Summary: Rockefeller´s partner as for GMO food, Monsanto, is taking over the world´s food market in order to rob and control us on behalf of the “international society”/NWO. The WHO/FAO project , the Codex Alimentarius, has through the UN usurped the power to decide what we are going to eat – since 1 Jan. 2010. The Codex has decided that it is not allowed to label GMO foods – in spite of its demonstrated dangers to health. The same decree is valid as for nano particle containing foods.
Nanotechnology involves the manipulation of teeny particles, measuring between one and 100 nanometers. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter, or roughly 80,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair, and they can penetrate deeply into the body. A chemical that’s normally harmless might be toxic in minuscule doses. Animal studies show that inhaled nanoparticles can cause pulmonary inflammation, move from the lungs to other organs, and interfere with cell signaling.
Studies have shown they are able to provoke cell death, organ damage, mutation and cancer. But in fact, little is known about their toxic effects on man. Information from toxicity studies with other routes of exposure indicate that several systemic effects on different organ systems may occur after long-term exposure to some nanoparticles, including on the immune, inflammatory and cardiovascular systems. Effects on the immune and inflammatory systems may include activation of pro-inflammatory (organ killing) cytokines in the lungs, liver, heart and brain (p.39). The smaller the particles the more dangerous. Long-term supplementation with nano-encapsulated CoQ10 resulted in significantly higher plasma levels for all formulations (of bioavailable fat– arteriosclerosis) compared with the other preparations
Nevertheless nanoparticles have been used in human foods for more than a decade to some extent – but their application is rapidly increasing, thus making mankind a bunch of guinea pigs for the corprations producing nanoparticles. It is big business which is expected to reach US$1 trillion by 2015. The particles are used to make commercial, mainly chemical products taste like and look like food – to give longer shelf-life, and better safety and traceability. Examples of nanotextured foodstuffs include spreads, mayonnaise, cream, yoghurts, ice creams, etc. Many corporations just want to use the nanoparticles without telling the public – in order to avoid the public scare over and resentment against CMO foods.
However, it seems that nanoparticles are useful in cancer diagnostics and treatment.
A FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on the Application of Nanotechnologies in the Food and Agriculture Sectors Potential Food Safety Implications was held to advise governments. Among the participants were several from the US Labour Department and 2 from the Codex Alimentarius. Twelve experts among 17 declared an (economic) interest in the topics (just as with the WHO´s swineflu vaccination scandal). They were acknowledged by the participants (this leaving out all objectivity).
However, it seems that the dialogue with the public is to be run by the WHO/FAO along the same lines as “global warming” – i.e. addressing/hushing up what people have already heard through magazines rather than real knowledge and then to present “a clear goal” – defined by the corporations (money, money ) and veiled to be adapted to the acceptability of the public. This is shown by the fact that nano-foods will not be labeled. They want to ensure that participants trust the host, that a trusted facilitator manages the process, and that participants have access to trusted (biased) information
sources and (biased) trusted experts, and (ix) upholding established scientific and ethical principles (just as with the climate lie – leaving out independent sceptics).
The scandal is that the corporations are making enormous fortunes on food additives which seem to be dangerous – without telling us and without knowledge of what damage they are doing to us. This is another proof of the contempt of the NWO for people.
As soon as scientists in corporative service have invented/discovered something new the question is not: How can this benefit mankind?”. Instead the question is: “How can we profit from this – at once. No matter what dangerous side effects may turn up?” Money – not neighbourly love – is the aim of these NWO/”International Community” emperors. I have previously written about the US government ruthless associate´s, the Rockefeller partner´s Monsanto´s dangerous GMO foods, and here and here and here, promoted by the Codex Alimentarius as well as the Rockefeller Foundation´s and Wall Street´s grain
speculations sending millions and millions of LDC – and US citizens into starvation and here.This article is about food pollution with nanoparticles which the food corporations have been polluting our commercial food with over the past decade or more.
Are there health risks associated with nanoparticles in food?
Scientific American 13 March 2008: Nanotechnology involves the manipulation of teeny particles, measuring between one and 100 nanometers. (A nanometer is one billionth of a meter, or roughly 80,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair, and they can penetrate deep into the body. A chemical that’s normally harmless might be toxic in minuscule doses. Animal studies show that inhaled nanoparticles can cause pulmonary inflammation, move from the lungs to other organs, and interfere with cell signaling.
FAO/WHO Expert Meeting: Knowledge of the potential toxicity of some classes of ENMs, such as nanoparticles with specific surface properties, is limited. Effects on the immune and inflammatory systems may include activation of pro-inflammatory (organ killing) cytokines in the lungs, liver, heart and brain (p.39). I.e. the smaller the particles the more dangerous). Long-term supplementation resulted in significantly higher plasma levels for all formulations (of bioavailable fat– arteriosclerosis) with nano-encapsulated CoQ10 compared with the other preparations (p.35).
The Food Empowerment Project: Nanoparticles have been used in food manufacturing for decades, no one really knows how prevalent they are because (just like GMOs) the FDA does not require companies to label nanofoods or even report their use in food products. Some industry experts speculate that 40 percent of US food products will contain nanoparticles by 2015. Antimicrobial properties of nanoparticles can disrupt signals between bacteria and plant hosts and transmit contaminants, which can endanger entire ecosystems. Nanoparticles are washed down drains, entering aquatic ecosystems where, research has found, they can kill and mutate fish embryos – and provoke cancer. No plans exist to stop this.
Some nanoparticles used in food production are so small that they can be absorbed through the skin, posing potential health threats to workers who are regularly exposed to such materials. One study demonstrated that even very low concentrations of zinc oxide nanoparticles are toxic to human lung cells. People working with nanoparticles inhale these micro-poisons on a regular basis. The vast majority of nanoparticles used in food production have not been safety tested.
PPJ Gazette 12 July 2011: Most of what sits in our stores is not really food as we have known it. It is a stew of sorts; chemicals, additives, flavorings, colorings, enhancers, preservatives, aspartame, neotame, and stuff we can’t even identify along with residual hormones, vaccines, antibiotics, herbicides and pesticides. It has been irradiated, sprayed with viruses and now covered in ammonia. According to this report, this technology will be applied to animal feeds and water, right along with commercially available foods. This way, no matter what you eat, you will be ingesting numerous versions of nanochips of one kind or another. Nano-chips will be used to supposedly make food taste more like food by enhancing the flavor and texture. RFID Nano’s and here and here are so small that once ingested they can circulate undetected by the immune system. Kind of like an on-board gps for humans.
Caroline Scott-Thomas, 26-Jul-2010: At IFT’s nanoscience conference last week, major industry players discussed how to avoid a rerun of the GMO debacle with consumers – with some saying that one solution could be to say nothing about introducing nanotechnology in foods and to do it anyway.
FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on the Application of Nanotechnologies in the Food and Agriculture Sectors (excerpt):
Potential Food Safety Implications. Among the participants several from the US Labour Department and 2 from the Codex Alimentarius.
Owing to our limited knowledge of the human health effects of these applications, WHO considered that it was appropriate to convene an Expert Meeting on the “application of nanotechnologies in the food and agriculture sectors: potential food safety implications.” The Expert Meeting was asked not to cover occupational health matters surrounding the use and application of nanotechnologies in the food and agriculture sectors (pp. 20-21).
17 experts were selected. Twelve experts among 17 declared an (economic) interest in the topics (just as with the WHO´s swineflu vaccination scandal). They were acknowledged by the participants (this leaving out all objectivity).
The advent of nanotechnology has already opened up a multibillion dollar industry in recent years, the global market impact of which is expected to reach US$1 trillion by 2015, with around 2 million workers. There is a large potential for growth of the sector in developing countries (p.20).
The report estimated that by 2012 the overall market value would reach US$5.8 billion. It has been estimated that over 200 companies worldwide are conducting Research & Development into the use of food nanotechnology outside Europe (p.31). In general, surveys of consumer perception found a relatively low level of awareness about nanoparticles , and positive or neutral attitudes about the relative benefits and risks of nanotechnology. However, the attitudes from surveys in Europe tended to be more negative.
Like other sectors, nanotechnology promises to revolutionize the whole food chain The current applications in the food and agriculturalsectors are relatively few. However, nanotechnology-derived products and applications in the food sectors have been steadily increasing in recent years, because the new technologies have a great potential to address many of the industry’s current needs.
The food industry aims at i.a. profitability. The industry is, therefore, always seeking new technologies to offer products with improved tastes, flavours, textures, longer shelf-life, and better safety and traceability. Examples of nanotextured foodstuffs include spreads, mayonnaise, cream, yoghurts, ice creams, etc. Increased health consciousness amongst consumers and tighter regulatory controls, have also driven the industry to look for new ways to reduce the amount of salt, sugar, fat, artificial colours and preservatives in their products, and to address certain food-related ailments, such as obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, digestive disorders, certain types of cancer (e.g.bowel cancer) and food allergies.
Nanosizing of bioactive substances is also claimed to give greater uptake, absorption and bioavailability in the body compared with bulk equivalents and to lessen the CO2–footprint.
The Engineered Nanomaterials (ENMs) likely to be found in nanofood products fall into three main categories: inorganic, surface functionalized materials, and organic ENMs.
Inorganic nanomaterials include ENMs of transition metals such as silver and iron; alkaline earth metals such as calcium and magnesium; Food packaging is the major area of application of metal (oxide) ENMs.
Organic nano-sized materials (many of them naturally-occurring substances) are used (or have been developed for use) in food/feed products. These include substances encapsulated in nanodelivery systems. Examples include vitamins, antioxidants, colours, flavours and preservatives.
An example is a feed additive comprising a yeast cell wall component that can bind mycotoxins to protect animals against mycotoxicosis.
Research is also being carried out into the development of various nanosized agrochemicals, such as fertilizers, pesticides and veterinary medicines with better effects. They may raise concerns over exposure of agricultural workers, and contamination of agri-food products. There may be instances where ENMs can get into food and drinks through environmental contamination
Nanoparticle life cycle unknown.
Prerequisites for good dialogue include i.a.: addressing issues raised in consumer perception surveys and previous public engagement exercises, ensuring that participants trust the host, that a trusted facilitator manages the process, and that participants have access to trusted information
sources and trusted experts.
In the above video, Richard Manning tells us that the Rockefeller Foundation has trebled grain production by means of straw shortening. He also tells that in 1940 an American farmer spent 1 calory of oil to produce 1 calory of food. Today he uses 10 calories of oil to produce 1 calory of food. This is certainly not possible in LDC countries any longer – their stone age peasants having been driven off their lands and their food being delivered by the multinationals. These now have a monopoly – bringing many to starve due to speculation.
Then I see Rockefeller´s FAO/WHO meetings recommendations for a “good dialogue”. I have a feeling that this is just the recipe for communicating the biggest lie in history: “manmade climate change”. Just communicate what has already been leaked into consumers´ perception surveys. Have trusted hosts and experts to advise us – after they have abolished labeling of GMO– and nanofoods!!! The WHO and FAO founded the Codex Alimentarius in 1963. Both FAO – and here through the CGIAR – and the WHO are closely interwoven with the Rockefeller Foundation. Just see this video how the Rockefeller Foundation praises itself for feeding Africans with their (barren) hybrid products. And the Rockefeller Foundation, who has spent 600 mio dollars on their “Green Revolution” in Africa, has strong support by Bill & Melinda Gates.
Clearly, corporations fear a repetition of the GMO scare – although the Codex Alimentarius and the US Government – the EU is wavering – have removed any labeling to show if a food article is GMO or nanoinfected. This is unscrupulous since the possible implications of both methods are terrible: organ damage, mutations and cancer. This is the New World Order´s (see videos on right margin of this blog) indifference to human health. The goal is money for the illuminati owners of the corporations – and if possible the destruction of mankind as wanted by the depopulationists.
This is not to say that nanoparticles do not have advantages. But these should be verified before all mankind are made guinea pigs – as has been the case over more than 10 years. Why does cancer increase – with 42% of Britons going to have cancer? Certainly not only due to longer life times.
- The worlds largest human experiment: GMOs, Roundup, and the Monsanto monstrosity – part one (blacklistednews.com)
- Organic farmers sue Monsanto (rt.com)
- New Film on Codex Alimentarius Outlines Vital Role of the National Health Federation (prweb.com)