From the November 2006 Idaho Observer:

Codex Puts Industry Interests Before Consumers – Again!

compiled by Ingri Cassel

The following release from the National Health Federation is critical to our understanding of what we are up against when it comes to our ability to choose the quality foods and supplements we must be able to access in order to maintain optimal health and reverse chronic ill health.

The rapid globalization taking place before our eyes that will, in effect, reduce us to slaves for corporate interests with no legal recourse once it is in place, should inspire everyone reading this to get involved in protecting our right to clean air, pure water and organic, living foods. The Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU) is currently the vehicle being used to completely regulate access to such vitally important supplements as vitamin C and access to nutraceuticals produced by small family farms.

Due to this collective threat to our ability to immunize without vaccines, the following report is the topic of this month’s column. For further background, see The Idaho Observer articles on Codex from January 2004, and April and June 2005.

From the National Health Federation—On November 3, 2006, 45 countries and 24 international non-governmental organizations completed a week of deliberations at the 28th session of the United Nations-backed Codex nutrition committee, held in Chiang Mai, Thailand.  

This year’s meeting of the committee, relocated from its heartland in Germany, unsurprisingly saw a strong turnout from Asian countries. However, cultural factors may have hindered interventions, leaving the European Commission and United States delegations to dominate proceedings under the chairmanship of Germany’s Dr Rolf Grossklaus. The re-location from Germany to Thailand also seemed responsible for the 30 percent and 32 percent reduction in attendance, between 2005 and 2006, from national delegations and non-governmental organizations respectively.  

The Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU), one of 27 Codex Alimentarius Commission committees, develops international guidelines and standards for foods including infant formula, cereal-based foods for infants, gluten-free foods and dietary supplements. Committee procedure is tightly controlled and, although consensus voting provides the mechanism for agreement of texts, organized pacts between national delegations frequently allow viewpoints biased in favor of industry to be pushed through, even in the face of fierce opposition from consumer-led international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) such as the U.S.-based National Health Federation (NHF).  

The NHF delegation at Chiang Mai, led by Ingrid Franzon from Sweden, initiated heated discussions at this year’s meeting that brought to light the need to take better consideration of the consumers’ metabolic, national and geographic differences. Also on the NHF’s delegation this year were Dr. Wong Ang Peng from Malaysia and NHF’s scientific advisor, Dr Robert Verkerk, from the UK.

The agenda items of particular interest to NHF at this meeting included discussions on the World Health Organization’s Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health, nutrient risk assessment, health claims and Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs), the latter of which currently seems the most likely candidate to replace Recommended Daily Allowances of vitamins and minerals on food, dietary supplement and functional food labels. The NHF has been taking an active part in the Working Group on risk assessment, a discipline which is set to become the key scientific justification for potential future bans on dietary supplements. Current risk assessment methods are flawed and biased, so methodologies that are scientifically rational are urgently required, and were central to the NHF’s interventions during this year’s meeting.

With the discussions on infant formula and foods occupying around 75 percent of the committee’s time, critical agenda items 7, 8 and 9 on health claims, NRVs and risk assessment did not commence until 7:23 p.m. on the final evening of deliberations, which closed shortly after 9 p.m. It seems that the continued low priority for these agenda items over successive CCNFSDU meetings is perhaps being engineered by the Codex Secretariat in order to allow the European Commission to progress its own regulations in these areas, so that once completed these can act as models for future Codex standards.

Ingrid Franzon said, "This year’s meeting can best be described as an industrial and geographic polarization. It is deeply disheartening to see the views of delegations from small countries, or those of INGOs like the NHF, backed by many thousands of consumers, being trampled on by the EC bloc and other big countries, who seem much more concerned with the problems of big business rather than the interests of consumers."

Dr Wong, who has previously attended a CCNFSDU meeting as part of the Malaysian delegation, added, "Fluoride and sugar in foods were two glaring issues at this year’s meeting. It seems without doubt that industrial interests are taking precedence over consumer interests. Current science, and even common sense, would say it is nonsense to include fluoride and extra sugar in foods, especially those destined for children. It seems that the European Commission, the USA, Germany and some other European delegates know no shame and, as a result, we now know better than ever before that the CCNFSDU’s purported remit of ’consumer protection’ is hollow."  

The NHF team stimulated some two hours of discussion following its intervention over the need to stipulate more detailed specifications for "safe water" to which infant formula is added. Safe water is a concept not well understood by many parents who use infant formula, and contamination continues to result in millions of cases of infant death and sickness annually. Interestingly, the chairman attempted to shut down the discussion following the NHF intervention by saying, "Safe, more safe, most safe, what is the difference?" but fortunately the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations (IACFO) and other INGOs, who were also more concerned with consumer interests, fought hard to reach a compromise on wording in the face of strong opposition from national delegations, who, seemingly, primarily voiced the views of industry.  

Dr Robert Verkerk, the NHF’s scientific advisor, was deeply unhappy with the allocation of time to key agenda items, saying, "I hope the 10 minutes given over to risk assessment and health claims a piece do not reflect this Committee’s interest in these hugely important subjects, both of which will have a big bearing on consumer health and freedom of choice in years to come. We hope, however, that useful discussions in the Working Group on Risk Assessment, with which we have been closely involved, will be reflected in the committee’s final report."  

This year’s CCNFSDU proceedings have once again shown just how difficult it is to make changes to international guidelines and standards, when such changes are motivated by consumer interests and natural health issues rather than industry. Fortunately, however, Codex procedures move slowly, and with continued, well thought-through and scientifically backed inputs, there are still opportunities for consumer voices to be heard so that positive changes to texts can be sought.

Nevertheless, the outcome of this meeting underscores yet again the importance of all freedom loving individuals, especially Americans, of opposing the creation of so-called "free trade areas" and regional blocs, such as the proposed North American Union.

The recent evidence of the European Union project, for example, shows us that the creation of "free trade areas" and regional blocs is merely a prelude to the dismantling of the political and legal systems of participating nations, and the replacing of these with a hemispheric government. As such, the passing of the European Union’s highly restrictive and Codex-compliant Food Supplements Directive, in 2002, should serve as a warning to Americans as to what could happen if we allow Congress to abandon the United States of America as an independent country. Just as the relatively liberal dietary supplement laws of the UK were overridden by the Codex-compliant EU Food Supplements Directive (as a result of successive treaties that the British Government had signed with its European neighbors), participation in the North American Union could similarly lead to U.S. dietary supplement law (i.e. DSHEA) becoming susceptible to Codex-compliant harmonization with the more restrictive dietary supplement laws of Canada and Mexico. 

In short, the unelected bureaucrats from the FDA who attend Codex meetings are ultimately not accountable to us. However, senators and representatives in Congress, many of whom are oblivious to the Codex threat to U.S. dietary supplement laws are accessible and should be kept informed by their constituents.

Established in 1955, the National Health Federation is a consumer-education, health-freedom organization working to protect individuals’ rights to choose to consume healthy food, take supplements and use alternative therapies without government restrictions. With consumer members all over the world, and a board of governors and advisory board containing representatives from six different countries, the Federation is unique in being the only consumer health freedom organization in the world to enjoy official observer status with the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

(end of NHF release)

Corporate wolves in consumer advocate clothing

It should be noted that John Hammell of International Advocates for Health Freedom has dedicated his entire life to protecting Americans from the looming Codex threat. Hammell is an amazing activist who has been to Capitol Hill on dozens of occasions to educate our congressional representatives about Codex and the North American Union, the vehicle that will be used to usher in restrictive Codex standards already in place in other parts of the world. Hammell wants to warn unwary Americans to "not forward the bogus Codex ‘alerts’ from the (so called) ‘Natural Solutions Foundation.’ They are a controlled opposition group working directly against NHF, IAHF, ANH, the Rath Foundation and all other legitimate health freedom organizations world-wide. They are continually disseminating a steady stream of truth, half truth, total lies and disinformation. Their goal is to steer us off a cliff by avoiding any mention of the very real threat to our health freedom – the North American Union as the vehicle to adopt Codex’s dietary restrictions and the FDA’s treasonous involvement in this process.

An out-of-control FDA

It is clear from the article by Byron J. Richards, author of Fight for Your Health: Exposing the FDA’s Betrayal of America, in the August 2006 edition of The Idaho Observer that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is completely out-of-control. After all, it is due to this agency that aspartame was approved and remains on the market; SSRI psychotropic drugs were approved and are still available by prescription and; dangerous vaccines continue to be approved and mandated for our children. And as you now realize, this rogue agency is our sole government representation at the international Codex meetings.

But what our representatives in Congress don’t seem to understand in spite of the growing outcry from Americans regarding the irresponsible actions, past and present, of the FDA, is the need for a complete dismantling of this federal agency. But our Congressional representatives simply don’t "get it" as is evidenced by recent legislation that would give the FDA more power and control when agency functionaries have repeatedly proven they cannot be trusted with Americans’ health and well being.

Senate and House bills S. 3546 and H.R. 6168 "The Dietary Supplement and Non-Prescription Drug Consumer Protection Act" would require the development of an Adverse Event Reporting (AER) system for dietary supplements and over-the-counter medications. Opponents cite the following three main points regarding this legislation:

1) These twin bills are unnecessary - as there are so few serious adverse events involving the use of supplements;

2) language in the bills is confusing - by definition of "serious adverse event" ALL reports should be directed to a healthcare professional "trained" to handle AERs and who would determine the "actual" cause;

3) these bills are wasteful of tax dollars - the FDA’s recent faltering and systematic setbacks show that it cannot manage such a bill. The FDA’s enforcement reports for drug products show it to be an agency under increasing pressure to do more with less. The number of warning letters issued to pharmaceutical companies has dropped over the past 10 years even as product recalls have increased. In other words, the agency is allowing more manufacturer product mistakes to reach the market and;

4) our food supply is becoming more dangerous for consumers as evidenced by the recent e.coli outbreak and the addition of genetically modified and irradiated foods on the market without proper labeling. These bills raise more concern for who is actually behind this legislation when there are clearly other pressing concerns over the quality of our food, water and air.

And then there is Senate bill S.3807 that actually gives the FDA more power to speed dangerous drugs onto the market and fails to solve the grave risk posed by unmonitored medications. These efforts to rush bad legislation through in the lame duck session, under the false pretense of consumer safety, should not be tolerated by freedom loving Americans.

For further research and involvement:

The National Health Federation www.thenhf.com

International Advocates for Health Freedom www.iahf.com

Alliance for Natural Health www.alliance-natural-health.org

The Dr. Rath Health Foundation www.dr-rath-foundation.org