Critical Analysis of NNFA's Legal Counsel's Contention That Codex & The EU Food Supplement Directive Are "Non Issues" Posing "No Threat" To American Dietary Supplement Manufacturers, Alternative Practitioners, Health Food Stores & Consumers

Draconian Global Vitamin Standard to be Ratified In July 2005 at CODEX Unless STOPPED!!

Opinion: Sidley, Austin, Brown & Wood LLP Should Not Be Representing NNFA They're Caught in a Gross Conflict of Interest With Numerous Pharmaceutical Clients

Their Spin Piece on the Codex/ EU Food Supplement Directive Issues is Dangerously Misleading.

This Backgrounder & Analysis Examines & Refutes Each Point Made in Their Q &A Piece in the December 2004 issue of NNFA Today.

Re: "International Natural Products Regulations Q & A:
What Affect do They Really Have on the U.S.?
By Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP, NNFA General Counsel
(published in NNFA Today: Vol. 18, # 11 November/ December 2004)
(website documents extensive interaction between SABW & Big Pharma)

Sidley, Austin, Brown & Wood's (SABW) Pharma Biased Spin On the Codex Issue

If Codex & the EU Food Supplements Directive are really "non issues" (as is vehemently declared to all members of NNFA by Sidley Austin Brown and Wood LLP), then why have the following American vitamin companies and prominent alternative practitioners gotten behind the ANH lawsuit to overturn the EU Food Supplement Directive, and why do they disagree with SABWs contention that the EU Food Supplement Directive & Codex are "non issues"???

Why do they disagree with SABWs contention that DSHEA is safe from global harmonization? Could they be connecting dots that more vitamin companies, alternative practitioners and consumers need to clearly see and understand?


The Life Extension Foundation; Nature's Plus; Allergy Research Group; Nutricology; Douglas Labs; Metagenics; Natures Benefit, Mineral Resources International, Crusador Enterprises, Julian Whitaker, MD; Jonathan Wright, MD; Stephen Levine, PhD; Jeff Bland, PhD (See additional companies and alternative medical organizations disagreeing with SABWs erroneous contention at


Christine Lewis-Taylor is currently "on loan" from the FDA to the World Health Organization where she is leading their "risk assessment project" for vitamins and minerals. (complete details in another section, below.)

What Taylor (and the US FDA) are doing is that they're "filling in the blanks" on allowable potency levels at CODEX, utilizing ONLY the opinions of pharma shills primarily from 3 groups considered by the World Trade Association to be "the experts" on the safety of vitamins.

Those 3 groups are the IOM at National Academy of Sciences, the UK's so called "Expert Group on Vitamins and Minerals (consultants to their Food Standards Agency) and the EU's Scientific Committee on Food.)

On January 14th, the Institute of Medicine at National Academy of Science has called for Congress to repeal the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act claiming that it "blocks" the FDA from "protecting American consumers against unsafe dietary supplements."

Their 327 page report calls for dietary supplements to be subjected to the same regulatory scrutiny as prescription drugs, and its being backed up by The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) at the National Institutes of Health.

Dr.Richard E Straus, director of NCCAM stated that requiring the same regulatory standards for dietary supplements as for prescription drugs "Will further the scientific investigation of this new field, increase its legitimacy as a research area, and ultimately improve public health."

Ironically, NCCAM (originally The Office of Alternative Medicine) was created by The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act itself via Trojan Horse language inserted into the law by pharma interests dominating the vitamin trade associations at the time DSHEA was driven through Congress.

Due to Pharma Interests hijacking NCCAM and subverting its original purpose, former Congressman Berkley Bedell, who was instrumental in its initial creation along with Senator Tom Harkin, was forced to form his own private foundation: The National Foundation for Alternative Medicine which is actually doing the work that NCCAM was originally intended to do, but which has never lived up to its mandate due to pharma hijacking and subversion of the office that has been well documented over the years by its original founders- (of which I was one.)

The Alliance for Natural Health (UK), recognizes the message of IOM at NAS as paralleling the nearly identical messages currently emanating from the British "Expert Group" on Vitamins and Minerals (Consultants to the British Food Standards Agency), the EU's "Scientific Committee on Foods" and the German "Federal Institute on Risk Assessment" (See below).

All 4 entities are promulgating junk science that has been exposed as scientifically fraudulent by Alan Gaby, MD [ See "Safe Upper Levels for Nutritional Supplements- One Giant Step Backward" JOM Vol.18 3rd & 4th Quarter 2003 #s 3 &4

See: Richard Malter, PhD "The NAS Risk Assessment Model for Establishing Upper Intake Levels for Nutrients- A Critical Review from a Psycho-Physiological Perspective"

See: Do Three Interlocking Events in November Signal the End of Health Freedom? Suzanne Harris, JD of the Law Loft reports from Codex meetings in Bonn, and Paris in 1994 demonstrates that American vitamin companies, health food stores and consumers are being set up for the harmonization of our dietary supplement laws to a grossly restrictive international standard which will be ratified in July 2005 unless stopped via massive supplement industry and grass roots action.

See: A Meeting of Two (re the Codex Meeting in Bonn Germany, November 2004 Scott Tips, JD of the National Health Federation graphically depicts the rampant corruption and non transparency inherent in the Codex process illustrating clearly how we're being set up by the FDA through their criminal actions at the Codex Alimentarius Commission. He also clearly shows how IADSA (International Alliance of Dietary Supplement Associations) is leading the American supplement industry to a largely unseen cliff by only PRETENDING to be defending health freedom as a UN NGO group "representing" the supplement industry at CODEX.)

See: German Report Claims Food Supplements Unsafe Rolf Grossklaus, Chair of the Codex Committee on Nutrition & Foods for Special Dietary Use, is Chair of a new German Institution: The Federal Institute of Risk Assessment.

They've just released at 341-page report on risk assessment of nutrients used in food supplements. The report makes recommendations for maximum levels that are well below those that are commonly present in vitamin and mineral supplements sold in health stores in the USA, UK, Ireland, Sweden, other EU countries, and elsewhere. Many people might, understandably, assume, as a result of this report, that commonly available food supplements are unsafe.

Grossklaus's report was published in January, 2005, with the World Health Organization on the verge of filling in the blanks on allowable potency levels for vitamins and minerals at Codex in May, 2005- with the global trade standard scheduled to be ratified on July 2005 at the Codex meeting in Rome- UNLESS STOPPED VIA EMERGENCY INDUSTRY & GRASS ROOTS ACTION.

WHO's "Risk Assessment Project" to fill in the blanks at Codex is being spearheaded by Christine Lewis-Taylor, PhD who is "on loan" to WHO from the FDA.

Taylor has selected a dozen people out of more than 600 applicants to participate in a "workshop" to be held in an as yet undisclosed location, on an as yet undisclosed date in May- somewhere in Europe- (most likely Geneva or Rome.) Attempts to learn who will be on the selection committee via conversations with Taylor have been met with stony silence.

It is highly probable that Taylor, a dietician, will stack the deck against us by selecting representatives entirely from such pharma dominated bodies as the US National Academy of Sciences, (currently calling for the repealment of DSHEA), The EU's Scientific Committee on Foods, the UK's "Expert Group on Vitamins and Minerals", the newly formed German "Federal Institute of Risk Assessment", the International Life Sciences Institute, and the Australian Working Group on Nutrient Risk Assessment (formed via Codex).

IAHF predicts that if anyone from our side such as Richard Kunin, MD or Robert Verkerk, PhD is allowed to participate, that they will be completely ignored through a so called "consensus process" just as has routinely occurred at CODEX meetings.


An Emergency Anti Codex Health Freedom Meeting was held at the ACAM Alternative Medical Conference in San Diego, CA on November 18th, 2004. [See streaming video at

MC ed by well known orthomolecular practitioner Jonathan V. Wright, MD, the meeting was attended by approximately 100 alternative practitioners, and representatives of several of the most innovative vitamin companies in the supplement industry. (Dr.Wright became well known globally after a nationally televised FDA raid against his clinic resulted in his appearing on Larry King Live.

A graduate of Harvard Medical School, Wright was a leader in the huge grass roots push to pass the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act in 1994. He acknowledges that we are currently in the midst of a desperate global battle to defend DSHEA in the Global Arena, and that we must overcome spin against our health freedom message emanating from several pharma dominated vitamin trade associations including CRN, NNFA and IADSA.

The Coalition created at this meeting is making donations to the UK based Alliance for Natural Health which will be in the EU's equivalent to the US Supreme Court (The European Court of Justice) on January 25th, 2005 in a bid to overturn the draconian, anti consumer EU Food Supplement Directive.

The Coalition created at this meeting is also pursuing a plan of action intended for implementation on US soil and globally to thwart Big Pharma's efforts to crush the dietary supplement industry via global harmonization. We welcome your support!!

A DVD of this Emergency Health Freedom issue can be seen on streaming video at


The following analysis will demonstrate that Sidley Austin Brown & Wood have asked leading questions intended to set up "straw man arguments" in order to "prove" that Codex & the EU Food Supplement Directive are "non issues" when it comes to the American dietary supplement industry. If you ask bad questions, you get misleading answers- otherwise known as "spin" against the truth.

What motive would NNFA's General Counsel have for misleading the rank and file membership of NNFA on the Codex Vitamin issue and on the EU Food Supplement Directive? Follow the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Sidley Austin Brown & Wood are a huge multinational law firm comprised of 1400 attorneys with offices on three continents.

Prior to the merger between the two firms in 2001, in the 1970s, Sidley & Austin represented GD Searle when the FDA fraudulently approved the neurotoxin Aspartame for consumer use.

While Sidley & Austin may not have violated any laws when representing this client, it appears highly incongruous that members of NNFA , (an entity presumably concerned about safe guarding the public health) would so cavalierly ignore this association given that a highly draconian global trade standard for vitamins and minerals will be ratified in July at the Codex meeting in Rome, Italy, unless a last ditch effort by innovative vitamin companies, alternative medical practioners, health food stores and consumers is successful.

In addition to a large New York office, Brown & Wood has maintained offices in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., London, Beijing, Hong Kong, and also has a strong Korean practice. Sidley & Austin have offices in New York, Los Angeles, Dallas, and Washington, D.C., as well as in London and around the Pacific Rim in Shanghai, Tokyo, Hong Kong, and Singapore. In 2001- the two firms merged.

Sidley Austin Brown & Wood represent huge multinational pharmaceutical companies:

It is a blatant conflict of interest that NNFA would hire this law firm. NNFA does not appear to be enforcing their bylaws pertaining to either Ethics, or Conflict of Interest Disclosure.

IAHF seriously doubts that members of NNFA have ever been given any disclosure as to what pharmaceutical clients this multinational law firm does business with- but its easy to see from their own website that they have MANY pharmaceutical clients:

Alliance for Natural Health (UK) to be in European Court of Justice (January 25, 2005) In Bid to Overturn EU Food Supplement Directive (Every member of NNFA should be supporting this legal effort, but Sidley Austin Brown & Wood is calling it a "non issue"

On January 25th, the UK based Alliance for Natural Health will be in the EU's equivalent to the US Supreme Court (the European Court of Justice) in a bid to defend consumer access to dietary supplements, not only within England and the other member states of the EU, but also the world.

The EU is the dominant political force at Codex with 17 countries participating. Germany is the Host Country of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Food for Special Dietary Uses and Dr.Rolf Grossklaus, the Chair of the Committee, has inserted anything into the final reports from these meetings that the EU Delgate has wanted, while totally ignoring dissenting views ( ) Grossklaus chairs the newly formed German Federal Institute of Risk Assessment which has just published a 341 page report calling for extreme restrictions on allowable potency levels that are much lower than current allowed levels in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Ireland, Sweden, Holland, and South Africa.

Against the Backdrop of This Information I Will Examine Each Point Made in SABW's Paper Titled International Natural Products Q &A What Affect Do They Really Have on the U.S.?

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: No. European Directive 2002/46/EC relating to food supplements establishes harmonized rules for the labeling of food supplements and introduces specific rules on vitamins and minerals in food supplements. The directive applies only to products sold in the European Union. It does not apply to retailers in the United States.


While the answer to this question is technically true, the problem here is that the question itself isn't a good question, and the answer totally ignores the political reality of globalization.

The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) threatens to harmonize all the laws between the Arctic Circle and Tierra del Fuego to create a carbon copy of the EU Dictatorship in our hemisphere- see Bush's timetable for finalizing negotiations for creation of the FTAA was January 2005 and only Brazil has been holding out. Given the near total lack of awareness by the average American of the threat posed by this threatened enormous extension of NAFTA, the globalists are dangerously close to pushing the FTAA through on us just as they already have with NAFTA and GATT.

If SABW truly cared about the interests of the health food stores and innovative supplement companies within NNFA, they'd have conducted workshops on global harmonization issues which take a very close look at these things but they're pretending that globalization isn't even taking place.

The United States has agreed to enter into a constant process of harmonizing its laws to emerging international standards- standards which the FDA is playing a very direct role in shaping, as discussed in detail above. Through the SPS and TBT agreements, sub sections of GATT, and through Mutual Recognition Agreements with other countries, the US has agreed to enter into a constant process of harmonizing its laws to international standards.

This is fully delineated in the following article by Suzanne Harris, JD: Do Three Interlocking Events in November Signal the End of Health Freedom?

The FDA is fully aware the international obligations the USA has entered into via NAFTA, GATT and now the WTO.

On March 17, 1997 acting FDA Commissioner Michael A. Friedman stated the following in a speech before the Senate Labor Committee " FDA plans to amend its regulations and procedures for consideration of standards adopted by Codex. This action is being taken to provide for the systematic review of Codex standards in order to enhance consumer protection, promote international harmonization, and fulfill the United States obligations under international agreements." FDA/CFSAN Federal Register 62 FR 36243 July 7, 1997

Current FDA efforts in January 2005 to "fully implement DSHEA" include an effort to amend their regulations pertaining to New Dietary Ingredients. See

FDA is clearly pushing in the direction of erecting barriers to many new ingredients for which they intend to require excessive testing and documentation intended to block many safe products from reaching the marketplace. FDA's efforts to subvert congressional intent on DSHEA must be viewed in the context of Friedman's statement above, and SABW should be assisting NNFA members in seeing this bigger picture so as to generate the awareness necessary to generate an industry warchest sufficiently large to fight on both the domestic front, and the international front.

Instead, SWBW is trying to put NNFA members to sleep right when they most need to be fully aware of the scope and magnitude of the threat they are facing. My suggestion to sleeping members of NNFA is that they "follow the money" and demand that NNFA enforce its bylaw article 14.3 on conflict of interest disclosure, beginning with SABW by demanding to see a current list of the firms pharma clients.

Q: Does the EU Directive have any impact on U.S. manufacturers and distributors of dietary supplements?

A: While the Directive applies only to member countries of the European Union, U.S. manufacturers and others who export dietary supplements with ingredients not contained on lists in the directive will no longer be able to sell those products in the European Union as of August 1, 2005

This answer makes zero attempt to show the interconnection between the EU FSD and Codex, zero attempt to show that the US is bound by international law to enter into a constant process of harmonizing its laws, and it would have NNFA members believe that the EU Food Supplement Directive is a "done deal", totally ignoring the fact that the Alliance for Natural Health has a very solid lawsuit and a very real chance to overturn it on January 25th, in the European Court of Justice. While it is an outrage that SABW are not helping NNFA members to fully see where they stand, the firm's stance should not be the least bit surprising to anyone who examines the fact that they have a huge number of pharmaceutical clients.

If the NNFA Board were to debate this issue, with some smaller, more innovative companies (who stand the most to lose business due to the EU FSD and Codex) pushing for the ouster of SABW, I predict that larger companies, especially those which have been bought up by drug companies will push for the ongoing retention of this law firm. (Health Food store members of NNFA and consumers, please take note.)

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 1 and 2 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. (Visit to view the annexes.) 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 on Annexes 1 and 2.

IAHF Note: Again, this ignores the fact that ANH will be attempting to overturn the EU Food Supplement Directive in the European Court of Justice on January 25th, and no effort is being made here to explain the scope or magnitude of the threat posed by the EU Food Supplement Directive. The intention appears to gloss over the threat in the hopes that not many members of NNFA will examine the 300 some odd ingredients which the EU intends to ban from use in product manufacturing, and 75% of the forms of ingredients currently allowed in the UK and Dutch markets. The intention seems to be to ignore the fact that the EU FSD could ban the most bioavailable FORMS of nutrients as well as drastically reduce allowable potency levels, forcing manufacturers to water down products to the point of ineffectiveness.

See How Proposals for EU, US, and Codex Regulations Could Destroy Natural Healthcare

Q: I read that 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 completely separate from the European Union and the European Directive. Codex is a body responsible for implementation of the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization/ World Health Organization Food Standards Program, which was established to develop international food standards in the interests of enhancing consumer protection and ensuring fair international trade in food products. The European Food Supplements Directive 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.

IAHF Note:

This outrageously simplistic assessment totally ignores the fact that the EU is the dominant power at Codex with 17 countries represented (all voting in lockstep) and it ignores the fact that the Chair of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses, Dr.Rolf Grossklaus, who is from Germany, the host country of CCNFSDU, the largest pharmaceutical manufacturing nation on earth, and the most powerful country within the EU.

It ignores the fact that Grossklaus has been observed by many observers representing the grass roots to completely favor the positions taken at Codex meetings by the EU Delegate, and that he has bent the meaning of "consensus" far beyond the breaking point on numerous occasions so that the positions of the EU would hold sway. Numerous observers have witnessed the EU Food Supplement Directive being overlaid as a template on top of Codex, and have seen US Delegates from the FDA consistently taking positions that aren't consistent with current US vitamin laws-clearly indicating a regulatory philosophy that is in sync with both the EU Delegate's and with the German Chair of the meeting.

See: A Meeting of Two (re the Codex Meeting in Bonn Germany, November 2004 Scott Tips, JD of the National Health Federation

Q:What is Codex's role in the regulation of dietary supplements?

A: Codex formed several committees to explore the development of guidelines governing vitamin and mineral supplements, food labeling and food additives. These guidelines are part of a series of guidelines being developed in conjunction with the World Trade Organization Agreement (also known as GATT). Every country that has ratified GATT (including the United States) has formed an official delegation that it sends to these committees. Guidelines on the composition and labeling of vitamin and mineral supplements are presently under consideration by the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Use (CNFSDU). At a November 2004 meeting, CNFSDU agreed to make recommendations on final guidelines for vitamin and mineral supplements (and thereafter, possibly, for other dietary supplements as well) to the full Codex Commission. The commission will meet in July 2005 to discuss adopting the guidelines.

IAHF Note: SABW would have members of NNFA believe that ratification of a finalized Codex vitamin standard in July in Rome would be "no big deal". By not exhibiting any concern, SABW would have members of NNFA believe (falsely) that there is "no cause for concern."

Well consider THIS: The person in charge of filling in the BLANKS on allowable potency levels for vitamins and minerals at Codex is Dr.Christine Lewis Taylor of FDA who is "on loan" to WHO specifically to head their "Nutrient Risk Assessment Project" via which they intend to "fill in the blanks" on allowable potency levels.

Keep in mind that Taylor is a dietician who feels that we get all the nutrients we need in our food. Keep in mind that she was on the Assistant US Delegate to the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Food for Special Dietary Use under Yetley when I was on the US Delegation in '96 and '98 prior to being thrown off the delegation as a whistleblower prior to the 2000 meeting in Berlin for attempting to get Congressional Oversight on Codex.

Keep in mind that Yetley and Lewis-Taylor totally ignored letters from 5 members of Congress, including Dan Burton, Chair of the House Oversight Committee which told them not to put a pharma funded, scientifically biased paper on the table at Codex in '98 generated by the National Academy of Science titled "A Risk Assessment Model for Establishing Upper Levels for Nutrients."

See this paper and Dr.Rick Malter's rebuttal to it at Malter's rebuttal was published in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine.

An additional, similar rebuttal can be found in Dr.Gaby's paper titled "Safe Upper Levels for Nutritional Supplements- One Giant Step Backward" JOM Vol.18 3rd & 4th Quarter 2003 #s 3 &4

Keep in mind that the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine (which published this biased, unscientific paper which FDA put on the table at Codex in '98 over congressional objection) is currently calling for the repealment of DSHEA, and that the American Herbal Products Association has exposed their current report as "heavily flawed" see

Why isn't SABW assisting members of NNFA to see the connections between National Academy of Sciences attacks on supplements at Codex, and their direct attacks on DSHEA?

Could it be because they have a lot of pharmaceutical clients, and don't have the best interests of NNFA's health food stores, and innovative manufacturers in mind? Could they only be serving the interests of pharma interests which NNFA has unwittingly allowed to be members of NNFA and to even chair key committees, such as the International Committee which is still chaired by a man who for years was an employee of Pfizer?

Q: Will final Codex supplement guidelines differing from DSHEA, if adopted by other countries, have an effect on the sale of vitamin and mineral supplements by U.S. companies in those countries?

A: Other countries that have ratified GATT have the option of adopting final Codex Supplement Guidelines. U.S. suppliers exporting vitamin and mineral supplements for sale in countries that decide to adopt Codex standards will have to comply with the guidelines for products involved in such sales. This could conceivably mean, for example, that structure/function claims may not be made for supplements sold in those countries. However, NNFA and other interested groups are working within relevant Codex committees to insure that final Codex Supplement Guidelines are consistent with DSHEA.

IAHF Comment: This leads people to believe that Codex guidelines would not be binding on the USA, but would "only impact international sales." It also leads people to believe that the supplement industry is well represented by groups working within Codex committees to insure that final Codex Supplement Guidelines are consistent with DSHEA.

Neither assertion is true, unfortunately.

See the discussion of the bindingness of the SPS Agreement as pertains to risk assessment techniques discussed in Suzanne Harris's article Do Three Interlocking Events in November Signal the End of Health Freedom?

Members of NNFA have been misled for years on the Codex issue by industry assertions that they were being "well represented" at CODEX meetings by IADSA (International Alliance of Dietary Supplement Associations).

This umbrella group of dietary supplement associations was created by an employee of Pfizer Pharmaceutical Company (Randy Dennin) who members of NNFA have unwisely been trusting for the past several years to provide "leadership" on international issues, especially Codex.

IADSA is exposed as a controlled opposition group at

Manufacturing members of NNFA who have bought their gelcaps from Capsugel (a Pfizer subsidiary) for years have viewed Mr.Dennin as a "friendly guy" (which he is) and as someone "they can trust" (which he most definitely is not when it comes to defending the interests of consumers, health food stores, and innovative manufacturers.)

Just two weeks after Congress whitewashed a congressional oversight hearing on Codex on March 20, 2001 in which Dennin's cochair on NNFA's International Committee testified before Congress calling Codex a "non issue" which could "only impact international sales, but not US domestic law", Dennin was chairing an IADSA meeting in Capetown South Africa called "Toward a Global Regulatory Model".

I pushed for this oversight hearing for 5 years after observing US Codex Delegate Dr.Beth Yetley violate US law at meetings in Bonn in '96 and again in Berlin in '98, and had DEATH THREATS for my trouble which forced me to move from the Miami Florida area to a remote location in the Appalachian mountains in SW Virginia (which I've since moved from.)

For 4 years I lived in Floyd County VA, a county with just one traffic light in 400 square miles.

During this period when I pushed for congressional oversight on Codex, Milt Copulous, a member of Congressman Dan Burton's staff, was fired for attempting to assist me in getting oversight on the Codex vitamin issue.

He was replaced by a pharma plant who was instrumental in whitewashing the Oversight Hearing on March 20, 2001 by not allowing me or any of my witnesses to testify.

The only person allowed to testify was Karl Riedel, Dennin's co-chair on NNFA's International Committee. He testified before Congress that Codex was a "non issue" (echoing what SABW are saying in their spin piece), but keep in mind what happened between Karl and I when we were on the US Codex Delegation in '98:

The day before the Codex meeting began, there was a pre meeting of the US Delegation in the Hotel where Dr.Yetley of FDA was staying.

I attended this meeting where I attempted to hold Yetley's feet to the fire over the issue of her putting a very biased, pharma funded paper on the table at Codex that had been generated by the National Academy of Sciences (which today, in 2005, are calling for the repealment of DSHEA).

I had letters from 5 members of Congress, including Congressman Burton (chair of the Oversight Committee) telling Yetley not to put this paper on the table because it was

A) Pharma Funded
B) Biased
C) Unscientific
D) Contradicted current US law
E) Had Never Undergone a Public Comments Period

The title of this paper is "A Risk Assessment Model for Establishing Upper Levels for Nutrients" and it can be seen at
Richard Malter, PhD generated a rebuttal that was published in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine. It can be seen here

Bolstering Malter's contentions that NAS's recommendations for "Safe Upper Levels" for vitamins and minerals are based on junk science is Alan Gaby, MDs article titled "Safe Upper Levels for Nutritional Supplements-One Giant Step Backward" JOM Vol.18 3rd & 4th Quarter 2003 #s 3 &4

Karl heard about a confrontation that had occurred at the pre meeting of the US delegation at which I confronted Yetley over the NAS paper, demanding to know whether or not she intended to obey the will of the American people and the will of Congress or not and withdraw mention of this biased, unscientific, pharma funded paper which had never undergone a public comment period, and not put the paper on the table.

He heard about how I confronted both Yetley & John Hathcock regarding the scientific fraudulence of this paper, and how I mentioned that Dr.Brian Leibovitz (former editor of the Journal of Applied Nutrition, and of the Journal of Optimal Nutrition- the man who formulated most of Twin Labs products and who once worked directly with Dr.Linus Pauling had awarded Hathcock with a "BS" (Bad Science) Award in an Editorial in JON noting that Hathcock had strung together the largest number of meaningless acronyms ever used in a scientific article wherein he had misextrapolated from a toxicology risk assessment formula intended to be used in the evaluation of toxic pharmaceutical drugs, and he'd misapplied it to safe nutrients.

Hathcock and Yetley looked like they wanted to kill me, and so did all the other pharma suits in the room. I videotaped the letter from Congressman Dan Burton in which he told Yetley not to use the paper. It was illegal for her to do so due to an amendment that we got in '97 to the FDA Modernization Act wherein we got dietary supplements specifically exempted from harmonization language which impacts the whole rest of the Food, Durg, and Cosmetic Act.

Yetley made it very clear to me that she fully intended to ignore the law and use the paper anyway. Undoubtedly she was aware of the extent of pharma penetration of the vitamin trade associations, and realized that if I pressed for congressional oversight on the issue, that she and her pharma cronies had the ability to block it- which they did on March 20, 2001, a day that will live in infamy.

Karl Riedel had been sent by NNFA to Codex specifically to brown nose Yetley out of "concern" about my "undiplomatic actions" and he chastised me on the first day of the meeting in Berlin in '98 for "being ineffective" for "pissing off Yetley."

I asked Karl if he had taken the time to actually READ the NAS paper titled "A Risk Assessment Model for Establishing Upper Levels for Nutrients" or not, and he ADMITTED THAT HE HAD NOT READ IT, but that Randy Dennin had, and had told him it helped us, and that THAT WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR HIM (!!!!) He then grabbed his necktie and said to me "John, it's a matter of OPINION as to whether or not this necktie is ugly or not, but we're not TALKING about OPINION here John, we're talking about SCIENCE!!!"

Oh, REALLY- says I.

Well Karl, I have letters from numerous prominent orthomolecular physicians on our side who have reviewed this paper and have pronounced it PSEUDOSCIENCE, and furthermore, by using this paper, Yetley is violating current US law, and is trying to set us up to lose in a future WTO trade dispute.

NNFA members have been placing BLIND TRUST in a man who in my opinion has been USED as an unwitting DUPE of pharma interests, a man who did not DO HIS HOMEWORK but who was FLATTERED by those who paid his way to Codex meetings.

Karl went on to be the only person allowed to speak in the whitewashed Codex oversight hearing on March 20, 2001. I wasn't allowed to testify, and neither were any of my witnesses.


Members of NNFA, AHPA, and CRN have been dangerously misled by IADSA and by CRN into believing that a "great victory" has been "won at Codex" because a move to base allowable potency levels at RDAs has been scrapped in favor of (so called) "scientific risk assessment", however what is being CALLED scientific is NOT at ALL scientific (as seen via Malter's and Gaby's exposes.)

What is happening here is this:

Pharma interests controlling CRN, NNFA and IADSA have been successfully using a technique of manipulation called the Hegelian Dialectic against busy health food store owners, and busy ceos of vitamin companies who are too busy to do their own homework on this complex issue and who just blindly trust what they're being told by their trade associations because they pay big dues to belong to them, and they just ASSUME that they're being given honest, accurate information.

It becomes very easy for such busy people to accept things such as SABWs spin piece on the Codex issue because it tells them "what they want to hear" (that Codex is a "non issue" and "don't worry guys, we're handling it."

Yeah, SABW, CRN, and IADSA are "handling" it all right. They're "handling" it just the way the pharmaceutical industry WANTS them to handle it. They're leading an entire industry over a largely unseen cliffs using sophisticated techniques of political manipulation including the Hegelian Dialectic, which in THIS case works like THIS:

First the Pharma Cartel creates the "problem" (threat of regulation to RDA levels via CODEX.)

They do this to trigger a desired public reaction (fear of regulation of vitamin potencies to RDA levels.)

In this climate of fear, the Cartel utilizes controlled opposition groups (pharma dominated vitamin trade associations and pharma front groups posing as "health freedom organizations" to usher in the alleged SOLUTION (in this case a move to base allowable potencies on so called "scientific risk assessment.")

All of this sounds wonderful til you look at what they're calling "scientific" as Christine Lewis-Taylor (on loan from FDA to WHO's International Programme on Chemical Safety) moves to "fill in the blanks" on allowable potencies of vitamins and minerals at Codex in May (just before the standard goes for ratification in July.)

There is zero transparency in the selection process of the 12 people who Taylor will choose to help her "fill in the blanks". She issued a "call for experts" to come forward to participate in a "workshop" to be held sometime in May, at an as yet undisclosed location in Europe. She received over 600 applications, including many from people on our side who are really smelling a rat such as Richard Kunin, MD, an esteemed orthomolecular physician from San Francisco.

Based on observing the Codex "process" for the past 9 years, I predict that NONE of the people from our side will be selected as participants in this "workshop" (and if a token one or two should be selected, they'll just be marginalized and ignored via a "consensus" process) because that would be consistent with everything any of us have seen in the Codex shell game thus far- there is zero reason to expect any honesty or fairness at all.

I predict that the 12 people who Taylor chooses will be drawn from the ranks of the Institute of Medicine at NAS (the same people who have called for the repealment of DSHEA in 2005)

I also predict Taylor will select people from the UK's so called "Expert Group on Vitamins and Minerals" (consultants to the British Foods Standards Agency) (whose junk science is ably exposed by Dr.Alan Gaby "Safe Upper Levels for Nutritional Supplements- One Giant Step Backward" JOM Vol.18 3rd & 4th Quarter 2003 #s 3 &4

She'll also select people from the EU's so called "Scientific Committee on Foods" (the same people who created the mindless potency restrictions which the Alliance for Natural Health) will be attempting to overturn in the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg on January 25th.

She might also select people from the brand new German "Federal Institute of Risk Assessment" chaired by none other than Dr.Rolf Grossklaus, the Chair of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Food for Special Dietary Use.

Look at samples of the allowable "Safe Upper Levels" Grossklaus would like to impose on us all: Vitamin C: 225 mg B6: 5.4 mg B 12- 9 mcg

These aren't much better than RDA's, but they're what our pharma dominated vitamin trade associations figure they can successfully foist off on a sleeping industry via such misleading press releases as THIS one of CRNs which would have the vitamin companies amongst CRN's membership believe we have won a great and wonderful "victory" at Codex:

Need I say more? While you're at it, you might check the pharma representation amongst CRN's membership at Do you see Bayer, BASF, Wyeth, Monsanto, etc?

Are you connecting the dots yet?

Don't you think NNFA should get rid of SABW as the trade association's legal counsel?

Shouldn't NNFA be supporting the UK based Alliance for Natural Health and allied organizations that are REALLY fighting for health freedom world wide?

Q: Does the USA have any say about what is passed by Codex or the EU? A: The United States does not have official say about what is passed in the European Union. The US Codex Office puts together delegations to each Codex committee meeting, arranges public meetings in Washington DC to gather comments from interested parties, and publishes all relevant proceedings. The website for the US Codex office is

IAHF Note: SABW shows no sign of caring about what gets passed in the EU. In marked contrast to SABW's attitude, IAHF has been working hard to urge American vitamin companies to donate to the Alliance for Natural Health's lawsuit to overturn the EU Food Supplement Directive, and it is for this reason that IAHF organized the Emergency Anti Codex Meeting held at ACAM in San Diego on November 18th- see streaming video at

IAHF suspects that at best SABW does not want money flowing from NNFA members to ANH to help with this lawsuit just because its not flowing into their OWN pockets, at WORST SABW may be consciously protecting the interests of its pharmaceutical clients. In any case, IAHF submits that vitamin company members of NNFA had better jump off this sinking ship PRONTO before SABW steers it into a watery grave.

As for the second part of SABWs response above- they'd have you believe that just because the USA "has a US Codex Office with a website which holds public meetings" that this entity can be TRUSTED, and that the Codex process is somehow "fair."

Nothing could be further from the truth, as I have found from sad personal experience!

The Codex "process" is nothing but a huge shell game put on for public consumption, rather like a game of three card monty in which a street urchin suckers unwary passers out of their money by playing sleight of hand card tricks on top of a cardboard box, outside the subway entrances in New York City.

Codex violates every tenet of representative government on which the US government supposedly bases its laws, and we shouldn't be participating at ALL. At Codex, its "one country- one vote" irregardless of whether or not the country even manufactures dietary supplement, and population size doesn't count for anything- Iceland or Norway has as much voting power as the USA, so we're easily out maneuvered in this "consensus process" by the EU, which dominates the "process" by controlling the Chairmanship through Germany as the host country and with 17 nations all voting in lockstep for the most restrictive regulations.

I was kicked off the US Codex Delegation to the Committee on Nutrition and Food for Special Dietary Use just prior to the meeting in Berlin in 2000 by US Codex Chairman Dr.Scarbrough at the US Department of Agriculture who manages the US Codex Office. Scarbrough kicked me off per the wishes of Dr.Beth Yetley who did not like my efforts to put her under Congressional Scrutiny for crimes I witnessed her commit at Codex meetings in Bonn in '96 and Berlin in '98.

Moreover, the German government permanently banned my participation at Codex meetings because in '98 I videotaped part of the meeting (til Grossklaus forced me to turn my camcorder off) and I put the streaming video on the web. I was told by German press officer Juergen Kundke that I would not be allowed to participate in future Codex meetings.

In 2000, due to this, I joined the street demonstration of Matthias Rath, MD in front of the gates of the Codex meeting in Berlin. Rath, a prominent orthomolecular physician and vitamin company owner, has been trying hard to expose the Cartel's criminal agenda for years.

Q: Is there anything that would prevent the United States from adopting the Codex Guidelines if it choose to do so?

A: No law would prevent the United States from accepting Codex guidelines on vitamins and mineral supplements. However, according to a US Department of Agriculture Codex official, the United States has never changed its laws or regulations to conform to any standards or guidelines adopted by Codex. He noted further that the United States does not, as a matter of practice, officially accept, accept in part, accept free distribution, or accept standards or guidelines adopted by the Codex Commission. Therefore it doesn't appear that any changes to US law or regulations would occur as a result of any adoption by the Commission of the vitamin and mineral food supplements guidelines. The Food and Drug Administration has affirmed this point with respects to vitamins and minerals, noting that the United States would not adopt any guidelines that are in conflict with (or would require any changes to) US laws or regulations.

IAHF Note: The USDA official referenced above, was probably Dr.Ed Scarbrough, US Codex Manager, the same person who did US Delegate Dr.Beth Yetley (FDA)'s bidding by kicking me off the US Delegation prior to the 2000 meeting in Berlin because of my efforts to put her under congressional scrutiny for crimes I observed her commit at Codex meetings in Bonn in '96 and Berlin in '98.

When Gary Null invited Scarbrough to debate me on the air over the issue of his kicking me off the US Delegation, he declined.

Everything SABW is saying here is contradicted by Suzanne Harris',JD article Do Three Interlocking Events in November Signal the End of Health Freedom?

by Scott Tips, JD article "A Meeting of Two"

Andy by this article of Suzanne Walter: Guidelines Completed- Now What?

Q: Who would decide whether to accept any Codex guidelines on vitamin and mineral food supplements if they were adopted by the Codex Commission?

A: Our research indicates that FDA would determine whether or not to accept any guidelines on vitamin and mineral food supplements adopted by the Codex Commission.

Q: If the United States decided to accept Codex guidelines, how would they be adopted?

A: Because the United States has not adopted Codex guidelines, there is no procedural precedent. It is likely that if the FDA were to consider accepting guidelines adopted by the commission, there would be a notice and comment period in which interested parties could submit comments to FDA on whether the move was advisable. There is a provision in the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR 130.6) that provides specific procedures for FDA to accept or not food standards adopted by the commission. Again, however, this provision has not been used.

IAHF Comment: They haven't been used YET, is what SABW is neglecting to inform the members of NNFA. The reason they haven't been used YET is that we're up against a deliberately incremental agenda that's being pushed with deliberate gradualness so as to not provoke a public backlash. The Cartel is hoping that spin by pharma friendly law firms such as SABWs will be sufficient to keep the wool pulled over the supplement industry's eyes til its simply TOO LATE for them to do anything to stop this crooked agenda from playing out.

With Codex on the verge of ratifying a highly draconian standard for vitamins and minerals in July, 2005 in Rome, we're literally on the edge of a largely unseen cliff.

It is for that reason that IAHF organized the Emergency Anti Codex Meeting held at the ACAM Medical Conference in San Diego on November 18, 2004. The MC was Jonathan Wright, MD Speakers included Robert Verkerk, PhD, Exec Dir, The Alliance for Natural Health Suzanne Harris, JD of the Law Loft and John Hammell, President of International Advocates for Health Freedom

I made a DVD of our emergency meeting titled "Push Back From Codex Cliff" which can be viewed on streaming video at I apologize for the poor sound quality and lousy camera work. I didn't have a directional microphone, and the camera operator was my partner Candace who has never operated a camcorder before. A volunteer in Spokane put the DVD on the web, and other volunteers helped edit it for a fraction of what it would normally cost, while another ally made copies at a fraction of what it would normally cost.

IAHF is a true grass roots catalytic entity dedicated to exposing and stopping Codex.

Q: What is NNFA doing about these issues?

A: NNFA's policy regarding the use and sale of dietary supplements in the international arena has been to lobby for adoption of DSHEA style laws and regulations. NNFA has been and will continue to be very active with the Codex Commission by attending meetings and filing comments on that press for Codex's adoption of DSHEA and other provisions of US law such as the ability to use structure and function health claims. If NNFA and others are successful in these efforts, there will be no concern about selling supplements in foreign countries under more restrictive rules. The principles embodied in DSHEA will apply internationally. Q: What can NNFA members do to support health freedoms in regard to Codex? A: Continue to support NNFA's active involvement in Codex activities, and contact overseas customers to urge them to advocate adoption of DSHEA's provisions by their own governments and Codex Delegations.

IAHF Comment: These last two Q&As really "take the cake." SABW appear to be using Hitler's "Big Lie" technique in the hope that no one in the rank and file membership of NNFA will wake up in time to see through this outrageous ruse.

They seem to be taking the view that if you lie to people long enough, consistently slinging the same garbage around, that in time, everyone will believe it.

I sure hope they don't get away with it.

I have devoted the past 9 years of my life to trying to expose this sleazy agenda, and I've worked very long hours, with no staff, barely putting food in my mouth. I've lost clients due to massive efforts to marginalize me, and if not for the immense integrity of The Life Extension Foundation which has stuck by me as a client through thick and thin, I would not have been able to do this work, I'd have been forced to pack it in years ago.

I've endured taunts that I'm "crying wolf" and that I'm "chicken little" who is crying "the sky is falling, the sky is falling", but the truth is that I've been very accurately witnessing a crime of vast proportions unfolding like a slow motion train wreck and now we find ourselves LITERALLY on the edge of Codex Cliff with a horrible vitamin standard on the verge of possibly being ratified in July of 2005 in Rome.

The Cartel knows they can't mount a full frontal assault against the American dietary supplement industry and expect to get away with it.

They learned that the hard way in '94 when we rammed DSHEA down their throats following the mindless FDA rulemaking effort inherent in the Dykstra Report which followed passage of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act.

I first began fighting for health freedom in 1989, 16 years ago. I was writing a book at the time about my orthomolecular recovery from a life threatening illness via a suppressed alternative treatment mode, but was forced to back burner the book because the NLEA was a stealth bill that had been fast tracked through the House and was on its way to the Senate like a guided missile aimed straight for the heart of the supplement industry.

When I noticed it, I was INCREDULOUS that the vitamin trade associations such as NNFA and CRN had not jumped in IMMEDIATELY to try to kill it, but I didn't know then what I have since learned.

When I first saw this bill moving, I realized that the book I was writing wouldn't do anyone any good if we all lost our access to supplements and I wasn't sure what to do. I asked my friend Donna who worked in the Health Shoppe in Morristown NJ who might have the answer on what to do.

She gave me the phone number for Clinton Ray Miller, one of the most experienced health freedom lobbyists in America.

I called Clint, and he explained what was really going on, telling me that NNFA had been penetrated by pharma interests intent on pulling the wool over the eyes of its members and that they were keeping their rank and file members in the dark about the immense danger posed by the Nutrition Labelling and Education Act.

Alarmed, I asked Clint what I should do.

He told me to get a legal yellow pad and a clipboard, and to go to the Public Library to get all the telephone books for a much wider area than my own phonebook covered, and to make a list of the name, address, and phone number of every health food store within a 50 mile radius of my house.

I protested, saying that for me to go to all those stores would be impossible, explaining that this would take in Manhatten Island in New York City and that there were thousands of stores.

He asked me how bad I wanted to preserve my access to dietary supplements, and I got the message. I had suffered all I was willing to as a prisoner of the pharma cartel, and vowed it would never happen again.

I'd been forced out of college in the mid 70s by schizophrenia and endured 4 long years suffering the torment of the damned inside the psychiatric gulag til I smuggled in the vitamins that turned my life around- see

If not for the late Carl C. Pfeiffer, MD, I would either be dead right now, or I'd still be mired inside the gulag. Pfeiffer risked losing his medical license to practice orthomolecular medicine, and I figured I could not repay him in any way except to work very hard to insure that I never lost my own access to supplements, and that no one else ever lost theirs either.

It is in the memory of Dr.Pfeiffer that I sent this urgent message to the vitamin consumers of America and the world.


1. Members of NNFA must immediate DEMAND a board meeting about what I am saying here, and they must DEMAND that the trade association fire SABW LLP as its legal counsel for all the reasons discussed herein. If NNFA's management declines, then a large number of health food stores and vitamin companies must QUIT the trade association and band together to form a NEW trade association, one that really WILL fight for health freedom since NNFA, "led" by IADSA, has clearly only been going through the MOTIONS.

2. Get every member of NNFA who really cares about health freedom to watch the DVD "Push Back from Codex Cliff" on streaming video at and to order copies from IAHF 556 Boundary Bay Rd. Point Roberts WA 98281 USA I don't mind if people burn DVDs from the streaming video on the web, or burn copies of the DVD I will send for a $15 donation (USA) and a $25. donation (outside the USA). Copies can also be ordered via paypal at The paypal button is located inside the site on the top of the scrollbar.

3. Every member of NNFA who really cares about health freedom should IMMEDIATELY donate to the UK based, pan European health freedom organization Alliance for Natural Health via their secure server at (Larger donations should be sent by wire transfer, see instructions on their site.)

I am leaving tomorrow, January 23rd to fly to Luxembourg as a reporter for Life Extension Magazine to cover what happens in the courtroom as ANH attempts to overturn the draconian EU Food Supplement Directive. I'll bring this draft of this report of mine with me in order to "fine tune it", and will seek input on it from other health freedom fighters who will also be watching the court proceedings.

Although I'm sure I'll make changes, I decided to release this draft now given that the fuse is burning closer to the bomb and we're running out of time to save the dietary supplement industry from carefully planned destruction.

Although what is unfolding may seem surreal, given that in America today you can walk into a health food store and buy just about anything you want, we can easily see the writing on the wall by observing the situation inside the European Union where the ruling Labor Party in England ignored over a million signatures gathered by vitamin consumers on petitions who oppose harmonization of England's dietary supplement laws to the outrageous EU Food Supplement Directive which will force thousands of products to be watered down to the point of ineffectiveness unless stopped by force of law.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see the overlap between the EU Food Supplement Directive and Codex, as you can clearly see from this report. You just have to be patient enough to "connect the dots" on the Cartel's little "baloney slicing" venture via which they're leading us to the cliff from within.

They're boiling the frog slowly, in the hope that the frog won't realize he's being boiled to death because they don't want him to hop out of the pan.

Rank and file members of NNFA and vitamin trade associations world wide, please take notice- Codex, and the EU Food Supplement Directive, threaten to destroy your business, and you have very little remaining time to act.

Don't freeze like deer caught in the headlights, each one teach 10, each 10 teach 100, each 100, teach 1000.

We're going to WIN this battle for health freedom by fighting the old fashioned way, ANY WAY WE CAN.

I don't have a staff, because I'm barely earning a living. For the past 9 years, I've been actually doing the work to defend members of NNFA that their pharma dominated law firm has only been going through the motions of doing, in my opinion. If any health food store or vitamin company would like to contribute to IAHF to help me expand it into a larger organization, please contact me.

I also urge everyone reading this to contact Suzanne Harris, JD who has written a rebuttal to the SABW spin piece which I haven't seen, but which I am sure is more technically precise than mine as I lack her educational background and legal experience.

While I was forced out of college years ago by a life serious illness, Suzanne was an honors graduate in political science at University of Michigan where she specialized in International Organizations. Her law degree was from Berkley. Ten years ago she stopped practicing law to become a journalist. You can see the fine quality of her work via her article Do Three Interlocking Events in November Signal the End of Health Freedom? Which I've mentioned several times above.

She's asking $3,000. for it- and it may well be worth the effort of a group of health food stores and vitamin companies to pool their resources to purchase it and to communicate with Suzanne about how to begin following the plan of action outlined in our Emergency Meeting at ACAM which you can see at

Rob Verkerk, PhD at the Alliance for Natural Health and I also would like to speak with anyone interested in forming a larger coalition globally through which to stop the Codex juggernaut. A rising tide raises all boats. There is no idea, like an idea whose time has come. CODEX is a modern day equivalent to the Flexner Report via which the Pharma Cartel sought to torpedo alternative medicine as it existed in 1910. Those who do not learn from history are often doomed to repeat history. We can, and MUST stop Codex.

John C. Hammell, President
International Advocates for Health Freedom
556 Boundary Bay Rd.
Point Roberts WA 98281 USA
800-333-2553 N.America
360-945-0352 World