Special to WorldTribune.com, June 26, 2023

Corporate WATCH

Commentary by Joe Schaeffer

The crucial battle to preserve food integrity has suffered two major blows in recent weeks. The U.S. Department of Agriculture on June 21 approved the sale of lab-grown chicken product while in Australia, a major push to have cattle inoculated with unproven mRNA animal vaccines is moving forward.

Let’s start with the Frankenfood before turning our attention to the horrors of experimental-jabbed cows.

“The USDA issued approval to Good Meat, a subsidiary of Eat Just, along with Upside Foods. Both companies had already received the go-ahead months earlier from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which said each company’s lab-grown chicken is safe for human consumption,” CNBC reports.

The article describes just how bizarre lab meat is:
 

Cultured meat, also known as cultivated, cell-based or lab-grown protein, is made by putting stem cells from the fat or muscle of an animal into a culture medium that feeds the cells, allowing them to grow. The medium is then put into a bioreactor to support the cells’ growth, creating an end product that looks and tastes like traditional meat.

Doesn’t that sound delicious?

By far the worst part of this crazed war on traditional food is the playing down of the potentially lethal threat that comes with consuming “lab-grown protein.” Popular natural health activist Dr. Joseph Mercola in May noted that “cultured meat produces toxic biowaste”:
 

As explained by [Alan Lewis, vice president of government affairs for Natural Grocers], the various “feed” ingredients are placed in a fermentation bioreactor set at 87 to 90 degrees Fahrenheit for anywhere from 24 to hundreds of hours to grow the target microorganism. The target organisms in the ferment consume the nutrients they need, and what’s left over after those organisms are extracted is hazardous biowaste.

While traditional fermentation processes, such as the making of beer, produce waste products that are edible by animals, compostable and pose no biohazard, the biowaste from these synthetic biology ferments must first be deactivated, and then must be securely disposed of. It cannot go into a landfill. Making food that produces hazardous biowaste is hardly a sustainable model.

An overtly supportive June 21 article in big-box propaganda organ The Associated Press describes the “feeding” process of cultivated meat cells:
 

Once the cell lines are selected, they’re combined with a broth-like mixture that includes the amino acids, fatty acids, sugars, salts, vitamins and other elements cells need to grow. Inside the tanks, called cultivators, the cells grow, proliferating quickly.

Dr. Mercola explains what this actually entails. It deserves to be quoted at length:
 

[S]ynthetic biology manufacturers rarely ever discuss what goes into the feed they use to grow the target organism, or what happens to the waste at the end of the fermentation process. That’s understandable, as both raise a number of serious questions.

As explained by Lewis, the starting ingredients in fermented synthetic biology products are cheap sugars derived from genetically engineered corn and soy. All GE crops are grown in environmentally destructive monocultures with taxpayer subsidies, and use loads of herbicides such as glyphosate, pesticides like neonicotinoids, and synthetic fertilizers.

As a result, they’re loaded with chemical residues. In addition to a base of sugars, hundreds of other ingredients may be added to the ferment in order to produce the desired end product, such as a certain protein, color, flavor or scent.

As explained by Lewis, the most-often used microorganism in the fermentation process is E. coli. The E. coli is gene-edited to produce the desired compound through its digestive process.

The microorganism must also be antibiotic-resistant, since it needs to survive the antibiotics used to kill off other undesirable organisms in the vat. As a result, antibiotic-resistant organisms also become integrated into the final product, and the types of foodborne illness that might be caused by gene-edited antibiotic-resistant E. coli and its metabolites are anyone’s guess. Nobody knows what such illness might look like.

Here is Lewis speaking on synthetic biology at the 2022 Environmental Health Symposium. It makes for a fascinating 12-minute listen:



Just as it did with the experimental COVID vaccines that have gone on to kill and injure countless of healthy human beings around the world, a fully allied dominant media establishment is singing the praises of this highly dangerous and totally irresponsible new venture.

Jonel Aleccia, co-author of that biased AP report in favor of cultivated meat, switched over to full-throated advocacy in a separate “news article” for the tainted wire service titled “Is it chicken? Here’s how the first bite of ‘cell-cultivated’ meat tastes.” Her argument is handicapped right out of the gate by the fact that it appeals to that small audience of cosmopolitan progressives who believe eating animals amounts to murder:
 

I’m a lifelong meat eater. I’m also a victim of the “meat paradox,” a term scientists use to describe the psychological conflict that occurs in people who like to eat meat but don’t like to contemplate the animals that died providing it.

Aleccia’s hardly surprising verdict on lab meat: Bon appetit!
 

Last week, I visited the Alameda, California, plant where Good Meat is poised to begin production of its chicken products. Chef Zach Tyndall was ready with a smoked chicken salad with mayonnaise, golden raisins and walnuts. He followed it with a chicken “thigh” dish — darker meat served on a bed of potato puree with a mushroom-vegetable demi-glace, golden beets and tiny purple cauliflower florets.

The taste was richer than a chicken breast, more like the dark meat of a thigh. And the texture was both tender and chewy, like a well-cooked chicken thigh should be.

That, says Tyndall, is the whole point.

“It needs to be as lifelike as possible for it to catch on,” he said.

While “lifelike” is an interesting word, from my side of the fork I think this will catch on.

A simple question will suffice here: When is the last time you heard a small farmer refer to the birds roaming his grounds pecking at the ground for worms and whatnot as “lifelike”? Meanwhile, in Australia, another phase in the War on Food continues to gather force like a hurricane. The Spectator Australia reported June 14:
 

In one example that mRNA is on its way Down Under, on May 2, 2023, Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) announced funding for a project to ‘test mRNA vaccines that can be rapidly mass-produced in Australia in the event of a lumpy skin disease or other exotic disease outbreak’.

The Manager for Animal Wellbeing, released a statement saying:

“This project will develop a mRNA vaccine pipeline initially for LSD, but potentially for other emergency diseases. This will enable capacity for rapid mass production of a vaccine for LSD in the event of an outbreak. No LSD vaccines are registered for use in Australia yet. While some vaccines exist overseas, the path to registration in Australia for traditionally-produced [vaccines] is longer than that of an mRNA vaccine.”

The magazine correctly emphasizes how a threat is amplified to justify an experimental technology that is far from proven:
 

A 2022 article in PubMed Central notes: ‘Recently, the successful application of mRNA vaccines against Covid has further validated the platform and opened the floodgates to mRNA vaccine’s potential in infectious disease prevention, especially in the veterinary field.’

Do you feel mRNA has been ‘validated’ over the last three years?

No doubt this is why we keep hearing bleatings of ‘emergency’ and ‘outbreak’ in the same breath as mRNA, as if to remind us of the mantra used during the Covid era to embark on what the former Health Minister referred to as the ‘largest clinical trial – the largest global vaccine trial ever’. Look how that turned out.

The state-affiliated Australian Broadcasting Corporation in September played up the dire crisis that may unfold, though is still far likelier not to, over the next five years if Lumpy Skin Disease comes to the nation:
 

An outbreak of LSD would wipe more than $7 billion from Australia's farm sector in its first year....

Australia is free from LSD, but expert analysis from the Centre of Excellence for Biosecurity Analysis earlier this year found a 28 percent likelihood of an outbreak in the next five years.

That compares to an 11.6 percent risk for foot-and-mouth.

As The Gateway Pundit observed in October, Australian officials are once again promoting the notion that only Big Pharma can save us all from catastrophe:
 

The government of New South Wales said... it had requested the American biotechnology company Tiba Biotech speed up the development of the first mRNA vaccines for foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) and lumpy skin disease.

“The NSW Nationals in Government are taking the threat of FMD and Lumpy Skin Disease extremely seriously, and this milestone is another step forward in preparing for a potential outbreak,” said Paul Toole, Deputy Premier and Minister for Regional NSW.

NSW hopes to produce a world-first synthetic vaccine for foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) and lumpy skin disease by August 2023 with a $6 million government grant.

“I have now written to vaccine manufacturers to take up my challenge to develop both vaccines ready for use and manufacture in NSW by August 1 next year,” Toole said.

The globalist elitist push for “transhumanism” is real and will not rest until it has burrowed its way into all aspects of our mutilated existences.

---

Action . . . . Intelligence . . . . Publish