Arla’s Bovaer food additive is not food, it is a drug

Last week, we published an article about the project Arla has launched to feed cattle with Bovaer which contains silicon dioxide, propylene glycol and 3-nitrooxypropanol (“3-NOP”).  According to the FDA, Bovaer is not a food, it is a drug.

There has been an enormous public backlash with the public boycotting Arla products and Arla’s partners.  

There seems to be a lot that is unknown about this new drug being fed to dairy cattle. Considering it is what can only be described as an experiment on both animals and humans, it’s not surprising farmers and the public are outraged.

A farmer posted a quick video on Sunday to thank the public for standing up to Arla.

If you would like an indication of which products Arla is potentially contaminating with its drug and so should be avoided, the Daily Mail has helpfully provided a list in its article ‘Full list of Arla Foods’ Bovaer ‘contaminated’ products boycotted by customers: from Lurpak to Cravendale and even Starbucks, as controversial cow feed additive sparks backlash’.

The UK Food Standards Agency is insisting Bovaer is “safe.”  A spokesman told MailOnline: “Milk from cows given Bovaer, a feed additive used to reduce methane emissions, is safe to drink.”

On Monday, The Standard said,  “On 26 November, Arla announced a new project that it hopes will cut the UK’s methane emissions.  Methane is a greenhouse gas and contributes to climate change … The initiative is part of Arla’s wider commitment to reduce the environmental impact of its dairy production. The organisation is aiming to reduce its CO₂ emissions by 30 per cent by 2030.”

Using the excuse “to reduce methane emissions” and “CO₂ emissions” and then tying it to Agenda 2030’s deadline of 2030, should raise an immediate red flag to anyone who has done even a little research in the last few years.

There is no anthropogenic climate change crisis, and, as we mentioned in our article last week, methane is an important part of the biogenic carbon cycle.  As we all know from primary school lessons, carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the elixir of life, supporting plants since the world began and making virtually all life on Earth possible.

The whole false anthropogenic climate change narrative should have disintegrated in 2009 when the Climategate emails were released.  But such is the determination, and money, of those who want to keep the UN’s agenda alive.

Related: Climategate is the worst scientific scandal of our generation

The Standard also reiterated the claim that Bovaer is safe, even though the outlet conceded that the UK Food Standards Agency said 3-NOP “should be considered corrosive to the eyes, a skin irritant and potentially harmful by inhalation” to humans handling it.

The Standard quoted an animal nutrition specialist at DSM, the first half in DSM-Firmenich which is the manufacturer of Bovaer, as saying “In every case, it [the additive] has proven safe for animal, farmer and consumer.”

How many “cases”? How has Bovaer been proven safe and what testing has been conducted?

It seems The Standard didn’t ask these basic questions. Besides that, the news outlet should know better than to rely solely on a quote from someone whose livelihood depends on the success of Bovaer.

Arla published a statement on Monday that said “Bovaer has undergone extensive testing to ensure it is safe for cows and humans.”

Yes, Arla would say that. Notably, Arla offered no proof to back up their statement.  The world has long moved past the “trust me because I said so” stage.  Perhaps Arla hasn’t realised that most of the population doesn’t trust the government, regulatory or public bodies, or the large corporations that stand to benefit from the various scams pushed by the controligarchs at the United Nations and the World Economic Forum.

So, has Bovaer “undergone extensive testing to ensure it is safe for cows and humans” as Arla claims?

Table of Contents

UK Food Standards Agency Assessment

The Food Standards Agency (“FSA”) doesn’t seem to have carried out any testing.  It merely evaluated risk assessments provided by DSM-Firmenich and relied on information from the European Reference Laboratory.

In its application for approval, DSM-Firmenich provided two tolerance studies to prove Bovaer’s safety for dairy cows.  One study involved 16 cows, 12 that were given varying doses of Bovaer for 90 days and 4 in the control group.

“The applicant claimed that a margin of safety of 5 could be derived from this study, but the JEG challenged this claim based on shortcomings in its design and implementation … It was considered that such a low sample size would be unlikely to yield reliable statistics, especially given that two cows … were euthanised prematurely,” FSA said.

The second study involved 80 cows, 60 were given varying doses of Bovaer for 56 days and 20 were in the control group. The highest dose given to a group of 20 cows was 200 mg/kg.

“At the 200 mg dose, effects identified included decreased ovary size, decreased serum activities of ALT (alanine aminotransferase) and LDH (lactate dehydrogenase), and reduced feed and water intake,” FSA noted.  However, the FSA explained these possible adverse effects away and concluded that “the additive could be considered safe at a dose of 200 mg/kg.”

DSM-Firmenich provided three studies to prove safety for the consumer, one carcinogenicity study and two studies for genotoxicity.  The carcinogenicity study was conducted in Wistar rats.  One of the two genotoxicity studies was conducted in vitro (outside a living organism, for example in a petri dish or test tube) and the other in vivo (within a living organism).

For the in vivo study, “the results [for genotoxicity] were negative except for males dosed at the top dose and sacrificed at 24 hours.”  Based on this study, which lasted for 24 hours before the animals (it doesn’t mention what kind of animals, we assume mice or hamsters) were euthanised, FSA concluded that “3-NOP is non-genotoxic in vivo.”

On the information the FSA has made public, it doesn’t seem Bovaer has “undergone extensive testing.”

Read more: Outcome of assessment of 3-Nitrooxypropanol “3-NOP” – Assessment, Food Standards Agency, published 31 March 2023 and updated on 20 March 2024

US Food and Drug Administration Assessment

Yesterday the Daily Mail reported that “DSM-Firmenich considers Bovaer a ‘blockbuster’ product and a recent deal to licence Bovaer in the US is expected to generate revenues of more than $200m (£158m).”  But evidence of the “extensive testing” Arla claims seems to be less “extensive” and more “narrow” there as well.

In a letter regarding 3-NOP marketed as Bovaer earlier this year, the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) said:

Based on the information provided in your letter, Bovaer 10 is an article (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of an animal, and therefore it is a drug. [Emphasis added]

Directions for Use:

Data supporting effectiveness has been evaluated when fed for no more than 105 days. Methane gas emissions were measured for individual animals. Data were not evaluated at the herd, farm, or larger scale. Data were not evaluated for other gas emissions. Milk production, feed efficiency, and milk solids have not been evaluated. [Emphasis added]

Caution:

Do not feed undiluted. For use in feed for lactating dairy cows only. Not for use in dry dairy cows, bulls, replacement heifers or bulls, growing cattle, or other ruminant species because safety and effectiveness have not been evaluated in these animals. Silicon dioxide from all sources cannot exceed 2 per cent by weight of the complete feed.

A decrease in dry matter intake may be observed in some animals. [Emphasis added]

Warning:

Not for human use. Caution should be exercised when handling this product. 3-nitrooxypropanol may damage male fertility and reproductive organs, is potentially harmful when inhaled, and is a skin and eye irritant. Personal protective gear, including eye wear, a dust mask, and impervious gloves, should be worn when handling this product. Operators should wash hands after handling. If accidental eye exposure occurs, rinse eyes thoroughly with water. The safety data sheet contains more detailed occupational safety information.

Letter to Elanco from the FDA, 24 May 2024

It seems according to the information supplied to the FDA, Bovaer is a drug, not a food, and there has been limited testing, less than 105 days, on a small scale. Also, does “a decrease in dry matter intake” indicate that the animals are eating less because they are unwell?

Although there are no details in the FDA’s letter there seems to be sufficient information to make an initial assessment; can anyone claim Bovaer has “undergone extensive testing”? No. Tests were conducted for less than 105 days on a small scale; “data were not evaluated at the herd, farm, or larger scale.”

As a drug, should it be only the FSA that approves Bovaer’s use in the UK? How much do people who are supposedly specialists in food safety know about pharmacology and drug safety? It would be prudent to view Bovaer as an unapproved, unregulated drug until proven otherwise.

European Food Safety Authority Assessment

Expanding on the “potentially harmful when inhaled” statement in the FDA’s letter, the European Food Safety Authority (“EFSA”) noted that “the active substance 3‐NOP may be harmful if inhaled … the genotoxicity of 3‐NOP is not completely elucidated, [so] the exposure through inhalation of the additive may represent an additional risk for the user.”

“The genotoxicity of 3‐NOP is not completely elucidated” contrasts with what the FSA said.  The difference in opinion may be due to timing.  EFSA’s assessment is dated 2021 and the FSA assessed Bovaer two years later in 2023 (updated 2024).

We have to ask: if caution should be exercised in handling the product, how safe is it for cows to eat?  It seems this is not as well-known as Arla claims.  EFSA says:

Systemic exposure or site of contact toxicity for the active substance 3‐nitrooxypropanol (3‐NOP), for which genotoxicity has not been fully clarified, in the target species, is unlikely based on ADME data available.  Consequently, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that Bovaer 10 was safe for dairy cows at the maximum recommended level. However, as a margin of safety could not be established, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of the additive for other animal species/categories. [Emphasis added]

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of 3‐nitrooxypropanol (Bovaer 10) for ruminants for milk production and reproduction (DSM Nutritional Products Ltd), European Food Safety Authority, 19 November 2021

Do you believe Bovaer has “undergone extensive testing”?

Always Ask Questions

If in doubt, the precautionary principle should apply: If it is possible that a given policy or action might cause harm to the public or the environment and if there is still no scientific agreement on the issue, the policy or action in question should not be carried out.

The British charity Soil Association agrees.  In response to queries received about Arla’s dubious project and the products Arla markets as organic, the Soil Association said:

Soil Association organic standards stipulate that all ingredients or components of a feed additive must be actively approved for use and be deemed safe and nutritionally useful for the animal.  The main components that make up Bovaer are not included in the list of approved products or compounds and as a result, Bovaer would not be permitted under organic standards and for use in organic farming.

Any organic milk [Arla] supply must meet organic regulation requirements and the production has to be completely separate from any non-organic milk. This must be demonstrated and independently audited every year.

Soil Association response to questions about Bovaer and Organic, Soil Association, 2 December 2024

Arla is attempting to introduce potentially harmful drugs to animals in their feed under false pretences of a “climate change crisis.” Do you trust Arla to follow organic standards? No?  Nor do we.

We don’t need science papers, studies or food standard authorities to use our discernment.  Based on our God-given logic and reasoning, and our recent experiences of the harmful covid “vaccines” – which were and still are publicised as “safe and effective” by health and regulatory bodies – would you risk drinking milk or eating cheese produced by Arla?

If you choose not to participate in yet another experiment, you can find farms run by people who feel the same and are declaring themselves to be Bovaer-free HERE. You can also find a Bovaer-free dairy near you HERE.

You may be interested to know that DSM-Firmenich, the manufacturer of the drug Bovaer, also makes dietary supplements and medical nutrition products for humans.  In the video below, recorded on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos at the beginning of the year, DSM-Firmenich CEO Dimitri De Vreeze spoke about the company’s “sustainable feed additive” and the weight-loss drug market, from which it hopes to profit in the form of new innovations in, for example, pre-biotics and pro-biotics to restore gut biomes.

Source:  https://expose-news.com/2024/12/04/arlas-bovaer-food-additive-is-not-food-it-is-a-drug/

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post Arla’s Bovaer food additive is not food, it is a drug appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

Source: https://www.hopegirlblog.com/2024/12/11/arlas-bovaer-food-additive-is-not-food-it-is-a-drug/