Codex Alimentarius - 3,000,000,000 Deaths forcasted, December 31 '09, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 145 times


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 07:11 PM by mpriebe81
reply to post by Teki187


You're just going to dismiss the whole CODEX ordeal based on what one guy with a blog thinks about the Doc in question? And did you bother to read any of the comments on this blog post? Give it another look my friend.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 07:18 PM by king9072
Originally posted by HulaAnglers
reply to post by huntsfromcanada


We are safe for now...

1. The Guidelines on Vitamin and Mineral Supplements specifically state they will only apply in countries that regulate vitamins and minerals as foods. In Canada, vitamin and mineral supplements are regulated as natural health products. The proposed Codex guidelines are therefore not applicable in this country.
2. Under Canada's Natural Health Products Regulations, which came into effect on January 1, 2004, the safety and efficacy of vitamin and mineral supplements sold in Canada is already ensured.source



You should have read my entire posts, I mention bill C-51 near the bottom, which will ruin things for Canada as well.

Additionally, through the many, many hours of research I never found one site that claimed that it was pushed back. But other people have brought it to attention that it may have been pushed back.

Really though, the start date is practically irrelevant, its the fraudulent tactics that they are using to set ridiculous limits, as well as their own documentation that is most damning. Whenever this gets implemented, it will be bad no matter what.

Furthermore, those are simply the projected deaths, I never said anything about by this date or that date everyones dead. Thats not the case, but it's extremely easy to see once these guidelines are in place, people who have never suffered from malnutrition will be suffering from it and dying.

Almost half of the deaths in previous centuries were attributed to malnutrition, diseases like scurvy which I already mentioned. In fact the curing of all these malnutrition diseases is one of the largest contributing factors to our longer life span these days, and the progress we have made will be reverted if these guidelines make it into action.

Finally, the evidence for the Codex plan is undeniable, you guys can pick a part any tiny section of my 2 pages all you like, but the facts are there. For those who didn't know about it, now you do. For those who only kind of knew about it, I hope you know more now as I learned a lot putting this article together that I had only 'kinda' knew before.

Thanks.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 07:59 PM by Ex_MislTech
Originally posted by Teki187
Well it looks like the apparent "Dr" is a complete farce.

angryscientist.wordpress.com...

Also isn't she part of the company that claims to have a cure for all cancers?

The person that writes that blog has admitted in public that he
has mental issues, so he also is suspect at best.

If you read far enough down in the comments you will see that.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 08:40 PM by king9072
Originally posted by zlots331
I appreciate all the hard work you have put into your presentation and mean no harm when I say that I am having a very hard time keeping all the different ways and dates that I'm going to die sorted out.

I am starting to get a "chicken little, the sky is falling" complex. Do I get a choice of which way to accept my fate or do I just wait and be surprised when the inevitable happens?

I admit that it's my own fault that I feel this way, as I probably spend way too much time on ATS.

If anyone would like to start a thread sometime that lays out all of the various destruction scenarios that float around on the inter webs I could then maybe pick one from column A and one from column B.

Anyhow, keep up the good work, somebody has to be right. After all, we all have die sometime; some sooner, some later. I vote for later, thank you.



What you need to understand and differentiate:

- This, unlike for instance "2012" topics, is not a prediction
- The facts are not manufactured, they are freely and openly given by Codex itself. Keep in mind, they believe this is "the right thing to do"
- People will not be dying by the tens of millions over night,
- This is a long term plan, that ultimately will lead to billions of preventable deaths
- Unlike other doomsday predictions, which are based from personal theories and spare facts, this is completely documented and if you asked a nutritionist the implications of these guidelines (without them knowing anything about Codex itself) they would no doubt, tell you how devastating such guidelines would be.
- Don't mark Dec 31, or any Codex related date on your calender, simply do your best to inform people of the fraudulent tactics that have gone into producing these ridiculous guidelines which are NOT for "protecting consumers".

I don't bother wasting days writing up threads based on speculation and online predictions.

I write threads that are based on open facts, which are up for interpretation. Especially this one, since all doomsday predictions come from inside Codex itself.

The failure of people and the internet today, is the fact that no one bothers to connect the dots. I will be the first to admit that prior to writing this thread, I only knew the basic premise of Codex, and I did not know all the details that I have presented.

But when you start to look at how Codex came about, who started it, and then look into how they are producing their guidelines, their deception is obvious and the implications are blunt.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 09:48 PM by Pauligirl
What work has Codex undertaken on vitamin and mineral supplements?

In the early 1990s, the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU) began discussions on guidelines for vitamin and mineral supplements.
This Committee is responsible for studying nutritional issues referred by the Codex Alimentarius Commission; drafting provisions, as appropriate, on the nutritional aspects of all foods; and developing standards, guidelines, or related texts for foods for special dietary uses. The Guidelines were adopted in 2005. The Guidelines apply only to supplements that contain vitamins and/or minerals, where these products are regulated as foods. The Guidelines address the composition of vitamin and mineral supplements, including the safety, purity, and bioavailability of the sources of vitamins and minerals.
The Guidelines do not specify upper limits for vitamins and minerals in supplements. Instead, they provide criteria for establishing maximum amounts of vitamins and minerals per daily portion of supplement consumed, as recommended by the manufacturer. The criteria specify that maximum
amounts should be established by scientific risk assessment based on generally accepted scientific data
and taking into consideration, as appropriate, the varying degrees of sensitivity of different consumer
groups. The Guidelines also address the packaging and labelling of vitamin and mineral supplements.
We encourage you to read the complete text of the Guidelines at www.codexalimentarius.net...
download/standards/10206/cxg_055e.pdf

Will Codex make all nutritional supplements only available by prescription? Will Codex ban all
supplements and make vitamins illegal the same way heroin is illegal? Will all natural herbs and
alternative remedies be banned by Codex?

These are some of the many unfounded rumours about Codex that can be found on the internet. The Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements (CAC/GL 55-2005) adopted in 2005
do not contain provisions for the prescription or prohibition of any nutrient supplements. They do not deal with natural herbs and remedies at all.

Why are there so many rumours about Codex on the internet? Where do they come from?

These rumours started some years back when one of Codex Committees
began work on guidelines for vitamin and mineral supplements. They appear to be linked to advocacy groups who wrongly believe that Codex is a threat to freedom of choice especially concerning
vitamin and mineral supplements. These rumours are self-reproducing through chain email messages and other low-cost means of communication.

Genetically modified food
Is Codex promoting genetically modified food (GM foods) and irradiated food? What about
organic or halal foods?

Codex is strongly committed to promote safe foods. Amongst safe foods, Codex does not give any preference to certain kinds of foods over others. Such choice belongs to consumers.
Codex has adopted principles and guidelines to assess food safety of foods derived from recombinant-DNA plants, animals and microorganisms. If a government chooses to build a regulatory mechanism to address the food safety of so-called GM foods, then they can use Codex text as a basis for it. This being said, each government is free to adopt its own policy as to the use of GM organisms
in the agriculture and other sectors. At the moment, there are no internationally agreed
recommendations on the fool labelling of GM foods. Governments are therefore applying their own regulations. Codex has developed standards and a code of practice to effectively apply the irradiation technology to improve food safety, together with guidance on the labelling of irradiated foods.
However, it is left to governments to determine their own approach to the use of food irradiation.
Codex has adopted international recommendations on the labelling of “organic foods” and “Halal foods”, in order to protect consumers from deceptive trade practices. These Codex texts are widely used by countries.

Can I trust Codex?

Codex bases its standards on the best available scientific knowledge at the time, and updates them as necessary. This is because science develops continuously and Codex decisions have to be reviewed in light of new events and discoveries. This is what the whole Codex procedure is about – to offer a neutral international forum for discussion and decision. Developing a Codex standard is a long and thorough process. In case of doubts it is likely that Codex will not develop a standard or take a longer time to build consensus especially when there are very different opinions among member governments.

Will Codex require all fruits and vegetables even organically grown ones to be irradiated and
sprayed with pesticides?

No. Codex guidelines and standards deal with the safe and appropriate use of irradiation and pesticides. Codex does not prescribe the use of these techniques which is up to national legislation.
At the moment, the market for irradiated food is very small and its use is mainly for herbs and spices
(see the video “The pepper trail” for more information about spices www.youtube.com...).

I have heard that the Codex will become law on 31st December 2009. Is it true?

This is an unfounded rumour: The standards, guidelines and codes adopted by the Codex Alimentarius
Commission are voluntary and do not therefore contain implementation deadlines or dates, nor can the
Commission turn them into binding law.
© Codex Secretariat
www.codexalimentarius.net...



I have a question for you, king9072. I got the above out of the newsletter. I tried reading the entire codex, but it just gave me a headache. Since you've read it, in what section is the part about "Under Codex, every cow raised for food must be treated with Monsanto's Bovine somatotropin"--I'd like to read it in context. Thanks.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 09:57 PM by treemanx
Great research and presentation king, you obviously put alot of time and effort into it. I have heard about this off and on for awhile now, and while I agree with some of the things you have put forth here, I dont agree with everything.

I think you could take any string of events from our history and present situations and put them together in such a way as to make a bigger picture, kind of a connect the dots sort of thing. Like in many of these type of theories, there is sometimes a bit of a stretch between the dots though.

I dont believe for one second that the end of that many living souls on this planet will come to an end by something so obviously contrived. There are a ton of these types of theories that project a certain date of catasrophy, but that day comes and goes just like thousands before it. But then there will always be someone to say, no wait! They pushed the date back due to these special circumstances, and now we have a new date of destruction!

I wont outright call this hogwash, as there are many facts that are true presented here. But what I question is the relevance of these facts to one another, and how that paints the picture as a whole.

This is a conspiracy site, and for those of you who slam threads like these to say, hey quit fear mongering here, your scaring people! I say that this is actually the best place for these theories, and they should all be taken with the due grain of salt.

Just my two cents.


reply posted on 14-6-2009 @ 12:43 AM by Teki187
Originally posted by mpriebe81
reply to post by Teki187


You're just going to dismiss the whole CODEX ordeal based on what one guy with a blog thinks about the Doc in question? And did you bother to read any of the comments on this blog post? Give it another look my friend.


First off thank you for reading my post, seems everyone else completely ignored it, ah well.

I'm going to dismiss the issues based on a few things....

There's absolutely no mention of testing or banning whatsoever in the guidelines!


Funnily enough though, in scanning through some of the other articles, I read one on "STANDARD FOR INFANT FORMULA", which detailed vitamin and supplement amounts and levels for food given to, er, infants. Strangely, for someone so hell-bent on limiting our access to vitamins, there are no upper/maximum limits on vitamin levels set. Instead, there are some low minimums set so that the food at least contains some nutritional benefit.

No vitamins are restricted whatsoever. Instead, they simply require that all supplements have their major components fuly labelled:

3.2 Contents of vitamins and minerals

3.2.1 The minimum level of each vitamin and/or mineral contained in a vitamin and mineral food supplement per daily portion of consumption as suggested by the manufacturer should be 15% of the recommended daily intake as determined by FAO/WHO.

3.2.2 Maximum amounts of vitamins and minerals in vitamin and mineral food supplements per daily portion of consumption as recommended by the manufacturer shall be set, taking the following criteria into account:
(a) upper safe levels of vitamins and minerals established by scientific risk assessment based on generally accepted scientific data, taking into consideration, as appropriate, the varying degrees of sensitivity of different consumer groups;
(b) the daily intake of vitamins and minerals from other dietary sources.
When the maximum levels are set, due account may be taken of the reference intake values of vitamins and minerals for the population. This provision should not lead to setting of maximum levels that are solely based on recommended nutrient intakes (e. g. Population Reference Intake or Recommended Daily Allowance values).

[...]

5.6 The label should indicate how the product should be used (quantity, frequency, special conditions).

5.7 The label shall contain advice to the consumer not to exceed the maximum one-day amount.


Did you actually read the Vitamins Guidelines? It's all of three pages long, and does nothing your horror story links claim. I'm very confused as to how it's even related to the EU drafts that are mentioned, other than some ethereal "Well, one world organisation is doing this, and a seperate government is doing that, so they must be related!" hypothesis.

There is repeated mention of scientific findings being required to prove any nutritional claims. Sounds like good sense to me!

Next stop, Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Labelling and Marketing of Organically Produced Foods!

The aims of these guidelines are:
♦ to protect consumers against deception and fraud in the market place and unsubstantiated product claims;
♦ to protect producers of organic produce against misrepresentation of other agricultural produce as being organic;
♦ to ensure that all stages of production, preparation, storage, transport and marketing are subject to inspection and comply with these guidelines;
♦ to harmonize provisions for the production, certification, identification and labelling have organically grown produce;
♦ to provide international guidelines for organic food control systems in order to facilitate recognition of national systems as equivalent for the purposes of imports; and
♦ to maintain and enhance organic agricultural systems in each country so as to contribute to local and global preservation.



reply posted on 14-6-2009 @ 12:45 AM by Teki187
Sorry for the spam, but character limit per post....

Either way, the guideline sets out to define that the very term "organic" itself should not describe anything using inorganic content. Some "brief" excerpts (it's a long article, covering all organic food, veg, fruit, meat AND fish):

Specific Criteria for Additives and Processing Aids:
a) binders, anti-caking agents, emulsifiers, stabilizers, thickeners, surfactants, coagulants: only natural sources are allowed;
b) antioxidants: only natural sources are allowed;
c) preservatives: only natural acids are allowed;
d) colouring agents (including pigments), flavours and appetite stimulants: only natural sources are allowed;
e) probiotics, enzymes and microorganisms are allowed;
f) antibiotics, coccidiostatics, medicinal substances, growth promoters or any other substance intended to stimulate growth or production shall not be used in animal feeding.

[...]

Mammals
38. All mammals must have access to pasture or an open-air exercise area or run which may be partially covered, and they must be able to use those areas whenever the physiological condition of the animal, the weather conditions and the state of the ground permit.
39. The competent authority may grant exceptions for :
− the access of bulls to pasture or, in case of cows to an open-air exercise area or run during the winter period;
− the final fattening phase.
40. Livestock housing must have smooth, but not slippery floors. The floor must not be entirely of slatted or grid construction.
41. The housing must be provided with a comfortable, clean and dry laying/rest area of sufficient size, consisting of a solid construction. Ample dry bedding strewn with litter material must be provided in the rest area.
42. The housing of calves in individual boxes and the tethering of livestock are not permitted without the approval of the competent authority.
43. Sows must be kept in groups, except in the last stages of pregnancy and during the suckling period. Piglets may not be kept on flat decks or in piglet cages. Exercise areas must permit dunging and rooting by the animals.
44. The keeping of rabbits in cages is not permitted.

[...]

12. Once the land has reached organic status and livestock from a nonorganic source is introduced, and if the products are to be sold as organic, such livestock must be reared according to these Guidelines for at least the following compliance periods:
24 Codex Alimentarius
Bovine and equine Meat products: 12 months and at least ¾ of their life span in the organic management system;
Calves for meat production: 6 months when brought in as soon as they are weaned and less than 6 months old;
Milk products: 90 days during the implementation period established by the competent authority, after that, six months.

[...]

6. Pests, diseases and weeds should be controlled by any one, or a combination, of the following measures:
− choice of appropriate species and varieties;
− appropriate rotation programs;
− mechanical cultivation;
− protection of natural enemies of pests through provision of favourable habitat, such as hedges and nesting sites, ecological buffer zones which maintain the original vegetation to house pest predators;
− diversified ecosystems. These will vary between geographical locations. For example, buffer zones to counteract erosion, agroforestry, rotating crops, etc.
− flame weeding;
− natural enemies including release of predators and parasites;
− biodynamic preparations from stone meal, farmyard manure or plants;
− mulching and mowing;
− grazing of animals;
− mechanical controls such as traps, barriers, light and sound;
− steam sterilization when proper rotation of soil renewal cannot take place.
7. Only in cases of imminent or serious threat to the crop and where the measures identified in 6. (above) are, or would not be effective, recourse may
be had to products referred to in Annex 2.


Said Annex 2, refers any use of chemicals as only allowed if permitted by national authorities or certification bodies.


reply posted on 14-6-2009 @ 01:03 AM by Teki187
Also....

I decided to copy out one of the more ridiculous-sounding parts of her monologue, about a guy named Fritz DerMeer. Only, when I look the name up on Google, the only places I can find it mentioned, are other sites linking to this video! For a guy that was supposedly president of IG Farben, designer of the slogan over Auschwitz's gates ("Work Sets You Free"), and then founder of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, he'd be more well known, don't you?

Also Matthias Rath is part of the Codex movement and erm i quote....

Rath is a controversial figure. The Sunday Times (Johannesburg) has described him as an "international campaigner for the use of natural remedies" whose "theories on the treatment of cancer have been rejected by health authorities all over the world."[9] On HIV/AIDS, Rath has disparaged the pharmaceutical industry and denounced antiretroviral medication as toxic and dangerous, while claiming that his vitamin pills could reverse the course of AIDS. As a result, Rath has been accused of "potentially endangering thousands of lives" in South Africa, a country with a massive AIDS epidemic where Rath was active in the mid-2000s.[10]


Sounds like a very credible fellow.

I don't know why I gave Rima Laibow the time of day again, firstly, she says the Codex will allow high levels of Aflatoxin into milk, yet Codex's own aflatoxin/milk guidelines contain no such levels whatsoever, and are in fact guidelines to producers to help them cut down on said toxins. Then she waffles on about how Codex won't let nutrionalists advertise the health benefits of their products and a little graphic about Thompson vs West States pops up. Only I can't for the life of me work out what it has to do with anything. I suppose if she's confusing nutrionalists with drug compound manufacturers, and Codex with an American courtroom, she might have a point, but the ruling actually went completely the other way . I gave up watching after that. The woman's a quack.

That is all for now.


reply posted on 14-6-2009 @ 11:19 AM by DiscloseExpose
reply to post by Teki187


Its not about the links or "the proof". The past defines the future, if you don't recognize/understand the momentum of our current civilizations trajectory I can understand why the thought of an "omnipresence" might seem like sci-fi to you.

Its inescapable and your inability to see the world around will only exacerbate and accellerate "the all seeing eye's" path to complete global control.


reply posted on 14-6-2009 @ 06:28 PM by Psychonaughty
reply to post by king9072


First off how does one get this number of 3,000,000,000?

Really how many people are already starving and not in the mix with these foods that are processed and chemically treated....

Second, this is why the war on drugs is so focused because with the legalization of such, it would cause a widespread permanent legalization of nutritious suplements.

How come I can have mono-sodium glutomite with my Whopper and probably die eventually, but I cannot take Lysergic acid Diethylamide without negative health effects.


At that how come I can take Tyelonol and if maybe I so happen to eat 8 I go into a seizuring frenzy of death, but I cannot eat a pound of marijuana without getting close to such a health hazard.

Just simply pro truth.

-Psycho.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Did Carl Sagan know something?
  Posted 17 days ago with 276 member flags
Earthly coincidences...or not.
  Posted 13 days ago with 122 member flags
STOP....Take a STEP BACK....and look at the BIG PICTURE!!
  Posted 19 days ago with 115 member flags
Was this the real reason why Megaupload was closed down?
  Posted 18 days ago with 96 member flags
The Mysterious Death of Marilyn Monroe
  Posted 16 days ago with 85 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 16 hours ago, 115 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 12 hours ago, 98 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 11 hours ago, 63 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 7 hours ago, 58 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 14 hours ago, 50 replies