Nanotechnology: Tracking food from farm to fork…and you right along with it

image source

Marti Oakley, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

I had come across an article in the Dairy Reporter last year, about the coming plans to insert nano-technology into food.  In the article from DR: Nanotechnology in food: What’s the big idea? By Caroline Scott-Thomas, 26-Jul-2010 this observation was made:

“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.”

We all have enough experience with today’s bio-pirates who are openly colluding with the USDA, FDA and anyone else in government, like “Dirty Harry” Reid NV (D), who single-handedly and unanimously cast the one vote needed to pass the fake food safety bill, to know that food safety and longer shelf life is most likely not what this technology is actually intended to do.  As it is, most products on the shelves of stores now are so chemically laden and contain so much GMO that I doubt spoilage is an option. After all…can chemicals, pesticides and herbicides actually rot?

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.  Reading any label for content makes one think you would be just as well off if you drank floor cleaner and it most likely might be a lot tastier although just as empty of nutrition.

We also know, from experience, that no matter what kind of song and dance emanates from one of these foreign corporations (FAO/WHO) and Big Ag and the Bio-pirates that nothing is in the works that will not have an adverse application of some kind, which is most likely the true intent.  Of course my immediate reaction is first and foremost: What are these foreign corporations doing setting “standards in technology” (profit and control) that are to be foisted on the US? But…I digress…that’s a story for another day.

The potential for abuse of this technology being used adversely is huge.

Big AG and the bio-pirates make no bones about their intent to track food from field to fork and at every step of the process in between which is why it is so imperative that they seize control of production and supply. It is really hard to control the food supply when you have not yet been able to lay claim to all of it no matter how cooperative “Dirty Harry” and his merry band of corporate hiney huggers were or are.

In this report FAO/WHO Expert meeting on the application of nanotechnologies in the food and agriculture sectors: potential food safety implications (PDF):

The industry is, therefore, always seeking new technologies to offer products with improved tastes, flavors, textures, longer shelf-life, and better safety and traceability.

• 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

________
 What the report fails to address or even mention is that every medical disorder listed has been greatly exacerbated and occurs at an accelerated rate due to the chronic contamination and adulteration of food supplies with chemical, pharmaceutical and foreign toxins.  Noting “certain food-related ailments” this committee failed to ask the most obvious and relevant question:   If these ailments are a result of the food we are eating . . . what is the underlying problem with the food?  And why would finding a remedy for this increase in possibly deadly ailments include further contamination and adulteration of the food supply with nano-chips?

I doubt any reasonable person would conclude that the underlying problem was a lack of RFID nano-chips, or a lack of organic nano’s, in the food supply. Or that there was any personal value in having your medication monitored by a satellite in the sky, at least for the reasons it would be done.  This is an invasion of privacy.

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 nano-chips of one kind or another.  The committee does ponder the question as to whether an accumulation of nano’s could cause further health problems, possibly creating peripheral problems from accumulation.  Also, the committee is concerned about the possibility of the chips to escape the GI track and leech out into other internal organs.

Nano-chips will be used to supposedly make food taste more like food by enhancing the flavor and texture.  Here again the obvious is avoided.  Natural food left uncontaminated by toxins, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and whatever else could be thrown in, tends to taste . . . like food.  You don’t need enhancers, or nanoparticles to stimulate your taste buds to fool your brain into thinking you actually just ate something nutritious and tasty.

Nanochips inserted as RFID is the last nail in the coffin of food freedom.  Having reduced the food supply and the available products to a substance that has to be enhanced or that has to be chemically pumped up to make you think it might really be food, is the problem.  And, it is an intentionally created system meant to eventually accommodate the insertion of RFID nanochips to detect not only what you are eating, but to extend surveillance of the individual.  Having reduced the commercial food supply to dangerously toxic concoctions, the report states, the intention and subsequent use of nanochips in food and pharmaceuticals will be used to monitor:

• the application of nanotechnologies in all aspects of the primary production of foods of plant and animal origin;
• the application of nanotechnologies in food processing, packaging and distribution;
• the use of nanodiagnostic tools for detection and monitoring in food and agricultural production.
• Nanotechnologies applied in the environment were also included if there was a potential direct impact on food safety through the environment to the food chain.
• The Expert Meeting was asked not to cover occupational health matters surrounding the use and application of nanotechnologies in the food and agriculture sector 

______________________
RFID nano’s are so small that once ingested they can circulate undetected by the immune system.  Kind of like an on-board GPS for humans or anything else for that matter.

The red flags should be flying right about now.  Here is the plan for field to fork, from fork to human monitoring and individual surveillance.  While I would truly like to think that the intentions of this committee of experts was to protect the food supply from further and unnecessary contamination, it is apparent the focus was instead, planning the future use of nanotechnology to track and control food production and its consumption. While many may argue this will help with traceability, it is a subterfuge meant to divert from the crux of the issue.

While some of what this committee addressed was the current use of organic nano technology which is said to be water soluble and which allows for greater absorption of nutrients, currently used in vitamins and supplements to some degree, and in some readily available food products, it is obvious the intent is to eventually track and control through nano-enabled RFID surveillance, the production and supply of food.  Organic nano technology and RFID nano technology are two divergent aspects that are intentionally discussed as though they are one and the same.  They are not.

Whatever happened to just plain food?

RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLE:
How Close Are We to a Nano-based Surveillance State?

Marti Oakley is a political activist and former op-ed columnist for the St Cloud Times in Minnesota. She was a member of the Times Writer’s Group until she resigned in September of 07. She is neither Democrat nor Republican, since neither party is representative of the American people. She says what she thinks, means what she says, and is known for being outspoken. She is hopeful that the American public will wake up to what is happening to our beloved country . . . little of it is left.  Her website is The PPJ Gazette