Our belief that every life has equal value is at the core of our work at the institute. We believe that exposure to toxic contaminants through consumption of food and supplements may cause harm to human health. The traditional risk assessment approach to public policy and legal infrastructure is flawed because it does not take into consideration epigenetic factors that contribute to individual susceptibility. Now more than ever, the risk of harm from consumption of toxic food contaminants varies from individual to individual and from generation to generation. The concept of acceptable risk is outdated and should no longer be used to determine "safe levels of exposure."
Rather than proclaiming allowable or acceptable limits of exposure for toxic materials, we need to take a different approach and seek alternatives and avoid the use of such materials in food manufacturing processes. Because it is not possible to prove that any amount of exposure to a toxic material is safe for sensitive populations, we must be guided by the precautionary principle. When uncertainty exists about the toxicity of a given material, it is best to avoid its use altogether in food manufacturing until parameters for its safe use can be determined and supported by research data. Although there are thousands of ingredients generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for use in food manufacturing, there is significant evidence to suggest that several highly consumed food ingredients are unsafe and harming human health now and in the future.
We, as citizens of the world, have a responsibility to preserve the natural foundations of life, now, and into the future. There is no such thing as acceptable risk when it comes to our children. When the number of children with learning disabilities is climbing, we cannot go along with this outdated concept of acceptable risk. Chemicals interact with nutritional and other epigenetic factors to cause harm in sensitive populations to include those with developing or declining immune systems.
|
|
