It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You may be wondering why some supposedly ‘healthy’ and ‘environmentally conscious’ companies deceive unknowing consumers into purchasing products with hidden additives and fillers. Perhaps one of the main reasons is that a large number of these pseudo-organic brands are owned by their very unhealthy ‘competitors’, such as Coca-Cola and General Mills. In fact, some of your favorite “All Natural” and organic companies may be owned by a corporate giant.
Companies like Honest Tea and Odwalla may appeal to health conscious shoppers, but they are actually owned by Coca-Cola — the very same company that is currently fuming over the requirement to change their recipes in order to avoid a cancer warning label. Another popular ‘health’ brand is Kashi, owned by the Kellogg corporation. It should come as no surprise that Kashi cereals have been found to contain a copious amount of GMOs and pesticides, according to an explosive report from the Cornucopia Institute. Kashi’s ’Heart to Heart Blueberry cereal’ was found to contain grains coated in the residue of many pesticides such as phosmet, carbaryl, azinphos methyl, malathion, chlorpyrifos methyl, chlorpyrifos. What’s more, the company’s products were found to oftentimes contain 100% genetically modified ingredients.
This information has been known for quite some time. Here’s a really revealing image from Michigan State University that reveals who really owns your favorite company. See if yours is owned by a corporate giant (click for full size):
Originally posted by Chai_An
reply to post by kn0wh0w
Thank you OP for posting this because on another thread I made mention of how the FDA owned the word organic. They did so to be able to define the term organic to mean what they want it to mean. Their version of the definition would include all kinds of stuff that in the most general understanding of the term wouldn't qualify. What's going on here is corporations including this government lie unashamedly about food contents and processes for the sake of making more money off of the people.
Originally posted by Peter Brake
Originally posted by Chai_An
reply to post by kn0wh0w
Thank you OP for posting this because on another thread I made mention of how the FDA owned the word organic. They did so to be able to define the term organic to mean what they want it to mean. Their version of the definition would include all kinds of stuff that in the most general understanding of the term wouldn't qualify. What's going on here is corporations including this government lie unashamedly about food contents and processes for the sake of making more money off of the people.
Hi - I am a certified organic grower here in NZ and what you have written here is the problem. Currently anyone can call anything organic and sell it as such. We (our organic group) have been fighting with government (not easy) to get the word organic to mean "certified organic" as our work is being devalued by others using this term.
Check the label if it doesn't say certified organic - then it is not organic