What the WEF gets wrong about the food transformation issue

The WEF recently published the article linked below. There are more than a few errors which the devout will overlook. Since I’m not in that group, I can attend to them. Some are nutritional errors which are debunked easily enough. The main focus for this episode is the population claims made by the author, and probably the WEF who published the piece.

The Great Reset and the Great Food Transformation are big PsyOps. Well funded and very well organized, but still PsyOps. This piece opens them to question their very arguments and legitimacy.

Listen to the show

Did you like this episode? Please support the show with a contribution below.

$5.00

]
$10.00

Return to podcasts page

Show script

Grab your tinfoil hats. We’re going deep into the weeds. I want to let you know right up front that this episode goes to some areas most people don’t want to go. There are sinister forces at play that mean us harm. In the process of doing that, they get fat stacks and mad power.

The World Economic Forum isn’t going away. At least, not any time soon probably. That means they are keeping at their Great Reset plans, even if they’ve dumped the branding. Of specific interest to this show is the food part.

I did a show about the Great Reset and food and I’ll link to that in the show notes.

By way of a brief recap, the Great Reset is the planned destruction of present-day capitalism which will be replaced by a monarchical form of governance that will attempt to plan and implement the economies of the world, country by country, with the help of the shareholder corporations and select individuals. The World Economic Forum will work with the World Health Organization, read Bill Gates, EAT/Lancet, and many food corporations to minimize or eliminate meat consumption and focus on what is essentially a vegan starvation diet. Keep in mind that as meat is consumed less, the need for animals is reduced. Think through that progression for about 10 steps and see if you are as horrified as I am.

The Great Reset has been underappreciated by the world. It seems the masses are not as eager to be puppets more than they are, which is contrary to what Klaus Schwab had either hoped or expected. In addition to food management, the Great Reset was to manage technology, environment, social and economic matters, and transhumanism. That’s also getting less play now. Feel certain that all these plans are still in play, perhaps mostly the culling of millions of humans. They have never been quiet about their goals. It’s just no one took them at their word for how outrageous they seemed.

One detail to keep in mind is that the WEF has many corporations in its hip pocket. The WEF calls them partners or sponsors or shareholders. From the WEF webpage, they write this about their partners, “World Economic Forum Partners are leading global companies developing solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. They are the driving force behind the Forum’s programmes.”

There’s a corporatocracy in play that’s another show. News corporations, food and beverage corporations, international banking are just some of the many companies in this corporate regime. It might sound like it’s hyperbole to say they have their tentacles in nearly every corporation that impacts humanity. You might think that’s conspiracy theory talk. For you who have skills at debunking such claims, this should be short work for you.

The focus of this episode is on a recent post from the WEF about food and the need, their word, to change nearly all aspects of food to preserve any chance at a future as a species and a planet. Sounds hyperbolic. More specifically, it is a show picking apart the language used to convey the message. It’s propaganda, an overused and accurate phrase. Moregenerally, it is gaslighting, telling you something that isn’t so to make you question your senses about what you see and what sounds right.

The article, from June 13, 2024, is “Feeding the future: why Renovation and Reinvention are key to saving our food system” and starts with this paragraph. “Our global food system is in urgent need of transition. At present, one-third of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions come from food production. At the same time, the global population is projected to reach nearly 10 billion people by 2050, which could increase the demand for food by 60%. Many of the ways we grow, manufacture and consume food are causing a dual crisis of human and environmental health, and the complexity will only intensify.”

That’s one heck of an opening. The greenhouse gas emissions and demand for food are hyperlinked. The greenhouse gas link is to a 2021 Nature.com page that identifies growth which mentions they have a new way to measure GHG, greenhouse gases. They write, “EDGAR-FOOD provides a complete and consistent database in time and space of GHG emissions from the global food system, from production to consumption, including processing, transport and packaging. Itresponds to the lack of detailed data for many countries by providing sectoral contributions to food-system emissions that are essential for the design of effective mitigation actions.” That last part means they’re guessing. They have no idea but won’t let the lack of data interfere with their plan to mess with the world’s food system.

The other link, population, was posted to the United Nations page in June 2012, yes 12 years ago. That date, 2012, isn’trandom. In 1992, the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro was held. The Rio+20 meeting was to be held after this article was posted.

This is worth reading. A few interesting points from that UN post. They acknowledge factory or industrial farming is a problem. It remains a big one.

To the point of population, and at least some commentary on projections and imperfect knowledge, they write,”According to estimates compiled by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), by 2050 we will need to produce 60 per cent more food to feed a world population of 9.3 billion. Doing that with a farming-as-usual approach would take too heavy a toll on our natural resources.”

Currently and approximately, the Earth’s population is approximately 8,118,000,000 people, according to the World Population Clock.

Here’s where it gets interesting.

The WEF has at least the same access to information that I do.

Let’s start with this tweet originally from the Daily Mail. It’s a tad long.

EUROPE FACES POTENTIAL DEPOPULATION CATASTROPHE According to researchers, countries need a birth rate of 2.1 children per woman to maintain a stable population. However, in Europe, the figures are far below that and could result in “staggering social change,” according to medical journal The Lancet. No country in the EU has a birth rate above 2.1, leading some politicians to fear that the number of young people will begin to drop like a stone. Italy’sPrime Minister Giorgia Meloni has now mounted a family-first campaign, backed by the Pope, to try and boost the number of births to half a million annually within a decade. The EU’s statistics and data service, Eurostat, predicts that by 2100, without any interventions, those aged 65 and over will account for 32% of the population, compared to 22% today. Unless European birth rates increase, The Lancet claims, “Reliance on open immigration will become necessary to sustain economic growth.”

That’s a dire prediction. Europe might be in trouble.

CNN.com on March 21, 2024, had this headline, “Global fertility rates to plunge in decades ahead, new report says.”

Well, now it’s global. The Wall Street Journal webpage wrote on May 13, 2024, a post with this headline. “Suddenly There Aren’t Enough Babies. The Whole World Is Alarmed.”

The National Center for Biotechnology Information in 2009 wrote “Declining birth rates in Developing Countries: A radical policy re-think is required.”

There’s more.

ThinkGlobalHealth.org, on March 20, 2024, wrote, “Global Fertility Rates Continues To Fall: How Governments Could Prepare.”

Reuters.com on March 20, 2024, offered this, “Global fertility rates to decline, shifting population burden to low-income countries.”

Also similar headlines and articles from the United Nations Population Fund, CNBC, BBC, Statista.com, The Economist.com, Euronews.com, AEI.org, and, interestingly, the WEF which wrote in 2022, “For the last 70 years, fertility rates have decreased worldwide, with a total 50% decline.”

So here’s the first question. How did the writer of the first piece miss this one from 2022? How can we be expected to take them at their word when they are shown to be lying?

Many of those posts from those sources are around the March 2024 timeframe which means they’re climbing on the headline click bandwagon.

At the opening of the show, I told you to get your tinfoil hat. Aluminum foil really, but in any case, it’s gonna get weird. Itcan get weirder and some shows go there. I’m stopping short Willoughby.

Klaus Schwab was an intern for Henry Kissinger in the early 1970s. Kissinger is reported to have said, “Control oil, you control nations; control the food and you control the people.” There are various versions of that exact quote. Did he or didn’t he? I don’t know. I feel pretty confident he did and also confident it was 1973.

That’s not the point. The point is young Klaus learned about control and controlling people from his mentor, Henry Kissinger. For you too young to recall, he served in the White House for 8 consecutive administrations, both Republican and Democrat. He was National Security Advisor and Secretary of State for Nixon and continued as Secretary of State for Carter. He served in 6 other administrations as an advisor.

The reason to give his resume isn’t to highlight his genius. It is to show that Republicans and Democrats rely on the same guy for years and years for foreign policy advice. The reason is to show that R and D aren’t that very different as they both get paid from the same checking account.

As it relates to our program, Kissinger did offer that the world population needs to decrease by 50%.

And, now we’re back to the WEF and the Great Reset. And that brings us back to the EAT/Lancet and WHO plans to reduce to near zero the consumption of animal sources of protein.

Let’s review. In 1992 there was a meeting about managing the food for the next 20 years. Birth rates start to decline causing the world to be concerned about the replacement of humans. Despite this, overpopulation is a concern so plans to reduce the population are conceived and implemented.

Earlier in those quotes one read how governments can prepare. Allow me to present Hungary. Hungary in 2019. On February 11, 2019, BBC.com published a post with the headline “Hungary tries for baby boom with tax breaks and loan forgiveness.” The first two paragraphs read, “Hungarian women with four children or more will be exempted for life from paying income tax, the prime minister has said, unveiling plans designed to boost the number of babies being born.

It was a way of defending Hungary’s future without depending on immigration, Viktor Orban said.”

The plan gets political rapidly. Starving a billion people is political.

Extermination or starvation or converting them to transhuman is political. Still wearing your hat?

Correlation is not causation. Jabs have had some negative patient care outcomes (depending on what you think the outcome was supposed to be). Also, according to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, if it walks like a duck it’s a duck.

The population crisis has been looming for longer than jabs have been given out. If you’ve been paying attention, season 2 of The Plandemic is coming soon. I’ve seen the trailers so I know that’s so.

So far all of this episode is from one paragraph.

The whole article reads like a sales copy. Frankly, it is. The next paragraph includes this, “Reorienting to a low-carbon economy requires intervention at every level of strategy. For example, industries must adopt new sources of power such as solar and wind; companies must develop new technologies like batteries and storage; and consumers must shift modes of consumption through energy cooperatives and electric vehicle use.”

The whole piece is aimed at those who agree. I imagine the writer seeing the reader nodding in agreement. As Chris Voss, the FBI negotiator says, yes is nothing without how.

How will they make these changes? Did anyone tell them the carbon and human cost for those low-carbon solutions is extreme? Probably. Do I think they care for one moment about that? No, I do not.

As with all propaganda, there is a part that is fact. It is woven almost inextricably with that which is false. To get the benefit, and there is some, you must accept the harm, and there is some. The net result is not, however, neutral, as it would seem, but net negative. In this paragraph, and this is the last one for today, they offer this, “Renovation is the first stage of the food transition. It prioritizes the immediate reduction of more harmful ingredients and components in our food, including excessive levels of salt, sugar, fat and additives. Renovation can also enhance a product’s nutritional profile, such as by adding more fibre or micronutrients. Though the product-level impact is small, the overall contribution to diet can be significant. For example, if one multinational food company adds whole grain to its main product line of snacks, it could increase Americans’ fibre intake by 5% by 2030. By prioritizing nutritional reformulation, we can mitigate adverse effects on public health, including the rise of chronic diseases such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular conditions.”

Sugar is bad. Fiber is not the panacea they want you to think it is. Salt and good fat, a distinction they do not make, is good for you. If your source for nutritional information is WebMD or some other mainstream website, you’ll find that this tracks. That’s the head-nodding, fist-thumping support they expect. It is only half right and the harms caused by such a thing are immense. Along with the glyphosate on the wheat, whole wheat or else wise is not a benefit to human health. If you read the article, know that when they mention alternative proteins, they mean bugs.

The solution to the issue is to grow your own and eat organic. Mostly meat and cheese and eggs. Some plants if you must. It’s still early in the year to make a garden network. Take a potted tomato to your neighbor. Ask them if you can let it grow at their house. With their permission, you’ll water it with their water and share the bounty. I agree that transforming the food system is a great and grand idea. I disagree a bazillion percent that any government or self-appointed monarch is the right choice to decide how that is done and what it looks like.

Mira Dessy, The Ingredient Guru discussed what 5 ingredients to reject

We know we should read the ingredient labels. When they start to conceal more than they reveal, that’s a problem. Mira discusses what some preservatives are and why we should reject the foods that have them.

We also discuss what bioengineered ingredients are, how they’re different from GMOs, and what that might mean for your wellness.