astonishingly high Codex-approved toxic residues are permitted in our food supply?

And why does Codex Alimentarius allow pesticide levels higher than current industry levels? Because the more pesticides are sold, the more profit will those who sell it make.

Codex: Friend To Toxins Well Beyond Pesticides

Codex Alimentarius wouldn’t just give free reign to pesticides, hormones, and antibiotics in food. It also allows aflatoxin, a potent carcinogen in milk, peanuts, almonds and other foods. It seems that Codex Alimentarius has been designed to open the gates for everything that is toxic to humanity and the Earth, while closing the door to everything that is natural and nutritious.

Consider just one example out of thousands: Aflatoxin is the second most potent non-radiation carcinogen (cancer-inducing agent) known to man. Based on trade considerations, not health, Codex sets an astonishingly high level for aflatoxin in milk: 0.5 mg/kg.

This is at least 100 times the recommended standard!

The official Codex documentation has this to say about aflatoxins (note how narrowly focused on trade considerations this paragraph is):

“The imposition of a maximum level less than 0.5 mg/kg would restrict international trade of feed ingredients because the level of aflatoxins in the feed would need to be controlled to lower levels than currently used in order to assure that the milk meet the lower standard. This issue is further complicated by the fact that the animals for which the feed components will be used are not known at the time of international shipments. Therefore, the milk level may result indirectly in an unwritten lower limit for aflatoxins in feed ingredients for all animals, even though animal feed is a good use of the more aflatoxin contaminated ingredients for many animal species.”

What does that mean? It means that according to the people behind Codex Alimentarius, it would be a burden on trade to reduce levels of aflatoxins in food, and that current levels are too strict. Remember, this is the second most potent known carcinogen we are talking about!

Codex Encourages Increase of Carcinogens

For those who care about reducing cancer in the world, reducing levels of aflatoxins should be a high priority. But why bother about reducing cancer, if permitting unsafe levels of aflatoxin can reduce sanitation expenses and thus increase profits? It goes even further than just milk. Codex Alimentarius says that it is ok to give material contaminated with aflatoxins to animals!

Aflatoxin is known to pass into milk and meat. So, just for a moment, forget about the health of the animals, and ask yourself, what will happen to the people who drink the milk or eat the meat of animals fed with aflatoxin contaminated feed?

Who benefits from toxic feed? The chemical-agricultural industry, which saves money by not having to discard poisoned feed as allowed by Codex Alimentarius.