To: IAHF List
Subject: Analysis of CFH Spin Control on Codex Vitamin Issue: CFH's Spin Exposed
From: "International Advocates for Health Freedom"
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 01:09:38 -0500

IAHF List: What follows is an in depth analysis of spin control on the Codex vitamin issue. I have gone to the website of so called "Citizens for Health" to skim off the worst parts of a propaganda piece of theirs through which they are subtly trying to deceive us. If you didn't know what to look for, you would be easily taken in by this spin, and most people who read it are. To help you see through it, I have put my comments to this nonsense in square brackets below. You will learn a lot about how the takeover has been proceeding against us via deceptive spin control intended to mislead people into thinking of Codex as a "non issue." Nothing could be further from the truth! Like any good controlled opposition group, CFH mainstains a powerful air of respectability, and 95 % of what they do is good, its the 5% thats NOT good that we have to be VERY CAREFUL of and this analysis really helps you see it!!!


FACT: There has been some confusion between Codex Commission activities, GATT and international regulatory harmonization efforts. The three issues are connected but not synonymous.

[They sure are synonymous. This statement is intentionally misleading, the intent being to keep people from focusing on how the pharmaceutical takeover has been proceeding. They don't want us to see how these things are interrelated. They don't want us to pay attention to what is going on right under our noses, so they try to put us to SLEEP with misleading statements like this which are intended to anesthetize us.]

The proposed Codex guidelines would be implemented only if 1) they are adopted by the full Codex Commission as presently drafted and 2) they are subsequently adopted by individual countries that have ratified GATT. GATT specifically provides that while ratifying countries must consider international health-related standards such as a final Codex guideline in connection with their own health-related laws and regulations, no ratifying country is required to adopt such a standard.

[ Actually, due to Mutual Recognition Agreements that the USA has signed due to GATT and NAFTA the only legal way any country can refuse to harmonize its domestic laws to an international standard is on a basis of safety, and they're in the process of undermining us on our ability to opt out on a basis of safety by generating phony, unscientific safety standards. If we could argue our case before an honest court, we could still defend our interests, but they are blocking us from being able to do this. We would be forced to argue our case before the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body which disallows individual testimony as well as NGO testimony. They only allow testimony from UN member nation government reps such as Dr.Yetley, who are already in the hip pocket of the Cartel, and they will consider the NAS papers and SCF papers from the EU to represent the "gold standard" on safety. The whole situation is one big set up from start to finish. It is true that on paper a Federal Statute, 19USC 3512(a)(1) and (a)(2) in theory protects our domestic laws from harmonization, but in reality this statute is only a paper tiger. This is why Congressman Ron Paul introduced the American Sovereignty Restoration Act which would pull us out of the WTO, and it had 18 cosponsors last congress and will be getting far more as the truth gets out there. CFH will never back Paul's bill due to having multinational corporate member companies.]

[The same CRN companies that helped fund the NAS risk assessment paper, also helped fund the recent NAS paper that attacks the safety of vitamin A. They're using the Hegelian dialectic of problem reaction solution to con people into accepting the idea of the NAS paper as "the lesser of two evils" without having any idea of what is really even going on at all. CFH is actively endorsing both CRN and NNFA's postion on Codex, which is to say, they're endorsing the position of the multinational pharmaceutical companies that belong to both CRN and NNFA. This shouldn't be surprising due to people like Dennin of Capsugel (Warner Lambert/Pfizer) being on the CFH Board. This is a conflict of interest.]

[The difference between IAHF and CFH is that IAHF will never compromise on matters such as this. If Dennin wanted to contribute money to IAHF, I would not accept it. Haeger not only would accept it, she is accepting it.]

This principle is reflected in the U.S. statute ratifying GATT, which explicitly provides that no provision of GATT is effective in this country if it is inconsistent with Federal law. Thus, any provision of Codex dietary supplement guidelines (if such guidelines are eventually adopted in any form), which conflicts with any provision of DSHEA, is null and void in the U.S. The FDA, which is required by Federal law to implement DSHEA, may not incorporate any part of any final Codex dietary supplement guideline in a regulation or policy, if to do so would contravene DSHEA.

[Attorney Milton Bass examined this Federal Statute and he did not agree with this assessment. He said that the word "inconsistent" is not defined, and the statute opens a Pandora's box as to how it would be interpreted. What if something isn't IN our law? Would it then be inconsistent? No. You can't say it would be inconsistent if its not in our law. Also, it is TRUE that a finalized Codex standard can't be DIRECTLY imposed on the USA. Harmonization doesn't work that way. The way it works is that if a challenge is mounted before the WTO's DSB, this country could be threatened with trade sanctions if we DON'T harmonize. In THEORY, Congress could simply REFUSE to harmonize and could accept the trade sanctions, but since they can be imposed across a broad cross spectrum of different industries not even having anything to DO with the supplement industry, the REALITY is that no country can really afford to accept this penalty, and the threat puts IMMENSE lobbying pressures on Congress to change our laws. These lobbying pressures are comparable to the huge pressures that forced NAFTA and GATT through to start with. We're already seeing news articles doing spin to try to get us to accept the idea of "UL"s even though the concept is scientifically fraudulent, but the problem goes even deeper, due to the efforts to force harmonization to the rapidly emerging EU regs by the TABD and TACD. Bear in mind that the TABD's dietary supplement working group is comprised solely of multinational pharmaceutical interests that want to monopolize the market. Look at the press release in the archives section of CRN's website under news releases re the TABD. Also the TACD is comprised of groups that have publicly stated their intention to repeal DSHEA. These groups include Public Citizen and CSPI. In other words, we're being set up in about 5 different ways for harmonization. CFH has been fully apprised on all of this by IAHF, but they remain tracked in on anything Dennin and Raubicheck tell them even though its very misleading. See also see and ]

COMMENT: The implications of harmonization over the long haul under treaties like GATT and NAFTA are not completely understood. What is clear is that at this point harmonization is each country's choice, and the United States cannot be forced to conform to an international standard that directly conflicts with existing U.S. law (e.g. DSHEA) without the consent of Congress.

[ The implications of harmonization are becoming painfully clear. This is why we had a Battle in Seattle See US Laws Not Safe Section, also see and get the book "Who's Trade Organization?" by Ralph Nader. Due to the threats to our domestic laws exposed via these sources, Congressman Ron Paul introduced the American Sovereignty Restoration Act which would pull us directly out of the WTO, and it needs a huge groundswell of support. As long as CFH accepts any funding from multinational corporate interests, they will never back this bill, yet it is what we so badly need. While it is technically true that there is a Federal Statute which on paper protects our domestic laws, the reality is that it is only a paper tiger, yet CFH would have us believe its rock solid. Its not....]

4. Fiction: Examples of individual nations developing regulations, and responding to specific product concerns are being called "Codex harmonization" efforts (e.g. Norway's restricted regulations on supplements, U.K.'s attempted restrictions on vitamin B6 potency, U.S. proposed restrictions on Ma Huang potency, and Canada's recent actions to increase regulation of herbal products).

[This is NOT "Fiction" , and it IS Codex harmonization, it is a movement in the direction pharmaceutical interests want things to go world wide, and its a very organized process that IAHF and allied groups have documented. IAHF and allied groups have documented visits between countries by regulators from Norway, Australia, and South Africa in an effort to tighten regulations world wide. We have documented the existence of ICDRA, the International Council of Drug Regulating Authorities, a little known UN body that coordinates the actions of the world's FDA's. We have documented harmonization efforts originating through such bodies as the WHO's collaborating centre on drug policy, chaired by Prof Peter Folb of the South African HPB, who was forced to resign his position due to PHARMAPACTS exposes on genocide in S.Africa which Folb orchestrated while simultaneously involved in an organized effort to work as an ethnopirate in order to turn herbs into drugs.]

FACT: The scope of the Codex's work addresses only essential nutrients and does not involve any discussion of herbs or a wide range of dietary supplements.

[This is a VERY misleading statement. I was at a Codex meeting in Bonn in '96 where I witnessed Dr.Yetley of FDA illegally second a Canadian motion to shift all deliberations on herbs completely OUT of Codex, where herbs would at least have been considered foods, as is consistent with US law, over to a secret panel at WHO, which regards all herbs to be DRUGS, (inconsistent with US law), and we have no access whatsoever to any deliberations made at WHO, in contrast to Codex where we can at least have SOME access. Alex Schauss did very deliberate spin control about what even happened at that Codex meeting in Bonn in '96 as it wasn't in the best interests of the EAPC if the public even knew the truth about what happened there re herbs, so he wrote a 17 page seemingly all encompassing report which intentionally ommitted any reference to Yetley's illegally seconding the Canadian motion to shift herbs out of Codex and over to WHO as it helped EAPC for that to happen. Also, Codex regards substances that don't have RDA's as "drugs" and that covers a lot of substances that Codex just ignores entirely, but doesn't want us to have access to except by prescription. Look very closely at what is happening with the EU Vitamin Directive.]

Citizens remains seriously concerned about specific incidents, both in the U.S. and abroad, that restrict consumer access to dietary supplements (eg: the UK B6 issue and the U.S. ma-haung issue). However, there is no evidence that these nations' internal actions are related in any way to efforts to force international harmonization or to influence developing Codex guidelines, especially when the examples involved fall outside the purview of issues under Codex's consideration.

[The first sentence here is reasonable sounding, setting people up to be deceived by the second sentence which is an outrageous statement, obviously intended to be deceptive, and it is totally false. We see visitation between countries by regulators all the time to discuss vitamin regulations, and they have one goal: to ratchet up the regulations world wide. This denies the existence of ICDRA at the UN which helps to coordinate the actions of the FDA and its sister regulatory bodies world wide. This also denies the influence of the TABD and TACD to harmonize the laws. We can document visitation by regulators from Norway and Australia to S.Africa, and we can name names. We can also document visitation by Precious Mutoso of the S.African HPB to Canada, and we know what these visits were for. They were about harmonization, about making all the laws the same. See "U.S. and European Leaders Agree on Principles to Harmonize Dietary Supplement Regulations" ]

It is important to remember that the proposed Codex guidelines are being hotly contested, are in the process of change and have yet to be finalized.

[Yes, it is true that they have yet to be finalized, but it is also true that we're being set up for harmonization yet CFH has been actively trying to anesthetize people on the issue, and they're not focused on it at all, and don't want us to look too closely at what is going on because then we could see it and we'd try to stop it!! They are doing nothing to get signatures on the Anti EU Vitamin Directive Petition at even though CRN has a press release at which is titled "U.S. and European Leaders Agree on Principles to Harmonize Dietary Supplement Regulations". CFH is doing nothing whatsoever to call attention to this because some of their supporters don't want them to because that would hurt their business interests. For the same reason CFH is doing nothing to get Codex oversight. The sentence above is intended to put people to sleep on the issue, and that is HARDLY in our best interests.]

COMMENT: The right of consumers to freely access dietary supplements must be balanced against issues of safety and efficacy. While Citizens For Health sees no proof of a worldwide "conspiracy" to force harmonization, we do recognize that some government agencies continue to look for reasons to restrict access to dietary supplements, and this is our primary concern.

[Oh no? Well they sure don't want us to pay any attention to which is titled "U.S. and European Leaders Agree on Principles to Harmonize Dietary Supplement Regulations" This statement seems to indicate that CFH thinks there ARE legitimate issues of safety and efficacy that should limit access. This is the attitude that multinational corporate interests would say are important if they wanted to steal these substances by raising the regulatory hurdles.]

How to take effective action: When communicating with government officials and agencies about Codex, it is important to know the facts. This educational piece gives you a strong basis with which to communicate your concerns to the U.S. Codex office, President Clinton, legislators, and the FDA.

[It would be nice if these WERE facts, too bad they're NOT!!! This CFH piece constitutes spin control, mind control, thought control. In short, it is propaganda.]

Action Items: 1. Become a member of Citizens For Health, and encourage others to do the same! That way you can stay abreast of new developments and support our work on this important issue.

[Wrong. CFH is a controlled opposition group that is actively misleading people on the Codex vitamin issue. Like any good controlled opposition group, they can appear to be legitimate, and 95% of what they do in fact IS, its that 5% via spin control that people must be wary of.]

2. Distribute this informational piece to friends, family, co-workers, community organizations, religious groups, health food store owners, etc.

[Not a good idea at all. See above.]

3. Write/Call/Fax/Email a brief letter to: the FDA, the US Codex Office within the USDA, President Clinton, your US Senators and Congressmen. Let them know that you "want them to support the efforts of the U.S. Codex delegation, through the FDA and the USDA to work for the protection of DSHEA and that you oppose the proposed Codex guidelines to restrict potency of and health claims one essential nutrients."

[ The US Codex delegation, led by unelected bureaucrat Beth Yetley of FDA, has been actively setting us up to lose in a trade dispute, while CFH has been actively supporting her efforts, and doing absolutely NOTHING to expose them.]

4. If you are a business person dealing with dietary supplements, contact Citizens so that we can connect you with the appropriate trade association and international network for you to help in this effort.

[ Yeah, thats right, so CFH can hook them up with CRN, NNFA, and IADSA which are doing nothing to stop Codex, but which are actively setting us up for harmonization world wide. While CFH is busy hooking companies up with these pharmaceutically dominated trade associations, IAHF is hooking companies up with true grass roots health freedom organizations while providing accurate information about what is REALLY going on re Codex. In the meantime, CFH is doing spin control against our efforts via such bogus articles as The Great Supplement Scare Are Herbal Remedies Under Attack From a Vast International Conspiracy?

[In light of the truth exposed herein, please assist IAHF in doing this work with a donation. CFH on the surface looks very impressive as they address a host of issues which IAHF has no time for being as small as we are. CFH is dangerous. They appear to be doing everything just right, and 95% of what they do IS good, its that 5%, that deceptive SPIN that you have to watch out for, and with that spin they can help usher in a pharmaceutical takeover, unless you help me expose whats going on. Please forward this alert widely.

IAHF needs and deserves more clients and donations.
IAHF PO Box 625 Floyd VA 24091 USA