14 Comments

November 16, 2009 at 11:02 pm by Steve Tonjes

Here are comments other than just us bloggers on the current bills being considered in Congress:

November 16, 2009
The Honorable Tom Harkin, Chairman
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
The Honorable Michael Enzi, Ranking Member
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Chairman Harkin and Ranking Member Enzi:
Our food system needs significant reform in order to restore the trust Americans should have in
the quality, reliability and safety of the food they eat. We the undersigned organizations
commend you for the serious attention you are giving this subject through your consideration of
S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act. However, we share the concerns of many Senators
about the bill’s unnecessary and unintended negative impacts on family farms, value-added
agricultural development, conservation and the environment, organic farming, and emerging
local and regional food systems. We therefore ask that you consider the following
recommendations as you refine the bill.
A thoughtful and enforceable definition of farm “facilities” will be critical to the Food Safety
Modernization Act’s effectiveness at decreasing food-borne illness. We propose the bill direct
FDA to conduct a formal public notice and comment rulemaking process to revise regulations
with respect to what constitutes on-farm manufacturing or processing. In sharp contrast to the
current rule enacted to satisfy the narrower considerations of the Bioterrorism Act, this new rule
should be established in the context of the pending comprehensive food safety act and should be
informed by risk-based analysis of specific activities as they relate to specific foods and
distribution systems.
We also propose that a two track system based on the size and type of a farm’s production is the
best way to assure the safety of the food system. Farms whose three-year average annual market
value of agricultural production is less than $1,000,000, do not co-mingle product, and are not
involved in high risk processing activities, should not be classified as facilities but instead
tracked to participation in training and technical assistance programs to assist them to develop
food safety plans. We believe this two track system will result in far better real world food
safety outcomes, at less cost, and with less popular opposition, than the one-size-fits-all approach
in the bill as introduced.
Under current FDA regulations, which S. 510 does not propose to alter and which H R 2749 as
passed would codify into law, any farm is defined as a facility if it either co-mingles products
from several farms or does any one of a very wide variety of activities to prepare the product for
market including washing, cooling, trimming, labeling, or packaging. These farms, regardless of
size or type of production, would be subject to FDA registration, preventive controls,
inspections, and, if the House were to prevail, would also be paying special taxes. While current
bioterrorism regulations and the pending House food safety bill provide an outright exemption if
the farm “facility” direct markets more than 50 percent of the processed food to consumers, this is
an inappropriate policy approach. We believe current rules are not only very difficult to enforce,
but needlessly overreach and do not result in appreciably improving the safety of the food
supply. Instead, their net result instead would be to stave off the growth of value-added
agriculture serving the increasing consumer demand for high quality, fresh and local product,
doing real harm to family farm survival, rural community economic development, and improved
nutrition and food access.
American producers want to supply nutritious, wholesome food and be full partners in a food
safety system that protects consumers. The best way to achieve that goal is to concentrate
enforcement on high risk activities and concentrate on education and food safety training for
farmers whose size, product type, or marketing plan do not pose significant risk. Senator
Stabenow, with Senators Bingaman, Sanders, Merkley, Gillibrand, Boxer, and Leahy, has
introduced the Growing Safe Food Act to establish a food safety training, education, extension,
outreach, and technical assistance program and information clearinghouse for farms, with a
special emphasis on small and medium-sized farms and small-scale processors. The program
would be administered through USDA’s National Institute for Food and Agriculture. Training
would include good agricultural, handling, and manufacturing practices, produce safety
standards, risk analysis and preventive control mechanisms, safe packaging and storage, recordkeeping,
etc. The new program would be coordinated with applied research under the existing
National Integrated Food Safety Initiative.
We strongly support adding the Growing Safe Food Act to the Food Safety Modernization Act.
This is a critical missing element that will keep small and mid-sized producers viable in
competitive markets and increase widespread knowledge of best food safety practices. The
Growing Safe Food Act should be adopted as a new section of the committee bill and integrated
with its basic provisions for facility registration and produce standards.
The Food Safety and Modernization Act would be improved if Congress guided FDA on the
writing of produce standards to consider points in the food supply chain documented to be most
risky. FDA should be instructed to create standards for holding, sorting, packing, processing,
and transporting and not just growing and harvesting of raw fruits and vegetables. To guarantee
that its standards do not unwittingly result in diminishing food safety, FDA’s produce standards
and Good Agricultural Practices guidance should:

Be consistent with conservation and environmental practice standards established by other
federal agencies and promote diverse cropping systems which mitigate the spread of
pathogens. Conservation measure such as perennial forage, buffer strips, and grasses filter
out contamination in overland water flows from livestock feedlots, loafing yards, pastures,
and manure storage areas. It is imperative that new food safety standards encourage
farmers to maintain and develop enhanced conservation system practices rather than
penalize them for doing so. It is also imperative that the government deliver a consistent
message to farmers and not force the farmer to choose between irreconcilable directives
from different agencies.

Be consistent between food safety standards and certified organic farming production
methods and requirements. FDA and USDA should coordinate to establish the standards
relevant to certified organic production. Special consideration for certified organic farms
and ranches should be made so that new food safety standards and their enforcement are
not duplicative with those already in place through the Organic Food Production Act of
1990 and do not act as a barrier to organic production and organic conversion. Again, the
government needs to deliver a consistent message and not a conflicting one.

Prioritize mixed fruits or vegetables or specific processes that have been consistently
associated with food-borne illnesses. In most of the recent outbreaks of food borne illness,
the main source of the problem was centralized co-mingling, processing and distribution,
not growing and harvesting. For instance, fresh cut, ready-to-eat packaged fruits and
vegetables pose a far greater risk than whole produce and should thus be a primary target
of standards developed for raw commodities.
Farmers are understandably concerned about the prospect of multiple inspectors on their farms.
USDA’s National Organic Program has developed an accredited inspection system in which
organic inspectors, acting as agents of the USDA, annually inspect certified organic farms. We
believe these accredited inspectors should be provided the opportunity on a voluntary basis to
become accredited food safety inspectors and to combine organic and food safety inspection in a
single annual field visit. We urge you to direct FDA and USDA to develop such a mutually
advantageous and cost-effective dual inspection system.
In the case of a food borne illness it is imperative that the cause of the contamination be easily
identified. Fruits and vegetables that are produced on a farm and sold directly to a consumer or
restaurant or grocery stores are quickly and easily identified and, as in the House bill, should be
exempt from new traceability requirements. The Senate bill should adopt that House language
and also extend the same treatment to fruits and vegetables that are farm identity-preserved
through to the final consumer. The Senate bill should also provide that one up, one down
traceability that is already required by the under the National Organic Program fulfill traceback
requirements for certified organic fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities.
We also recommend that the same standard be applied to all other farms subject to traceability
requirements.
We understand the difficulty the Committee faces in crafting a bill that will tangibly improve the
safety of American food within the context of limited resources, but believe that using scientific
evidence of how food is most likely to become contaminated and the important role of
conservation efforts to reduce air and water borne pathogens while concentrating enforcement on
high risk processes will allow the legislation to be targeted to the critical points of prevention.
The growth of small farms, the diversification of mid-sized farms to serve regional food systems,
and the burgeoning demand for organic food are all very positive developments with substantial
health and wellness benefits. Connecting consumers to the farmers who grow their food
increases transparency and accountability in the system and is sparking economic development
in struggling rural communities.
We look forward to working with you to ensure that these economically and environmentally
important new farm and food systems are not inadvertently undermined by legislation produced
by the Committee. Thank you for considering our concerns and for giving serious attention to
our detailed legislative proposals.
Sincerely,
National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
National Organic Coalition
National Farmers Union
Organic Trade Association
California Farmers Union
Carolina Farm Stewardship Association
Cascade Harvest Coalition
Center for Rural Affairs
City Seed
Community Alliance with Family Farmers
Defenders of Wildlife
Edible Santa Fe
Farm Fresh Rhode Island
Farm Aid
Fay-Penn Economic Development Council
Food Alliance
Food Democracy Now!
Future Harvest – Chesapeake Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
Izaak Walton League of America
Kansas Rural Center
Land Stewardship Project
Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association
Michigan Farmers Union
Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service (MOSES)
Missouri’s Best Beef, Inc.
Missouri Farmers Union
National Center for Appropriate Technology
Nebraska Farmers Union
New England Farmers Union
NOFA- Connecticut
NOFA – Massachusetts
NOFA – New Hampshire
NOFA- New Jersey
NOFA – New York
NOFA – Vermont
NOFA Interstate Council
Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides
Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association
Ohio Farmers Union
Organic Farming Research Foundation
Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture
POP Campaign – Preserve Organic Power
Rocky Mountain Farmers Union
Roots of Change
Rural Advancement Foundation International – USA
Wild Farm Alliance

[Reply]

November 14, 2009 at 11:42 am by amicus curiae

these new laws are an industrial/gmo/lobbyists way to kill off any REAL SAFE food production.and impose ridiculous costs and restrictions on people who actually care and give a damn about Real food.
while I understand that, if you are not? a paid PR poster for the industry, you could, if uninformed be led to think this is a good idea, do some research!
if its in a packet from a stupormarket you probably should leave it alone.
I have had e-coli camphylobacter and yersinia, in a timeframe of 20 years. ALL were from commercial foods. one really made me ill for months the rest I managed to get over fairly fast.
may i suggest you look to alternatives to pharma drugs for your child.

[Reply]

November 14, 2009 at 11:00 am by Rady

Elizabeth, how regrettable – and avoidable – that your daughter (and your family) has to experience this. Have you seen the film, FOOD, Inc.? You can now watch it online for free.

FOOD, Inc. features a woman who lost her boy to E. coli, which thrives on factory farms (CAFOs) where animals are crowded together. She became a food safety advocate who recognizes that US “food safety” laws are really designed to monopolize food production, and legitimize their unhealthy practices.

Another 2009 film dealing with the dangerous model of CAFOs is Fresh, which features hog farmer Russ Kremer who shares a personal tale of how he almost died from contracting a monster form of strep. After graduating from an agriculture college, he had convinced his family to use the new chemical-laden model of concentrated feeding operations. That model produces super-bugs, because of the over-use of antibiotics. That model almost killed him.

Reflecting on how his family had done well for generations on the natural farm model, he finally exterminated his herd and went back to natural ranching. With his new herd of 300 pigs, he hasn’t used antibiotics in 14 years and no longer has to treat sick hogs. He saved over $14,000 in medicine and vet bills his first year. (See my review of the film for further sources.)

The slew of “food safety” bills in Congress will not protect us from E. coli and other “super bugs” that thrive in CAFOs. Just the opposite. Oppose S 510 and its companion bills.

Safe food is found from locally and organically grown food.

[Reply]

November 14, 2009 at 2:42 am by Sue Diederich

I’m so sorry that your family has to go through this, and I know there are many others with similar stories and worse.

Watch your aim.

Unfortunately, HR 2749 and S 510 are NOT going to protect anybody from having to endure the same emotional, physical and mental trauma your family has faced.

The problem with your solution is many-fold. First of all – the contamination of the spinach was caused by the runoff from a faulty irrigation line on a nearby CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation).

Perhaps we should be not only our brother’s keeper, but also his judge, jury and executioner as well. After all – we should KNOW what is going on on someone else’s property, at all times, right?

Tell me what you would do if your neighbor set foot on your property, without your permission, and started poking around in your garage. To blame the guy that grew and sold the spinach is asking him to create an identical situation.

Yet – 2749 would basically impose this situation on every farm and garden, as well as every CAFO or mono-culture crop farm in the nation. Seems a little backward.

The small farmer eats what he grows as well as selling some. The owner of a CAFO eats as far away from that product as he can possibly get.

Ask yourself how a farmer who NEVER EVER gets close enough to touch his cow is going to know if it is healthy? What about the one that sits down next to it and milks it by hand. Who’s going to know if his animals are healthy?

Does the person on a 3-story tall combine know what bugs or weeds are in with his row crops, or the guy with this farm-all who’s out there checking plants by hand every morning and hand-picking for the local farmer’s market?

Have you ever MET a person that works for Tyson, Cargil, Kraft, Beatrice or Smithfield? I bet not – but you can drive to the farmer’s markets and meet, talk with and get to know the local farmer that grows what he sells, and sells what he grows.

Which person would be more likely to care about the quality of what they are selling – the guy that never has to look you in the eye, or the one that knows your first name as well as Ashley’s?

How long is the market farmer going to be in business if he has to give a week’s worth or more of his income to the FDA every year versus the company that makes that $500 in far less than an hour?

The bills (10 in total at last count) do NOT address these issues. Nor do they address the myriad other issues in the processing and sale of food – which is where most contamination comes from.

In reality, according to the CDC, less than 5% of contamination happens on the farm. More than 90% happens in processing, transportation and sale of food. Another small percentage happens in people’s homes, and 1 – 2% have “unknown” causes.

2749 places incredible burdens on the 5% WHILE VIRTUALLY IGNORING the 90% that are the problem.

Attacking farmers in the way the so-called “food safety” bills do, does nothing to protect children like Ashley from anything other than the ability of her parents to find quality, healthy food. As a matter of fact, this bill and its kin actually INCREASE the likelihood that the situation will be repeated.

These bills are about international trade, not consumers or health. They facilitate the CODEX Alimentarius standards, which are supposed to become mandatory on a global basis by December 31, 2009. They aren’t on track, but passage of ANY one of these bills will facilitate this, even if a bit off schedule.

87% of our nation’s farms are considered small farms. ALL 87% are at risk from these bills. Instituting the fees alone will destroy a percentage of them.

Not one of these bills allows for judicial review, placing ALL of the decisions in the hands of a single person at the federal level. What the “administrator” or “secretary” says, goes.

ALL of these bills grant immunity for any wrong-doing to the agents, representatives and other government employees.

It is the government agencies which have not only allowed, but encouraged the abuses that have all but destroyed American’s confidence in our food system.

Think organics are safe? Not on ANY level.

The National Animal Identification Program would have every person that owned so much as a back-yard laying hen for their own personal use to register their property as a premise. (Without getting into legal jargon, this makes the effective owner of that property the USDA – not the person living and working on it.)

Then, they propose to tag every animal of more than 29 different species with an electronic “840″ tag. The “840″ designation is a CURRENCY code specific to our country, issued by the WTO. Basically, this reduces private property (the animal) to currency, and we all know who gets to keep cash found on someone else’s property – therefore – farmers are not only deprived of title to their own land, but also to each animal tagged under the program.

(Here we could get into why the animal rights and animal welfare people are not hot after destruction of the program! If they want animals to have the same rights as people one would think that they would oppose reducing them to a non-living medium of exchange, no?)

In the false name of “animal disease tracking”, any of 39 “instances” must be reported for each animal within 24 hours, via internet.

It does nothing to prevent the introduction of disease (TB from Mexico, BSE from Canada, FMD from South America). It tracks disease through its progression AFTER it has been introduced.

Due to funding being diverted to NAIS from testing programs, diseases such as Mad Cow (BSE) are now tested at 1/10th the level they were just three years ago!! Take that $15 million and put it back into something that WORKS. NOPE – that is not the way our government works these days.

Take that same $15 million and hire a few inspectors that will do their jobs instead of encourage people at butchering facilities to skin 3-day-old calves alive (Becuase the “other inspector” wouldn’t let them get away with it) for a photo op!!

Not only does this program violate MANY Constitutional amendments – it does nothing to prevent disease in animals. AND – it stops at slaughter, which is where the animals come into contact with the manure that contaminates the meat. Go Figure!!!

Designed, bought and paid for by the multi-national corporations that fund both the USDA and the FDA (public record). Certainly opposed by small farmers, Christians, and thinking people everywhere.

Back to organics and the death of healthy food:

Without the manure off of the small organic livestock farms, the Amish/Mennonite farms, etc, there IS no organic agriculture. It dies with the loss of the manure. How do they fertilize organic produce without organic manure?

We can’t trust the USDA-owned term organic anymore anyway!

Skipping the more graphic details, we don’t have cause to ignore NOFA member Bushway skinning calves alive and HSUS posting videos of it on YouTube… Answer? Introduce a bill that the calves have to be 10 days old, rather than 3 days old. Nothing about skinning them alive.

Hatcheries throwing male chicks into meat grinders alive.

I wonder. Just how educated are we about the food we choose for our families anyway? Have we been relieved of ALL of our senses?

Should we mention the hormones in the organic milk? The answer? A $10K fine for a company that makes that much money in less than a week, the inspector was removed to a new jurisdiction, and OCA is still wrangling over it.

I remember people dumping apples not so long ago – and milk dumpings just recently. Why? Pesticides and prices.

There is nothing in any so-called “food safety” bill currently in Congress that addresses these two issues, either. IN FACT, nothing is mentioned about the use of chemicals, pesticides, hormones, anti-biotics or even cyanide and arsenic. Nothing about lead solder. Nothing about synthetic estrogens in plastics. Nope – these are to be “rules.”

Rules are made to be broken and the government has an abysmal record of enforcing “rules.” They have a hard time enforcing LAW. Especially when it comes to the US Code and the Constitution!

What has NAIS to do with HR2749? The program is mandated in the bill. Why should you care if some unknown, faceless farmer’s constitutional rights are violated – because YOUR’s are next.

In fact – your’s are violated right along with that farmer’s. YOU lose the choice of going to a local farmer rather than a corporation to purchase your food. YOU lose the option of inexpensive local meat and produce. YOU lose the ability to decide in what manner your food will be grown. YOU lose quality for a false promise of safety. YOU lose more money to taxes in order to enforce all the crap. YOU lose period.

What do YOU gain from bills like this? Higher prices at the store. YOU gain a reduction in choices to make your decisions “easier.” YOU gain the higher doctor bills and chronic illnesses associated with low quality food.

The multi-nationals get fatter wallets. The government gets fatter discretional funds. The legislators get to look busy. They get to sleep well at night knowing the public is appeased, if not given justice.

YIPPEE!!!!

Then we get to the actual bill’s unconstitutionality itself.

2749 allows for the unannounced AND unwarranted viewing and copying of records on any property that deals with food. Now I don’t know about you, but my computer is in my house, not in a barn. Search and seizure when it comes to a private residence is supposed to be facilitated by a warrant. No warrants here.

Unannounced inspections are going to do just WHAT, when you have inspectors telling people not to do things in front of “other” inspectors, because they’ll get fined. Further, how would you like them coming to your house if you have a garden out back? Unannounced.

And – “reasonable hours” to the USDA, FDA and health departments are any time after 4 am when the normal farmer is out milking, and before 10 pm.

How would you feel if armed government officials came pounding on your front door at 4 am or 10 pm? It happened to an IL farmer we worked with through IICFA. Of course, he is now not only out of business, but his buildings, equipment and much of his land has been sold, his social security check (the family’s only income) is being garnished – and for something we PROVED was the fault of the USDA – NOT the farmer.

Welcome to farming in the US.

Notice, too, that the bill emphasizes inspection of RECORDS, not the animals themselves. There is no mention of re-instituting the disease testing that has largely been abandoned. There is little provision other than funding for more inspections at processors. More government employees = deeper recession, and still no safety.

Why is it we should support these bills??

To give an idea of what this could be like, think about the coop in OH, owned by the Stowers family (hubby serving in Iraq at the time) which was raided for POSSIBLY selling food that was not allowed… No one got sick, no one complained. Someone looked at their website.

Elizabeth, her children and a neighbor were held BY A SWAT TEAM, AT GUNPOINT in their living room for several hours. ALL of the food was confiscated – even that which was not part of the coop. PERSONAL items were taken. The entire family was TERRORIZED, while the husband was risking his life to protect our freedom.

This bill not only allows for this sort of thing, it MANDATES it. The Stowers had NOT received any prior notice. There was no warrant. Sorry, but there is no government funding to provide the counseling the children required for months after their ordeal. There is no re-imbursment for the destroyed and spoiled food. There is no fund to cover damage done to the property. All of that, AND legal defense bills, comes from the Stowers’ own pockets.

All that – for POSSIBLY. And that is without the behemoth that is 2749.

There is something in law called “void for vagueness.” The bill is worded in such a way that, if some zealot were in the administrator’s position, it could be interpreted that any home (a place that handles or stores food), car (a vehicle used to transport food), or back yard garden (a place that grows food) could be brought under its jurisdiction. It also fits this bill.

I don’t know about you, but I am not about to pay the FDA $500 per year in order to give my neighbor a tomato over my back fence. I am CERTAINLY not happy with the idea that if the law is ever enforced this way I could face a $100,000 fine and up to 10 years in jail for doing so! (HR875 was worse – that was a MILLION dollar fine, and still no judicial review.)

Think I am kidding? There are comments from FDA officials on the public record that state that AT THIS TIME, they aren’t CONSIDERING enforcing this on an individual level. They do NOT rule out that possibility in the future.

Currently, beef farmers working a “cow-calf” operation are projected by the government to take more than a $25 LOSS per animal this year (without 2749’s fees, NAIS compliance costs, etc) and more than $50 next year. Dairy farmers are being lost at a rate of more than 50 farms PER DAY.

2749 is not even ok for vegans… Commercial growing, handling, processing and distribution channels being what they are, you need local farms and “certified naturally grown” labels to even be reasonably sure of safe food.

Since it wasn’t the farm growing the spinach, but the runoff from the CAFO, does it make sense to condemn the spinach farmer, or the guy behind him with the 10,000 head of cattle on 10 acres?

Rather than slap around farmers that are already operating at a loss for the most part with fees, fines and other stupidity – would it not be better to create laws that would actually punish those responsible for the chaos, injury, death and trauma?

One final thought. Any organism capable of digestion already HAS e-coli. WE ALL HAVE IT. The problem comes when it is aggravated.

There is another bill introduced by some Congressional genius through its corporate handlers – to prevent e-coli in in food. One dairy farm has already been cited under a different existing law, because there was e-coli found in the manure on the farm. WELL OF COURSE… That is where it is SUPPOSED to be!!!

If its in the manure, chances are it is NOT in the muscle, the milk or the organs.

Hmmm… Think about the amount of manure at a CAFO…

I don’t know many people who would allow their children to be nourished from a toilet. I know a lot of kids that were not able to drink the milk from those cows – and for NO SOUND SCIENTIFIC REASON other than a fear of e-coli that was unfounded, unsubstantiated (the MILK was found negative), and promulgated by those who would profit off of the general ignorance of the public.

HR2749/S510 are about the last things you want to have passed if safe food and your daughter’s health are really your first concern.

The answer is to educate the public, get people INVOLVED rather than complaining in their coffee clatches, and mobilized. We ALL know industrialized, verticalized farming is killing us. We ALL know that local foods grown by people that have to look us in the eye are what we should eat.

HR 2749 and S 510 will NOT facilitate ANYTHING but more dollars for those already abusing the system. They will create even more conflicts of interest with FDA and USDA. They will create MORE instances of food related illness and death.

99% of the information I have given can be found doing a quick google search of the terms.

However:

Anyone needing more information on any of these issues, from the bills to NAIS, to CODEX, WTO connections etc – PLEASE educate yourself. Ask questions. DEMAND ANSWERS. Don’t blindly trust the very self-same government that created the problems to get us out of them!!

If you want my documented sources, feel free to contact me at suediederich@comcast.net – I will generally get back to you within 24 hours.

Please think long and hard before supporting this bill.

Sue Diederich
Illinois Independent Consumers and Farmers Association
(847) 873 – 0251

[Reply]

November 13, 2009 at 10:53 pm by Marge M.

I’m so sorry about your little girl and hope she is doing better. I wouldn’t put my trust in those bills you mentioned though because they won’t help and will hurt those who can provide her with safe food, our farmers. I hope you will find a good source of organic food for her near you. Be sure to keep her away from the swine flu vaccines which are killing people here and in Europe (the government and media aren’t reporting it). Best wishes.

[Reply]

November 13, 2009 at 10:45 pm by Barbara W

We need farmers. We need those corporate “food safety” bills like we need another bailout. Have you read the bill you are promoting? HR 2749 was a stinker. You must not have looked at it. The new one is surely worse. Give your child normal LOCAL food and stay away from anything processed and she’ll do fine. You might have to cook and not depend on fast food or TV dinners, but it’s worth it since they are garbage in any case.

[Reply]

November 13, 2009 at 10:39 pm by Carol

I don’t believe your post is real. It reads like something from someone doing PR and trying to sound like a real person. HR 2749 was a purely corporate bill (now it is S 510) and no ordinary person would have said it was good. Ordinary people were fighting it since it does nothing whatever to address the contamination issues you mention. No inspection, no getting rid of CAFOs, no getting rid of GMOs which are related to the new e coli problems. It only gets rid of farmers and opens the door to imported foods with no checks on them.

Are you working for one of the corporations pushing these bills?

[Reply]

November 13, 2009 at 10:33 pm by Arlene

I hope by food safety you don’t mean S 510 which calls itself that but was written by Monsanto and will destroy farmers in this country. Food safety is not hard to achieve. Buy real food from local farmers. Grow a garden. Avoid GMOs. Avoid processed food. Eat the real thing and make sure it is organic. Food is only unsafe because it comes from industry that puts anything in to cheapen it. Skip their junk (it is not food) entirely, get your food from farmers, and your food will be safe.

[Reply]

November 13, 2009 at 10:02 pm by 中国工程机械维修中心

现在大多数出口都有一些不安全因素！但我们也会有很好的预防措施!说大了像工程机械出口质保期维修费也很高！但现在我国内有很多不错的工程机械维修工厂让用户感觉到了方便和优惠！如中国工程机械维修中心http://www.zg-wx.com 都很不错！有些还是要有一些安全措施比较好！

[Reply]

Leave a Comment

Name: Your name is required

Email: An Email address is required

Website:

Comment:

Click to cancel reply

Notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail