Fwd: Vitamins: Will they be regulated as drugs?

[Guest guest]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43024

 

Vitamins: Will they be regulated as drugs?

 

Some warn of draconian measure by world body, others roll eyes

 

 

Posted: February 25, 2005

1:00 a.m. Eastern

 

By Ron Strom

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

 

While e-mails circulating about the imminent

banning of over-the-counter vitamins and minerals

in the U.S. are overly hysterical and in some

cases downright false, food-supplement activists

still are skeptical about new guidelines likely

to be put into effect later this year by a

U.N.-linked global commission.

 

As with many e-mail warnings passed through the

ether, the current letters include some accurate

information but with overblown conclusions and

misleading predictions.

 

One such warning talks of new global regulations

overriding U.S. law. Though they theoretically

could be used as a tool by the World Trade

Organization, the guidelines under consideration

would not supersede regulations that govern what

supplements will be available at local

health-food stores in the U.S.

 

Those who distribute the warnings, however, are

convinced that Americans could be seeking a

doctor's prescription to get their usual vitamin

E dosage in the not-too-distant future.

 

All the anxiety centers around the Codex

Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food

Supplements, which likely will be finalized in

July at a meeting of the Codex Alimentarius (food

code) Commission in Rome. The commission,

established in 1963 by the Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations and the World

Health Organization, develops the international

food code that intends to ensure the safety of

food, and provides regulations for global trade

of food products.

 

The supplement guidelines were finalized in a

meeting of the Committee on Nutrition and Foods

for Special Dietary Uses in Bonn, Germany, in

November. The meeting has been described as a

struggle between those nations that see

supplements as " food, " such as the U.S., and

those that see them as " drugs, " such as most of

the European countries. Observers say the final

product saw the Europeans' viewpoints win out on

most issues.

 

" Under Codex authority, these guidelines are

optional suggestions, not a mandatory trade

standard that must be followed in trade between

countries, " explains Suzan Walter of the American

Holistic Health Association on the group's

website.

 

However, Walter points to powers of the World

Trade Organization to use the non-mandatory

guidelines in trade disputes, which could compel

losing parties to adopt certain global

regulations, such as the Codex guidelines.

 

" Therefore, the regulations in the guidelines

must be taken seriously, " she writes.

 

Walter says the biggest concern in the

guidelines is that they will limit the dosage

amounts of common vitamin and mineral supplements

to " safe " levels. It has yet to be determined

what those levels are.

 

Meanwhile, in the European Union, the EU Food

Supplements Directive is set to take effect on

Aug 1. Though there is a list of 28 " safe "

vitamins and minerals that will continue to be

sold in EU countries, there are 200 substances

that will be restricted. Activists in the U.S.

feel such restrictive policies are precursors to

what could occur on this side of the Atlantic.

 

Stateside activists also are concerned about

legislation that was introduced two years ago to

regulate certain supplements in the U.S. Though

the bills died when the 108th Congress ended in

December, new versions are thought to be ready

for introduction in March or April.

 

One of the bills from last Congress would have

granted the Food and Drug Administration

authority to regulate supplements in the same way

that it regulates over-the-counter drugs.

 

These bills would weaken the Dietary Supplement

Health and Education Act of 1994, which gave

consumers who use supplements certain protections

against government regulations.

 

Many of the warning e-mails mention bill numbers

from last Congress that no longer apply. The new

bills, assuming they are introduced, likely will

have different numbers.

 

Walter points out her concern about a line

included in the Federal Register having to do

with U.S. regulations.

 

She writes: " The United States Federal Register,

Oct. 11, 1995, FDA Policy on Standards, states

that 'where a relevant international standard

exists, or completion is imminent, it will

generally be used in preference to a domestic

standard. ...' If this is still the FDA policy,

once the Codex guidelines are finalized this

summer, will we find the FDA working to use this

against the Dietary Supplement Health and

Education Act? "

 

Some in the U.S. welcome stricter regulations on

supplements. Snopes.com, a website that exposes

myths and hoaxes, said in an analysis of the

Codex scare that Americans should be subject to

more safeguards.

 

" Despite their presence on store shelves, not

all dietary supplements are safe for consumers to

use, let alone are beneficial to their health, "

the analysis said. " Products can be 100 percent

natural yet deliver a deadly payload, as have

some in the past. Lacking regulation of such

ingestibles, there is no protection afforded

consumers, and authoritative-looking labels are

no guarantee that what is being vended in those

bottles they envelop is not harmful. Under

current law, dangerous supplements get onto the

market and stay there, with serious physical harm

resulting among those who use them, as was the

case with ephedra, which caused strokes, heart

attacks, and upwards of 150 deaths before the

Food and Drug Administration was finally able to

get it out of the stores. "

 

The piece goes on to sing the praises of the

legislation introduced in 2003, saying it " looked

to regulate dietary nostrums by imposing quality

and safety standards on them, and by giving the

FDA the ability to take them off the market

before a great number of folks have been harmed

by them. "

 

The site doesn't see a threat to impose the

regulations based on the United States'

membership in the WTO, saying the standards would

only come into play when American manufacturers

of dietary supplements " look to vend them on the

international market. "

 

Snopes notes: " What [the Codex Alimentarius

Commission] seeks and what it can do are very

different things. It has no power to force its

will on any nation. Codex standards are

voluntary, which means if the U.S. doesn't adopt

them, they will not govern the regulation of

vitamins, minerals or dietary supplements in the

USA. "

 

Some analysts see the new guidelines as another

step toward world government and believe the

large pharmaceutical companies are behind the

effort. If those companies, by working through

the World Trade Organization, the argument goes,

can get supplements to be regulated as

prescriptions, they can cash in on a new and

lucrative market.

 

Consumer advocate Tim Bolen recently pointed the

finger of blame at pharmaceutical giant Merck.

 

The company " controls the manufacturing and

distribution of the base ingredients of the only

supplements that will be available in Europe -

and possibly North America " once international

regulations take effect, he wrote.

 

" This is battle for world domination - period.

Either 'we the people' run our governments, and

decide world policy, or big multinational

corporations will - through the WTO. "

 

 

Ron Strom is a news editor for WorldNetDaily.com.

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

 

The individual is supreme and finds its way through intuition.

 

Sepp Hasslberger

 

 

My page on physics, new energy, economy: http://www.hasslberger.com/

 

Critical perspective on Health: http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/