Comments on: Food Safety Enhancement Act (HR 2749) Advances Out of Committee http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/ An in-depth guide to the world of nutrition Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 Nutrition Wonderlandhttp://nutritionwonderland.com/wp-content/themes/nw_theme/images/NW_Logo_v2.0_144x56px.jpghttp://nutritionwonderland.com400156Nutrition Wonderland is an in-depth guide to the world of nutrition. By: esbee http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-1337 esbee Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:46:02 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-1337 This bill is too much like NAIS and takes away too many freedoms for the sake of a little food safety. This bill micromanages places that grow just about anything, chraging a yearly fee of $500 to do so, and prohibits dogs and cats from roaming on farms...what farm does not have a dog or barn cat? more on NAIS---NAIS (National animal Identification System) is a business plan designed to benefit corporate ag, but the rest of us are dragged in to work and fund the program, while corporate ag gets a free ride. Under NAIS, you register your premises with the government, even if you own even one animal, such as a horse, llama, goat, chicken, cattle, pet pot belly pig, parakeet, etc. (This step clouds title to private property.) All critters must be microchipped and all births, deaths and movements reported into a database. This costs time and money. (Factory farms do NOT have to do this, they get one lot number per group of animals. Any animal in that group could be diseased and who would know.) But if animal disease is suspected in an area, the USDA can depopulate a 6 mile radius (140 sq. miles of dead healthy animals. Touted to be a disease tracking program, so foreign countries will feel safe about buying US raised meat, while the private citizen has to tag and track every critter, corporate ag gets a free ride by having one lot number per groups of animals and few reporting events. I am not in the same business as big ag, but because I own horses, I am forced against my will to be part of the business plan with none of the benefits nor profits but bearing all the costs and risks. Over 90% of the speakers at the USDA NAIS listening sessions on youtube are telling why they oppose NAIS. This bill is too much like NAIS and takes away too many freedoms for the sake of a little food safety. This bill micromanages places that grow just about anything, chraging a yearly fee of $500 to do so, and prohibits dogs and cats from roaming on farms…what farm does not have a dog or barn cat?
more on NAIS—NAIS (National animal Identification System)
is a business plan designed to benefit corporate ag, but the rest of us are dragged in to work and fund the program, while corporate ag gets a free ride. Under NAIS, you register your premises with the government, even if you own even one animal, such as a horse, llama, goat, chicken, cattle, pet pot belly pig, parakeet, etc. (This step clouds title to private property.) All critters must be microchipped and all births, deaths and movements reported into a database. This costs time and money. (Factory farms do NOT have to do this, they get one lot number per group of animals. Any animal in that group could be diseased and who would know.) But if animal disease is suspected in an area, the USDA can depopulate a 6 mile radius (140 sq. miles of dead healthy animals.
Touted to be a disease tracking program, so foreign countries will feel safe about buying US raised meat, while the private citizen has to tag and track every critter, corporate ag gets a free ride by having one lot number per groups of animals and few reporting events.
I am not in the same business as big ag, but because I own horses, I am forced against my will to be part of the business plan with none of the benefits nor profits but bearing all the costs and risks. Over 90% of the speakers at the USDA NAIS listening sessions on youtube are telling why they oppose NAIS.

]]> By: esbee http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-2848 esbee Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:46:00 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-2848 This bill is too much like NAIS and takes away too many freedoms for the sake of a little food safety. This bill micromanages places that grow just about anything, chraging a yearly fee of $500 to do so, and prohibits dogs and cats from roaming on farms...what farm does not have a dog or barn cat? more on NAIS---NAIS (National animal Identification System) is a business plan designed to benefit corporate ag, but the rest of us are dragged in to work and fund the program, while corporate ag gets a free ride. Under NAIS, you register your premises with the government, even if you own even one animal, such as a horse, llama, goat, chicken, cattle, pet pot belly pig, parakeet, etc. (This step clouds title to private property.) All critters must be microchipped and all births, deaths and movements reported into a database. This costs time and money. (Factory farms do NOT have to do this, they get one lot number per group of animals. Any animal in that group could be diseased and who would know.) But if animal disease is suspected in an area, the USDA can depopulate a 6 mile radius (140 sq. miles of dead healthy animals. Touted to be a disease tracking program, so foreign countries will feel safe about buying US raised meat, while the private citizen has to tag and track every critter, corporate ag gets a free ride by having one lot number per groups of animals and few reporting events. I am not in the same business as big ag, but because I own horses, I am forced against my will to be part of the business plan with none of the benefits nor profits but bearing all the costs and risks. Over 90% of the speakers at the USDA NAIS listening sessions on youtube are telling why they oppose NAIS. This bill is too much like NAIS and takes away too many freedoms for the sake of a little food safety. This bill micromanages places that grow just about anything, chraging a yearly fee of $500 to do so, and prohibits dogs and cats from roaming on farms…what farm does not have a dog or barn cat?
more on NAIS—NAIS (National animal Identification System)
is a business plan designed to benefit corporate ag, but the rest of us are dragged in to work and fund the program, while corporate ag gets a free ride. Under NAIS, you register your premises with the government, even if you own even one animal, such as a horse, llama, goat, chicken, cattle, pet pot belly pig, parakeet, etc. (This step clouds title to private property.) All critters must be microchipped and all births, deaths and movements reported into a database. This costs time and money. (Factory farms do NOT have to do this, they get one lot number per group of animals. Any animal in that group could be diseased and who would know.) But if animal disease is suspected in an area, the USDA can depopulate a 6 mile radius (140 sq. miles of dead healthy animals.
Touted to be a disease tracking program, so foreign countries will feel safe about buying US raised meat, while the private citizen has to tag and track every critter, corporate ag gets a free ride by having one lot number per groups of animals and few reporting events.
I am not in the same business as big ag, but because I own horses, I am forced against my will to be part of the business plan with none of the benefits nor profits but bearing all the costs and risks. Over 90% of the speakers at the USDA NAIS listening sessions on youtube are telling why they oppose NAIS.

]]> By: Ace http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-1172 Ace Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:55:07 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-1172 <i>"For example, in the latest Nestle outbreak, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me."</i> The bill says: “prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area.” it's not just truckers who have cookie dough on board like you make it seem, although I'd be against that too, it extends to <b>any vehicle</b> that <b>has ever</b> been used to hold or transport a certain product. Meaning, in such a circumstance, even the average person who maybe brought home some nestle cookie dough a week prior (to use your example) could have the movement of said vehicle restricted. That is unprecedented authority handed over to the FDA and I would reflect your warning back on you, be careful what you wish for. An occasional salmonella or e.coli outbreak doesn't really strike fear into my heart that I'm willing to hand sweeping powers over to the FDA. Especially when these "outbreaks" are quite small given the amount of people consuming them and they rarely kill anyone as in the case with the Nestle example which killed nobody, I would also point out the fact that these people were eating RAW cookie dough which is a risk even if it's from a major manufacturer. “For example, in the latest Nestle outbreak, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me.”

The bill says: “prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area.”

it’s not just truckers who have cookie dough on board like you make it seem, although I’d be against that too, it extends to any vehicle that has ever been used to hold or transport a certain product. Meaning, in such a circumstance, even the average person who maybe brought home some nestle cookie dough a week prior (to use your example) could have the movement of said vehicle restricted.

That is unprecedented authority handed over to the FDA and I would reflect your warning back on you, be careful what you wish for. An occasional salmonella or e.coli outbreak doesn’t really strike fear into my heart that I’m willing to hand sweeping powers over to the FDA. Especially when these “outbreaks” are quite small given the amount of people consuming them and they rarely kill anyone as in the case with the Nestle example which killed nobody, I would also point out the fact that these people were eating RAW cookie dough which is a risk even if it’s from a major manufacturer.

]]> By: Ace http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-2847 Ace Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:55:00 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-2847 <i>"For example, in the latest Nestle outbreak, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me."</i> The bill says: “prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area.” it's not just truckers who have cookie dough on board like you make it seem, although I'd be against that too, it extends to <b>any vehicle</b> that <b>has ever</b> been used to hold or transport a certain product. Meaning, in such a circumstance, even the average person who maybe brought home some nestle cookie dough a week prior (to use your example) could have the movement of said vehicle restricted. That is unprecedented authority handed over to the FDA and I would reflect your warning back on you, be careful what you wish for. An occasional salmonella or e.coli outbreak doesn't really strike fear into my heart that I'm willing to hand sweeping powers over to the FDA. Especially when these "outbreaks" are quite small given the amount of people consuming them and they rarely kill anyone as in the case with the Nestle example which killed nobody, I would also point out the fact that these people were eating RAW cookie dough which is a risk even if it's from a major manufacturer. “For example, in the latest Nestle outbreak, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me.”

The bill says: “prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area.”

it’s not just truckers who have cookie dough on board like you make it seem, although I’d be against that too, it extends to any vehicle that has ever been used to hold or transport a certain product. Meaning, in such a circumstance, even the average person who maybe brought home some nestle cookie dough a week prior (to use your example) could have the movement of said vehicle restricted.

That is unprecedented authority handed over to the FDA and I would reflect your warning back on you, be careful what you wish for. An occasional salmonella or e.coli outbreak doesn’t really strike fear into my heart that I’m willing to hand sweeping powers over to the FDA. Especially when these “outbreaks” are quite small given the amount of people consuming them and they rarely kill anyone as in the case with the Nestle example which killed nobody, I would also point out the fact that these people were eating RAW cookie dough which is a risk even if it’s from a major manufacturer.

]]> By: John Serrao http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-1171 John Serrao Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:22:07 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-1171 Ace, you are talking about giving the FDA to have the ability to shut down a regional area based on a widespread contamination. To understand what Ace is talking about, you need to think of the multinational corporate aspect of food production, which HR 2749 is targeting. For example, in the <a href="http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/nestle-cookie-dough-recall-suspected-ecoli-0157h7-outbreak-in-26-states/" rel="nofollow">latest Nestle outbreak</a>, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me. The idea that the FDA is going to swarm into a regional area and shut down the entire farmers marker circuit based on one outbreak is simply not true. If you read the bill, ALL direct sales by farmers to consumers ARE EXEMPT from the bill. Most small farmers who produce food would face new rules as our guest columnist alluded to recently but it all depends on what you are selling. Considering the Nestle outbreak hit something like 30 states, in Ace's universe the FDA would have to shut down something on the order of 2500 farmers markets. The logistics of this alone should assuage your fears. Farmers markets are not the outlets for multinational corporations and their outbreaks. Derailing this legislation ensures a repeat of the deadly outbreaks we have seen this year. Be careful what you wish for Ace. Ace, you are talking about giving the FDA to have the ability to shut down a regional area based on a widespread contamination. To understand what Ace is talking about, you need to think of the multinational corporate aspect of food production, which HR 2749 is targeting.

For example, in the latest Nestle outbreak, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me.

The idea that the FDA is going to swarm into a regional area and shut down the entire farmers marker circuit based on one outbreak is simply not true. If you read the bill, ALL direct sales by farmers to consumers ARE EXEMPT from the bill. Most small farmers who produce food would face new rules as our guest columnist alluded to recently but it all depends on what you are selling. Considering the Nestle outbreak hit something like 30 states, in Ace’s universe the FDA would have to shut down something on the order of 2500 farmers markets. The logistics of this alone should assuage your fears.

Farmers markets are not the outlets for multinational corporations and their outbreaks. Derailing this legislation ensures a repeat of the deadly outbreaks we have seen this year. Be careful what you wish for Ace.

]]> By: John Serrao http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-2846 John Serrao Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:22:00 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-2846 Ace, you are talking about giving the FDA to have the ability to shut down a regional area based on a widespread contamination. To understand what Ace is talking about, you need to think of the multinational corporate aspect of food production, which HR 2749 is targeting. For example, in the <a href="http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/nestle-cookie-dough-recall-suspected-ecoli-0157h7-outbreak-in-26-states/" rel="nofollow">latest Nestle outbreak</a>, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me. The idea that the FDA is going to swarm into a regional area and shut down the entire farmers marker circuit based on one outbreak is simply not true. If you read the bill, ALL direct sales by farmers to consumers ARE EXEMPT from the bill. Most small farmers who produce food would face new rules as our guest columnist alluded to recently but it all depends on what you are selling. Considering the Nestle outbreak hit something like 30 states, in Ace's universe the FDA would have to shut down something on the order of 2500 farmers markets. The logistics of this alone should assuage your fears. Farmers markets are not the outlets for multinational corporations and their outbreaks. Derailing this legislation ensures a repeat of the deadly outbreaks we have seen this year. Be careful what you wish for Ace. Ace, you are talking about giving the FDA to have the ability to shut down a regional area based on a widespread contamination. To understand what Ace is talking about, you need to think of the multinational corporate aspect of food production, which HR 2749 is targeting.

For example, in the latest Nestle outbreak, the FDA would have been able to immediately seize all cookie dough products and stop any vehicle transporting the products in any of the effected states. That really doesnt sound like a terrible idea to me.

The idea that the FDA is going to swarm into a regional area and shut down the entire farmers marker circuit based on one outbreak is simply not true. If you read the bill, ALL direct sales by farmers to consumers ARE EXEMPT from the bill. Most small farmers who produce food would face new rules as our guest columnist alluded to recently but it all depends on what you are selling. Considering the Nestle outbreak hit something like 30 states, in Ace’s universe the FDA would have to shut down something on the order of 2500 farmers markets. The logistics of this alone should assuage your fears.

Farmers markets are not the outlets for multinational corporations and their outbreaks. Derailing this legislation ensures a repeat of the deadly outbreaks we have seen this year. Be careful what you wish for Ace.

]]> By: Ace http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-1170 Ace Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:10:14 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-1170 What a spin this John Serro character put on this one. This bill would allow the shutdown of farm markets when they aren't even involved in a contamination. It would also give the FDA power to quarantine an area and restrict movement of ANY vehicle that has been used to transport or hold the food in question - EVEN IF THERE IS NO FOOD CURRENTLY IN THE VEHICLE HORRIBLE LEGISLATION What a spin this John Serro character put on this one. This bill would allow the shutdown of farm markets when they aren’t even involved in a contamination.

It would also give the FDA power to quarantine an area and restrict movement of ANY vehicle that has been used to transport or hold the food in question – EVEN IF THERE IS NO FOOD CURRENTLY IN THE VEHICLE

HORRIBLE LEGISLATION

]]> By: Ace http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-2845 Ace Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:10:00 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-2845 What a spin this John Serro character put on this one. This bill would allow the shutdown of farm markets when they aren't even involved in a contamination. It would also give the FDA power to quarantine an area and restrict movement of ANY vehicle that has been used to transport or hold the food in question - EVEN IF THERE IS NO FOOD CURRENTLY IN THE VEHICLE HORRIBLE LEGISLATION What a spin this John Serro character put on this one. This bill would allow the shutdown of farm markets when they aren’t even involved in a contamination.

It would also give the FDA power to quarantine an area and restrict movement of ANY vehicle that has been used to transport or hold the food in question – EVEN IF THERE IS NO FOOD CURRENTLY IN THE VEHICLE

HORRIBLE LEGISLATION

]]> By: John Serrao http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-1149 John Serrao Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:03:32 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-1149 Curiosity- Hopefully your name would guide you to the text of the actual bill (which was linked to in the original article): <a href="http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2749/text" rel="nofollow">http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2749/text</a> You should read over it - there are TONS of provisions for small farmers included in this bill. Small farmers like yourself <strong>may not even be subject to any inspections</strong>. The FDA is MANDATED by the bill to set up guidelines where small producers can avoid be declared as 'food facilities'. ONLY food facilities large enough to pose a serious, systemic type risk will be inspected. Many of those small facilities will only be reviewed once every 4-5 years - a period that can be lengthened if you can prove you don't pose a risk. If you are on the smaller end of this scale, you are only charged $500/yr (and I believe its only the year you are inspected in). These are extremely lenient terms. So, if you are as small as you say, you will likely never be inspected. I can think of no more efficacious way to do this, can you? And we are plenty aware of the problems at the FDA and have grave reservations about their expansion of power - but ultimately someone will be in charge of food safety, so similar charges could be leveled at any arm of the government in charge of this task. Remember - this bill still does not update the USDA FSIS food safety rules at all (the USDA is in charge of the entire meat, beef, poultry, pork scene) - so if anything <strong>HR 2479 is far too weak in our opinion</strong>. If you are interested in outlining what a better provisions for small farmers a food safety bill should include versus HR 2749, we would be more than happy to run your story and give your small farm some publicity in the process. Curiosity-

Hopefully your name would guide you to the text of the actual bill (which was linked to in the original article):
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2749/text

You should read over it – there are TONS of provisions for small farmers included in this bill. Small farmers like yourself may not even be subject to any inspections. The FDA is MANDATED by the bill to set up guidelines where small producers can avoid be declared as ‘food facilities’. ONLY food facilities large enough to pose a serious, systemic type risk will be inspected.

Many of those small facilities will only be reviewed once every 4-5 years – a period that can be lengthened if you can prove you don’t pose a risk. If you are on the smaller end of this scale, you are only charged $500/yr (and I believe its only the year you are inspected in). These are extremely lenient terms.

So, if you are as small as you say, you will likely never be inspected. I can think of no more efficacious way to do this, can you?

And we are plenty aware of the problems at the FDA and have grave reservations about their expansion of power – but ultimately someone will be in charge of food safety, so similar charges could be leveled at any arm of the government in charge of this task. Remember – this bill still does not update the USDA FSIS food safety rules at all (the USDA is in charge of the entire meat, beef, poultry, pork scene) – so if anything HR 2479 is far too weak in our opinion.

If you are interested in outlining what a better provisions for small farmers a food safety bill should include versus HR 2749, we would be more than happy to run your story and give your small farm some publicity in the process.

]]> By: John Serrao http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-2844 John Serrao Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:03:00 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-2844 Curiosity- Hopefully your name would guide you to the text of the actual bill (which was linked to in the original article): <a href="http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2749/text" rel="nofollow">http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2749/text</a> You should read over it - there are TONS of provisions for small farmers included in this bill. Small farmers like yourself <strong>may not even be subject to any inspections</strong>. The FDA is MANDATED by the bill to set up guidelines where small producers can avoid be declared as 'food facilities'. ONLY food facilities large enough to pose a serious, systemic type risk will be inspected. Many of those small facilities will only be reviewed once every 4-5 years - a period that can be lengthened if you can prove you don't pose a risk. If you are on the smaller end of this scale, you are only charged $500/yr (and I believe its only the year you are inspected in). These are extremely lenient terms. So, if you are as small as you say, you will likely never be inspected. I can think of no more efficacious way to do this, can you? And we are plenty aware of the problems at the FDA and have grave reservations about their expansion of power - but ultimately someone will be in charge of food safety, so similar charges could be leveled at any arm of the government in charge of this task. Remember - this bill still does not update the USDA FSIS food safety rules at all (the USDA is in charge of the entire meat, beef, poultry, pork scene) - so if anything <strong>HR 2479 is far too weak in our opinion</strong>. If you are interested in outlining what a better provisions for small farmers a food safety bill should include versus HR 2749, we would be more than happy to run your story and give your small farm some publicity in the process. Curiosity-

Hopefully your name would guide you to the text of the actual bill (which was linked to in the original article):
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2749/text

You should read over it – there are TONS of provisions for small farmers included in this bill. Small farmers like yourself may not even be subject to any inspections. The FDA is MANDATED by the bill to set up guidelines where small producers can avoid be declared as ‘food facilities’. ONLY food facilities large enough to pose a serious, systemic type risk will be inspected.

Many of those small facilities will only be reviewed once every 4-5 years – a period that can be lengthened if you can prove you don’t pose a risk. If you are on the smaller end of this scale, you are only charged $500/yr (and I believe its only the year you are inspected in). These are extremely lenient terms.

So, if you are as small as you say, you will likely never be inspected. I can think of no more efficacious way to do this, can you?

And we are plenty aware of the problems at the FDA and have grave reservations about their expansion of power – but ultimately someone will be in charge of food safety, so similar charges could be leveled at any arm of the government in charge of this task. Remember – this bill still does not update the USDA FSIS food safety rules at all (the USDA is in charge of the entire meat, beef, poultry, pork scene) – so if anything HR 2479 is far too weak in our opinion.

If you are interested in outlining what a better provisions for small farmers a food safety bill should include versus HR 2749, we would be more than happy to run your story and give your small farm some publicity in the process.

]]> By: Curiosity http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-1146 Curiosity Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:01:52 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-1146 I am shocked that someone or something (whatever this it) promotes nutrition and healthy eating, food safety, etc... and supports the worst bill ever introduced into the house regarding food safety. You really need to check your facts on this one. You should be fighting it and certainly not promoting it. Shocking. Ignorance is the only reason that comes to mind. This bill will kill most small food processors and small family farms across the US. Literally! I am BOTH. Shame on you and do a little more research. Direct mail me if you help. FIGHT THIS BILL if you wish to keep the food supply out of the hands of the BIG few and into the hands of the multiple small. I am shocked that someone or something (whatever this it) promotes nutrition and healthy eating, food safety, etc… and supports the worst bill ever introduced into the house regarding food safety.

You really need to check your facts on this one. You should be fighting it and certainly not promoting it. Shocking. Ignorance is the only reason that comes to mind.

This bill will kill most small food processors and small family farms across the US. Literally!

I am BOTH. Shame on you and do a little more research. Direct mail me if you help. FIGHT THIS BILL if you wish to keep the food supply out of the hands of the BIG few and into the hands of the multiple small.

]]> By: Curiosity http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-2843 Curiosity Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:01:00 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-2843 I am shocked that someone or something (whatever this it) promotes nutrition and healthy eating, food safety, etc... and supports the worst bill ever introduced into the house regarding food safety. You really need to check your facts on this one. You should be fighting it and certainly not promoting it. Shocking. Ignorance is the only reason that comes to mind. This bill will kill most small food processors and small family farms across the US. Literally! I am BOTH. Shame on you and do a little more research. Direct mail me if you help. FIGHT THIS BILL if you wish to keep the food supply out of the hands of the BIG few and into the hands of the multiple small. I am shocked that someone or something (whatever this it) promotes nutrition and healthy eating, food safety, etc… and supports the worst bill ever introduced into the house regarding food safety.

You really need to check your facts on this one. You should be fighting it and certainly not promoting it. Shocking. Ignorance is the only reason that comes to mind.

This bill will kill most small food processors and small family farms across the US. Literally!

I am BOTH. Shame on you and do a little more research. Direct mail me if you help. FIGHT THIS BILL if you wish to keep the food supply out of the hands of the BIG few and into the hands of the multiple small.

]]> By: jeanruss http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-1122 jeanruss Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:48:20 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-1122 This is the twin bill to HR 875 that was intended to destroy organic farming. Monsanto and their ilk will continue to try to buy off Congress. This issue is non-negotiable. We cannot allow the government to control our food. Factory farms are where these hideous outbreaks occur because they pervert nature. We defeated HR 875 and we will continue to fight this oppression from the Fascist corporations in America. This is the twin bill to HR 875 that was intended to destroy organic farming. Monsanto and their ilk will continue to try to buy off Congress. This issue is non-negotiable. We cannot allow the government to control our food. Factory farms are where these hideous outbreaks occur because they pervert nature. We defeated HR 875 and we will continue to fight this oppression from the Fascist corporations in America.

]]> By: jeanruss http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/food-safety-enhancement-act-hr-2749/comment-page-1/#comment-2842 jeanruss Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:48:00 +0000 http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=676#comment-2842 This is the twin bill to HR 875 that was intended to destroy organic farming. Monsanto and their ilk will continue to try to buy off Congress. This issue is non-negotiable. We cannot allow the government to control our food. Factory farms are where these hideous outbreaks occur because they pervert nature. We defeated HR 875 and we will continue to fight this oppression from the Fascist corporations in America. This is the twin bill to HR 875 that was intended to destroy organic farming. Monsanto and their ilk will continue to try to buy off Congress. This issue is non-negotiable. We cannot allow the government to control our food. Factory farms are where these hideous outbreaks occur because they pervert nature. We defeated HR 875 and we will continue to fight this oppression from the Fascist corporations in America.

]]>