March 21, 2018 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
12:20
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| We are now witnessing a corporate revolt in the food industry with Campbell's announcing support for national mandatory GMO labeling and actively withdrawing its support from groups that oppose state GMO labeling initiatives. | |
| This is huge for several reasons that I've discussed in other podcasts, but here's something that you need to know. | |
| Campbell's had previously supported and helped fund through the GMA, which is a money laundering front group for the food industry. | |
| They had helped fund opposition to state GMO labeling ballot measures. | |
| And of course, Campbell's was named, I believe, on many different lists to boycott because of their opposition to food transparency. | |
| But they've changed their tune. | |
| They now see the light. | |
| They see that food transparency is the only way forward. | |
| They know that 92% of Americans support GMO labeling. | |
| They know that people everywhere want to know what's in their food. | |
| They want to know what they're eating. | |
| Transparency is the key to survival for the future of any food company. | |
| And those companies that engage in continued obfuscation, deception, and hiding of the origin of their ingredients will be economically punished in a severe way. | |
| They will be boycotted. | |
| They will be shamed publicly. | |
| They will be named. | |
| And, by the way, the toxicity of their foods will be outed scientifically by groups like myself running my science lab. | |
| That has just undergone a massive expansion with lots of new science coming out this year about food safety, food contamination, highlighting companies that have safer, more honest foods, and exposing companies that have toxic chemicals in their foods, including herbicides that are used on GMOs. | |
| So Campbell's just made a brilliant decision. | |
| I mean, absolutely brilliant. | |
| Even though they're going to take a lot of criticism from inside the industry, they just did the right thing. | |
| You've got to understand that the future of food is all about transparency. | |
| Citizen science is on the rise, and there are even now Kickstarter campaigns to fund... | |
| Small portable devices that you can attach to an iPhone or an Android that do a spectrographic analysis of substances in a handheld device. | |
| Now this is going to change the future of food. | |
| Let me explain this. | |
| Right now, the kind of analysis that I do in my own science laboratory, and I'm one of the pioneers of citizen science in clean food, in the realm of clean food. | |
| I don't think anybody else has ever done what I've done in building a lab and using it to test foods and publishing the results for the public good. | |
| No one has ever done that to the extent that I'm doing it. | |
| I mean, perhaps you could argue Consumer Reports is doing that. | |
| Well, they are doing that, but I mean, that's not their primary focus. | |
| They do a lot of other things as well. | |
| My focus is just clean food. | |
| Now, the expense that it costs To acquire the instrumentation is very, very high right now. | |
| But that's going to be changing with the innovation of small, affordable, portable devices that people can use with their iPhones and Androids. | |
| So right now, I've spent... | |
| I mean, the first lab, version one of my lab was about a million dollars. | |
| Version two is at least another million, actually much more. | |
| So we're probably like $2.5 million into this in terms of instrumentation, the facilities, supplies, trading, and so on and so forth. | |
| I mean, I think I just spent $15,000 on extraction kits for extracting certain types of ingredients from food samples. | |
| I mean, just the kits alone, you know, can cost a fortune. | |
| The instrumentation is very expensive. | |
| You know, the ICP-MS is like $300K by the time you add things onto it that you need. | |
| You know, a good LC is at least $60,000 to $80,000. | |
| A TOF on top of that. | |
| Mass spec instrument is another, you know, $250K to $300K on top of that. | |
| You know, you get very quickly into multiple millions of dollars. | |
| Now, what if that capability could be offered to people in something that costs $99? | |
| What if you could take the analytical capabilities of instrumentation that costs a million dollars and shrink it down into a device that fits in your pocket that anybody can take to the grocery store and they can point it at a piece of fruit or a vegetable or open a can of soup from Campbell's and they can point it at the ingredients inside the can and then they can get a reading Of what's in that. | |
| We're talking Star Trek technology here. | |
| The tricorder. | |
| Remember that? | |
| But this is what's happening. | |
| This technology is shrinking down and it's becoming more affordable and more readily available. | |
| Now, I'm not trying to say that the spectroscopy of the portable devices on Kickstarter are equivalent to, let's say, an LC-MS setup. | |
| I'm not saying they're equivalent. | |
| But it's moving in that direction. | |
| Most likely, the spectroscopy analysis used by handheld devices is going to give you a reading on the predominant material composition of whatever you're scanning. | |
| And it's obviously not going to give you a quantitative readout. | |
| In other words, you can't point it at an apple and read, well, how many parts per million of lead is present in that apple. | |
| It's not going to give you that kind of analysis. | |
| It doesn't have that capability. | |
| But it could potentially, with some more research and development a few years down the road, it could potentially say, yes, there is the presence of lead. | |
| In this apple. | |
| It could potentially do that. | |
| We're not there yet, but that's what's coming. | |
| My point is that the scientific analysis of food composition is becoming democratized. | |
| And any food company that does not understand the implications of this point is going to find itself bankrupt. | |
| And Campbell's just got out in front of this by announcing mandatory GMO labeling and working on the removal of chemical additives and so on, because a few years down the road, if things continue to move in this direction, we are going to have every citizen... | |
| With a device in their pocket that can detect glyphosate, that can detect herbicides and pesticides, heavy metals, toxic chemicals, chemical preservatives, sodium benzoate, artificial food colors, sodium nitrite, benzenes, parabens, chemical contaminants, perchlorate, rocket fuel, all of these things, they will be able to detect with a device that they can carry in their pocket. | |
| And when that day comes, Food companies that continue to try to use these chemicals and hide them from consumers are going to be bankrupted, as they should be. | |
| And at the same time, companies that use clean ingredients that avoid the synthetic toxic chemicals That, for example, they can use essential oils like a rosemary extract as a preservative rather than sodium benzoate, especially in meat products. | |
| Well, they're going to be rewarded economically because consumers are going to be able to verify with their own devices, their own handheld devices, that those products are clean and honest and therefore they're going to buy them. | |
| We're talking about the ability of the entire consuming population to test for the composition of foods and beverages and to be able to post and share that information online through social media and across the internet. | |
| This is going to change the food industry. | |
| I'm just at the leading edge of this, having the abundance The financial ability to build a laboratory and do it now when it's millions of dollars. | |
| But other people in the future will be able to do this for maybe a thousand dollars or maybe someday $99. | |
| This will change everything about the food industry. | |
| And I want to see this happen. | |
| I would love for all the instrumentation that I'm using now that costs millions of dollars to cost $99 instead. | |
| I would love everybody to be able to do what I'm doing because the more people that we have analyzing food composition and publishing those results, well, the more honest food we're all going to have. | |
| You know, it's the democratization of science. | |
| And I've always said that science should not be limited to the monopolistic domains of universities and governments and corporations. | |
| Because when it is, we get bad science, we get fraudulent science, quack science. | |
| The GMO science is quack science. | |
| In many ways, vaccine science is quack science. | |
| I'm not saying that all vaccines don't work, but the safety and efficacy studies are often faked as admitted by the vaccine virologists themselves who filed False Claims Act with the federal government. | |
| There is so much fakery and fraud behind these realms of vaccines and GMOs that the public, if they had the ability to test substances themselves, it would be transformative. | |
| It's the democratization of science. | |
| Thank you. | |
| If we can detect the composition of anything around us in our environment, including our food, including our water, including our air, then all of a sudden we have a massive increase of awareness about the contamination of chemicals and heavy metals that is in our food and in over-the-counter medicines, for example, children's vitamins, which are loaded with toxic chemicals, by the way, but that's another discussion. | |
| This is transformative. | |
| So, Campbell's is doing the right thing. | |
| They're getting ahead of this and other companies had better wake up because this is coming. | |
| The democratization of science will transform the food industry forever. | |
| And pretty soon it won't cost millions of dollars to have the kind of instrumentation that can find pesticides, herbicides, and other toxic chemicals in grocery store foods. | |
| Until that day comes, I'll be doing it for you in my laboratory and publishing the results on naturalnews.com. | |
| So if you want to know what's in your food, just check out Natural News. | |
| And just remember, what I'm doing will be obsolete in a few years probably, because then you'll be able to do it too. | |
| That will be amazing. | |
| Thanks for listening. |
Export Selection