Codex Alimentarius Commission Adopts Restrictive Vitamin Guidelines

 

 

News from the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), which has now voted to adopt the Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Supplements proposed by the Codex Nutrition Committee (CDNSDU).

 

The following 4 press releases tells the story:

 

Codex Alimentarius Commission (28th Session) Rome, Italy.

NHF Update on Codex Proceedings Currently in Session

 

By Scott Tips, NHF, July 5, 2005.

 

The Codex Alimentarius Commission is an international body, operating under the auspices of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO), that is charged with establishing food standards that will be implemented worldwide.

 

One of the food standards being set is for vitamin-and-mineral food supplements, overseen by one of the Commission’s Committees that meets annually in Bonn, Germany.

 

That Committee had just last November prepared and sent to its parent Commission a draft Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements that would greatly restrict consumer access to vitamins and minerals.

 

 

The National Health Federation, a U.S.-based international nonprofit organization of health consumers seeking to preserve health freedom in their various countries has attended Codex meetings for years and is the only health-freedom organization with a voice at the Codex meetings.

 

In its efforts to oppose harsh and restrictive Codex standards, the NHF has been supported at these meetings by many other organizations and individuals, including the Danish-based May Day, the Canadian-based Friends of Freedom International, and the UK-based Alliance for Natural Health.

 

 

On Independence Day 2005, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, meeting in Rome, Italy for its 28th Session, quickly went down a list of many Codex guidelines for approval. It was obvious to all that the Chairman, a Swede, was hellbent for leather to get every single one of the guidelines approved by the Commission. A rhythm of approval was quickly set.

 

When the Chairman reached the draft Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements, the momentum slowed just for a moment as the Chairman dealt with some last-minute revisions sought by Australia, Venezuela, and China.

 

 

 

The first two countries’ revisions were deemed technical while China’s was determined by the Chairman to be substantive. The last ruling was important because if a change sought by a country was substantive, then the guideline could not be approved and must be sent back to its Committee for re-review.

 

After these countries were heard, the Chairman recognized the National Health Federation. NHF’s head delegate and General Counsel, Scott Tips, then spoke out as the sole voice against adoption of the draft Guideline by the Commission.

 

Arguing that they were defective and must be sent back to Committee, Mr. Tips gave three main reasons: (1) According to Codex’s own Procedural Manual, guidelines must state a purpose for those guidelines in the Preface and the draft Vitamin-and-Mineral Food Supplement Guidelines do not contain a purpose, (2)

 

The Guidelines fail to define what vitamins and minerals are covered by the Guidelines since they refer to an FAO/WHO list of approved vitamins and minerals that does not even exist and therefore it is unclear as to what would be covered by the Guidelines; and

 

(3) The comments made by China, and the changes sought by China to the Guidelines, were substantive and according to the Codex Rules of Procedure as stated on page 27 of the Manual of Procedure, any substantive amendment must be sent back to the Committee and dealt with at the committee level.

 

After the NHF spoke, a so-called organization of supplement associations, called IADSA, then argued in favor of the adoption of the Guidelines.

 

Ignoring the blatant procedural defects, and with all of the countries silent on the issue of health freedom, the Chairman simply acted as he wished. He brushed aside the substantiveness of the Chinese-requested changes, completely failed to address the issue of those defects, and decided on his own that the Guidelines were adopted.

 

In doing so, the Chairman made a complete mockery of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. He ignored and mocked its own rules of procedure and he showed that the Commission is being run as an autocracy and not a democracy.

 

At least now, it can be clearly seen by the World that the Commission needs to be completely reformed before it continues any of its important works."

 

Source: The National Health Federation (NHF, USA).

Read more: http://www.thenhf.com

 

Transcript of the National Health Federation Statement

 

By Carolyn Dean, M.D., NHF, USA & Friends of Freedom International (FOFI, Canada), July 4, 2005.

 

Scott Tips of the National Health Federation was recognized by the chair. The following is a transcription of Scott Tips’ statement at Codex regarding the vitamin and mineral guidelines.

 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. The NHF is a world wide consumer organization. We compliment you on your rapidity with which you have adopted many draft guidelines here today. But this is one that should not be rushed and should not be approved. It should not be rushed in the same way as the others.

 

I encourage you to read the document that is being distributed to you right now: for these defective guidelines are incomplete and may not be adopted because, first of all, they contain no statement of purpose in the preface, which is contrary to our own rules of procedure.

 

What are they there for if we do not follow them? We cannot do that; they have to be sent back to Bonn for redrafting. Second, they don’t define what vitamins and minerals are. The FAO has admitted that they cannot provide us with a list of the vitamins and mienrals that are supposed to be defined in this document. You are trying to pass a document that is not complete or defined.

 

Third, Mr. Chairman you are quite correct when you said that the Chinese comments are subtantive and as the Columbian delegate pionted out his comments are substantive too. And, page 27 of the Codex Procedural Manual says that if an amendment is ruled as substantive, it shall be referred back to the Committee. The Guideline must, therefore, be sent back to Committee. Thank you Mr Chairman.

 

Source: Friends of Freedom International

Read more: www.friendsoffreedominternational.org

 

Codex Alimentarius Adopts Vitamin Guidelines

 

By Sepp Hasslberger, National Health Federation & La Leva di Archimede, Italy.

 

The Codex Alimentarius Commission has voted to adopt potentially restrictive guidelines for vitamin and mineral supplements proposed by the Codex Nutrition Committee.

 

In its 28th session here in sun dried, heat plagued Rome, the planet’s supreme food regulator has given a nod to industry in approving guidelines for food supplements over the strenuous opposition of consumer representatives.

 

Several associations representing consumers and health practitioners were present under the banners of the National Health Federation: Friends of Freedom from Canada, the Europe-based Alliance for Natural Health, La Leva from Italy, the US Health Freedom Coalition as well as the Dr. Rath Health Foundation…

 

Source: Health Supreme, July 04, 2005

Read more: http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp

 

Vitamins to be Banned Worldwide…

 

Press release by Diane Miller JD of the National Health Freedom Coalition (NHFC, USA), July 4, 2005.

 

After the countries were heard, the Chairman recognized NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations). National Health Federation (NHF) a world wide consumer organization with NGO status at Codex was recognized to speak.

 

Attorny Scott Tips of NHF stood and requested the guidelines not be adopted but rather be sent back to commitee for 3 important reasons:

1. According to Codex rules a "purpose" statement must be part of all guidelines adopted and the Vitamin and Mineral guidelines did not contain a purpose.

 

Secondly, the guidelines did not define vitamin and mineral and therefore it is unclear as to what is being regulated

 

And lastly, he pointed out that the Chinese comments were substantive and according to Codex rules on page 27 of the procedural manual, a substantive amendment request should be addressed at the committee level. His comments were heard.

 

Source: National Health Freedom Coalition + Quackpot Watch, USA.

Read more: http://www.nationalhealthfreedom.com

www.quackpotwatch.org