Posted on 07/12/2005 11:15:48 AM PDT by Jenny Hatch
In UK, it will go black market.
Heads up. What's your take?
I guess when every other commercial on TV seems to be for arthritis, depression, pain relief or sexual dysfunction it sure looks like they have a stranglehold on the message. One fight I'm also gearing up for is all this mental health testing coming into the schools......if that doesn't wake up the soccer moms, nothing will.
Jenny, that article is about the EU. Why you continue to insist that what goes on over there is going to take away the rights of US consumers, I have no idea, but you are wrong and should stop scaring people.
Do a little googling, like I did. You will find out that the U.S. supplement industry was in favor the very stuff you claim is about to wreck their business. They would not be if what you are saying were true.
"As I posted in the "other" thread, and with links -- this is exactly what Hillary Clinton and Dick Durbin (during Clinton Admin years) proposed for the US -- no vitamins/supplements without a Doctor's Prescription.
In UK, it will go black market."
Alia,
This is what is the most amazing of all, that Hillary Clinton can wrap herself up in "hating big pharma" and then just work for socializing all of it. It makes no sense, but since when did she ever make any sense?
Jenny
"Jenny, that article is about the EU. Why you continue to insist that what goes on over there is going to take away the rights of US consumers, I have no idea, but you are wrong and should stop scaring people."
Not trying to scare anyone, I'm just trying to sort it all out, and from what I have studied the Pharmaceutical companies are trying to take over the supplement industry. When I asked for facts to prove that I was wrong on other threads I was flamed and given links to snopes and quackwatch. I also was given text from government web sites. These did not convince me.
"Do a little googling, like I did. You will find out that the U.S. supplement industry was in favor the very stuff you claim is about to wreck their business. They would not be if what you are saying were true."
Which US supplement industry? Please share links, and proof of what you are saying. What do you have to say about this "for instance" claim?
"Action Alert: WTO Codex Regulations Will Restrict Consumer Access to Nutritional Supplements
http://www.wrightnewsletter.com
April 8, 2005
by Jonathan V. Wright
You've taken supplements for years. You're out of vitamins C and E. You go to your natural food store, but you can't find the kind you want on the shelf. You ask a clerk to find them for you. She says you can't get your vitamin E as mixed tocopherols (the best natural form) anymore, and asks if you like your vitamin C in the 100 or 200 milligram size. The 1,000 milligram size, you say.
"Where have you been?" she asks. "Asleep since 2004? It's 2007 now! The types and sizes of vitamins you just asked for have been declared illegal by the Dispute Settlement Body of the World Trade Organization!"
"Wait!" you reply. "This is America! Our President says we're fighting for American freedom--and you're telling me that the World Trade Organization can dictate what size vitamin C I can take, and forbid me from taking mixed tocopherols?"
The sales clerk sighs, and reaches for a piece of paper. "It's a little complicated," she says. "A few years back, the European Commission passed the European Food Supplements Directive..."
You feel your blood pressure rising. "What does the European Commission and its Directive have to do with me? If Europeans want bureaucrats to tell them what to do, that's their business. I'm a free citizen of these United States!"
"Now, now, dear, your blood pressure will go up, and you can't get calcium citrate, magnesium aspartate, CoQ10 or L-arginine or anything else natural to help regulate it anymore."
"What? This goes beyond the FDA's wildest dreams!"
"That's not a tenth of it, dear. While you were distracted by the war overseas, here at home we lost our right to buy any amino acids at all-no arginine, no carnitine, no tryptophan, nothing. I can't sell you any essential fatty acids either-no DHA or EPA. And no beta-carotene, no mixed carotenoids, no MSM, no boron...The list goes on and on."
"So what can I buy?" you ask.
"Let's see...those 100 and 200 milligram vitamin Cs. Vitamin B6 maximum 4.2 milligrams, vitamin B1, 2.4 milligrams. Oh, here's a better one: You can get niacin at 32 milligrams."
"Enough! I'm getting sick! How did this ever happen in these United States?" "As I was saying, the European Directive..."
"I heard you. But what about America's Congress, America's President?
"Oh, they signed us up for this in the 1990s, when they made us members of the World Trade Organization. According to the Congressional Research
Service: 'As a member of the World Trade Organization, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multilateral body. The United States is legally obligated to ensure national laws do not conflict with World Trade Organization rules.'"
"Actually, we did have a chance or two to reverse this in 2004, but it's going to be incredibly difficult now."
"But I really need my mixed tocopherol vitamin E. And my mother with congestive heart failure depends on CoQ10."
"I'm not unsympathetic, especially to your poor mother, dear." She looks all around, then lowers her voice. "I can give you some sources downtown." She whispers a few names.
"But those people deal dangerous drugs! Now they're selling vitamins, too?" "That's freedom in America in 2007, dear."
Think it can't happen? Think again The FDA's wildest dream-and our worst nightmare-is about to come true."
http://www.organicconsumers.org/organic/wtoalert041105.cfm
And, why do you care if we chat about it? You don't have to believe what is said, and you don't have to post on this thread. Just go start your own thread.
Jenny
From an ad linked off of Powerline Blog...
http://www.stoptheftaa.org/artman/publish/article_447.shtml
"Loss of independence of U.S. federal, state, and local governments to regulate service professions and businesses to CAFTA’s “Cross-Border Trade in Services” provisions. “Cross-Border Trade in Services … applies to measures adopted or maintained by a Party affecting cross-border trade in services by service suppliers of another Party.
Such measures include measures affecting: (a) the production, distribution, marketing, sale, and delivery of a service;
(b) the purchase or use of, or payment for, a service;
(c) the access to and use of distribution, transport, or telecommunications networks and services in connection with the supply of a service;
(d) the presence in its territory of a service supplier of another Party; and
(e) the provision of a bond or other form of financial security as a condition for the supply of a service….
For purposes of this Chapter, “measures adopted or maintained by a Party” means measures adopted or maintained by:
(a) central, regional, or local governments and authorities; and
(b) non governmental bodies in the exercise of powers delegated by central, regional, or local governments or authorities..."
Jenny
It ain't abut making sense, with her: It's about becoming the Big Cheese, the First Female Pres, the Evita! It's about power, and however, it works to her benefit. But you knew this already.
It makes no sense, but since when did she ever make any sense?
"There were (and are) many articulate, principled, patriotic, constitutionalist, no-compromise opponents of the WTO and its regional subsidiaries such as NAFTA, CAFTA and the FTAA. But you don’t see or hear them in the controlled "debate." They have been frozen out of the equation because for them sovereignty, freedom and the Constitution are not negotiable. The public "debate" — at least as presented by the CFR Insider-dominated media and political institutions — has been between the one-world principals and their paid agents.
Following the Battle in Seattle, Francis Fukuyama, a full-fledged globalist (he’s a member of both the CFR and the Trilateral Commission), explained that the Marxist globalists should be grateful to the capitalist globalists for the WTO. "By creating the WTO, global capitalism has solved the left’s collective action problem," he opined in the December 1, 1999 Wall Street Journal. "The WTO," Fukuyama explained, "is the only international organization that stands any chance of evolving into an institution of global governance, setting rules not only for how countries will trade and invest with one another, but also for how they will deal with issues like labor standards and the environment."
To those who will take the time to examine the evidence, it soon becomes overwhelmingly apparent that the tie-dyed revolutionaries in the streets actually are working in concert with the silk-tied revolutionaries in the suites. Both are part of a giant pincer strategy, applying simultaneous "pressure from above and below." Their scripted "confrontations" are about as genuine as the ludicrous Monday Night television "wrestling" matches between those strutting, steroid-drenched grapplers in masks and tights.
More phony debates, more charades and more rigged wrestling matches are on the agenda, as the battles over CAFTA, FTAA, WTO expansion and other trade agreements heat up. Coalitions of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) claiming to represent tens of millions of U.S. voters and hundreds of millions of people around the globe are putting pressure on Congress to oppose CAFTA and FTAA unless they are expanded to include environmental, labor, health, education, and other matters. Americans committed to preserving our constitutional republic, our independence and our economic viability must expose this false opposition; we must not allow them to usurp our voice and speak in our name."
http://www.stoptheftaa.org/opposition/
Jenny
I know a few people here believe this. I think most of us realize that it makes no sense at all from an economic standpoint. Pharmaceutical companies are looking for new substances they can patent--potential billion-dollar a year markets. Vitamins and herbs really don't fit the profile, and even if they did, that doesnt mean companies would want to make them Rx. Every year companies spend serious money trying to move stuff from Rx to over-the-counter so they can sell it to more people. Going from OTC to Rx is not a guaranteed way to make more money and in fact could mean making less. Selling at a higher price is not always a formula for success because you get fewer customers.
Which US supplement industry? Start with the people who represent the health food stores. I found them at www.nnfa.org. They say what you are posting is completely wrong.
And, why do you care if we chat about it?
I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't put words in my mouth. What I care about is that you are asking people to write their members of Congress based on a false premise that the sky is falling. They will look foolish if they do. I'd much prefer that FReepers be known to their members of Congress as good sources of information, not people fooled by alarmist literature.
Interesting link Freespirited....
You need to understand that some of us here are very aware of some flames being thrown in our general direction when we talk about these subjects. It "feels" like swarms of people will all of a sudden start mocking, questioning, and personally attacking when we post links about world government encroaching.
I went to the site you linked to, and found this q and a about the EU Limits. It was an interesting read...
Q: I've heard that a law in Europe called the “EU Directive on food supplements” will force retailers in the United States to stop selling thousands of dietary supplements. Is this true?
A: European Directive 2002/46/EC relating to food supplements was adopted on June 10, 2002 by the European Parliament and the Council. The directive establishes harmonized rules for the labeling of food supplements and introduces specific rules on vitamins and minerals in food supplements.(1)
It is important to be clear that the European Directive applies only to products sold in the European Union . It does not apply to retailers in the United States. Retailers operating in the United States will be able to continue selling products.
Q: Does the EU Directive have any impact on U.S. manufacturers and distributors of dietary supplements?
A: Again, the directive only applies to member countries of the European Union. However, manufacturers, distributors and retailers that have exported dietary supplements containing ingredients that are not on the Directive's list will no longer be able to sell those products in the European Union as of August 1, 2005. In this way, the European Directive can have a negative impact on the U.S. dietary supplement industry.
Q: What does the directive do specifically, and how will it affect the dietary supplement market in Europe?
A: The EU Directive specifies which food supplements may be sold in Europe. Listed in Annexes I and II of the directive are all vitamins and minerals that may be sold as food supplements in the European Union and vitamin and mineral substances that may be used in the manufacture of food supplements.
As of August 1, 2005 , manufacturers, distributors and retailers of food supplements in Europe will not be allowed to sell food supplements containing vitamins and minerals and forms other than those listed in Annexes I and II of the directive. Certain member countries of the European Union may provide for variations from this list. However, these variations must be abolished on or before January 1, 2010.
Many in Europe are frustrated with the directive because of the limited nature of annexes. For instance, in the United Kingdom there are at least 270 ingredients currently in use that are not included in Annex II of the directive, such as pro-vitamin A carotenoids, chromium picolinate and selenium yeast.
Q: Are there any labeling requirements imposed by the directive on food supplements?
A: Yes. The labels of food supplements must contain:
the term “supplement” and specifications concerning the nutrients in the supplement (e.g. the category and/or the name of nutrients, the quantity of the nutrients in both a numerical form and as a percentage of the daily amount recommended);
the recommended daily amount of the food supplement;
a warning of the risks to health if the recommended daily amount is exceeded;
a declaration to the effect that the supplement is not a substitute for a varied diet;
the reference “This is not a medicinal product,” where the presentation of the product is similar to that of a medicinal product;
a warning to the effect that the product should be stored out of the reach of young children.
The labeling of food supplements must not contain:
any statement attributing to the product properties of preventing, treating or curing a human disease;
any mention stating or implying that a balanced and varied diet cannot provide appropriate quantities of nutrients in general.
Q: Is there a way for additional ingredients to be added to the lists of permitted ingredients under the directive?
A: Additional ingredients may be included in the Annexes I and II of the Directive 2002/46/EC on food supplements on the request of an interested party. To do this, a party must provide a scientific dossier concerning the safety and bioavailability of the individual ingredients. Furthermore, the ingredient concerned must have been positively evaluated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (http://efsa.eu.int).
Q: I read the EU Directive is part of a larger regulation known as Codex. Is that true?
A: No. The Codex Alimentarius Commission (“Codex”) is an organization that is completely separate from the European Union and the European Directive.
The Codex Alimentarius Commission is a body responsible for implementation of the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization Food Standards Program. This program was established to develop international food standards in the interests of enhancing consumer protection and ensuring fair international trade in food products. Codex Alimentarius is a Latin term meaning a code of laws governing foods.
The European Food Supplements Directive on is a product of the European Union – and not of Codex. However, many are under the mistaken impression that there is a link, because recent Codex considerations have also tended to favor making only a restricted group of supplements available to consumers.
Q: Are there other European regulations I should know about?
A: Currently, there is a proposal for a European regulation to introduce common EU rules for adding vitamins and minerals. It would create a list of the vitamins and minerals that could be added to foods. It would also establish the criteria for setting the minimum and maximum levels for such nutrients added to food, on the basis of scientific advice. All foods that contain added nutrients would have to be labeled to inform consumers about the nutritional value.
Products like kava-kava, St. John's wort may be prohibited while products like taurine and guarana may be subject to scrutiny. The proposed regulation would not apply to supplements, only to conventional foods. It is still uncertain when this European law would go into effect. It is expected to be adopted by 2005-2006.
Q: If adopted, would this regulation concerning additions of vitamins and minerals to foods have any impact on U.S. manufacturers, distributors and retailers of foods?
A: This regulation would only apply to member countries of the European Union. Hence, the law has no direct impact on the U.S. food market.
However, manufacturers, distributors and retailers that have to date exported food containing vitamins and minerals that are not on the list of the European Regulation, would, most likely, no longer be able to incorporate those products into conventional foods sold in the European Union. In this way, the European regulation can have a negative impact on the U.S. food industry.
http://www.nnfa.org/codex/eufaq.htm
It is all interesting to me. As per your concern that fellow freepers may be making idiots by contacting congress people about non-issues....why don't you let individual people worry about how they look, and you worry about your own foolishness?
If I am making an idiot of myself by continually posting about topics I am passionate about; American Sovereignty and Health Freedom, I don't think that reflects on anyone buy myself. You just start a thread talking about how stupid people who are worried about health freedom are and you can have your little chat with all the people who agree with you.
Obviously, some people here are as concerned about this move as I am, and while I acknowledge that this thread is about what just happened in Europe, I am very curious to see if and when the CAFTA vote passes the house, if what just happened in Europe happens here.
But I guess we will know in a few days...
Jenny
NAFTA was bad for U.S. jobs. CAFTA will be as big a mistake. We cannot allow it to be passed.
Really good bloggin at the Heritage Foundation web site on Cafta...
http://www.heritage.org/press/dailybriefing/CAFTAblog.cfm
Nobody is talking about nutritional supplements. It is all sugar, and Rumsfeld talked about stabilizing the countries to help with terror issues. I would agree that this is important, but I am so curious to know what back room deals are being made at this moment before the vote.
The pharmaceutical companies tried to use extreme measures to get out of being accountable for Thimerserol damage to children a few years ago. This was exposed at the last minute... But I am really curious to see what has been happening this time around.
Jenny
"I think most of us realize that it makes no sense at all from an economic standpoint. Pharmaceutical companies are looking for new substances they can patent--potential billion-dollar a year markets. Vitamins and herbs really don't fit the profile"
That is the very point. If they can regulate these food supplements and class them in a way that one has to get a prescription in order to purchase them, well, you know what will happen.
I have been thinking all moring about the Q and A that was posted by me last night from off the web site you linked to. What I have come to, is if this is the published version of what we anticipate happening in Europe. Meaning, if all of these regulations, "scientific" proving, etc that is outlined in the answers is what they are willing to put out to the public before the laws kick in on August 1st, then what is in fact around the corner?
What do they have waiting in the wings in terms of control, managing this sector of the economy etc.. I mean, I think the things they have outlined in the answers are egregious enough, and will in fact control supplements to a degree un heard of to this point in our history.
My gut feeling is that the site you linked to is one of the many front organizations that are out on the web trouble shooting for Codex and This power grab by Big Pharma. As I went through the materials, it was so obvious that they had an agenda of making it seem so scientific, and so reasonable.
I did note a few instances where they dissed the things that were being discussed and brought up issues and problems...but the blanket...."everything is just dandy with Codex" and no these EU things are not going to be a bad thing was just too conciliatory, compared to some of the rabid indictments I have posted links to and from on this thread and other's that I have started on this topic.
But again, we shall see...
Jenny
Alia, I wonder what Arnold S. thinks of CAFTA?? Have you heard anything about his views?
Jenny
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/13/eu.supplements/
No, hon -- I have no idea of his views on CAFTA.
Medicinal herb ban passes in the EU, link,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.