The Shiny, Bright Future Beckons!

Codex Alimentarius drools over Franken-meat

“Many of today’s problems are the result of yesterday’s solutions.” –Thomas Sowell

At the latest week-long meeting of the Codex Committee on Food Additives (CCFA55) held here in Seoul, South Korea from March 24-28, 2025, there was a special afternoon event dedicated to “cell-based food production,“ as Codex calls it. Dr. Dean Powell, an Australian with the self-styled Good Food Institute, kicked off the event with his PowerPoint presentation on this newest miracle of science: lab-grown meat. His slide show laid out the details for creating this shiny, new future for food consumers.

Now It’s Franken-meat Being Pushed

Dr. Markus Lipp, the FAO Science Officer, gushed over the innocuously labeled lab-made meat that opponents call “Franken-meat” as he assured the Codex delegates on Tuesday afternoon, March 25th, 2025, that JECFA’s safety review was not going to be a problem but just a formality.[1] In fact, he said, “why not create a whole new food category for it” since “it’s not really a food additive.” “Of course,” he continued, gathering speed as his thoughts ran away with him, “There will be objections to it. Some people will feel threatened by it.”

The WHO Science Officer, Dr. Kim Petersen, was not nearly as effusive about these laboratory creations when he asked, “Will consumers accept these products? We are in the beginning of this, and we need some regulatory bodies to look into this.”

Interestingly enough, Dr. Lipp’s comments about opposition to Frankenstein foods and people being “threatened” by them followed the National Health Federation’s firm statements made the previous day strongly opposing them. The Federation most definitely sees these laboratory creations as a threat to human and animal health, and it was not shy at warning the assembled Codex delegates of its dangers:

“Lab-grown meat, developed through cell culture techniques requiring cellular immortalization, introduces oncogenic risks into the food supply, raising significant safety concerns. Additionally, exosomes secreted by these manipulated cells may carry bioactive molecules—including microRNAs and oncogenic proteins—that could cause unintended physiological effects and harm in consumers.”

However, the National Health Federation (NHF), a Codex-accredited INGO, did agree with Dr. Lipp on one point: These new synthetic foods are not really food additives – they warrant a separate category of their own. Dr. Lipp proposed calling them “production factors,” which seemed as reasonable as any other term suggested. Still, regardless of the label, introducing substances with cancer-causing potential into the food supply is unacceptable, especially from Codex, which claims to prioritize food safety.

Bugs for You and Me, Steak for Them

At Codex, “alternative protein sources” is the new code word for an insect-based food supply slated to replace or augment traditional Western-based diets. The entire infrastructure is being created at Codex for us to eat insects as a protein source instead of animals, at least for the peasants. The elite will eat as they always have.

The NHF once again objected to including insects in Codex’s New Food Forms both because of widespread allergies among humans to insects and the unhealthy presence of parasites in insects.[2] I also questioned why Codex is promoting insect consumption at the same time as it struggles to keep insect infestation out of the food supply, and when Codex could more properly focus on the huge food-waste problem as a solution to feeding the World’s population. As usual, however, there were no satisfactory responses to my objections.

Red Dye #3

 Red Dye #3 is an organoiodine compound, specifically a derivative of fluorone. It is a red-pink dye used for food coloring, cosmetics, hair coloring, pet products, and many industrial colorings. Also known as erythrosine, INS127 (at Codex), and E127 (in the European Union), it was recently banned by the FDA due to safety concerns per the Delaney Clause in the United States. I had one delegate approach me during a break to ask me for an explanation of why the FDA had banned this food dye.

 At Codex, a request was made to include Red Dye #3 on the Priority List for safety re-evaluation following its recent market withdrawal in the United States. However, CCFA55 accepted the JECFA Secretariat’s word that no new data was available for this substance and that the current safety evaluation conducted in 2018 remained valid.

So, CCFA55 excluded Red Dye #3 from the Priority List until new data becomes available. If or when any new data is available, then this Committee will ask JECFA to reassess the safety risks of Red Dye #3.

Monk Fruit Sweetener

The big surprise at this Codex meeting was to see the aspartame front group, Calorie Control Council (CCC), pushing for the adoption of a standard for the healthy alternative sweetener, monk fruit. I never thought in a million years that the NHF would ever find common ground to agree with the aspartame people on anything, at Codex or anywhere. But, well, here we are – in agreement on creating an international standard for this healthy, natural sweetener.

The NHF Delegation

The NHF delegation at CCFA55 consisted of Sayer Ji, Dr. Tia Kansara, and me as the head of delegation. Both Sayer and Tia were helpful in providing comprehensive support throughout the meeting, covering real-time reporting, photography and video, research, interviews, and interactions with other Codex delegates. Tia published her own informative report on this meeting.[3]

But the NHF could not have even attended this meeting had it not been for the financial support of one of our NHF members, a true silent heroine, who generously donated enough money to cover the costs of attending several Codex meetings, including this one. When people ask me what they can do to help NHF with Codex – or with any of its projects, for that matter – helping to put us at the forefront of the fight tops the list.

The Takeaway from this Meeting

While anyone can read the CCFA55 Final Report, it is highly sanitized, technical, and largely devoid of crediting which delegation opposed or supported a proposed food standard, which makes the entire process less transparent and much more difficult for any country’s citizens to track and then take to task their country’s Codex delegation if it goes rogue.[4]

I remember riding in an elevator once at the 2018 Vet-Drug-Residue Committee meeting in Chicago with, among others, the New Zealand delegate whom I overheard remarking to a fellow passenger how his Codex office represented consumers too. This remark was made entirely for my benefit since the NHF was the only consumer group in attendance at that particular meeting and I had commented on that fact to the delegates when speaking out at the meeting session. Sadly, this delegate could not have been more mistaken, as both New Zealand and Australia are well known for taking the most anti-consumer, pro-industry stances at every Codex meeting. I think we need to remember who really is looking out for the interests of the consumer at these global meetings, and I can assure you that it’s not the Anglo-Saxon countries.

What is apparent is that the anti-consumer and pro-Big Food viewpoint tends to prevail at these meetings. The insect food standards are advancing, as are the proposed Frankenstein-meat alternative food for humanity – certainly if the blessings of the High Priest of Codex Science are any token of future success. Still, NHF has had a major impact on weightier issues than these in prior meetings, including in this very committee. Patience, persistence, and support from our NHF base will help to carry the day.

---

[1] JECFA is the acronym for the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Food Additives and is generally regarded by most Codex delegates as unassailable in its scientific opinions.

[2] NHF had previously objected to the creation of these food categories at the CCNFSDU meeting in Dusseldorf, Germany in March 2023, and at a Chinese Codex committee meeting before that.

[3] Dr. Tia Kansara, “Silent Heroes, Sovereign Choices: A Journey to Codex Alimentarius in Seoul,” Kansara substack, March 27, 2025, at https://replenishearth.substack.com/p/silent-heroes-sovereign-choices-a?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email#media-30b33717-326a-47c4-8526-e4656073bc91.

[4]  The CCFA55 Final Report can be read online at fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/sh-proxy/en/?lnk=1&url=https%253A%252F%252Fworkspace.fao.org%252Fsites%252Fcodex%252FMeetings%252FCX-711-55%252F%25E2%2598%2585Final%2Breport%252FREP25_FAe.pdf. NHF’s remarks on bug food and Franken-meat are summarized in paragraph 42 of that report, without credit being given to NHF for its opposition.