VERY IMPORTANT! everyone please read
- 02-02-2005, 04:17 PM
VERY IMPORTANT! everyone please read
Mods - feel free to move this if necessary.
This has been mentioned on this board but this gives greater detail.
This was posted at another board by Cutieface and the full article can be read here:
Our right to choose your vitamin, mineral and other supplements may end in June of this year (2005).
After that, US supplements will be defined and controlled by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World Health Organization (WHO).
It is called the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS (food code) and it is setting the supplement standards for all countries in the WTO. CODEX met secretly in November, 2004 and finalized ‘Step 8 (the final stage)’ to begin implementation in June, 2005, severely restricting the use and availability of numerous vitamins, minerals and other supplements.
The US president and congress agreed to the takeover when the WTO treaty was signed, therefore these supplement standards WILL BE ENFORCED BY THE WTO AND WILL OVERRIDE US LAWS. CODEX violations are/will be punished by WTO trade sanctions.
No supplement can be sold for preventive or therapeutic use.
Any potency higher than RDA (recommended daily allowance, aka minimal strength) is a ‘drug’ requiring a prescription and must be produced by drug companies. Over 5000 safe items now in health stores will be banned, terminating health stores as we now know them.
CODEX regulations become binding internationally.
New supplements are banned unless given very expensive CODEX testing and approval.
CODEX now applies to Norway and Germany, among others, where:
Zinc tablets rose from $4 per bottle to $52.
Echinacea (an ancient immune-enhancement herb) rose from $14 to $153.
Both examples above are now allowed by prescription only. They are now ‘drugs’.
Vitamin C above 200mg? Banned for over-the-counter. Sold as a prescription drug only.
Niacin above 32 mg? Banned for over-the-counter. Sold as a prescription drug only.
Bitamin B6 above 4 mg? Banned for over-the-counter. Sold as a prescription drug only.
Same for Amino Acids like arginine, lysine, carnitine, etc.
Same for the Omega Essential Fatty Acids and many more supplements including DMEA, DHEA, , MSM, beta-carotene, etc.
The CODEX rules are not based on real science. They were made by a few people meeting in secret (see web sites below); not necessarily scientists. In 1993 the FDA and drug companies tried to put all supplements under restriction and prescription, but over 4 million Americans told congress and the president to protect their freedom of choice on health supplements. The DSHEA law was passed in 1994 which does so, but this will be overruled by CODEX and the WTO.
Virtually nothing about it has been in the media. What the drug corporations have failed to do through congress, they have gotten by sneak attachk through CODEX with the help of a silent media.
So…what can be done at this late hour?
Spread the word as much as possible. Inform yourselves fully at www.ahha.org and www.iahf.com and www.illiance-natural-health.org.
Oppose bills S.722 and H.R.3377. These support the CODEX restrictions with US laws, changing the DSHEA law.
Support H.R.1146 which would the sovereignty of the US Constitution over CODEX, etc.
Express your wishes ASAP to the president, senators and representatives (they got us into this!).
Contact multi-level health marketing groups that can get their members to inform the government.
Send donations, however small, to the British Alliance for Natural Health (see website above). It has succeeded in challenging the CODEX directives in World Court later this month or next. They need help financially, having carried the fight effectively for everyone.
CODEX claims to wish to protect us the same way the FDA protects us from prescription drugs. To accomplish this, they used a study of prescription drugs (not supplements) by three medical scientists as reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association, April 15, 1998-Vol. 279, No. 15, p. 1200, "…Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) was found to be extremely high." Covering 30 years from 1966 to 1996, it was found that in the US, an average of 106,000 hospitalized patients per year die from ADRs. That’s equivalent to 290 people per day. 2.2 MILLLION need more hospitalization for recovery. And these were FDA approved drugs, properly administered by competent professionals in hospitals…yet none were considered malpractice. ADRs represent the number four cause of death in the US. When combined, they account for 7% of all hospitalized patients. This is equivalent to a 9/11 attach every ten days.
Contrary to pharmaceutical drugs, there are few fatalities from supplements. Can you just imagine the news coverage if vitamins and supplements created the amount of death that drugs do?
There is no need for more FDA control of supplements than is already in place, which is substantial. Instead of drastically restricting supplements, why doesn’t the FDA better control and restrict the extremely dangerous pharmaceutical drugs which are now killing us at the rate of a major airline crash per day?
Wallace G. Heath, PhD.
1145 Marine Drive Bellingham, WA 98225
Ok to make is as easy as possible for people here are some steps to help and here is the page to find your comgress and senator people, remember to get them all.
2) Witer your letter based on this info:
There are three actions to take. The most urgent is to support a case brought by the British Alliance for Natural Health to overturn the European Food Supplements Directive. In January 2004, the alliance's attorneys (a firm which has successfully had another European Directive overturned) won the first round in the High Court of Justice in London. The appeal was referred to the European Court of Justice.
(Please visit the alliance's Web site, read about their case and, most importantly, make a donation to support their efforts to protect everyone's supplements, including yours. Even a few dollars will help. A few dollars from each of us will add up. If we can help them overturn this food supplement dictatorship in Europe, it won't ever come here.)
The second action I urge you to take is to write, call and e-mail your state's senators and congressmen. Tell your senators to oppose S.722, the Dietary Supplement Safety Act, and tell your congressmen to oppose H.R. 3377, the Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act. These two bills put the wheels in motion for restrictions similar to those outlined in the EU Directive to become U.S. law, which would be even more threatening to us than just an international code of standards.
These extremely dangerous and misnamed proposals would allow the FDA to "roll back" most of the small amount of health care freedom you and I regained with the 1994 "DSHEA" law we all fought so hard for. Even if we're successful in helping the Alliance for Natural Health defeat the European Food Supplements Directive, if these bills are passed into law, our supplement choices will shrink dramatically anyway.
The final step to take is to tell your U.S. senators and congressmen to support U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's H.R. 1146, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act. This accurately named (for once) legislation would make the Constitution of the United States the supreme law of the land again, and law-making and judging power to our elected representatives and American courts, respectively. Please don't leave this off your list. In the long run, it's the most important action of the three.
Please make a donation of any size to the Alliance for Natural Health as soon as you can. Then, please write, call, fax, and e-mail your U.S. Senators and Representatives as often as you can, telling them to oppose S. 722 and H.R. 3377, and to support American freedom by voting for H.R. 1146.
For further information on the European Union Directive on Dietary Supplements and on the Codex Alimentarius legislation, contact the American Holistic Health Association (www.ahha.org), the Alliance for Natural Health (www.alliance-natural-health.org), or the International Advocates for Health Freedom (www.iahf.com).
3) Don't forget the CODEX COMITTEE
Even easier to fill out
- 02-02-2005, 04:35 PM
I don't really know how to respond to this. This is one of the most unreal things I've ever heard. Land of the FREE...
- 02-02-2005, 05:02 PM
Ive seen this floating around as well, but I have heard nothing from the USFA, which kind of makes me doubt if this is real or not. I mean the companies that produce multis and whatnots are huge...we would have heard something by now I think.
02-02-2005, 05:40 PM
That is probably because, as far as I know, it is currently in Europe and has not reached the United States yet. If you read the full article (I provided a link to it at the top, its at mercola's site) then you will see how it will effect us. If the WTO and WHO organizations agree on this then we must abide by it because that overrides US law (that is a very basic explanation and as I said see the whole article for full detail) I have talked to others who have spoken with congressman's aids, and they have stated that this is apparently likely to happen.
02-02-2005, 08:25 PM
The United States is not bound by European Union directives.
Quoting from the linked web-site:
Note how the statement jumps from discussing the EU directive to stating that the US, because it is a member of the WTO, is therefore bound not by a WTO directive, but a EU directive.
Even if the American government didn't want to go along with the regulations imposed by the EU Directive, we really wouldn't have a choice. In fact, the United States never has acknowledged or stated any form of acceptance for the EU Directive. But hard as it is to believe, this "directive" can actually override U.S. law if it isn't stopped in Europe.
As a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the U.S. will be bound by any finalized standards put forth in the directive.
If we choose to ignore the regulations our WTO-affiliation binds us to, we would face severe trade sanctions with other WTO countries, which could potentially cripple part of our economy. And there's no way that our already anti-natural medicine government is going to let that happen over access to vitamins and minerals. So the best way to ensure it doesn't get to that point is to do everything we can to stop it now -- before it happens.
Also, it states that the US would face severe trade sanctions by WTO countries. No country with significant power would consider sanctioning the US in the Bush-doctrine era.
02-02-2005, 09:11 PM
I absolutely agree. This is one area that I definitely dont think will be touched here in america. There was/is always someone trying to portrary supplements in a negative light (remember before the spotlight was on prohormones it was on creatine and a lot of people thought that was going to be banned for a while), but even the average uninformed Joe Shmoe of america will think this is ridiculous. granted the media can and has skewed things ridiculously in the past, but how is are they going to portray an excess of vitamin C as a life-threatening and necessary of government regulation? How many people have had problems with overdosing on vitamins (I'm not talking iron-overdosing which does happen on occasion with very young children and non-childproof tops on vitamin bottles). Look at it this way, for a prescription drug to get to market, the manufacturer must prove to the government the benefits outweight the possible side effects and negative effects. you be hard-pressed to prove the otherway with these particular supplements.Originally Posted by ahsans
02-02-2005, 09:34 PM
this is crazy if this happens then I will finish my military time up and move to mexico or something. WTF
02-02-2005, 10:00 PM
i think this has much more to do with pharmaceutical industries wanting control over all the aforementioned substances rather than people overdosing on vitamins.
many countries already experience the control of these products, the attitidue that it cannot happen here is the one which will allow it to occur. im certainly not trying to create an argument here, the article was posted simply to inform you and make you aware of the possibilities so that you could take action if you desired.
02-03-2005, 12:22 AM
Where you'll what ... take advantage of the perfect laws and social system in Mexico???this is crazy if this happens then I will finish my military time up and move to mexico or something. WTF
02-03-2005, 08:11 AM
oh I will live like a king. You know how much dough I will be making shipping all that bulk B-6 Vit C and zinc to the states. I shoudl make $$$$$$.Originally Posted by rrgg
Seriously though I probably wouldn't leave this country because I love it and I serve it, but damnit this is not freedom at all. Maybe I can make it to politics fast enough to stop **** like this.
02-03-2005, 10:37 AM
Guys this is no joke.My mom sends my grandmother stuff for her arthritis and back plus some multi vitamins
over to greece because they are all perscribed there.When I was there I noticed percription stuff she had and was paying up the ass for what I could of bought at wallmart for next to nothing.
The funny part was while I was there I walked into a pharmacy and got 3 bottles of t4 and 30 vials of deca with no problem lol.
02-03-2005, 01:40 PM
That is how the WTO works. The united States has no veto power in the WTO. That was one of the reasons everyone was upset about when we got into the WTO. If everyone votes against us as they often do, the United States would have to comply or face trade sanctions. Just say hypothetically, that most countries in the WTO felt it wasn't fair that the United States doesn't let them dump radio active waste into the water off our shores. The WTO voted and agreed with the other countries. After that if we didn't change our laws we would face trade sanctions. This of coarse is totally unconstitutional.Note how the statement jumps from discussing the EU directive to stating that the US, because it is a member of the WTO, is therefore bound not by a WTO directive, but a EU directive.
Also, it states that the US would face severe trade sanctions by WTO countries. No country with significant power would consider sanctioning the US in the Bush-doctrine era.
02-03-2005, 02:01 PM
I've heard about s. 722. my congressman replied about this bill when I wrote him about the ph ban. he supports it and said that it is supposed to force supplement suppliers to be truthful on labels including the amount of ingredients in them.
02-03-2005, 04:16 PM
This makes no sense. Vitamin C is in Orange juice. Under this police-state logic - you should serve 10 years for possession of orange juice. And 50 years for dealing it.
My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
hair loss from steroids dot com
02-03-2005, 04:18 PM
Since when does the US do what the WTO wants anyway?
Doesnt the US still have protective barriers and quotas against imports anyway? (I know it does against Australia, and we have a friggin Free Trade Agreement with you guys!)
I think that this may be a load of crap just so the "organisations" against it can raise some $.
02-03-2005, 04:25 PM
I hope so.I think that this may be a load of crap just so the "organisations" against it can raise some $.
02-03-2005, 06:14 PM
Maybe you should rephrase that. Since when does anyone do what the WTO wants?Since when does the US do what the WTO wants anyway?
02-06-2005, 05:25 PM
...hmmm....FRESH SQUEEZED OJ, with intention to distribute...10-15 in the hole. The land of the free! Don't get me wrong, I'm as patriotic as they come. Some things make you shake your head, though.
Sledge, maybe that idea you had a while ago for "Designerville" could be on another planet!
02-06-2005, 05:33 PM
Maybe they'l figure out a way to restrict the amount of vitamin c in orange juice when this all pans out.
02-06-2005, 06:44 PM
Tell that to Justice Kennedy, please. The guy has been trying to make the argument that if a legal argument isn't available in US law and jurisprudence that he should be able to search the globe for other law or jurisprudence to use in a case.Originally Posted by ahsans
You want to see sovereignty erode, get a few more guys like that on the Supreme Court. Thank God for Scalia. I saw him comment on this, and as you can imagine, he about blew up. lol
02-07-2005, 01:49 PM
Make sure to run that through a whatman before injecting....pulp hurts.Originally Posted by milwood
02-08-2005, 12:12 PM
The United States would be obligated to obey WTO rulings as Under the Constitution treaties that The United States has entered into become the Supreme law of the land. As we have entered into the WTO we are techincally bound by any WTO directives. Remmber the problems with the tariffs we were placing on foreign steel coming into the US. Violation of a WTO order and it does present economic and finacial penalties against the US for violating. However, I am confused about how a EU directive can be applied to the US. The EU and WTO are completely different entities, and the EU has no authoirty over what the US does whatsoever.
02-08-2005, 02:50 PM
02-09-2005, 09:27 AM
02-09-2005, 09:43 AM
02-18-2005, 02:39 PM
02-18-2005, 02:47 PM
02-18-2005, 02:59 PM
The following quote from the link still disturbs me...Originally Posted by Zoldian
"Vitamins and minerals are not under the gun. Dietary supplements are."
02-18-2005, 03:22 PM
Yep that article really didn't lift any kind of spirits. And after all of the B.S. that Custom is going through, I feel that the paranoia is justified.
02-18-2005, 05:09 PM
Bro the above article leads the reader to believe that their right to purchase vitamins, minerals, and dietary supplements in the U.S. is about to be lost to them unless they act decisively in defense of it. This is simply not true.Originally Posted by ryansm
I'm not sure if you read the whole article, but if you did you would see there is no need for paranoia.
"This is another case of an issue that is now largely moot due to outdated information. Back in 2003, two versions of a bill that proposed the regulation of dietary supplements (S. 722, the "Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2003," and H.R. 3377, the "Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act") were introduced to Congress. Neither of these bills was ever voted upon, much less passed. They both expired with the end of the 108th Congress in 2004 and have not been reintroduced to the currently sitting 109th Congress.
02-18-2005, 05:44 PM
...It's nice to hear that the extremes to which this gov't control/regulation were imagined may be overstated. Nonetheless, our ongoing concern stems from the real-life experience of having supps we use ripped away (legally/legislatively) on an ongoing basis, and seemingly to no end. Ephedra, PH/PS's being the most obvious and recent, but we are hearing more and more that technicalities can quickly eliminate most any substance in question. Some politicians are have itchy trigger fingers, because they love to hype themselves as "protectors" of society, constituents' health, "the children", etc. etc. Hell, pharmaceutical companies probably have a hand in a lot of basic vitamin production, so I'm pretty confident that those will be free-flowing forever. When you hear that things like creatine are on the hit list, though, and hear some bonehead referencing it in the same breath as AAS's, you gotta wonder. Many of these people are just whipping up frenzied concern to an uneducated public. And because they have the law, they get to drop the hammer.
02-18-2005, 08:00 PM
Thanks bro, but I read the article. Like Stryder remarked the emphasis on dietary supplements is what concerns me, and others.Originally Posted by Zoldian
02-18-2005, 08:03 PM
The urban legends art is encouraging. But, who is to say if a similar bill to this mentioned in European countries (albeit possibly incorrect) won't be enacted and passed here?
I don't have a good feeling about new supps - ala CEE, 7-OH, or anything else Sledge (and his few constituents coming out w/ new products). I've read that the FDA would like to excersize control over anything introduced after '94 - they will have to be declared safe by clinical testing. Which would make Sledge's job much more costly.
I can only hope we don't see those days, new supps will be gone from the market.
02-18-2005, 11:37 PM
No I completely agree Bro...The future definately does not look bright for certain types of supplements. Actaully last time I was looking into it the FDA was already having issues with CEE. Since CEE is a membrane permeable form of creatine that can enter the cell without having to use the creatine transporter molecule, they may be considering it a drug.Originally Posted by ryansm
"For the reasons discussed above, the information in your submission does not provide an adequate basis to conclude that creatine ethyl esters, when used under the conditions recommended or suggested in the labeling of your product, will reasonably be expected to be safe. Therefore, your product may be adulterated under 21 U.S.C. 342 as a dietary supplement that contains a new dietary ingredient for which there is inadequate information to provide reasonable assurance that such ingredient does not present a significant or unreasonable Page 3-Dr. Samuel Augustine risk of illness or injury. Introduction of such a product into interstate commerce is prohibited under 21 U.SC. 331 and ."
Similar Forum Threads
- By ppltakepower in forum AnabolicsReplies: 4Last Post: 09-07-2011, 09:40 PM
- By bigcat23 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 3Last Post: 12-24-2009, 05:00 AM
- By glenihan in forum AnabolicsReplies: 21Last Post: 03-14-2006, 11:17 PM
- By glenihan in forum AnabolicsReplies: 11Last Post: 04-26-2005, 08:25 PM