Here are a few article's that includes the concern of the USDA ( 
)to almond growers. And the concern of the deamd of the USDA to the almond industry. The orangnic almond growers has voiced there concern to the mandatory fumigation and the chemicals used in the process since 2007.
USDA Demand that Raw Almonds Be Pasteurized Drives Consumers Nuts
USDA Plan to "Pasteurize" Almonds Has Consumers Going Nuts
Mandate Would Require Use of Chemical Fumigant or Heat Treatment on "Raw" Almonds
The Cornucopia Institute, August 6, 2007
Straight to the Source
Contact:
The Cornucopia Institute
Will Fantle,
715-839-7731
CORNUCOPIA, WI: Small-scale farmers, retailers, and consumers are renewing their call to the USDA to reassess the plan to "pasteurize" all California almonds with a toxic fumigant or high-temperature sterilization process. All domestic almonds will be mandated to have the treatments by early next year. The plan was quietly developed by the USDA in response to outbreaks of Salmonella in 2001 and 2004 that were traced to raw almonds.
"The almond 'pasteurization' plan will have many harmful impacts on consumers and the agricultural community," said Will Fantle, research director for The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group. "Only 18 public comments from the entire U.S.-and all from almond industry insiders-were received on the proposal. The logic behind both the necessity and safety of the treatments processes has not been fully or adequately analyzed-as well as the economic costs to small-scale growers and the loss of consumer choices."
Last Wednesday, the California Almond Board suddenly requested that USDA delay the treatment mandate until March, 2008-it had been scheduled to take effect on September 1. "We support this request for a delay," said Fantle, "but a delay, due to the industry being unprepared, isn't enough. The USDA must also re-open the rule for public review and comment so that those who have been shut out of the decision-making process can have input into any almond treatment plan."
Although foodborne illnesses have garnered headlines in recent years, including contamination of California-grown spinach and lettuce, raw produce and nuts are not inherently risky foods. Contamination occurs when livestock manure or other fecal matter is inadvertently transferred to food through contaminated water, soil, or transportation and handling equipment. Raw foods can also be infected by poor employee hygiene and sanitation practices either on the farm or in processing facilities.
"All fresh foods carry some chance of risk," notes Bruce Lampinen, a scientist at University of California, Davis, who studies almonds, "but there is no more risk now than there was thirty years ago."
And the fear in the farming community is that this will competitively injure smaller sustainable and organic growers. "This will put American farmers at a distinct disadvantage in the U.S. and abroad," says organic almond farmer Mark McAfee. Fumigated almonds are banned in the EU and many other countries. McAfee worries about the impact of the rule on his business. Seventy percent of California's crop is exported.
Several domestic companies that use California almonds are already investigating foreign sources for their needs. After buying almonds from local producers for over 25 years, Living Tree Community Foods, a Berkeley, CA-based natural foods supplier, will soon begin buying almonds from Italy and Spain. Dr. Jesse Schwartz, the president of the specialty retailer, believes the rule, if implemented, will be a travesty for American agriculture. "California almonds are the heritage of the American people," he says, "they are superior in every way."
Jason Mahon owns Premier Organics, a company that produces raw almond butter in Oakland, CA. Mahon is also looking to foreign suppliers and believes the rule is an unnecessary "fear-based decision of the Almond Board, that is clearly trying to protect itself from bad press and lawsuits."
The equipment to meet the new USDA mandate is very expensive, ranging from $500,000 to $2,500,000. Farms can outsource the pasteurization process, but Hendrik Feenstra, a small-scale California handler of organic almonds, believes that to do so will still be prohibitively expensive for modest-sized growers and handlers. "Because pasteurization companies often charge a flat rate no matter the quantity of almonds, it could be four or five times more expensive for small-scale almond producers to pasteurize almonds than it will be for industrial-scale producers," Feenstra says. And modest-size marketers are concerned that increased transportation costs will also add to their burden
Organic farmers also question the science behind the rule. They believe that the sustainable farming methods they use, such as mowing and mulching, rather than controlling weeds by chemical herbicide applications, naturally prevent the spread of harmful bacteria more effectively than treatment after the fact. According to almond grower Glenn Anderson, "An organic farming system fosters biodiversity and creates an environment where Salmonella cannot survive. This rule ignores the root causes of food contamination-the unnatural, dangerous, and unsustainable farming practices on industrial farms."
An important segment of the agricultural community feels that requiring small-scale and organic farms to comply with this rule is unwarranted and premature, as Salmonella outbreaks have only been traced to a very large industrial farm, and there is currently no published research pinpointing the causes of the harmful bacteria. "With the costs involved, and the implications on trade, they are recklessly experimenting with the livelihood of farmers," Fantle added.
Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence supporting the use of the chemical fumigant, propylene oxide (PPO), and steam as the only effective treatments to reduce risk of Salmonella. The most common method of sterilizing almonds is by PPO treatment, a genotoxic chemical recognized as a possible carcinogen that is banned in the European Union, Canada, Mexico, and most other countries. Many chemical-free and heat-free alternatives are being researched. "The Almond Board has not released any of the scientific research justifying their treatment choices," asserts Eli Penberthy, a policy analyst at Cornucopia. "This rule should not be implemented until alternative technologies are thoroughly explored."
The Cornucopia Institute also contends labeling treated almonds as "raw" is misleading and deceptive to consumers. "People choose to buy raw almonds for a variety of personal reasons, including health, nutrition, and even religious beliefs," Cornucopia's Fantle said. "This rule denies them the right to control their food choices by making informed decisions in the marketplace."
In fact, some strict vegetarians who consume only raw foods rely on almonds to provide as much as 30% of their caloric intake, believing that they are a nutritionally superior alternative to meat in the diet. "Raw almonds are increasingly popular for their health benefits," said Goldie Caughlin, the Nutrition Education Manager at Puget Community Cooperative in Seattle, who estimates that the co-op sells 28,000 pounds of raw almonds every year. She said customers are already confused and angered by the implications of the rule, and worries how it will affect sales.
Fantle charges that the rule could very well establish a precedent for more governmental control of fresh foods. Says Fantle, "If almonds require pasteurization, what foods will be next on the list of mandatory sterilization, heat treatment, and irradiation? Truly raw, untreated nuts, fruits, and vegetables might no longer be legally available in the marketplace."
MORE:
Public concern about the almond treatment plan has been growing. Over 1,000 comments opposing almond pasteurization have been submitted to the USDA since the plan was approved on March 31, and an online petition to stop the implementation of the rule has garnered over 15,000 signatures. (To learn more about the issue, go to http://www.cornucopia.org/ and click on the Save almonds campaign button.)
The only exemption to the almond treatment regulations will be an allowance for growers to sell truly raw almonds directly to the public from farmstead stands. Unfortunately, this will give only a limited number of consumers in specific areas of California, the only state in the nation that produces almonds, access to untreated nuts.
Diets based on raw foods are integral to some religious denominations, such as Seventh-Day Adventism, so the rule poses a threat not only to consumer choice, but to religious freedom as well.
USDA Requirement to Pasturize Raw Almonds
Please help to get the word out about this issue. We need lots of folks to object to this new USDA regulation that would require all almonds to be pasturized before sale. Not only will this put small producers out of business, but it will eliminate our ability to purchase raw almonds. One of the allowable methods for "pasturization" involves use of a dangerous chemical. And, to make matters worse, the pasturized almonds will still be able to be called raw.
New rule goes into effect on September 1 unless we can get enough folks to object!
Thanks,
Howard Garrett
Tell USDA Not to Allow Companies to Process Almonds with Toxic Chemicals & High Heat & Label Them 'Raw Almonds'
Act Now to Save Raw Almonds The Cornucopia Institute
In response to two outbreaks of Salmonella in 2001 and 2004 traced to raw almonds grown in California, the Almond Board of California and the USDA have quietly developed a new regulation mandating that all almonds undergo a sterilization process that includes chemical and/or high-temperature treatments.
The plan is angering many small-scale farmers, retailers, and consumers. This new rule is controversial for many reasons. It could force family farms out of business, ignores the underlying systemic problems with conventional agriculture that cause food contamination, and is upsetting to consumers seeking organic and raw foods.
Truth in Advertising, or Greenwashing Questionable Technology?
While the USDA generously describes the new almond treatments as pasteurization, the most common treatment method expected to be used fumigates almonds with propylene oxide. In lab experiments, the chemical leads to gene mutation, DNA strand breaks, and neoplastic cell transformation. The U.S. EPA has classified propylene oxide as a probable human carcinogen. Its use in treating food for human consumption is banned in the European Union, Canada, Mexico, and most other countries.
Organic Almonds Might Be Safer but Will Not Be "Raw"
The only exemptions to these new regulations will be organic "raw" almonds, which will not be fumigated, but will undergo the steam-heat treatment, and small-scale growers who can sell truly raw almonds but only direct to the public from farm stands. Almonds that have heat treatment will deceptively still be labeled as "raw," despite having undergone surface sterilization treatments.
Family Farmers Could Be Squeezed Out of Business
The costs of the chemical and heat treatments, in addition to the costs of transporting and recording the new procedures, will be especially onerous on small-scale and organic farmers. The equipment to pasteurize almonds is very expensive. A propylene oxide chamber costs $500,000 to $1,250,000, and a roasting line can cost as much as $1,500,000 to $2,500,000. Smaller, family-operated handlers that buy almonds from small, family-owned almond growers and cater to the organic and natural foods markets, are concerned that they will not be able to afford such expensive equipment and will be forced out of the almond business.
Pasteurization?
Unlike milk, eggs, and meats, for which real pasteurization or cooking offers an important protection from food-borne illness, no scientific evidence exists to show that almonds are an inherently risky food. In fact, Salmonella contamination of almonds can only occur when livestock manure or fecal matter is inadvertently transferred to the nuts through contaminated water, soil, or transportation and handling equipment. Almonds may also be infected by poor employee sanitation either on the farm or in processing facilities.
While two outbreaks may bring bad publicity and economic losses to the almond industry, it does not prove that almonds are inherently unsafe. Is it justified to impose these onerous regulations on an entire industry, impacting all consumers, because of two relatively small outbreaks, one of which has been traced to Paramount Farms, a giant, industrial-scale farming operation raising 70,000 of acres of nut crops, that is by no means representative of the industry as a whole?
Rule Status
The rule is set to go into effect on September 1. The Cornucopia Institute has formally asked the USDA to re-open the regulatory proceeding to allow for additional public input and review. Only 18 public comments-all from the almond industry-were received on the draft rule when it was open for public comment in early 2007. Unlike consumers, retailers, or other organizations concerned with food safety, all almond handlers received a personal letter or fax from the USDA alerting them to the sterilization proposal and inviting their comments. It's time other stakeholders-consumers and retailers-have an opportunity to have their voices heard in this matter.
USDA Says Almonds Labeled as 'Raw' or 'Organic' Must Be Pasteurized
Under pressure from industrial agriculture lobbyists, the USDA has quietly approved a new regulation that will effectively end distribution of raw almonds, while putting many smaller almond farmers out of business. The regulation is scheduled to go into effect on September 1st, unless thousands of consumers take action now.
The rule requires pasteurization of almonds, including organic, yet allows those same almonds to continue to be labeled as "raw". Nutritionists point out that raw, organic almonds are far superior, in terms of nutrition, to pasteurized almonds.
One of the FDA-recommended pasteurization methods involves the use of propylene oxide, which is classified as a carcinogen in California and is banned in Canada, Mexico, and the European Union.
Organic and family-scale almond farmers are protesting the proposed rule, saying it will effectively put them out of business, since the minimum price for the pasteurization equipment is $500,000.
)to almond growers. And the concern of the deamd of the USDA to the almond industry. The orangnic almond growers has voiced there concern to the mandatory fumigation and the chemicals used in the process since 2007. USDA Demand that Raw Almonds Be Pasteurized Drives Consumers Nuts
USDA Plan to "Pasteurize" Almonds Has Consumers Going Nuts
Mandate Would Require Use of Chemical Fumigant or Heat Treatment on "Raw" Almonds
The Cornucopia Institute, August 6, 2007
Straight to the Source
Contact:
The Cornucopia Institute
Will Fantle,
715-839-7731
CORNUCOPIA, WI: Small-scale farmers, retailers, and consumers are renewing their call to the USDA to reassess the plan to "pasteurize" all California almonds with a toxic fumigant or high-temperature sterilization process. All domestic almonds will be mandated to have the treatments by early next year. The plan was quietly developed by the USDA in response to outbreaks of Salmonella in 2001 and 2004 that were traced to raw almonds.
"The almond 'pasteurization' plan will have many harmful impacts on consumers and the agricultural community," said Will Fantle, research director for The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group. "Only 18 public comments from the entire U.S.-and all from almond industry insiders-were received on the proposal. The logic behind both the necessity and safety of the treatments processes has not been fully or adequately analyzed-as well as the economic costs to small-scale growers and the loss of consumer choices."
Last Wednesday, the California Almond Board suddenly requested that USDA delay the treatment mandate until March, 2008-it had been scheduled to take effect on September 1. "We support this request for a delay," said Fantle, "but a delay, due to the industry being unprepared, isn't enough. The USDA must also re-open the rule for public review and comment so that those who have been shut out of the decision-making process can have input into any almond treatment plan."
Although foodborne illnesses have garnered headlines in recent years, including contamination of California-grown spinach and lettuce, raw produce and nuts are not inherently risky foods. Contamination occurs when livestock manure or other fecal matter is inadvertently transferred to food through contaminated water, soil, or transportation and handling equipment. Raw foods can also be infected by poor employee hygiene and sanitation practices either on the farm or in processing facilities.
"All fresh foods carry some chance of risk," notes Bruce Lampinen, a scientist at University of California, Davis, who studies almonds, "but there is no more risk now than there was thirty years ago."
And the fear in the farming community is that this will competitively injure smaller sustainable and organic growers. "This will put American farmers at a distinct disadvantage in the U.S. and abroad," says organic almond farmer Mark McAfee. Fumigated almonds are banned in the EU and many other countries. McAfee worries about the impact of the rule on his business. Seventy percent of California's crop is exported.
Several domestic companies that use California almonds are already investigating foreign sources for their needs. After buying almonds from local producers for over 25 years, Living Tree Community Foods, a Berkeley, CA-based natural foods supplier, will soon begin buying almonds from Italy and Spain. Dr. Jesse Schwartz, the president of the specialty retailer, believes the rule, if implemented, will be a travesty for American agriculture. "California almonds are the heritage of the American people," he says, "they are superior in every way."
Jason Mahon owns Premier Organics, a company that produces raw almond butter in Oakland, CA. Mahon is also looking to foreign suppliers and believes the rule is an unnecessary "fear-based decision of the Almond Board, that is clearly trying to protect itself from bad press and lawsuits."
The equipment to meet the new USDA mandate is very expensive, ranging from $500,000 to $2,500,000. Farms can outsource the pasteurization process, but Hendrik Feenstra, a small-scale California handler of organic almonds, believes that to do so will still be prohibitively expensive for modest-sized growers and handlers. "Because pasteurization companies often charge a flat rate no matter the quantity of almonds, it could be four or five times more expensive for small-scale almond producers to pasteurize almonds than it will be for industrial-scale producers," Feenstra says. And modest-size marketers are concerned that increased transportation costs will also add to their burden
Organic farmers also question the science behind the rule. They believe that the sustainable farming methods they use, such as mowing and mulching, rather than controlling weeds by chemical herbicide applications, naturally prevent the spread of harmful bacteria more effectively than treatment after the fact. According to almond grower Glenn Anderson, "An organic farming system fosters biodiversity and creates an environment where Salmonella cannot survive. This rule ignores the root causes of food contamination-the unnatural, dangerous, and unsustainable farming practices on industrial farms."
An important segment of the agricultural community feels that requiring small-scale and organic farms to comply with this rule is unwarranted and premature, as Salmonella outbreaks have only been traced to a very large industrial farm, and there is currently no published research pinpointing the causes of the harmful bacteria. "With the costs involved, and the implications on trade, they are recklessly experimenting with the livelihood of farmers," Fantle added.
Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence supporting the use of the chemical fumigant, propylene oxide (PPO), and steam as the only effective treatments to reduce risk of Salmonella. The most common method of sterilizing almonds is by PPO treatment, a genotoxic chemical recognized as a possible carcinogen that is banned in the European Union, Canada, Mexico, and most other countries. Many chemical-free and heat-free alternatives are being researched. "The Almond Board has not released any of the scientific research justifying their treatment choices," asserts Eli Penberthy, a policy analyst at Cornucopia. "This rule should not be implemented until alternative technologies are thoroughly explored."
The Cornucopia Institute also contends labeling treated almonds as "raw" is misleading and deceptive to consumers. "People choose to buy raw almonds for a variety of personal reasons, including health, nutrition, and even religious beliefs," Cornucopia's Fantle said. "This rule denies them the right to control their food choices by making informed decisions in the marketplace."
In fact, some strict vegetarians who consume only raw foods rely on almonds to provide as much as 30% of their caloric intake, believing that they are a nutritionally superior alternative to meat in the diet. "Raw almonds are increasingly popular for their health benefits," said Goldie Caughlin, the Nutrition Education Manager at Puget Community Cooperative in Seattle, who estimates that the co-op sells 28,000 pounds of raw almonds every year. She said customers are already confused and angered by the implications of the rule, and worries how it will affect sales.
Fantle charges that the rule could very well establish a precedent for more governmental control of fresh foods. Says Fantle, "If almonds require pasteurization, what foods will be next on the list of mandatory sterilization, heat treatment, and irradiation? Truly raw, untreated nuts, fruits, and vegetables might no longer be legally available in the marketplace."
MORE:
Public concern about the almond treatment plan has been growing. Over 1,000 comments opposing almond pasteurization have been submitted to the USDA since the plan was approved on March 31, and an online petition to stop the implementation of the rule has garnered over 15,000 signatures. (To learn more about the issue, go to http://www.cornucopia.org/ and click on the Save almonds campaign button.)
The only exemption to the almond treatment regulations will be an allowance for growers to sell truly raw almonds directly to the public from farmstead stands. Unfortunately, this will give only a limited number of consumers in specific areas of California, the only state in the nation that produces almonds, access to untreated nuts.
Diets based on raw foods are integral to some religious denominations, such as Seventh-Day Adventism, so the rule poses a threat not only to consumer choice, but to religious freedom as well.
USDA Requirement to Pasturize Raw Almonds
Please help to get the word out about this issue. We need lots of folks to object to this new USDA regulation that would require all almonds to be pasturized before sale. Not only will this put small producers out of business, but it will eliminate our ability to purchase raw almonds. One of the allowable methods for "pasturization" involves use of a dangerous chemical. And, to make matters worse, the pasturized almonds will still be able to be called raw.
New rule goes into effect on September 1 unless we can get enough folks to object!
Thanks,
Howard Garrett
Tell USDA Not to Allow Companies to Process Almonds with Toxic Chemicals & High Heat & Label Them 'Raw Almonds'
Act Now to Save Raw Almonds The Cornucopia Institute
In response to two outbreaks of Salmonella in 2001 and 2004 traced to raw almonds grown in California, the Almond Board of California and the USDA have quietly developed a new regulation mandating that all almonds undergo a sterilization process that includes chemical and/or high-temperature treatments.
The plan is angering many small-scale farmers, retailers, and consumers. This new rule is controversial for many reasons. It could force family farms out of business, ignores the underlying systemic problems with conventional agriculture that cause food contamination, and is upsetting to consumers seeking organic and raw foods.
Truth in Advertising, or Greenwashing Questionable Technology?
While the USDA generously describes the new almond treatments as pasteurization, the most common treatment method expected to be used fumigates almonds with propylene oxide. In lab experiments, the chemical leads to gene mutation, DNA strand breaks, and neoplastic cell transformation. The U.S. EPA has classified propylene oxide as a probable human carcinogen. Its use in treating food for human consumption is banned in the European Union, Canada, Mexico, and most other countries.
Organic Almonds Might Be Safer but Will Not Be "Raw"
The only exemptions to these new regulations will be organic "raw" almonds, which will not be fumigated, but will undergo the steam-heat treatment, and small-scale growers who can sell truly raw almonds but only direct to the public from farm stands. Almonds that have heat treatment will deceptively still be labeled as "raw," despite having undergone surface sterilization treatments.
Family Farmers Could Be Squeezed Out of Business
The costs of the chemical and heat treatments, in addition to the costs of transporting and recording the new procedures, will be especially onerous on small-scale and organic farmers. The equipment to pasteurize almonds is very expensive. A propylene oxide chamber costs $500,000 to $1,250,000, and a roasting line can cost as much as $1,500,000 to $2,500,000. Smaller, family-operated handlers that buy almonds from small, family-owned almond growers and cater to the organic and natural foods markets, are concerned that they will not be able to afford such expensive equipment and will be forced out of the almond business.
Pasteurization?
Unlike milk, eggs, and meats, for which real pasteurization or cooking offers an important protection from food-borne illness, no scientific evidence exists to show that almonds are an inherently risky food. In fact, Salmonella contamination of almonds can only occur when livestock manure or fecal matter is inadvertently transferred to the nuts through contaminated water, soil, or transportation and handling equipment. Almonds may also be infected by poor employee sanitation either on the farm or in processing facilities.
While two outbreaks may bring bad publicity and economic losses to the almond industry, it does not prove that almonds are inherently unsafe. Is it justified to impose these onerous regulations on an entire industry, impacting all consumers, because of two relatively small outbreaks, one of which has been traced to Paramount Farms, a giant, industrial-scale farming operation raising 70,000 of acres of nut crops, that is by no means representative of the industry as a whole?
Rule Status
The rule is set to go into effect on September 1. The Cornucopia Institute has formally asked the USDA to re-open the regulatory proceeding to allow for additional public input and review. Only 18 public comments-all from the almond industry-were received on the draft rule when it was open for public comment in early 2007. Unlike consumers, retailers, or other organizations concerned with food safety, all almond handlers received a personal letter or fax from the USDA alerting them to the sterilization proposal and inviting their comments. It's time other stakeholders-consumers and retailers-have an opportunity to have their voices heard in this matter.
USDA Says Almonds Labeled as 'Raw' or 'Organic' Must Be Pasteurized
Under pressure from industrial agriculture lobbyists, the USDA has quietly approved a new regulation that will effectively end distribution of raw almonds, while putting many smaller almond farmers out of business. The regulation is scheduled to go into effect on September 1st, unless thousands of consumers take action now.
The rule requires pasteurization of almonds, including organic, yet allows those same almonds to continue to be labeled as "raw". Nutritionists point out that raw, organic almonds are far superior, in terms of nutrition, to pasteurized almonds.
One of the FDA-recommended pasteurization methods involves the use of propylene oxide, which is classified as a carcinogen in California and is banned in Canada, Mexico, and the European Union.
Organic and family-scale almond farmers are protesting the proposed rule, saying it will effectively put them out of business, since the minimum price for the pasteurization equipment is $500,000.
This has me more motivated to make stuff at home as much as possible. :)
Fortunately I keep receipts - hope i can return it and think i will take a copy of the info on carrageenan with me!
