| Home | Bookmark | Tell | Active petitions in over 75 countries | Follow GoPetition |
Maintain the Integrity of Our Raw Almonds
This petition was published by Julie Wilson on Sep 05, 2007
To the USDA: Please reopen the discussions on your recent mandate for pasteurization of all raw almonds. The decision was made before anyone had a chance to find out about it and comment.
My issues are:
1. False Labeling -- current mandate says that all almonds will continue to be labeled as raw which is misleading to the public. There is absolutely no reason that pasteurized almonds cannot be labeled as such, other than the small financial impact of reprinting almond packaging. Perhaps the Almond Board is afraid of losing money by turning away consumers with words like "pasteurized." Don't underestimate the public! We are not confused by the difference between big words like "pasteurized" and "raw."
2. Healthy Food Choices Taken Out of the Hands of Consumers -- I want to be able to choose between truly raw (and organic) almonds and pasteurized ones. A very reasonable proposition has been put on the table over and over again. Simply establish two lines of almonds: Pasteurized and Raw. There have only been two outbreaks of salmonella since raw almonds have been cultivated for public purchase. In both of those cases it was due to poor handling by large almond factories, NOT at the small, organic-farmer level. There have been many more cases of salmonella outbreaks in chicken, beef, and a handful of produce. Yet, the government cannot control a few unfortunate incidents that are bound to happen everywhere. Your efforts to "protect us" are appreciated, but misguided. All we ask is that you give us the choice and hear our voice on this subject again.
3. Carcinogenic Pasteurization Process -- The very process that you believe is going to protect us is likely far more harmful than the two cases of salmonella outbreak in question. Propylene Oxide has been outlawed for use in food by almost every other country. Why would you mandate implementation of a pasteurization process that has far more health ramifications than the small health concerns you are trying to protect the public from? This needs to be thought through, and I believe that the opportunity for intelligent discussions on this topic should be reopened.
A Message To the Almond Board of California: I believe you have gone behind the backs of consumers to protect your own interests. Clearly, your only objective was to protect yourself from lawsuits. There is not one press release on your site that shows when you originally requested the mandatory pasteurization process. The first press release on the subject appears to be on August 20, 2007 -- one week before the September 1, 2007 mandate. By then it was obviously too late for consumer comment. These disingenuous actions are thinly veiled. Because of your quiet actions to petition the USDA to protect you from potential lawsuits, you have jeopardized the integrity of one of California's greatest heritages -- the California Almond. You have jeopardized the livelihood of the small almond growers of California who offer top quality and organic product. You have taken CHOICE out of the hands of consumers. You have been assigned to represent California almonds, yet it would seem as though you have no idea what almonds are. Perhaps you have forgotten about the health benefits that you so proudly announce in press release after press release on your site. You do not seem to know the difference between raw, roasted, cooked, steamed, processed, heated, sprayed and pasteurized almonds. If this is the work you do, I do not believe you should be representing California's great heritage. If you do not work hard at undoing the damage you have done by selfishly rolling out a toxic pasteurization process on the public; if you do not at least find a way to allow truly raw almonds to remain available to consumers and LABELED correctly, I predict a consumer backlash that far outweighs any potential lawsuit from a rare outbreak of salmonella. After the numerous petitions that you consistently ignore, you may be seeing large-scale lawsuits and boycotts next. Ask yourself these questions: How many pounds of raw almonds are purchased by naturalists, health advocates and raw foodists every day? What market share to they represent in this industry? Where will they go now for their almonds? What financial impact will that have on the California almond industry? Will you be responsible for huge financial losses in the industry, and more importantly, will you be held accountable? If you don't already know the answer to these questions, then someone over there has not done their homework.
My issues are:
1. False Labeling -- current mandate says that all almonds will continue to be labeled as raw which is misleading to the public. There is absolutely no reason that pasteurized almonds cannot be labeled as such, other than the small financial impact of reprinting almond packaging. Perhaps the Almond Board is afraid of losing money by turning away consumers with words like "pasteurized." Don't underestimate the public! We are not confused by the difference between big words like "pasteurized" and "raw."
2. Healthy Food Choices Taken Out of the Hands of Consumers -- I want to be able to choose between truly raw (and organic) almonds and pasteurized ones. A very reasonable proposition has been put on the table over and over again. Simply establish two lines of almonds: Pasteurized and Raw. There have only been two outbreaks of salmonella since raw almonds have been cultivated for public purchase. In both of those cases it was due to poor handling by large almond factories, NOT at the small, organic-farmer level. There have been many more cases of salmonella outbreaks in chicken, beef, and a handful of produce. Yet, the government cannot control a few unfortunate incidents that are bound to happen everywhere. Your efforts to "protect us" are appreciated, but misguided. All we ask is that you give us the choice and hear our voice on this subject again.
3. Carcinogenic Pasteurization Process -- The very process that you believe is going to protect us is likely far more harmful than the two cases of salmonella outbreak in question. Propylene Oxide has been outlawed for use in food by almost every other country. Why would you mandate implementation of a pasteurization process that has far more health ramifications than the small health concerns you are trying to protect the public from? This needs to be thought through, and I believe that the opportunity for intelligent discussions on this topic should be reopened.
A Message To the Almond Board of California: I believe you have gone behind the backs of consumers to protect your own interests. Clearly, your only objective was to protect yourself from lawsuits. There is not one press release on your site that shows when you originally requested the mandatory pasteurization process. The first press release on the subject appears to be on August 20, 2007 -- one week before the September 1, 2007 mandate. By then it was obviously too late for consumer comment. These disingenuous actions are thinly veiled. Because of your quiet actions to petition the USDA to protect you from potential lawsuits, you have jeopardized the integrity of one of California's greatest heritages -- the California Almond. You have jeopardized the livelihood of the small almond growers of California who offer top quality and organic product. You have taken CHOICE out of the hands of consumers. You have been assigned to represent California almonds, yet it would seem as though you have no idea what almonds are. Perhaps you have forgotten about the health benefits that you so proudly announce in press release after press release on your site. You do not seem to know the difference between raw, roasted, cooked, steamed, processed, heated, sprayed and pasteurized almonds. If this is the work you do, I do not believe you should be representing California's great heritage. If you do not work hard at undoing the damage you have done by selfishly rolling out a toxic pasteurization process on the public; if you do not at least find a way to allow truly raw almonds to remain available to consumers and LABELED correctly, I predict a consumer backlash that far outweighs any potential lawsuit from a rare outbreak of salmonella. After the numerous petitions that you consistently ignore, you may be seeing large-scale lawsuits and boycotts next. Ask yourself these questions: How many pounds of raw almonds are purchased by naturalists, health advocates and raw foodists every day? What market share to they represent in this industry? Where will they go now for their almonds? What financial impact will that have on the California almond industry? Will you be responsible for huge financial losses in the industry, and more importantly, will you be held accountable? If you don't already know the answer to these questions, then someone over there has not done their homework.
Complete the fields below and click 'Sign'. Optional fields may be completed or left blank.
* - required fields
 |
GoPetition respects your privacy. Click here for more information. |