To: John N. Hathcock, PhD
Vice President and International Affairs
Council for Responsible Nutrition
I have just read your memo dated 4/21/05 re CRN's final report on the 22nd Session of the Codex Committee on General Principles (CCGP) that just took place in Paris on April 11-15, 2005. This memo was sent out by Libby Hogan-Heath. If I were her boss, I'd fire her for not using encryption. See one excerpt from this memo in particular below, and my comments. The vitamin consumers of the world deserve a detailed response to every single question asked in this email.
Its not very smart of CRN to not use encrypted email. I did not intercept Libby Hogan Heath's email myself, but a hacker who used to work for NSA at Fort Meade and is currently solo sailing around the world (and uses dietary supplements) intercepted it and anonymously circulated it to me and several other activists in the global health freedom movement so that we could read your insulting comments (see below) and feel empowered by them. Currently this individual is in the South Pacific, but he's been reading all of your internal communications for the past several months. Don't bother moving to encryption, this guy is good, he can hack most encryption programs and has friends at NSA who also use dietary supplements who are helping him because they're just as enraged by your spin as he is.
CRN, IADSA, and all the other pharma dominated vitamin trade associations are attempting to pull a fast one on the vitamin consumers of the world via your and Mark LeDoux's appalling spin campaign of fabrications and distortions (and similar spin campaigns via the other trade associations). Some of this spin has been perpetuated by ignorant, albeit well meaning people who we hope will take a much closer look at what we're saying below....
Why can't you and LeDoux just tell the TRUTH to all the distributors of the numerous network marketing companies such as Mannatech, Shaklee, Herbalife, GNLD, Nuskin that belong to CRN???
We find it appalling that you support and endorse the totally NON TRANSPARENT WHO "Nutrient Risk Assessment Panel" http://www.who.int/ipcs/highlights/nutrientraproject/en/ as they create the framework that will ultimately seal the fate of vitamin consumers world wide by banning our access to vitamins and minerals within the therapeutic range via the totally unscientific so called "risk assessment" process so ably exposed as fraudulent via this ANH Submission to WHO http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_121.pdf
CONTENTS OF THE HACKED CRN MEMO WHICH ENRAGE AND OFFEND THE GLOBAL HEALTH FREEDOM MOVEMENT: WE DEMAND ANSWERS
At the END of your memo, in a section titled Additional Actions you have made the following totally UNACCEPTABLE statement: (EMPHASIS IS MINE)
"The CRN delegation used the CCGP meeting to "take the temperature of" and to lobby several national delegations on the need for the CAC to adopt the vitamin and mineral supplement guideline at its meeting in July. We have been concerned of a POSSIBLE COALITION OF OPPOSITES THAT MIGHT THWART THAT PROPOSAL. Clearly, the intent of the INTERNET ACTIVISTS who make a living by spreading alarm and hysteria in resistance to almost any regulation of supplements and the countries currently legislated RDA-based maximum potencies might cooperate in resisting the guideline that will be considered by the CAC. That guideline will identify maximums based on nutrient-appropriate risk assessment, an approach that CRN has been strongly advocating for several years and is the basis of our recommended policy on maximums for certain vitamins and our Vitamin and Mineral Safety, 2nd Edition, 2004."
"At the CCGP, we found strong support for the risk assessment approach among the national delegates present, many of whom are the same individuals who will represent their countries at the CAC meeting in July."
"CRN believes that the vitamin and mineral supplement guideline will indeed by adopted by the CAC, but we believe it prudent to reinforce that possible outcome in every way we can."
"In addition to the vitamin and mineral supplement guideline, CRN delegates discussed the FAO/WHO nutrient risk assessment with the Chairman of the Commission and several national delegations. We entered preliminary discussions on whether that project could be continued and expanded in a forum that allows NGOs, such as CRN, to participate directly."
--------------------------------IAHF COMMENTS ON THIS DRIVEL:
First things first:
Lay off the SPIN. You are lying to CRN's vitamin company members about what you are doing at Codex, and THAT has to stop RIGHT AWAY because you are attempting to lead them down the primrose path regarding the TRUTH about what you are CALLING "scientific risk assessment". When I called you just now, you told me that you're not one of the 18 people selected to be on the WHO Nutrient Risk Assessment panel, and you claim that you "don't know who's on it." http://www.who.int/ipcs/highlights/nutrientraproject/en/
YOU DON'T KNOW WHO'S ON THE PANEL BUT YOU USED TO WORK AT FDA??? GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
Given the fact that you used to work at FDA and are FRIENDS with Christine Lewis Taylor who has assembled this panel, I find that very hard to believe.
You told me that no industry people were on it, that it was "strictly academics"------- and you CLAIM that you "don't know" whether or not Grossklaus is on it or not, but lets face it- we BOTH know that even if Grossklaus is NOT on it, academics who he works closely with from the BfR are BOUND to be on it, in fact it would MAKE SENSE (given the FDA's agenda here) if Christine Taylor stacked the DECK with Grossklaus's people dominating the panel, but my BIGGEST question to you is why do you SUPPORT this TOTALLY NON TRANSPARENT PROCESS???
Please read, and provide IAHF with your most astute comments about this table http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_145.doc This shows that you are lying to every vitamin company amongst CRN's membership. This shows the intended END RESULT of so called "scientific" risk assessment after junk science derived "nutrient risk analysis" and numbers from some mythical "average diet" (which doesn't exist) are subtracted from the so called "Safe Upper Levels" generated by the National Academy of Sciences.
Why aren't you and Mark Le Doux telling the TRUTH to your vitamin company members, Dr.Hathcock?
Could it have anything to do with the fact that you worked at the FDA, directly alongside former US Codex Delegate Dr.Beth Yetley and with Christine Lewis Taylor before going to work with CRN where you are clearly ONLY representing the interests of greed driven companies seeking to knock the smaller, more innovative supplement companies off a cliff?
Why are you lying to the world about what is happening at Codex when you know as well as I do that only the German Federal Institute of Risk Assessment (BfR), led by Dr.Grossklaus, has done the full math on so called "scientific" risk assessment? What is your response to the scientific arguments raised by ANH which expose this process as fraudulent? http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_121.pdf
At the END of your memo, in a section titled Additional Actions you have made the following totally outrageous, and totally UNACCEPTABLE statement which INSULTS our global movement of health freedom activists:
We have been concerned of a possible coalition of opposites that might thwart that approval. Clearly, the intent of the internet activists who make a living by spreading alarm and hysteria in resistance to almost any regulation of supplements and the countries currently legislated RDA-based maximum potencies might cooperate in resisting the guideline that will be considered by the CAC. That guideline will identify maximums based on nutrient-appropriate risk assessment, an approach that CRN has been strongly advocating for several years and is the basis of our recommended policy on maximums for certain vitamins and our Vitamin and Mineral Safety, 2nd Edition, 2004."
LETS LOOK AT YOUR SPIN FOR A MINUTE DR.HATHCOCK:
First of all, you are calling EVERYONE on the internet who is concerned about the unscientific so called "risk assessment" process as "hysterical". Explain to the vitamin consumers of the world how you think ANH is being hysterical when they raise THESE concerns about the gross LACK OF SCIENCE in this "risk assessment process" which totally IGNORES the BENEFITS of dietary supplements, while employing only JUNK SCIENCE in a less than objective "effort" to assess supposed "risks"
: http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_121.pdf ? What is CRN's point by point response to ANH's argument? You do REALIZE that ANH's argument is endorsed by a slew of highly qualified scientists and alternative MDs from around the world such as Dr.Jeff Bland, Alan Gaby, MD and many others, don't you?
Now, lets look at the REST of what you're saying: you are suggesting that there is an "ALLIANCE" between the global health freedom movement, and the countries which currently base allowable potencies at RDA levels.
That is OUTRAGEOUS!!
Our movement endorses and supports ANH's efforts to expose this SCAM called "Scientific Nutrient Risk Assessment" which CRN has the NERVE to call "SCIENTIFIC".
We want to know IN DETAIL why CRN DID NOT SUPPORT the ANH lawsuit?
We want to know IN DETAIL why CRN has not made ANY PUBLIC STATEMENT about the specific points raised by ANH in this paper which was submitted to WHO, but which WHO is IGNORING as they listen ONLY TO DR.GROSSKLAUS and his STOOGES? http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_121.pdf ?
Given the total non transparency of the WHO Nutrient Risk Assessment panel overseen by FDA employee Christine Lewis Taylor, we want to know, in detail, what assurance you can give the multitudes of distributors in Mannatech, Shaklee, GNLD, Herbalife, and Nuskin that it won't be THESE numbers generated by the German Federal Institute of Risk Assessment that won't be the END POINT of this less than transparent, less than scientific so called "process"?:
CRN NOT THE LEAST BIT CONCERNED ABOUT CAFTA/ FTAA & ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR AMERICA
CRN NOT TELLING ITS MEMBER VITAMIN COMPANIES TO URGE CONSUMERS TO LOBBY AGAINST CAFTA/FTAA ...... WHY NOT???
You told me in our phone conversation that you aren't THE LEAST BIT CONCERNED about regional harmonization threatening to impact the USA (and DSHEA) via the expansion of NAFTA via CAFTA and FTAA.
Could your lack of concern possibly have ANYTHING to do with the fact that CRN's membership includes the following multinational pharmaceutical companies:
Monsanto, Bayer, BASF, Pfizer, Wyeth, Cargill and others?
Is it possible that the LARGEST COMPANIES within CRN are skillfully using you and Mark LeDoux to do major SPIN against the TRUTH?
As I told you in our conversation Dr.Hathcock, the implications of a carbon copy of the EU Dictatorship being foisted off on us in our hemisphere concern me a great deal.
It concerns me because in the UK, the government ignored the wishes of over a million vitamin consumers who'd signed petitions against the UK's harmonizing its vitamin laws to the mindless EU Food Supplement Directive.
What makes you think the same thing wouldn't happen here in America if we allow CAFTA and FTAA to be signed off on by congress?
The John Birch Society on the right, and Public Citizen on the left are BOTH VERY CONCERNED about CAFTA and FTAA, Dr.Hathcock.
Between these organizations they cover the whole political spectrum, see these websites where the public can send form letters in to Congress voicing opposition to this planned hijacking of America: http://www.stoptheftaa.org/ and http://www.citizen.org/trade/cafta/
Furthermore, why isn't CRN urging the vitamin consuming public to support H J Res 27 which would get us out of the WTO?
CRN's argument is that "DSHEA is not vulnerable to a WTO trade dispute because our law is so much more liberal than any foreign countries."
Yeah, it IS, but you told me yourself that FDA could block a foreign manufacturers product from coming in here if it contained one or more NDIs (New Dietary Ingredients) that weren't grandfathered in under passage of DSHEA, and you know as well as I do that if that happened, it could trigger a trade dispute in which DSHEA would come under close scrutiny by the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body, a new international court that doesn't use US rules of evidence, which meets behind closed doors, and which was designed to make end runs around any national laws that interfere with the profits of companies such as CRN members Monsanto, Bayer, BASF, Pfizer, Wyeth, Cargill and others, isn't that TRUE?
You know or SHOULD KNOW that in every case the WTO Dispute settlement body has ruled against the environment, against the public health, against human rights, against labor rights, against every intangible that goes in to the make up of any democratic nation's laws. See for yourself. Read Lori Wallach's book WTO Whose Trade Organization? A Comprehensive Guide to the WTO http://www.citizen.org/trade/wto/articles.cfm?ID=10441
A detailed response to the questions asked in this email would be very appreciated by the global health freedom movement, and in future, kindly refrain from making insulting remarks about us, we're reading your internal memos on a regular basis and expect you to be on your best behavior from now on.
I'd say the jig is up John. Why don't you come clean by responding in minute detail to every single question asked in this email? You do realize it will be read by thousands of network marketing distributors working for CRN member companies that you're attempting to mislead, don't you? You also realize they're reading this article of Suzanne Harris's titled Who Says Whatever Happens at Codex Does Not Affect US Law and Why Are They Saying It? http://www.thelawloft.com/Freedom/050125_us_law.htm
With Serious Concern About the LIES of CRN and the OTHER Pharma Dominated Vitamin Trade Associations vis a vis the Codex Vitamin Issue,
John C. Hammell, President
International Advocates for Health Freedom