Running head: FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
Finding Meaning for Food Safety
Yvette Viands-Evans
South University
1
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
2
Finding Meaning for Food Safety
Supporting human life not only requires food, it also demands multiple elements in nature
to promote a good state of health. The food supply must be nutritious including vitamins,
enzymes, minerals, proteins, fats, fiber, and water. Food must also be free of components that are
able to cause damage. To maintain life both concepts must exist, and if either one is
compromised the life source of the human element suffers, and may even result in death. Food
safety has required utmost attention through out the ages. Increasing over the past 100 years
many people in the United States and around the world advocate money and power to be more
important than promoting healthy life. The concern for maintaining purity in the food supply has
diminished. Apathy for protecting valuable life sustaining food now grows like a cancer in
America, and if citizens hope to remain strong as a government everyone needs to find meaning
in creating, protecting and consuming nourishing food. Americans should realize there is great
significance in protecting a healthy food supply and reject the promoters of adulterated, toxic,
genetically engineered and empty food robbed of precious nutrition. The war against this
destructive apathy begins with understanding all of the components.
Historical records show people sought food alteration as early as the 1300’s for ideas
such as enhancing flavor and creating perceived visual appeal. History also reveals the health
failures that have resulted from misguided attempts to improve food. In the U.S. food producers
began making unhealthy changes to foods in the early 1900’s causing the U.S. government to
establish the Food and Drug administration (FDA, 1903). The administration had authority to
protect citizens from harmful additives or contaminated foods. Since that time industry and
subtle corruption of the food supply has evolved to massive lengths.
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
3
A similar view from history shows that the once mighty Roman Empire practiced adding
lead to the wine source, and also used lead for piping to carry water (Lewis, 1985, para.2). After
the discovery of the ill effects “serious health problems and even madness and death” (Lewis,
1985, para.4), they continued to use lead for wine production and as a food additive. The apathy
for safe nourishment eventually became a contribution to the demise and fall of the greatest
empire the world has known (Lewis, 1985). The root of cultural apathy became Rome’s silent
enemy, and eventually won the battle against the government. The empire fell.
People should be able to trust farmers, grocers, or restaurants and have confidence the
food being grown or prepared for consumption will be beneficent. Humans should have higher
intelligence than animals, yet animals know what to eat and usually foods to avoid unless they
have been feed adulterated foods by people. Humans are still trying to establish safety measures
for agricultural and food additives. Almost all additives except added vitamins have never
shown to be nutritionally enriching. Toxic chemicals disguised as “insecticides” (Swan, 1998,
para. 1) were already being used in the U.S. in the early 1900’s. The government established the
“Food, Drug, and Insecticide Administration” (Swan, 1998, para. 1), later changed to the FDA
(Food and Drug Administration, 1927). What began with one chemist in the government has now
evolved to 9100 employees costing taxpayers over 1.2 billion dollars annually (Swan, 1998,
para. 2). The human race has a peculiar curiosity for adulterating foods. Others also give
underserved trust in those that farm and produce foods. Today in the U.S. there is a growing
movement to produce adulterated foods; against another growing population learning to return to
food purity, starting from the farmer to the interested consumer.
The battle to establish healthy sugar intake has been ongoing in the country. Sugar has
been a notorious villain since the 1400’s when it was so popular the production and transport of
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
4
it lead to the slave trade in the U.S (Whips, 2008, para. 6). Sugar addiction has evolved with such
power despite the fact it is known to contribute to metabolic syndrome (diabetes), obesity, tooth
decay, and other diseases, causing Americans to spend “ $65 billion in lost productivity and $150
billion on health-care resources annually” (Lustig, 2012, para.13). Studies for damaging effects
of excessive sugar consumption are many, and Internet readily available. It doesn’t stop
Americans who are the highest sugar consumers in the world (Lustig, 2012). The community
battle over the recommendation for sugar intake continues even as an oxymoron. This was
apparent in 2011 when “KFC introduces the 64-ounce Mega Jug. For each one sold the chain
donates $1 to the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation” (Taubes & Couzens, 2012, para.47). It
does not make sense to promote a disease that is caused by the over consumption of the
promoter’s product.
Pesticide use is another additive adulterating the U.S. food chain. While it had been
introduced in the late 1800’s and mandated in the early 1900’s it was after WWII usage became
prolific. DDT among other dangerous pesticides originally gave agriculturists and consumers a
false sense of farming security. The truth about using them eventually motivated consumers to
make changes. Safer insecticides were created. The reemergence of pesticide use again is toxic
and has become a dietary health threat. GMO crop marketers claim the crops are “Roundup
Ready” (Monsanto, 2013). This translates gene splicing the “BT corn, cotton and soy beans”
(Smith, 2011, para. 6) genetically to include the pesticide to resist pests. BT is now proven not
only stay in the digestive track, but also lead to many diseases such as multiple sclerosis, and
rheumatoid arthritis. The apathy for accepting food that can cause disease or death continues
with use of pesticides now being genetically engineered into the plants. Many families do not
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
5
have access to certified organic foods, or do not feel the threat is great enough to pay higher
costs for food.
Another chemical food additive recently got attention after a teenager discovered it in a
bottle of Gatorade, which instigated a public outcry through Change.org (Strom, 2012, para. 4).
Many Americans did not realize that a beverage invented specifically for athletes included a
chemical called bromine. Europeans banned use of bromine in foods in the 1970’s after learning
about the toxicities. Producers in the U.S. continue adding bromine to bleach flour, and almost
all sodas and some performance drinks such as Gatorade and Powerade. Bromated pesticides are
also sprayed on most strawberries (inorganic). Since bromine is stored in the body after drinking
sodas and consuming bromated bread for years, it can turn very toxic over time. The health of
U.S. citizens has proven it. The FDA did not have the country’s health in mind when bromine
was allowed into food sources. This apathy has cost many their good state of health, and goes on
to affect health care costs and taxation. Illness not only affects the sick but every one around
them including our economic state. Even though the FDA originally banned bromine as a flavor
enhancer it was later re-allowed as a stabilizer and continues to be added to many processed
beverages and flour today (Israel, 2011).
Some other threats to food safety include harmful chemicals such as mercury. Seafood
and its consumers are at high risk for mercury and PCB’s (polychlorinated biphenyls). PCB’s in
the aquatic environment have been a problem since the 1970’s before usage was banned, but too
late after environmental contamination proliferated. Farmed salmon as an example contains high
levels of mercury due to absorption by the environment. A collection of mercury in the human
body can lead to learning disabilities, heart disease, and defects in the immune system (Duncan,
2009, para. 2). A study done over 10 years by a physician at University of Illinois has found that
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
6
those on a regular seafood diet consuming seafood about twice a week suffered memory loss and
problems learning (PETA, 2013). The researcher also reported higher levels have lead to
“learning disability, behavioral problems, seizures and even death” (PETA, 2013). There is a
great collection of scientific information about the dangers in seafood, yet the FDA has not
subscribed to more testing, labeling and warning for the public’s best interest. Citizens around
the country need to be made aware of the dangers of seafood, and seafood needs to be tested
more diligently. The apathy for protecting the population against seafood dangers has grown at a
significant level. Many fishers are not fully aware of the harmful contaminants.
Antibiotic resistant organisms are on the rise in the U.S. Being a land livestock consumer
has its dangers too. The blatant “misuse and overuse of antibiotics” (ProQuest, 2013) have
played a major role in contributing to such resistant organisms as salmonella, and E. coli.
Farmers claim to use the antibiotics for “sub-therapeutic” reasons, or prevention, but it
coincidentally has shown to cause weight gain in livestock, which is very beneficial for a meat
producer. Most people would not argue about giving animals antibiotics for prevention or
treatment for disease. The usage of antibiotics for animals in the U.S. is estimated between “15
and 17 million pounds” (PBS, 2013) yearly. The cost of treatment for resistant organisms is
about “$35 billion” (CDC, 2010, n.p.). Having an antibiotic resistant organism is no picnic and
can even cause death in immune compromised patients. The FDA is not doing enough to
advocate for consumers over the antibiotic usage in farm animals when raised for food. Even the
U.S. president has remarked that the FDA’s lapses in food protection are unacceptable
(ProQuest, 2013).
The GMO food supply has become a controversial topic for farmers and food suppliers.
Although hybridization has been going on prior to the 19th century that act of splicing the genes
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
7
of an organism into the DNA of another is a whole different process. One hybrid example is a
horse can mate with a donkey and a mule is created. The problem with this new animal is it’s
unable to reproduce. Mules are infertile. There are elements lost and gained in gene splicing and
there has not been enough research to show the safety or lack of it in genetically engineered
foods. The addition of chemicals into the splicing process has already been proven to be disease
causing. This practice continues in the GMO production of corn, soy and cotton by Monsanto
and research has now revealed that the “Bt- toxin” (Smith, 2011, para. 6) is collecting in the
digestive systems of humans contributing to autoimmune disease and cancer. Many products are
using cottonseed oil for ingredients in processed foods. The evidence from research has been
available for over two years now, yet, the FDA has not done any follow up for the protection of
the U.S. citizens from consuming GMO foods.
Americans are left as guinea pigs for the government’s experimental project. Let them
eat GMO! The words ring out with exaggerated apathy in the ongoing allowance of unsafe foods
in the U.S. economy. Although the GAO (Government Accountability Office) has accused the
FDA of “oversight” (Eng, 2012, p.1) the penalties for the process resulted in criticism only, and
recommendations for “random audits” (Eng, 2012, p.1). People are being salaried to care about
protecting and regulating the nation’s food source, and they should be held accountable.
A recent uprising for GMO foods occurred in California. A movement began over
concerns for GMO food production and the citizens began a movement that went to voter ballot
during a California election in 2012, Proposition 37. Purists and concerned consumers were
asking that GMO foods have labeling mandate. Unfortunately, the vote showed a narrow margin
win for GMO companies to continue hiding the truth about the products. If a company is proud
of it’s ingredients such as organic processors, it is a good thing to advertise ingredients as pure
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
8
and unadulterated. If GMO were truly good for people the truth would not have to be hidden.
Apathetic scientists argue that the cost of labeling is more important than giving consumers
truthful packaging allowing the consumer to choose. This attitude values money over health and
knowledge rights. China, Europe, Russia and Australia have either banned GMO foods (Eng,
2012, para. 9) or non-labeled GMO’s. Concerned Americans are only asking for labeling. This is
not too much to ask and the FDA and GOA need to get on board. Recent studies in France reveal
abdominal cancer in rats after consuming GMO food for two years (Vidal, 2012, para. 1). More
studies need to be done in the U.S. There are 9100 people working for the FDA. This does not
equate to being short of staff for a food claim that is potentially deadly. No one wants to choose
to get cancer or an autoimmune disease. If Americans had to pay higher prices for healthy foods
or even higher prices for risky nutrition lacking foods, they may think more wisely about making
food choices, and prevent over eating the more risky foods. It is a rare sight to see any child with
out a toy, electronic game or cell phone. People still complain about spending an extra dollar for
a food that was created for nourishment.
Another hot topic in the countries food supply is radiation. The government believes our
foods need a healthy dose of it to kill harmful bacteria and prolong shelf life. Consumers need to
know the sign for radiated food and what the radiation does to foods. First of all irradiating foods
does not guarantee that all bacteria will be eliminated. People need to wash the foods they buy as
a rule whether organic or nonorganic. The food could have been grown and transported with out
any threat of bacterial contamination. Another consumer can enter the grocery store with a virus
or resistant organism and either touch, cough or sneeze on the foods with out any one’s notice.
Foods need to be cleaned when brought home from the grocery or farm stand.
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
9
Irradiation of foods has been going on since 1916 when Sweden attempted to use the
process on strawberries (Priesnitz, 2013, para.4). It did not become popular until “1953, when
U.S. President announced ‘Atoms for Peace’ program (Priesnitz, 2013, para.4). The president’s
focus was for good intent, but he and the scientists did not realize at the time that the ill effects
were more dangerous than the idea. The radiation process for food causes interference in the
molecular structure of the plant or food, and creates “negatively charged ions” (Priesnitz, 2013,
para. 8) or as currently recognized today, the process creates free radicals. This information has
been researched and scientists have been aware yet the FDA still approves irradiation of food.
The fact that a food source has been changed to contain free radicals is only one part of the issue;
the process also kills off precious vitamins, minerals and enzymes that the human body needs to
survive. Irradiation by design contributes negatively, no pun intended, to both concepts of
characteristics to healthy food. The process of irradiating the pesticides on the foods is still
another unsolved mystery in how damaging the food becomes once affected.
Dr. Epstein, chair of the “Cancer Prevention Coalition” (Priesnitz, 2013, para. 11)
declared at the 2001 cancer symposium how greatly the government has neglected protective
measures for food safety and went even farther by saying “It’s no exaggeration to say that our
government has turned the American people into guinea pigs” (Priesnitz, 2013, para. 11). Cancer
doctors are aware of the high rate of cancer in the U.S. Last year 28 million people were
diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. alone. This should be an indication that Americans are getting
exposed to carcinogens at a higher level than the body can overcome. The food source should be
the first place that carcinogens are removed, or not allowed.
The type of irradiation that is being used on U.S. foods is “cesium-137, and cobalt-60”
(Priesnitz, 2013, para. 15). These types of radiation are gamma rays, the most damaging
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
10
radiation used. Since the Japan tsunami “people are concerned” (Loew, 2012, para. 2) about
radiation exposure. The recent level of concern is ironic since American’s have been consuming
irradiated products for many years now. The public has been told that the process is necessary in
order to resolve bacterial problems at food processing facilities (Priesnitz, 2013). Consumers do
not realize that the irradiation they are consuming can accumulate in the human body. There has
been reason for concern since the very beginning of irradiation practice yet the FDA remains
disconnected from the responsibility towards the health of the nation. The indifference is not a
solution, it remains problematic for the health of the population and in some cases, disastrous.
The FDA was set up to validate safety in the food source in the U.S. They are also
responsible for regulating “generally recognized as safe” (Strom, 2013, para. 14). Dangerous
additives, adulteration and mishandling of foods have been going on before the FDA was
created, and 9100 employees later the dangers not only continue to exist, they are exponential.
The public is not able to rely on the government’s ability to keep harmful food out of the grocery
store shelves. Americans that are aware and able to make the financial sacrifice are consuming
organics, but much of the populations are still at risk for compromise, whether knowingly or not,
people need to provide for sustenance in order to survive. Advertising plays a big role in the
American diet as well. When youth are constantly engorged in candy and soda advertising
eventually it all seems normal and acceptable.
Public awareness for food safety is growing. Thanks to the movie-makers for Food Inc.
(Kenner, 2008) and Supersize Me (Spurlock, 2004), along with other concerned grocery
marketers such as Wholefoods, people are beginning to understand the nature of the beast behind
the food production in the U.S. The down falls of capitalism from those who have no real
concern for the health of the country have just begun to be confronted. Many may have begun
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
11
with good intent for providing food for the masses, but now, new information is available.
Capitalism was meant to be a good venture, not a way to scam the consumer. The momentum for
a safe food supply requires the whole population to get on board. Concerned adults need to start
writing congressional representatives, refusing to buy adulterated foods, and encourage others to
buy organic and certified organic. California may have lost the battle for demanding GMO
labeling, but the country has not lost the war. It is never to late to refuse unhealthy unsafe food
consumption. Growing herbs and small vegetables is inexpensive and recreational, and can be
done even in an apartment. It doesn’t have to start on a farm. It takes a nation to come together
with solutions for changing a broken system, and demanding purity in the food source.
Organic foods should be a way of life for the country not just the wealthy and highly
educated. Using a scientific example for nutritious food, organic verses inorganic can be
explained. “ Oxalic acid” (Shook, 1999, p.3) is created by adding “sodium, potassium, calcium,
iron and manganese” (Shook, 1999, p.3), common minerals needed by the body. Oxalic acid is
commonly used for bleaching or rust proofing, and the combination is a chemical hazard able to
cause serious injury if exposed and even death if ingested. A place where the mineral
combination is also found in nature is in the common salad vegetable sorrel and also rhubarb
(Shook, 1999). Neither plant is dangerous or deadly. This comparison brings the obvious
explanation to practice food safety. Man made chemical combinations and irradiation does not
belong in the human diet.
The FDA has been apathetic and disconnected to the needs of American’s nutrition in
foods. The evidence for governmental apathy and organizational greed for profit and power is
overwhelming. It is up to everyone to demand healthier unadulterated foods, and boycott those
that have been affected. Every American should know there is real meaning in what is eaten by
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
12
the body, and people need to be able to trust when entering a grocery store they are not shopping
for their next disease causing imposter for a food source so some one else can get rich. All of the
information about risky or dangerous food needs to be taken into consideration and the FDA,
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) the GOA should start demanding identification for
unsafe foods. Citizens need to hold all of the government agencies accountable for what tax
dollars are being collected to do. The information available should be better advertised and
studies for safer food production should be initiated. Creating safer nutritious food and healthy
living in the country will contribute to the nation’s health and economic recovery. Every life is
worth it.
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
13
References
Israel, B. (2011, December 12, 2011). Bromated Battle: Soda Chemical Has Cloudy History.
Environmental Health News. Retrieved from
http://www.environmentalhealtnews.org/ehs/news/2011/brominated-battle-in-sodas
Kenner, R. (2009). Food, Inc. Retrieved from Magnolia
Lewis, J. (1985). Lead Poisoning: A Historical Perspective. Retrieved from
http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/perspect/lead.html
PETA (2013). Toxins in Fish. Retrieved from http://www.peta.org/living/vegetarianliving/toxins-in-fish.aspx
ProQuest Staff. (2013). At Issue: Food Safety. ProQuest LLC. Retrieved from SIRS Issue
Researcher
Shook, E. E. (1999). Advanced Treatise in Herbology. Retrieved from Warsaw, IN
Smith, J. (2011, October 6, 2011). Dangerous Toxins Found From Genetically Modified Corn
Found in Blood of Women and Fetuses. Web Mercola.com
Spurlock, M. (2004). Supersize Me, the Movie. Retrieved from Sundance Institute
Taubes, G., & Couzens, C. K. (2012, Nov/Dec). Sweet Little Lies. Mother Jones, 37. Retrieved
from SIRS Issues Researcher
Taubes, G., & Kearns Couzens, K. (2012). Sweet Little Lies. Mother Jones, Nov/Dec(35+), .
http://dx.doi.org/Retrieved from
Vidal, J. (2012, December 19, 2012). Study Linking GM Maize to Cancer Must be Taken
Seriously by Regulators.. Guardian. Retrieved from
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/28/study-gm-maize-cancer
FINDING MEANING FOR FOOD SAFETY
14
Whipps, H. (2008, June 2, 2008). How Sugar Changed the World. Live Science. Retrieved from
http://www.livescience.com/4949-sugar-changed-world.html