By Barbara H. Peterson
Just when we thought that buying “Organic” was safe, we run headlong into the deliberate poisoning of our organic food supply by the FDA in collusion with none other than the folks who brought us Aspartame. NutraSweet, a former Monsanto asset, has developed a new and improved version of this neurotoxin called Neotame. Neotame has similar structure to aspartame — except that, from it’s structure, appears to be even more toxic than aspartame. This potential increase in toxicity will make up for the fact that less will be used in diet drinks. Like aspartame, some of the concerns include gradual neurotoxic and immunotoxic damage from the combination of the formaldehyde metabolite (which is toxic at extremely low doses) and the excitotoxic amino acid. (Holisticmed.com)
But surely, this product would be labeled! NOT SO!!! For this little gem, no labeling required. And it is even included in USDA Certified Organic food.
The food labeling requirements required for aspartame have now been dropped for Neotame, and no one is clear why this was allowed to happen. Neotame has been ruled acceptable, and without being included on the list of ingredients, for:
- USDA Certified Organic food items.
- Certified Kosher products with the official letter k inside the circle on labels. (Janet Hull)
Let me make this perfectly clear. Neotame does not have to be included in ANY list of ingredients! So, if you buy processed food, whether USDA Certified Organic or not, that food most likely will contain Neotame because it is cost-effective, and since no one knows it is there, there is no public backlash similar to what is happening with Aspartame. A win/win situation!
But that’s not all. Just love chowing down on that delicious steak? Well, that cow most likely will have been fed with feed containing…..you guessed it…..Neotame! A product called “Sweetos,” which is actually composed of Neotame, is being substituted for molasses in animal feed.
“Sweetos is an economical substitute for molasses. Sweetos guarantees the masking of unpleasant tastes and odor and improves the palatability of feed. This product will be economical for farmers and manufacturers of cattle feed. It can also be used in mineral mixture,” said Craig Petray, CEO, The NutraSweet Company, a division of Searle, which is a part of Monsanto. (Bungalow Bill)
Why would we feed animals food that is so distasteful that we would have to mask the unpleasantness with an artificial sweetener? Most animals will not eat spoiled, rancid feed. They know by the smell that it is not good. Enter Sweetos (Neotame). Just cover up the unpleasant tastes and odors, and you can feed them anything you want to, courtesy of the oh, so considerate folks at Monsanto and company.
But of course, Monsanto is no longer associated with NutraSweet. In the time-honored tradition of covering its assets, Monsanto has a proven track record of spinning off controversial portions of its company that generate too much scrutiny, such as it did with the Solutia solution.
Says the Farm Industry News, “Monsanto, which has long resided in the crosshairs of public scorn and scrutiny, appears to have dodged at least one bullet by spinning off its industrial chemical business into a separate entity called Solutia a couple of years ago. Solutia has since been hammered by lawsuits regarding PCB contamination from what were once called Monsanto chemical plants in Alabama and other states” (Source Watch)
So what is the solution to this problem? Buy local organic food, know your local farmer, and don’t buy processed foods whether they are labeled “Organic” or not. This requires a drastic change in lifestyle that most will not want to make. For those who choose to ride the wheel of chance by succumbing to this genocidal adulteration of our food supply by those who stand to profit from our sickness and early demise, my only comment is….it is your choice. But for those of us who have decided to fight this battle one bite at a time by hitting these sociopaths in the pocketbook where it hurts……viva la revolucion!
(C) 2010 Barbara H. Peterson
Jan 16, 2011 @ 20:28:25
All those comments came in on the FW site. I dont blame that lady one bit for deleting comments over there. I think people either cant read or just dont read. its obvious all that information was taken from government docs…..what part of that dont they get? but then if you dont read the sources you can claim you didnt know and it isnt true.
Jan 16, 2011 @ 20:20:12
There have been no posts concerning this article deleted.
I do delete when there is an obvious ad hominen attack against authors or other posters, gross profanity or simply a non-sensical statement meant to derail any serious discussion.
As for the information in this article……the assertions made in it were all taken from FDA/organic standards and other government documents. IF there is anything misleading, inaccurate or of concern to you…..you need to check with these people….it is their info, published in their pages that is cited.
Behind this article, and especially since the sources quoted were taken from their own pages, an all out attack was launched including the use of trolls who landed simultaneously attempting to discredit the author, calling names, cursing, denigrating remarks etc..
While this did not happen here on PPJ, it is not something we would allow to happen. While many sites depend on unmoderated trash talk to rev up their traffic……we don’t.
Marti Oakley
Jan 16, 2011 @ 19:44:00
What happened to all the posts questioning the facts in this article. I have read elsewhere that this is not true and even on this site…. looks like a bunch of posts have been deleted… why?
Jan 04, 2011 @ 17:09:13
War is peace.
Perhaps a reading of Orwell’s 1984 could answer that question for you, Sophie.
Sorry, couldn’t resist….
Jan 04, 2011 @ 00:48:29
Why isn’t it required to be listed in the ingredients?