Sunday, December 9, 2012

FDA Expands Irradiation of Food Supply; Harmonizing with Codex Alimentarius

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

Demonstrating the lack of concern held by regulatory agencies for public safety or public opinion as well as the increasing attempts to become compliant with Codex Alimentarius regulations, the FDA has recently expanded the amount of ionized radiation that can be used to treat unrefrigerated raw meat.

As reported by Food Safety News, the two new policies decided upon by the FDA were issued in response to two petitions filed in 1999 by the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

While the previous policy was that only refrigerated or frozen meats could be irradiated, the new rule allows for the irradiation of unrefrigerated raw meat. The second rule change allows for increasing the dose of ionizing radiation in poultry from 3.0 kGY to 4.5 kGy.

Although a period for public comment is always set aside for regulatory agency decisions regarding potential changes to policy, the FDA promptly ignored the many comments it received from individuals all over the country as well as consumer advocacy groups which requested the denial of the two FSIS petitions.

The response from the FDA was that all of these comments, made by individuals and by groups such as Public Citizen and the Center for Food Safety, “were of a general nature” and “did not contain any substantive information that could be used in a safety evaluation of irradiated poultry.” This statement was made regarding both the poultry irradiation rule and the passage of a new meat temperature rule.

Predictably, the FDA has defended its decision by circular logic that flies in the face of science and common sense. The agency is claiming that “irradiating unrefrigerated meat was not found to increase meat’s toxicity, change the food’s nutritional properties or increase the likelihood of certain bacteria thriving on meat; therefore FDA has determined that this is a safe application for the process.”

Of course, while the FDA claims that irradiation is not found to increase toxicity or change nutritional properties, the very reason that the FDA has jurisdiction over food irradiation to begin with is because the process of irradiation can do just these very things. Even the FDA admits[1] that, because irradiation “can affect the characteristics of the food,” it is considered a “food additive.” Thus, because food additives fall under the purview of the FDA, irradiation is regulated (or not) by the agency.

By allowing for higher doses of irradiation in food, the FDA is knowingly complicit in covering up unsanitary food production practices by major corporations as well as accepting the inclusion of clearly harmful material (i.e. radiation) into the food supply. Keep in mind, irradiation is mostly used by corporations in order to cover up deplorable manufacturing conditions and dangerous food contamination.

However, much like the FDA’s position on genetically modified food, even the concept of consumer choice is nothing more than a smokescreen.

For instance, while the FDA states that all irradiated foods entering the supply chain must be accompanied by a radura symbol indicating the irradiation process, the fact is that this symbol is only required to be presented to the “first consumer,” not the average person actually buying and eating the food. More often than not, the “first consumer” is actually the high-level distributor of the food. Needless to say, the radura symbol is removed in short order before the goods are shipped to the market and long before they reach the people who purchase them directly.

Indeed, the FDA has made moves to derail consumer knowledge even further with relatively recent attempts to re-label irradiated food as “pasteurized” so as to obscure the real nature of the “treatment” process. In fact, the proposal even states that an “alternate term to ‘irradiation’” may be considered for use with no further suggestion as to what this term may be.

Therefore, one legitimately wonders whether or not, if the proposal should go through, the selected terminology will be even more obfuscating than that of “pasteurization.”

Lastly, it is important to note that the FDA has been making clear strides toward harmonization with Codex Alimentarius guidelines for at least the last ten years. As I discuss in my book Codex Alimentarius – The End of Health Freedom, Codex Alimentarius itself has set the acceptable limit of food irradiation at 10 kGy with loopholes that actually allow for unlimited levels of irradiation.

Indeed, the FDA has also pushed for Codex harmonization with vitamin and mineral supplements, as well as genetically modified foods[2].

With this in mind, it would be well within reason to expect to see the acceptable levels of food irradiation raised even higher in the very near future.


[1] Federal Register Proposed Rule – 72 FR 16291 April 4, 2007: Irradiation in the Production, Processing, and Handling of Food, P.1. *Source no longer readily available online.*

See also,

Turbeville, Brandon. Codex Alimentarius – The End of Health Freedom. 2010. The Book Patch. False Flag Publications. P.79.

[2] Smith, Jeffrey. Seeds of Deception. YES! Books. 2003.

Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over 175 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville's podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV.  He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) 


This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Anonymous said...

I guess on some level we ought to thank these jerks, because thier ill actions have compelled an ever growing number of people to seek out direct from farm food relations which give the local food movement, localized economies, good health and idividual rights fuel for the fire. they will not succeed with their depopulation through food, too many people are aware and choosing alternmatives for them to "win"

bottom line, if this story deeply bothers you- buy meat ( and all other foods) from a trusted source, or not at all. is a good site that shows you where there are farm markets, csa's direct sales etc across the us. Worth checking out, if you're like ok, i want good food, but don't know where to get it. it's a good start.

and also didn't they increase the acceptable amount of radiation in ALL food shortly after the Fukushimi melt(ing) down?

ketabyte said...

great article.

Interesting to note in 2003 codex general standard for irradiated food stuffs no longer has an upper dose limit.

KGY= kilograys. 1 gray= 1 joule of energy absorbed per kilogram of food material.

1000 grays= 1 kilogray or kgy.

thats alot of cobalt 60

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, we have to be very careful about what we eat. Modern society has lost touch with its food supply. Best choices are back to the roots of food nutrition. Fresh organic fruits and vegetables .. no meat.

Fish is poison. Most of it is farm raised and toxic. Most fish comes from the Indian and Pacific Oceans which have been irradiated by Fukushima. Most fish has toxic levels of mercury. Do not eat tuna. Its heavy in mercury as are many other species of fish

Problem is: healthy, locally grown produce is expensive and not always easy to get. Preparing a healthy meal requires more labor than heating something out of a box. Most prepared meals are GMO. They are toxic. Basic is better.

Anonymous said...

Irradiation is not done with "ionized radiation", but with ionizing radiation. Examples of ionizing radiation are ultraviolet light, and x-rays. When you sun bathe, you are being irradiated by ionizing radiation. When a cow is grazing, in the sunshine, it is being irradiated by ionizing radiation. Radioactive substances are not added, when food is processed in this manner.
Food is irradiated in order to kill bacteria, and inactivate viruses. Irradiating hamburger kills the bacteria that cause food poisoning. You do not offer any mechanisms through which food irradiation might cause harm, to the consumer. Why is that? This article relies on the average persons ignorance, and fear of "radiation" to influence them.

Anonymous said...

Genocide. Arrest the politicans for treason and genocide. I am sick and tied of the evil.

@3:50, you don't know what you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

Yes ionizing radiation is equivalant to sunshine, but intensified, negative aspects of this presumably benign practice include:

1)- there are other wavelengths that make UV rays beneficial to say sun bathing, or cows grazing,plants growing by itself, intense UV radiation IS damaging.
2)- uv rays are damaging to enzymes and nutrient density of food, to go along with the decrease in nutritional value aims of codex. ya know, thats why they say don't store food in direct sun, or many shelf stable food stuff comes in dark or opaque containers.

If food is obtained from a clean reliable source, you don't have to worry about "killing bacteria" or food poisioning.

On some level uv pasturization of food is a little less damaging to nutrients then high heat pasturisation, but this(heat) doesn't work for raw meat or other raw foods.So yes, on some level, uv is better than alternatives (antibiotics, heat pasturisation) but the best option is clean food.

the ignorance lies in the fallicy that our food is inherently contaminated and needs to sterilized. that lie has been perpetuated for the benefit of big agriculture, who by the way has been the source of something like 98% of foodborne illnesses in the US. the article definately was lacking in some vital information, but the ignorance of which you speak is far beyond fear or radiation, but a fear of food.

Anonymous said...

Apparently, were NOT getting SICK or DYING fast enough!!
Gee, great way to balance the budget!!
Yea, as usual We the people get the SHAFT!!
Buy farm organic or grow your own!
Take control of your life: BEFORE THEY DO!!

Post a Comment