To: "Anderson, Ellen M", "Yetley,Elizabeth" <>,,
Subject: TRANSPARENCY = NON OBFUSCATION=FDA?: LET ME COPY ALL CODEX VITAMIN COMMENTS!!: Attn: Beth Yetley FDA, Ellen Anderson, FDA,Jonathan Emord,JD, Yonce Shelton: Congressman Boucher, Norm Singleton: Congressman Paul, Beth Clay: Congressman Burton, Paul Smith (Senator Hatch's Press Secretary),Matthias Rath,MD c/o Alexandra Niedswiecke,MD, Dr.Gary Null & His Radio Listening Audience,Life Extension Magazine, The Spotlight Newspaper, Senator Hatch's Press Secretary,,Congressman Boucher (Yonce Shelton) My Senators(and a bcc list of millions world wide)
From: John Hammell <>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 12:48:27 -0400

*URGENT! All Webmasters-American Media Assn,Matthias Rath, Gary Null, The Spotlight, LEF,:



At 05:14 PM 5/12/2000 -0400, Ellen Anderson of FDA wrote:

Mr. Hammell -- We met this morning regarding your request. Since this has never been requested nor provided for previous Codex meetings, we are in the process of determining the best way to make the comments available to the public. -- Ellen Anderson

Dr. Ellen M. Anderson
Food and Drug Administration
Office of Nutritional Products, Labeling, and Dietary Supplements

THANKS Ellen and Beth, your helpful cooperation is much appreciated.

1. Please let me know how it is that you are now receiving email again at your address when recently mail sent to that address was coming back to a lot of people as "undeliverable"? Were you hit by that "ILOVEYOU" virus emanating from the Phillipines? (Many people who tried to send you comments at this address weren't able to and you may not have received them all, in light of this, I will forward a lot of them that were cc'd to me, and I'll also hand carry them to the meeting (uh, is it NOT on thursday the 18th?) so that they can be duly examined,considered, and COUNTED in proper unobfuscated "ONE COMMENT- ONE VOTE CODEX LIKE fashion. Contrary to the wishes of the multinationals/Bilderbergers this is supposedly America, not some banana republic of the New Whirrrrrrrrrrld Odor! ;->

2. Certainly, you must agree, that the BEST way to make the comments available to the public would be to provide for...ALL of them ('especially CRN and CHPA's AND everyone from the grass roots) to be PHOTOCOPIED. Any measure LESS than this would not be TRANSPARENT-it would be farcical, and it would undermine the public trust, not only in American Vitamin Consumers, but in Vitamin Consumers all over the world who are ALSO watching this little melodrama with more than a little passing interest given that the videotape of Dr.Yetley ignoring the gif filed letters from Congress at can be viewed at !

German Pharma-Cartel Hoechst, Bayer and BASF– Unmasked as the Organizers of Auschwitz – Now Threaten World-Wide Vitamin Freedom

(Open Letter from Matthias Rath, MD to the American Health Food Community)

***US DOJ PRESS RELEASE MAY 5th 2000***:


3. Please let me know in advance of the meeting on the 18th if a copier IN GOOD RUNNING ORDER will be available with sufficient paper so I can make copies of all the comments or else perhaps you could keep them on file at the Dockets Management Branch since they have copiers there. I am a member in good standing of the American Media Association and have a valid Press Pass.

4.*VERY IMPORTANT!* I would appreciate it a lot if you could please help me to have a clearer idea of exactly how you weigh the incoming comments when drafting the US comments. Many consumers and small vitamin manufacturers have been asking me about this and until I talk more with you to find out, I won't know what to tell them.

Dr.Rick Malter worked very hard to write his rebuttal to the NAS paper "A Risk Assessment Model for Establishing Upper Levels for Nutrients" and it raises some serious questions about the methodology and data in the NAS paper which consumers inherently distrust due to how it was funded. For example, Hoffman La Roche and Daichi Fine Chemicals were 2 of the companies that helped fund it and they were heavily fined by the US Dept of Justice for engaging in illegal price fixing in the sale of vitamin raw materials. There is very real concern that a number of multinational drug companies appear to be trying to accomplish via Codex what they've been blocked from doing by the US DOJ and by Congress.

I also sent you Darlene Sherrell's detailed expose of NAS's fluoride data and it bothers us a lot that the NAS paper "A Risk Assessment Model for Establishing Upper Levels for Nutrients" never underwent any sort of formal comments period. I feel that ALL Codex discussion papers that the USA is involved with drafting should undergo some sort of public review before the USA just blindly endorses them. It is very disturbing to Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw that even as you guys are being charged with contempt of court in the Pearson case, and even as the Grocery Manufacturers of America have Petitioned you to WITHDRAW your guidance document on SSA, you've appended it to the Discussion Paper which is helping to build consensus towards eventual passage of a Codex vitamin standard that many feel won't just effect the foreign vitamin market, many of us feel that you guys are trying to "set us up" for harmonization to an onerous and wholly unscientific standard.

In '97, I worked 80 hour weeks for two and a half months to lead the grass roots charge that got dietary supplements specifically exempted from the harmonization language of the FDA Modernization Act, and the effort almost killed me. We made the Senate Labor Committee's fax machines run out of paper and ink. You guys are violating current US law in a number of ways. You're going through the motions of upholding US dietary supplement laws, while simultaneously helping pharmaceutical interests build consensus on the Codex vitamin issue.

This really bothers a lot of us. A lot of people are looking at the Global Trade Watch website and they're checking out the "harmonization alerts" section. WTO Dispute Settlement Body decisions have already forced many changes to our democratically enacted laws because the USA has been threatened with trade sanctions if we don't "harmonize".

You guys have a lawyer on your staff, Melinda Plaiser, who none of us agree with. She says our interpretation of GATT is incorrect, but what she's saying doesn't square with what is plainly observable.

It is against current US law for FDA to take ANY action at Codex which threatens to harmonize our dietary supplement laws to a restrictive Codex standard, and that includes all of your efforts to build consensus on the issue.

Dr.Hathcock of CRN publicly stated at the May 1 meeting that CRN "favors ongoing deliberation" of the Codex vitamin guidelines. CRN does not represent the people of America, they don't speak for us.

In light of this fact- please explain to me how you are weighing our individual comments, vis a vis those that represent multinational pharmaceutical interests via CRN, and CHPA. In our opinion, CHPA, which used to be called the Non Prescription Drug Manufacturers Association has a lot of NERVE now calling themselves the "Consumer Healtcare Products Assn", because they sure don't represent the interests of the man on the street- the American dietary supplement consumer.

I, on the other hand, DO represent the man on the street. I was once HOMELESS. Vitamins saved my life, and helped me regain my health after drugs almost killed me. Vitamins are gifts to us from God. They were given to us for our use, and no regulatory body on EARTH has the right to block ANYONE from having the chance that I had 21 years ago to heal after drugs and shock treatments almost killed me.

It is therefor very important to me, that our Codex delegation TRULY represent the PEOPLE of AMERICA when it goes over to Berlin, and the PEOPLE have spoken on this issue, we spoke with the Proxmire Act in '76 and with DSHEA in '94, and we DO NOT LIKE CRN's position! Its NOT SCIENTIFIC! There has GOT to be nothing less than TOTAL TRANSPARENCY and TOTAL SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNTABILITY in the US draft comments, and thus far, there hasn't been, not even CLOSE, and it saddens me, because the decisions we make impact people's lives and health.

The UN Codex process makes a mockery of science and of our whole system of representative government.

The Codex process is undermining our sovereignty, and thus far, the US delegation to the CCNFSDU has NOT represented the people, or the will of Congress- and its got to change.

Please respond to these questions:

* Will you have a working copier with sufficient paper that I can use on the 18th to copy ALL CCNFSDU comments?

* Exactly HOW do you place weight on the incoming comments? How do you assess them in light of our laws, in light of the will of the people, and the will of Congress? How will you assess them in light of the specific concerns expressed herein? Aren't Rick Malter's comments, mine, and those of all the people who wrote in valid? Our votes must COUNT! CRN's vote is _NOT_ valid- its incongruent with current US law for FDA to even have the APPEARANCE of trying to work towards CONSENSUS and PASSING of the Codex Vitamin Proposal!

This is America: our government is of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE, it is _NOT_ "of the multinationalcorporations, by the multinational corporations, or FOR the multinational corporations."

For Health Freedom,
John Hammell

-----Original Message-----
From: John Hammell []
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 1:11 PM
To: Anderson, Ellen M; Yetley, Elizabeth A
Subject: Transparency on German Codex Meeting Comments for Vitamin Issue? Attn Ellen Anderon, FDA, Yonce Shelton: Congressman Boucher, Norm Singleton: Congressman Paul, Beth Clay: Congressman Burton.

IAHF LIST: No information has been forthcoming from Dr.Anderson thus far on this. Lets hope she responds to the questions below. I am ccing this to my Congressman and also to Congressman Paul's office and Congressman Burton's office and am requesting that they assist in asking these questions. Will there in FACT be ANY transparency on the Codex vitamin issue?

Dr.Ellen Anderson
Ph.202 205-5662
Fx. 202-205-5532

Re: Conversation I had with Jenny Butler at FDA Dockets Management Branch
301- 827-6860

Dear Dr.Anderson:

When comments come into the FDA from the public, the usual place where they can be viewed is at Dockets Management Branch. I just asked Jenny Butler in that FDA office if she has any Codex Comments for the CCNFSDU meeting in Berlin on file for public viewing.

She told me that the only information she has on file on Codex for public viewing pertains to meetings for which the USA was the host country, and for which a Federal Docket Number was issued due to an announcement in the Federal Register.

She told me there was "no Federal Register Announcement, therefor no Docket Number" pertaining to either the May 1, or May 18th pre meeting for the CCNFSDU Codex meeting in Germany, therefor the public comments coming in to FDA pertaining to that meeting would not be on file for public viewing at Dockets Management Branch."

So, I just called Ellen Madden, US Codex Office at USDA to run this past her, and she told me that "all the incoming Codex Comments for the CCNFSDU meeting would be available for public viewing at the public meeting at the FDA building at 200 C St SW on May 18th." When I asked if there would be
a copy machine available in that building so that the copies could be made of those comments, she said she "wasn't sure."

Will the comments in fact be on public file for viewing at the meeting on the 18th, and will there be a copy machine in the building that people can use to make copies of them?

Please let me know. The impression many American vitamin consumers have is that the whole Codex process is highly OPAQUE and NON TRANSPARENT. This is very disconcerting. Please clarify this.

Right now the strong impression we have is that the FDA essentially IGNORES all incoming public comments on the CCNFSDU meeting in Germany unless they came from a trade association or a multinational company.

Given that actions taken by the FDA at these meetings can effect not only American consumers, but also vitamin consumers world wide, we need to know

1) If it will be possible to make photocopies of the comments that came in to you either at the meeting on May 18th or at any other time, and if so, WHERE?

2) Does FDA count each comment that comes in with as much weight as any other comment? (If NOT, WHY NOT?) (To be consistent with how Codex is run whereby any country, regardless of population size has as much voting power as any other country, it should follow that any comment, from any American vitamin consumer should have as much weight as the comments from CRN, NNFA or any multinational corporation.)