The so-called \u201corganic\u201d foods industry may not be as natural as consumers have been led to believe, owing to a lack of serious testing and other major flaws in the system, according to a former inspector of organic foods in the United States and Canada who grew up on an organic farm. What the expert described as the \u201cglobalist environmental movement\u201d \u2013 George Soros, for example, and others like him \u2013 is also deeply involved in promoting organic foods, he explained. <\/p>\n
In an interview with The New American<\/em>, Mischa Popoff, who serves as a policy advisor to the Heartland Institute and wrote a book exposing \u201cthe inside story\u201d of the organic industry<\/a>, explained that much of the certification process for organic produce today essentially amounts to a \u201cscam.\u201d The crux of the problem, he said, is that there is no field testing of organic crops or livestock anywhere in the world.\u00a0 <\/p>\n \u201cThere is some end-product testing being carried out by the EU, but that\u2019s like testing Olympic athletes after they go home,\u201d said Popoff, who spent five years working as an organic inspector. \u201cAthletes are tested during the games when performance-enhancing drugs are still coursing through their veins, not after.\u201d Despite years of promises, neither the U.S. Department of Agriculture nor the Canadian Food Inspection Agency conduct proper tests to ensure that organic standards are being met, he added.<\/p>\n The way the system works now, Popoff continued, is by having organic farmers and processors keep records of their activities, which are then reviewed once a year during a pre-announced \u201cinspection.\u201d Meanwhile, up-front organic certification fees can cost thousands of dollars, followed by transaction fees collected as sales are made.<\/p>\n That creates problems in the way the system is operated, Popoff said. \u201cIt\u2019s clear that instead of having an incentive to stamp out fraud, the private, for-profit certifiers that operate under the aegis of the EU, USDA and CFIA actually have an incentive to rubber stamp the certifications and sales of their clients,\u201d he explained.<\/p>\n Also, despite oft-cited claims that organic agriculture is somehow more \u201csustainable<\/a>\u201d than regular farming, Popoff said the environmental benefits are negligible at best. Organic farms, for example, are prohibited from using modern, nitrogen-based fertilizers that drastically increase crop yields. Synthetic pesticides are also prohibited. Because agriculture inherently becomes less productive under such restrictions, it takes far more land and resources to produce the same amount of food. <\/p>\n With a global population of around seven billion, efficient and cost-effective farming, of course, becomes even more crucial. That is why, according to Popoff, globalist environmentalists with deep pockets and dubious motives have taken such an interest in the promotion of organic farming and all things \u201csustainable<\/a>.\u201d Among the key figures: John Podesta, former White House chief of staff to President Clinton and current boss of the statist Center for American Progress; self-styled communist and former Obama administration \u201cgreen jobs\u201d czar Van Jones; and billionaire globalist financier George Soros.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/p>\n \u201cBut here\u2019s the far more important consideration,\u201d Popoff said. \u201cEverything else the globalist environmental movement ever tried before required that people stop buying things, whether it was fur, meat, wood, fuel for our cars, or cars themselves. But now these activists have found a way to encourage people to buy \u2013 i.e. \u2018organic,\u2019 local and \u2018humane\u2019 food \u2013 and thereby fund their anti-technological revolution with genuine market-driven capital.\u201d <\/p>\n \u201cThis is unprecedented,\u201d he continued. \u201cUnprecedented in today\u2019s market place, unprecedented in human history. And, in fact, it makes the whole concept of carbon trading look like child\u2019s play by comparison.\u201d At the end of the day, Popoff believes that this may represent \u201cthe biggest green scam since Nazism.\u201d<\/p>\n One of the motivations behind the groups and individuals pushing the organic movement is reducing human population levels<\/a>, Popoff argued, echoing widespread concerns<\/a> among analysts who monitor the \u201csustainability\u201d establishment and its schemes. He said that by using a combination of subsidies for organics and stiffer regulations for conventional farming, population-control zealots are gradually \u2013 if quietly \u2013 winning in their gambit to reduce the number of humans on the planet. <\/p>\n \u201cAnytime an organic activist argues that organic agriculture can feed the world, the unspoken assumption contained in that assertion is that there will be far fewer people to feed in the future,\u201d Popoff said. \u201cHow many fewer? Those who support population control but who are unfamiliar with the actual limitations of organic agriculture put the estimate at about half the planet\u2019s current population of human beings. Those who are more informed put it at something closer to a quarter.\u201d <\/p>\n In fairness, there are plenty of experts and countless activists who believe that the push to foist genetically modified agriculture on the world are seeking to reduce the population as well. While the U.S. government claims GM foods are substantially equivalent to traditional crops, a growing number of studies have linked certain biotech products to serious health concerns. <\/p>\n Last year, for example, a major French study using rats found a correlation between genetically modified corn and cancer<\/a>. While the research was lambasted by biotech firms and their allies, it was hardly the first time scientists have sounded alarms bells on the potential negative effects of certain forms of GMO crops. Alarm about the entire business model, which includes patenting DNA, has also been expressed. So for consumers rightly or wrongly concerned about the issue, buying organic may still represent a good choice, and there are actually mechanisms in place that try to keep GMOs out of the organic food supply. <\/p>\n Popoff, while conceding that some of the companies involved may well be questionable, is a strong supporter of genetic engineering, saying it will help humanity and that concerns are \u201ccompletely unfounded.\u201d He pointed to synthetic insulin, developed using biotech technology, as an example of the potential benefits that genetically engineered organisms can offer the world.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/p>\n Still, companies like Monsanto have been staunch supporters of \u201csustainability\u201d schemes, too \u2013 openly backing the controversial United Nations Agenda 21<\/a>. As The New American<\/em> reported in February, the bio-technology behemoth, which recently sparked global protests<\/a>, officially joined <\/a>the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, a group of powerful interests including major banks and Big Oil backing the deeply controversial UN \u201csustainable development\u201d plot. <\/p>\n Despite Popoff\u2019s concerns about the problems in the existing organic regulatory system, he is not necessarily opposed to any and all organic crops. However, he urges consumers to be educated and cautious in choosing what products to buy. Among other recommendations, he said people who want genuine organic foods should try to buy them directly from a farmer they know \u2013 preferably right from the farmer\u2019s farm.\u00a0 <\/p>\n \u201cThe consumer has to be his or her own eyes and ears when it comes to determining what\u2019s organic and what\u2019s fake,\u201d Popoff said. \u201cThe consumer cannot under any circumstances rely on the public-private bureaucracies of the EU, USDA or CFIA to guarantee anything. They are simply not equipped to find fraud, and can\u2019t be bothered to do so even if they were.\u201d<\/p>\n He also says that a free-market approach to the system for people interested in purchasing healthy, toxin-free foods is not only possible, but \u201cwell within reach.\u201d According to Popoff, competition and advances in technology have dramatically slashed the price of proper testing, for example. The current system of asking farmers to keep records for pre-announced \u201cinspections\u201d by federally approved bureaucrats does not keep people honest \u2013 and it just will not work.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/p>\n \u201cFor the last ten years I\u2019ve been saying that instead of record-keeping and record-checking by private, federally accredited certification agencies, let\u2019s instead rely on testing through private labs to prove a farmer or processor is organic,\u201d he said. \u201cThere\u2019s no better free-enterprise solution. After all, governments the world over already agree on what constitutes parts-per-million in lab tests.\u201d<\/p>\n The major biotech firms \u2013 companies like Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, and others \u2013 \u201clove\u201d the current organic system, Popoff explained, saying that they did not want organic certification to become scientific, market-driven, and hence, legitimate. Meanwhile, honest organic farmers are being \u201ccrushed\u201d under the weight of bureaucratic compliance. While there may not be a perfect solution, like in virtually all fields, the free market would almost certainly do a better job in helping consumers. <\/p>\n Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for <\/em>The New American, is currently based in Europe. He can be reached at Related articles:<\/p>\n UN: Let Them Eat Bugs! <\/a><\/p>\n GMO Giant Monsanto Joins Big Business Coalition for UN Agenda 21<\/a><\/p>\n UN Pushes Population Control Agenda <\/a><\/p>\n EU Targets Seeds and Gardeners; Critics Lash Out <\/a><\/p>\n Anti-GMO Labeling Campaign Accused of Fraudulent Claims <\/a><\/p>\n Two Million March Against Monsanto in Worldwide Protest of GM Foods <\/a><\/p>\n Russia Bans GMO Corn Over Cancer Fears as Pressure Builds on Monsanto <\/a><\/p>\n UN Sustainability Summit Exposed: Big Business, Dictators, and NGOs <\/a><\/p>\n The Real Agenda Behind UN \u201cSustainability\u201d Unmasked <\/a><\/p>\n Despite Setbacks, UN \u201cSustainability\u201d Agenda Marches on After Rio+20<\/a><\/p>\n Alabama Adopts First Official State Ban on UN Agenda 21 <\/a><\/p>\n
\n This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
\n .<\/em><\/p>\n