(Re the Announcement I sent out earlier today at http://www.ymlp.com/pubarchive_show_message.php?jham+362)
Use this link http://www.firstamendmentradio.net/ to listen instead of the one I sent out earlier, they're having technical problems and have set this up as a temporary link so you can listen live
IAHF Webmaster: Codex Emergency, Breaking News, Anti CAFTA, All Countries, What to Do:
John Hammell will be on the air tonight, July 4th at 7 PM Pacific, 10 PM Eastern Time on Web based World Wide First Amendment Radio http://www.wwfar.com/ As guest of Darren Weeks. You will need Winamp installed to listen on the web, and can also listen via satellite at Galaxy 13 Channel 16, Sub-Audio 7.70
The nightmare scenario which IAHF first warned the world about in 1996 came true today at the 28th General Session of the Codex Alimentarius when the global trade guideline for vitamins and minerals was RATIFIED (with nary a whimper of protest from US Codex Manager Dr.Ed Scarbrough, our traitorous delegate.) (See Press Release below my comments by Diane Miller who is in Rome.)
SEE WHAT TO DO BELOW: WE MUST KILL CAFTA TO STOP CODEX FROM COMING HERE:
THE SHELL GAME CONTINUES------> CODEX RATIFIED AN EMPTY SHELL
What Codex ratified was a FRAMEWORK with the blanks on allowable potencies to be filled in next November at the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Use Meeting in Bonn.
How they intend to fill in those blanks, however, is highly predictable given that the World Health Organization's "Nutrient Risk Assessment Project" is being "led" by an FDA employee: Christine Lewis Taylor, a dietician who firmly believes that taking any nutrient above RDA levels merely "enriches the urine."
The Pharma Dominated vitamin trade associations have conned their vitamin company and health food store members into thinking that "SOUND SCIENCE" would be used to fill in the blanks on allowable potencies, and that a "victory" was won when a move to scrap RDAs as the basis for filling in the blanks was replaced by a move to base them on "scientific" risk assessment instead.
(See CRN Press Release http://www.crnusa.org/PR04_110204jointCodex.html)
But just how "scientific" is it in FACT when they're only looking at presumed "RISKS" while ignoring BENEFITS? The Pharma Dominated trade associations have conned their members into believing that the END POINT of the Codex risk assessment would be the "SUL"S or "Safe Upper Levels" generated by the US National Academy of Sciences. These numbers aren't much different from the potencies that vitamin companies are currently allowed to sell in the USA so vitamin companies have easily bought into this LIE.
The awful REALITY, however is that the SULs are only the STARTING point for this most unscientific risk assessment, because the fine print calls for them to be further watered down til by subtracting junk science derived "nutrient risk factors" and junk science derived numbers from some mythical "average diet" which doesn't in fact exist, you end up with a the numbers generated by the German Federal Institute of Risk Assessment show in this table, which as you can see in some cases are even LOWER than the RDAs:
The UK based Alliance for Natural Health sees all of this, and in an effort to head it off commissioned the Dutch based HAN Foundation to do a PROPERLY SCIENTIFIC risk assessment which takes into account the BENEFIT of dietary supplements, which the so called World Health Organization is outrageously IGNORING completely:
Judging from what just happened in Rome, however, no vitamin consumer in America can count on Codex paying the least bit of attention to the HAN Foundation's findings however when Codex meets next in November. We have to assume the worst- that they'll fill in the blanks on allowable potencies exactly the way the FDA would want them to, which is of course just the way the German government would like as seen in the table above.
WHY WE MUST KILL CAFTA ON THE HOUSE FLOOR- HOW CAFTA TIES IN WITH CODEX
CAFTA VOTE - ANYTIME AFTER CONGRESS RECONVENES ON JULY 11th
WE MUST NOT ALLOW CAFTA AND CODEX TO OVERRIDE DSHEA
The Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) Treaty will require the U.S., a member of the World Trade Organization, to revise our food laws and regulations based on Codex decisions. CAFTA would force harmonization of our dietary supplements and regulations to international standards, overriding the DSHEA Act of 1994.
The Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and the even-broader Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA) are both modelled after the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). These agreements are typical bureaucratic monstrosities of "managed" trade that masquerade as free trade and would expand NAFTA to include first Central America and then the rest of the Americas in an economic "union." True free trade would take a few pages of written text to enact ("eliminate these barriers to trade and these tariffs," etc.); all three of these agreements encompass thousands of pages of bureaucratic textual garbage sprinkled liberally with rules, regulations, and special-interest benefits.
Buried in the language of CAFTA is Section 6 that would require of all its members that they form a Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary (SPS) committee for the purpose of insuring ongoing harmonization under the terms of the SPS Agreement in the World Trade Organization (WTO). You can find that text at the following website:
If you then look at Article 3 of the WTO's SPS Agreement, you will read the following words: "To harmonize sanitary and phytosanitary measures on as wide a basis as possible, Members shall base their food safety measures on international standards, guidelines or recommendations." (emphasis added) And as you all know by now, Codex sets the international standards for food safety including vitamins & minerals.
So, CAFTA, which is set for a vote in the House of Representatives any time after they reconvene July 11th, 2005, is another critical link by which health-freedom haters hope to bypass the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 and obligate the United States and Canada by treaty to harmonize to the harshly restrictive Codex vitamin-and-mineral standards. They cannot be allowed to succeed, and we at the NHF completely oppose these two treaties that would put a knife in the back of our health freedoms.
~CAFTA has already passed the Senate in a 54 to 45 vote on July 1st, 2005.
~Legislators have just recessed for one week, reconvening July 11, 2005.
~IMPORTANT- For House consideration, when they return, the Senate Bill 1307 (click here http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:3:./temp/~c109OjRqbt:: to view bill), ratifying CAFTA, can be voted on without going to committee. It is on the House calendar and may be brought up at any time.
CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES. URGE THEM TO VOTE AGAINST CAFTA NOW.
YOUR LETTERS WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THE VOTING IN THE HOUSE WILL BE CLOSE. WE MIGHT ONLY HAVE ONE WEEK TO FLOOD THEIR OFFICES WITH CAFTA OPPOSITION LETTERS.
PLEASE JOIN IN THIS EFFORT AND CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES.
Contact any member of the House of Representatives via http://www.house.gov/writerep/
LETTER TO USE:
In 1994 vitamin consumers generated the largest volume of mail to Congress on any issue in the HISTORY of Congress when we passed the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994.
Today, CAFTA threatens to undo all of our hard work, and to set the USA up for harmonization to an excessively restrictive global trade guideline for vitamins and minerals just finalized on July 4th 2005 at the 28 General Session of the UN's Codex Alimentarius Commission.
The seeds of our health freedom destruction are sewn inside Section 6 of CAFTA where members are forced to form a Sanitary-Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Committee for the purpose of insuring ONGOING HARMONIZATION of our laws under the terms of the SPS Agreement in the WTO Trade Agreement. (See http://www.ustr.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/CAFTA/CAFTA-DR_Final_Texts/Section_Index.html
If you examine Article 3 of the WTO's SPS Agreement you will read the following words: "To harmonize sanitary and phytosanitary measures on as wide a basis as possible, members SHALL base their food safety measures on international standards, guidelines or recommendations."
(Codex sets the international standard for food safety, and they intend to fill in the blanks on allowed potencies at levels even LOWER than RDAs- see http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_145.doc
Vitamin consumers drove many congressmen out of office who failed to vote for DSHEA in '94.
Any member of Congress who fails to heed our concerns about CAFTA and votes for this unconstitutional trade agreement anyway, despite how it sets us up for harmonization to Codex, and despite its continuing the failed policies of NAFTA which gave us our present $617 Billion trade deficit risks being driven from office. IAHF will be posting a list of any member of Congress who ignores our concerns. We urge you to watch Kevin Miller's excellent documentary on this issue at http://www.welltv.com
PRESS RELEASE ON WHAT JUST HAPPENED TODAY AT CODEX
Subject: Press Release - National Health Freedom Coalition: Codex Full Commission adopts Codex Guidelines
Press Release - National Health Freedom Coalition: Codex Full
Commission adopts Codex Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food
Supplements in final form July 4, 2005, Rome Italy.
by Diane Miller JD
Minutes ago the full Commission of Codex Alimentarius adopted in final
form, the Codex Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements.
This adoption is the Step 8 adoption, the final stage of adoption for
the international Codex guidelines. The Codex Vitamin and Mineral
Food Supplements guidelines are now official and no longer in draft
The Commission, attended by over 85 of the 171 Codex countries,
adopted the guidelines by consensus method. There was brief
discussion before adoption taking in comments from a small number of
countries and two NGOs.
Australia requested adding the word "only" in Section 1.3 bertwee the
words "apply" and "in". The sentence would then read "These
guidelines apply only in those jurisdictions where products defined in
2.1 are regulated as foods."
Australia's comments were followed by request from Venzuela and Spain
to clarify the spanish translation.
Venezuela was followed by China. China stated that every government
in making decisions about vitamins and minerals should take into
account the dietary limitations of their own countries, that
governments can select vitamins and minerals acocording to the customs
and habits of their country. China also pointed out that there should
be definitions of the sources of vitamins.
Columbia spoke up and commented that Vitamins and Minerals are
intended for deficiencies and are recommended for health reasons and
said that there has to be no exaggerated use of minerals.
Egypt commented and offered a clarification saying that vitamin and
minerals can be considered if daily needs are not being met.
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. Attonery Scott Tipps 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.
The NGO IADSA was then recognized. IADSA stressed the fact that the
draft guidelines should be adopted because they had been worked on in
committee for near 10 years and that valuable consensus had been
reached in the Bonn Germany committee meeting and the guidelines
should now be passed.
After all comments, the Chair, consulted with counsel to assess
whether the addition of the word "only" would change the meaning of
the sentence. After learning that it would not he consulted with
Australia and Australia repeated their request for amendment. The
Chair recommended adoption of the amendment and there was no dissent.
Then the Chair recommended the guidelines be adopted at Stage 8 in
their final form and that China submit their substantive amendment
requests to the committee at their next meeting. There was no further
comment or dissent from any country and the guidelines were adopted.