Big Government Plan for Your Supplements

Here's the latest CODEX update from National Health Federation

Anti-Vitamin Misinformation

The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) celebrated its 50^th year of existence the first week of July while also conducting its 36^th session, with several hundreds of member-state delegates and non-governmental organizations in attendance.  Chairman Sanjay Dave was re-elected as CAC Chairman and presided over the meeting in a fair and business-like manner.
          But fair and business-like did not compensate for the Commission’s gross nutritional ignorance that resulted in certain Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs) being approved for vitamins and minerals over the repeated and strong objections of the National Health Federation (NHF), a Codex-accredited non-governmental organization.
          As Scott Tips – the NHF’s delegate at that meeting – remarked afterwards, “Of course we spoke up in opposition to approval of these NRVs, because they will reduce by 20% to 66% all but one of the already-low B vitamin NRVs, increase Calcium NRVs while reducing Magnesium NRVs (the exactopposite of what modern nutrition tells us should be done), and promote, at best, subsistence nutrition when optimal nutrition is called for here. These are standards that would only allow consumers to put one foot before the other, barely avoiding slipping into the grave, as they shuffle through life.  Consumers deserve better, they deserve optimal nutrition that allows them to maximize their potential and quality of life.”
          To continue reading the full report of what happened at this most recent meeting, CLICK HERE. The fight over these NRVs is not over and will continue in November in Germany at the Nutrition Committee meeting to be held there.
          Another detailed critique of the proposed Codex recommendations has been written by health journalist Bill Sardi, as commissioned by the NHF.  The entire critique can be read online.  Sardi has written the U.S. delegate to Codex in the past, opposing passage of similar guidelines. He has been an outspoken critic of Codex.
          Codex has drawn the similar ire of other health-freedom advocates.  There is a concern that Codex solely serves the needs of big business and that it is a conduit for disease mongering by establishment of nutrient recommendations that lock in in a certain level of disease in human populations that then requires more doctoring and drugs.
          For more information, contact the National Health Federation, the only health-freedom organization with standing to participate at Codex meetings.

Proposed Changes In Recommended Daily Dietary Intake Of Essential Vitamins & Minerals CODEX (World Health Organization/ Food & Agriculture Organization of The United Nations) versus Daily Value/Reference Daily Intake
NUTRIENT	Proposed Recommended Nutrient Intake (RNI) -CODEX	100% Daily Value(what is listed on dietary supplement labels) based on RDI (Reference Daily Intake)	Difference
Thiamin (Vitamin B1)	1.2 mg	1.5 mg	-20%
Riboflavin (Vitamin B2)	1.2 mg	1.7 mg	-30%
Niacin (Vitamin B3)	15 mg	20 mg	-25%
Pyridoxine (Vitamin B6)	1.3 mg	2.0 mg	-35%
Folic acid (Vitamin B9)	400 mcg	400 mcg	No change
Cobalamin (Vitamin B12)	2.0 mcg	6.0 mcg	-66%
Vitamin A	550 mcg (1833 IU)	1500 mcg (5000 IU)	-64%
Vitamin C	45 mg	60 mg	-25%
Vitamin D	200 IU (5 mcg)	400 IU (10 mcg)	-50%
Calcium	1000 mg	1000 mg	No change
Iodine	150 mcg	150 mcg	No change
Iron	14 mg	18 mg	-22%
Magnesium	240 mg	400   mg	-40%
Zinc	12 mg	15 mg	-20%
IU = international units Mg = milligrams Mcg = micrograms	Source: CODEX NRVs CCNFSDU PWG Discussion Paper	RDI -Reference Daily Intake Source: Nutribase.com

          Minneapolis, Minnesota will be the hosting city for Codex Alimentarius’ next Committee meeting on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods (August 24-30, 2013). NHF will be there participating not only at the plenary session but also at the working group session on the Guidelines on Risk Management Recommendations for Residues of Veterinary Drugs, with the intent and goal of keeping as many drug residues out of our foods as possible.

CODEX: Yes to Malnutrition

Our thanks go to the National Health Federation and Scott Tips for his shattering report on the recent CODEX deliberations in Germany.  You should too.

As these government directed pundits go you see for the most part that not only do they have no understanding of nutrients and nutrition, they seem stubbornly to hold on to old thinking not based on current science.  This thinking too is not in the best interest of your health and well being, only the corporate mantras.

This excerpt clues you in to what is on the way to your food, well beyond the interest in labeling GMO (genetically modified organisms) ingredients in food.

[3] The proposed Codex NRVs are: Vitamin A (dropped from 800 mcg to 550 mcg); Vitamin D (5 mcg or 200 IUs); Vitamin E (8.8 mg); Vitamin K (60 mcg); Vitamin C (dropped from 60 mg to 45 mg); Thiamin (dropped from 1.4 to 1.2 mg); Riboflavin (dropped from 1.6 mg to 1.2 mg); Niacin (dropped from 18 mg to 15 mg); Vitamin B6 (dropped from 2 mg to 1.3 mg); Folate (raised to 400 mcg); Vitamin B12 (2.4 mcg); Pantothenate (5 mg); Biotin (30 mcg); Calcium (raised from 800 mg to 1000 mg); Magnesium (dropped from 300 mg to 240 mg); Iodine (150 mcg); Iron (14.3-43.1 mg depending upon bioavailability); Zinc (dropped from 15 mg to 3.6-11.9, depending upon bioavailability); Selenium (30 mcg); Phosphorus (700 mg); Chloride (2.3 grams); Copper (900 mcg); Fluoride (3.5 mg); Manganese (2.1 mg); Chromium (30 mcg); and Molybdenum (45 mcg).

To read the complete article and learn more about why these nutrient values are non supportive of health please go here.

SELECTIONS FROM NATURAL HEALTH NEWS

Natural Health News: Update on CODEX

May 17, 2010

UPDATE: 17 May, 2010 - International Advocates for Health Freedom was the first to call the Codex international threat to health freedom in 1996 via an article by John C. Hammell in Life Extension Magazine. More about ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

Natural Health News: Obama Pens US Alignment with CODEX

Sep 13, 2010

In regard to herbs and CODEX. NB: While I do not accept the move to standardization of herbs, because it moves them more into the category of drugs as they become fractionated and may offer more in the form of side effects ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

Natural Health News: CODEX UPDATE - Food Additives Meeting

Jul 06, 2008

The National Health Federation is the only sanctioned Codex-accredited health-freedom organization with the right to attend Codex committee meetings such as the one reprted here. In fact, NHF has for years been attending ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

Natural Health News: Is CODEX for Killing the Elderly?

Jul 13, 2005

By explaining to those vitamin-popping seniors that CODEX's bottom-line purpose is not to make Big Pharma and doctors and pharmacists rich, but to reduce socialist nations' elderly populations, and to the reduce the life ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

 

Natural Health News: The FDA Attacks Again! Both vitamin ...

May 03, 2006

In recent years the Codex process has been criticized by the international agency's parent organizations, the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization for failing to contribute to better health.

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

Natural Health News: Health Freedom: Beware of False Messengers

Aug 24, 2007

Additionally, we work closely on Codex issues with the National Health Federation, which is the only health freedom organisation to have official observer status— and thus enabling it to speak—at Codex meetings. However ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

Natural Health News: Supplements Saved

Apr 13, 2010

Supplements Are Exempted From Codex Language in Food Safety Bill The FDA Food Modernization Act (S. 510), also referred to as the “Food Safety” bill, has been modified to exempt dietary supplements from language that ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

Natural Health News: Vitamin Combo Helps Delay Aging

Apr 16, 2010

ALLOWABLE VITAMIN POTENCY UNDER CODEX: Vitamin C (225 mg - up from the original 60 mg); Vitamin E (15 mg - up from the original 7)(Gamma Tocopherol); Magnesium (400 mg); Vitamin B-12 (9 mcg when normal ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

Obama Pens US Alignment with CODEX

from Dr. Rebecca Carley, 

Executive Order 13544 of June 10, 2010

Establishing the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and
Public Health Council

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-14613.pdf

Courtesy: Rense News Network

In regard to herbs and CODEX

NB:  While I do not accept the move to standardization of herbs, because it moves them more into the category of drugs as they become fractionated and may offer more in the form of side effects and reduced efficacy, this is the doctrine of CODEX - 

The German Commission E Monographs contain scientific data regarding the effectiveness of herbs. 

Between 1983 and 1993 this collective data was compiled and the German Commission E based its results entirely on strict scientific investigation, then released Monographs that have been promulgated to be  recognized for scientific standards. To ensure the completely unbiased investigation of the Commission E, the work was financed by the German government.

The German Commission E Monographs are now used for their authoritative description of herbs, their uses and side-effects by herbalists, pharmacies (Apotheken), and medical doctors (mostly in the EU, few in US).

The complete Monographs can be found in the "Bundesanzeiger"(the federal registry of Germany).

The same is done to supplements.  For example, vitamin C is limited to 60 mg, the amount known to prevent scurvy; vitamin E is to be at 7 IU to 14 IU,  but therapeutic levels will not be permitted. Single B vitamins such as B6 will be excluded as it is already under attack by Big PhRMA to be used only as a patented drug in P5P (bioactive) form.

Update on CODEX

UPDATE: 17 May, 2010 - International Advocates for Health Freedom was the first to call the Codex international threat to health freedom in 1996 via an article by John C. Hammell in Life Extension Magazine. More about CODEX

For the most in depth CODEX information and interrelated issues stay up-to-date with IAHF.

Use the search box to find more than two dozen CODEX related articles on Natural Health News

Prepared by Alliance for Natural Health this new Codex flyer is part of our joint efforts to bring credible, up-to-date information to interested consumers and practitioners.

Originally posted 5/19/08 - The Codex Alimentarius Commission is an inter-governmental body with over 170 member countries, established in 1963, within the framework of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme established by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Its primary stated purpose is “protecting the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade.” The Commission also promotes coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations (INGOs). Guidelines and standards are used as a benchmark for regional/national legislation and in World Trade Organization (WTO) disputes. Work is conducted through nearly 30 committees, each dealing with specific areas of food, and decisions are based on consensus voting by member countries. INGOs do not have voting rights, but may influence proceedings. Most INGOs present at Codex meetings represent transnational corporation interests.

Supplements Saved

US office of the great Alliance for Natural Health, started years ago by Dr. Robert Verkirk, just announced a victory for US consumers of nutritonal supplements

Supplements Are Exempted From Codex Language in Food Safety Bill
The FDA Food Modernization Act (S. 510), also referred to as the “Food Safety” bill, has been modified to exempt dietary supplements from language that otherwise creates a slippery slope toward U.S. harmonization with Codex Alimentarius. ANH-USA worked to protect the natural health community from this dangerous provision that threatened access to high quality, therapeutic supplement doses by working with key senators to modify the language, now for the second time. Read Complete Article

Limits on Supplements

I found it interesting that another blog just recently reported on the issue of imposed limits to be placed on supplements.  It is interesting to me because as a long time health freedom educator I have been engaged in this issue for most of my career, as well as intensely during the past two decades.

There are two international groups that spearheaded this fight to stop the CODEX effort through food directives in the EU, also WHO, and USDA, etc.  In the USDA effort it was widely known that panel members were industry supported.

One group is International Advocates for Health Freedom, NHF, and the UK based Alliance for Natural Health.

In the arena of health freedom, natural health advocacy, and related areas, please rely on the real and accurate sources that have historically been involved.  Shy from those who try to make panic-ridden headlines as if they are the first to report.

Know your sources!

Electronic Records, Data Mining and Your Health

While it is more likely than not an activity most people don't about, data mining can be a lucrative endeavor.

Along with drug data and prescribing activity used by CVS and other large pharmacy chains, web sites like Reeal Age are known to have been selling your data for profit.

’Data mining’ for drug companies goes to courts

By Associated Press | Saturday, June 20, 2009 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Healthcare
MONTPELIER, Vt. — The prescription drugs you take are on the minds of a lot of people: judges on two federal courts, legislators in several states, countless doctors and, at the center, the companies that make money by figuring out who’s prescribing what.

"Data-mining" firms — which gather electronic information on the drugs prescribers order for their patients, then sell that information to pharmaceutical companies — have sued to block laws restricting their activities in New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont.

At issue is the use by drug company "detailers" — the sales force that deals with doctors and other prescribers and tries to get them to use the company’s products — of the information about doctors’ prescribing habits.

If, for example, a doctor usually uses one company’s antidepressant drug instead of another’s, that can be valuable information for a detailer trying to get the doctor to switch.

In upholding the New Hampshire law, 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston found the result of the activity is often higher drug costs, because the detailer usually is trying to steer the prescriber toward the newest, most expensive, medicines.

The data mining companies are set to appear Tuesday at the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York to ask a three-judge panel to block Vermont’s law from taking effect July 1.

And the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide by the end of the month whether to hear the data-mining companies’ appeal of the Boston court’s decision on the New Hampshire law. The Boston court has put a separate Maine case on hold until New Hampshire’s is resolved.

The issue has come up in more than 20 state legislatures, advocates on both sides said.

Randy Frankel, vice president for external affairs at IMS Health, said restricting the ability of his and similar companies to collect doctors’ prescribing data could hurt more than just commercial activity.

The data also are used to help law enforcement track when narcotic drug prescriptions spike; they help academic and government researchers follow drug safety and help aim information at doctors prescribing a drug when new side effects or other issues crop up, Frankel said.

"These data have enormous value to the public good," he said.

Maine state Rep. Sharon Treat, D-Hallowell, head of a national group of lawmakers following drug issues, said the data-mining companies’ "bread and butter" is selling the information to drug companies to bolster their marketing efforts.

The more that doctors are urged to use expensive drugs rather than generics, the less money there is to spread around to deliver the most health care to the most people, Treat said. She argued that’s a bad idea when many states are cutting people from public and subsidized health programs in budget-cutting moves.

The data companies, IMS Health Inc. and SDI, argue that restricting the data collection and use violates their and the drug companies’ First Amendment free speech rights to collect and use the information.

But the Boston court rejected the First Amendment argument, saying the issue was less a matter of speech than of conduct. In both that court and the U.S. District Court in Vermont, judges ruled that commercial speech can be regulated without violating the First Amendment, and that what the data-mining companies were doing fell into that category.

Treat concurred that "this isn’t about speech. They’re trying to change behavior" — the behavior of health providers in deciding which kinds of drugs to prescribe.

"That’s what it’s all about," Treat said. "What it’s not about necessarily is good health care."
___

On the Net:National Legislative Association on Prescription Drug Prices: http://tinyurl.com/mxn8ab

Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/jobfind/news/healthcare/view.bg?articleid=1180068

At the same time as data mining companies are suing to get access to this data in states where it is prohibited, Big Pharma is making half-baked back room deals with Baucus and others to try to boost appearances of something real happening in DC on Plan D.

Emerging $80B deal would help fund Medicare drugs

So far an unmentionable on either side of the asile is the idea that freedom of choice in this discussion should be considered.

The preventive and curative nature of vitamins, minerals, and herbal supplements continue to be ignored and, according to the National Health Federation's support of the efforts of www.CodexFund.com. (More factual information on Codex can be found at www.nocodexgenocide.com)

Consider this from CodexFund's FAQ page -

The 2005 Guidelines are in Direct Conflict with Existing US Law - the Proxmire Amendment of 1976.
In 1976, Congress passed the Proxmire Amendments to stop FDA from establishing standards limiting potency of vitamins and minerals in food supplements or regulating them as drugs based solely on potency. (PL-94-278 Section 501 (a)).

Throughout the 1960s and early 1970s, the FDA initiated measures to reclassify vitamins and minerals with a potency of 150% or more of their recommended daily allowance (RDA) be classified as drugs. (Vitamins A and D were to be classified as drugs at 100% of their RDA.) Congress considered these actions as infringements on consumer's freedom of choice and amended the law to forbid the FDA from setting such limits. The law, which became known as the Proxmire Amendment barred the FDA from setting the composition or maximum potency of vitamins, minerals, or combinations thereof, unless they were of a specified type (e.g., toxic, habit-forming, administered by a doctor) or unless they were intended for use by a specified clientele (e.g., by individuals in the treatment of specific diseases or disorders, by children, by pregnant women).

Dave Lindorf writes, "But you cannot achieve the twin goals of reducing health care costs and providing access to health care to 50 million uninsured people, while leaving the profit centers of the current system—doctors, hospitals and the health insurance industry—in charge and in a position to continue to reap profits."