CODEX Archives

Interesting update reference Codex in California

[ CODEX Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!
 
        

Interesting update reference Codex in California

Posted by cezanne [1073.1463] on July 17, 2005 at 05:28:52:

Forwarded From Rima Laibow, M.D.:

"...the citizen who thinks he sees that the commonwealth's political clothes are worn out, and yet holds his peace and does not agitate for a new suit, is disloyal; he is a traitor."
- Mark Twain

Lawrence,

California Congresswoman Susan Davis has introduced a new bill into the US House of Representatives that could hurt you and your loved ones. Bill HR 3156 gives the FDA astonishing power to remove nutrients from the market if there is ANY risk associated with their use.

HR 3156 allows nutrients to be removed from the marketplace even if no harm has been caused by them and despite any benefit they may provide to consumers!

It sets up a wildly non-level playing field by creating an Adverse Events reporting requirement for nutrients (which are known to be astonishingly safe and free of risk or complication) while there is no such reporting requirement or system for pharmaceuticals (which are the 3rd leading cause of death in the US when used according to instructions).

And the bill would cost an estimated $5 million per year. You are supposed to pay for a bill that could remove your supplements not only with your tax dollars, but also by giving up your health rights provided by the Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act (DSHEA) passed by unanimous consent by Congress in 1994!

DSHEA classifies nutritional supplements as food, and thus prevents the implementation of upper limits on nutrients. DSHEA is the key legislation that safeguards health freedom and access to natural health products.

HR 3156 would destroy DSHEA.

Is HR 3156 Timed to Coincide With Passing of
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Vitamin and Mineral Guideline?
HR 3156 specifically excludes vitamins and minerals from the things it covers.

Why?

Because just a few days after Susan introduced HR 3156 into the House, the CODEX Vitamin and Mineral Guideline was due to be passed. So there was no need to fuss with them: it was already a done deal thanks to the CODEX Vitamin and Mineral Guideline.

There is a vast body of biochemistry and nutritional literature that makes it clear what the health consequences of passing HR 3156 are (ask me for references by sending me an email).

Consequences of Susan Davis HR 3156 for Your Health
If allowed to become law in the US, HR 3156 would allow the elimination of nutrients from the marketplace, which would:


Shorten your lifespan and that of your children and parents
Increase your likelihood of developing cancer
Increase your likelihood of developing diabetes
Increase your likelihood of developing Parkinson's disease
Increase your likelihood of developing Alzheimer's disease
Increase your likelihood of developing potentially lethal allergies
Increase your likelihood of developing osteoporosis
Increase your likelihood of developing macular degeneration and
Increase your likelihood of developing and dying from chronic disease

Contact Your Congressional Delegation
and Tell Them to Oppose HR 3156
As shown by the list above, HR 3156 is not in the best interest of the people of America. The first order of action for any health conscious person like yourself is to contact your Congressional Delegation now and make sure that they understand that voting for this tyrannical bill will mean the end of their political career. And, by the way, this atrocity also needs to signal the end the careers of its co-sponsors: Waxman of California and Dingell of Michigan.

It's important to learn about destructive bills like HR 3156 and to know who the people behind them are. An armed citizenry is the best defense against tyranny. So lets get down to some education.

Why I Believe Susan Davis is Seeking
to Destroy DSHEA With HR 3156
Whose business is Ms Davis minding? Whom is she serving at her table? Obviously not you and I. Let me explain. Keep in mind that HRF 3156 would destroy the natural health product-supporting DSHEA.

HR 3156 would destroy DSHEA, and Susan Davis must know this. But who is Susan Davis? Who is the woman behind HR 3156? Let's find out.

Davis was elected to the US House of Representatives from California's 53rd District. She has been involved in public service for years, first in her lovely hometown of San Diego and then as a member of the California State Assembly.

Here is what the official Davis web site has to say about Susan:

Susan's interest in public affairs grew out of her experiences as a social worker, parent, youth mentor, and military spouse. Growing up, Susan remembered her father, a pediatrician, sometimes leaving the house in the middle of the night to care for his young patients. Through these life experiences, Susan developed an understanding of and deep commitment to improving her community and country.

Born in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Susan grew up in Richmond, California. She graduated from the University of California at Berkeley with a degree in sociology. She then earned a master's degree in social work from the University of North Carolina.

After graduation, Susan and her husband, Steve, lived in Japan with their two children, Jeffery and Benjamin, while Steve served as a doctor in the Air Force during the Vietnam War.

Residents of San Diego since 1972, Susan and Steve have been married for 38 years. They have two grandchildren, Henry and Jane.

Altogether, Susan Davis sounds like a nice lady with a public spirit and a devotion to doing the right thing, doesn't she? And, for all I know, maybe she is. Maybe on the private levels she is a terrific mom and grandmother and, for all I know, grows beautiful roses and gives great dinner parties, too.

So here we have a seeming nice lady with a long marriage and a public spirit serving her district in the House. So the issue is not whether Susan Davis is a nice person or not. The question that our health freedom hangs on due to Susans HR 3156 is: whose work is Susan doing?

Why would Susan (who understands the high personal cost of illness from her physician father and husband's professional lives) introduce a bill designed to gut DSHEA and result in increased human suffering as a result of loss of natural health products from the free market? After all, her bio says that she is interested in health. She is probably interested in the nutrition of her children and grand children, too.

But just whose health is Susan Davis protecting?

Why would her HR 3156 Bill get introduced into the House of Representatives on June 30, 2005, just days before the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission was set to adopt the restrictive and pro-illness Vitamin and Mineral Guideline?

And why would that bill specifically exclude vitamins and minerals? If you're going to be regulating natural health products, isn't it a little bit odd to omit vitamins and minerals?

Well, let's see what sort of district Susan represents. In addition to the lovely Torrey Pines State Reserve, Sea World and Balboa Park, here's who lives in her neighborhood and who's coming to dinner at Susan's well-laid table:

The San Diego metropolitan area is a leader in biomedical research and development, with a significant concentration of research institutions and biotechnology firms - such as Salk Institute, Scripps Research Institute, and the University of California, San Diego.

There are more than 1,400 life scientists working in the region, three biological institutions granting life science PhDs. One of these institutions is ranked among the top 20 nationally in life sciences research.

The San Diego area has 33 publicly traded biotech companies and includes 31 firms with more than 100 employees. Sixty-one of these firms are members of the national Biotechnology Industry Association.

Wow! Susans district seems to be swarmed with pharmaceutical and biotechnology firms. Exactly the kind of companies that are behind CODEX ALIMENTARIUS and the attack on natural health!

According to ColorBasePair, there are 72 pharmaceutical firms in lovely San Diego, 11 more in nearby La Jolla, and that's just for starters! So Susan's table is serving up a royal feast for Big Pharma. All of these are in Susan Davis district!

Can you guess whose health she's taking care of?

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.

Why Big Pharma Is So Worried About
Natural Health Products and Treatments
Big Pharma is, contrary to popular belief, not in the business of keeping you or your loved ones truly healthy. Pharmaceutical dr*gs are useful in covering up symptoms of disease, but they do not actually cure anything at the root. In fact, as shown by the Vio *x scandal, dru*s can often produce further health problems with their side-effects.

Although much of the raw materials for your nutritional supplements are produced by Big Pharma or its subsidiaries (and often distributed by them, too), all that nutrition stuff is bad for the business of multi-national drug-making, because it can solve health problems at the root. Solving health problems at the root would make pharmaceuticals to cover symptoms unnecessary.

Scientific literature and clinical experience, as well as common sense, offer clear evidence that when people have ample levels of nutrients they simply do not develop the chronic, degenerative diseases which are the result of long-term toxicity (from our polluted air, water, and food) and under-nutrition.

Without disease, people do not seek drugs.

Chronic degenerative diseases are where the money is for the pharmaceutical industry.

As is often the case, follow the money.

Macular Degeneration as Excellent Example
of Disease Profiteering Instead of Curing
Take macular degeneration (MD), for example. When I graduated from Medical School in 1970, by definition MD never afflicted anyone younger than 60 and was very rare in people under 65. Besides, MD was pretty uncommon in the population at large.

Today, we have an epidemic of MD, making it the leading cause of blindness in the US.

I have personally seen a family in which an 18 year old daughter and their 21 year old son had both lost their sight to MD!

It has become commonplace in people in their 40's and is often seen in 30 year olds.

Why this epidemic of Macular Degeneration in only a few decades? How come when I was in Medical School in the 60s, I did not come across Macular Degeneration?

Very simple:

MD has become so common due to chronic under-nutrition leading to cellular degeneration. The vicious cycle of cellular degeneration kicks in because the body lacks the nutritional tools to correct the degeneration, and the state of the cells deteriorates until a critical point is reached where the damage is far gone. Damage accumulates and one more blind victim of nutritional scarcity struggles to get through life in the dark.

You may say "food in our society is plenty" so how can there be under-nutrition?

Most of what passes for food is industrially processed and has no semblance to nutritious food. Most vitamins and minerals have been stripped from food to prevent spoilage on store shelves. There are all sorts of chemical additives for flavor as well as preservation. Thus, in terms of nutritional content, our food is literally starving our cells even as we get bigger and bigger at the waist line.

Now, as for all other diseases of chronic under-nutrition, there have been pharmaceutical dru*s developed for Macular Degeneration. They don't work particularly well and they are VERY expensive, but there they are. And more are in the pipeline.

If Macular Degeneration was cured through nutritional medicine, if the causes of this epidemic were addressed and solved at the root, would there be an opportunity for the drug companies to sell their drugs?

The answer is no. Big pharma depends on disease.

Nutrients that Cure Throw a Monkey
Wrench into the Business Model of Big Pharma
If you are a pharmaceutical company and you are going to spend the better part of a billion dollars developing a drug for something (say Macular Degeneration) and getting it approved for market, don't you want a lot of that something around so you can sell a lot of your drug?

Yes you would.

Here is the logic of the pharmaceutical business model:

1. "Selling drugs is our business."

2. "We make massive money from our business."

3. "Healthy people don't need drugs."

4. "Nutrients make and keep people healthy."

5. "Nutrients are bad for business."

6. "Let's get rid of nutrients."

Or, in more practical terms: lets make sure that CODEX ALIMENTARIUS supports our business worldwide by eliminating nutritional products and treatments. And, then let's go have dinner at Susan's table!

When Susan Davis proposes a bill that would allow haphazard removal of nutritional supplements from the market, it appears that she is serving no one but those sitting around her table.

What Should Supporters of Natural
Health Products Do About HR 3156?
We need to make sure that HR 3156 does not get passed. Protect DSHEA and tell Congress that you take this issue seriously enough to make sure that health defenders will go back to Congress and Big Pharma friends will not be re-elected.

Please take action now and send this quick letter to Congress about Susan's HR 3156. Sending the letter is very easy and takes only a minute or two. Click below:

http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/new-letter

I wish to tell you, Lawrence, that I am delighted that you have chosen to subscribe to our mailing list. It's a good decision. Now you will remain comfortably in the loop about the latest news on health freedom. And you'll be updated about important emergency calls to action to protect yourself and your family from tyrannical measures. Emergency calls to action like Susan Davis HR 3156.

So send that letter to your Congressional Delegation now and let us continue working together to defend health freedom. And please tell everyone you know to do the same. Simply send them to the link above (ending with new-letter) and tell them that HR 3156 would destroy existing American law (DSHEA) and jeopardize access to natural health products.

Wishing you a great weekend.

Yours in Health and Freedom (from Rome),

Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
rima.laibow@healthfreedomusa.org
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org

P.S. General Stubblebine (my husband) and I will be heading home today from Rome after spending a couple of weeks there to observe the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission (CAC) meeting. We'll send you a full report with our observations next week.





Re: Interesting update reference Codex in California

Posted by PhillyLady [2051.1599] on July 17, 2005 at 10:47:14:

In Reply to: Interesting update reference Codex in California posted by cezanne [1073.1463] on July 17, 2005 at 05:28:52:

Hi Cezanne:

They're attacking from all sides, aren't they? Here is the actual language of bill H.R. 3156:

--------------------------------------------------

Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act (Introduced in House)

HR 3156 IH


109th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 3156
To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to dietary supplements.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 30, 2005
Mrs. DAVIS of California (for herself, Mr. WAXMAN, and Mr. DINGELL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to dietary supplements.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act'.

SEC. 2. DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS; PRODUCT LISTING; REPORTING, POSTMARKET SURVEILLANCE, AND OTHER PROVISIONS REGARDING SAFETY.

(a) In General- Chapter IV of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 341 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following section:

`SEC. 416. DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS; PRODUCT LISTING; REPORTING, POSTMARKET SURVEILLANCE, AND OTHER PROVISIONS REGARDING SAFETY.

`(a) Limitation on Applicability- Notwithstanding the other subsections of this section, this section does not apply to any dietary supplement that meets the conditions described in paragraphs (1) and (2), as follows:

`(1) The supplement bears or contains one or more of the following dietary ingredients:

`(A) A vitamin.

`(B) A mineral.

`(C) A concentrate, metabolite, constituent, extract, or combination of any vitamin or mineral.

`(2) The supplement does not bear or contain--

`(A) an herb or other botanical, an amino acid, or a dietary substance for use by man to supplement the diet by increasing the total dietary intake; or

`(B) a concentrate, metabolite, constituent, extract, or combination of any ingredient specified in subparagraph (A).

`(b) Product Listing- Every person who is required under section 415 to register with the Secretary with respect to manufacturing or processing a dietary supplement shall, in the form and manner prescribed by the Secretary, report to the Secretary twice each year, once during the month of June and once during the month of December, the following information:

`(1) A list of each dietary supplement manufactured or processed by the person for commercial distribution in the United States, other than dietary supplements previously included on a list reported under this subsection by the person.

`(2) The labeling for each of the dietary supplements on the list.

`(3) A listing of the major ingredients of each dietary supplement on the list (including active ingredients, as applicable), except that the Secretary may require the submission of a quantitative listing of all ingredients in such a supplement if the Secretary finds that such submission is necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act.

`(4) If, since the date the person last made a report under this subsection (or if the person has not previously made such a report, since the effective date of this section), the person has discontinued the manufacture or processing of a dietary supplement included on a list reported under this subsection by the person--

`(A) notice of such discontinuance;

`(B) the date of such discontinuance; and

`(C) the identity of such supplement.

`(5) Such other information describing the dietary supplements as the Secretary may by regulation require.

`(c) Reporting of Information on Adverse Experiences-

`(1) SERIOUS EXPERIENCES- Each person who is a manufacturer or distributor of a dietary supplement shall report to the Secretary any information received by such person on serious adverse experiences regarding the supplement. Such a report shall be submitted to the Secretary not later than 15 days after the date on which the person receives such information.

`(2) INVESTIGATION AND FOLLOW-UP- A person submitting a report under paragraph (1) on a serious adverse experience shall promptly investigate the experience, and if additional information is obtained, shall report the information to the Secretary not later than 15 days after obtaining the information. If no additional information is obtained, records of the steps taken to seek additional information shall be maintained by the person.

`(3) AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY- In addition to requirements established in this subsection, the Secretary may establish such requirements regarding the reporting of information on adverse experiences as the Secretary determines to be appropriate to protect the public health. The Secretary may establish waivers from requirements under this subsection regarding such information if the Secretary determines that compliance with the requirement involved is not necessary to protect the public health regarding such supplements.

`(4) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this subsection:

`(A) The term `adverse experience regarding a dietary supplement' means any adverse event associated with the use of such supplement in humans, whether or not such event is considered to be related to the supplement by a person referred to in paragraph (1) who obtains the information.

`(B) The term `serious', with respect to an adverse experience regarding a dietary supplement, means an adverse experience that--

`(i) results in death; a life-threatening condition; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization; a persistent or significant disability or incapacity; or a congenital anomaly, birth defect, or other effect regarding pregnancy, including premature labor or low birth weight; or

`(ii) requires medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes described in clause (i).

`(d) Postmarket Surveillance- The Secretary may by order require a manufacturer of a dietary supplement to conduct postmarket surveillance for the supplement if the Secretary determines that there is a reasonable possibility that a use or expected use of the supplement may have serious adverse health consequences.

`(e) Authority to Order Demonstration of Safety-

`(1) IN GENERAL- If the Secretary has reasonable grounds for believing that a dietary supplement may be adulterated under section 402(f)(1), the Secretary may by order require the manufacturer to demonstrate to the Secretary that the supplement is not so adulterated.

`(2) DISTRIBUTION OF PRODUCT PENDING COMPLETION OF PROCESS-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Subject to subparagraph (B), a dietary supplement may not be considered adulterated under section 402(f)(1) during the pendency of a demonstration under paragraph (1) by the manufacturer of the supplement and during the pendency of the review under paragraph (4) by the Secretary with respect to the demonstration.

`(B) IMMINENT HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY- This subsection does not affect the authority of the Secretary under section 402(f)(1)(C).

`(3) TIMEFRAME FOR DEMONSTRATION-

`(A) IN GENERAL- An order under paragraph (1) shall provide that the demonstration under such paragraph by a manufacturer is required to be completed not later than the expiration of 180 days after the date on which the order is issued, except that the Secretary may extend such period if the Secretary determines that an extension is appropriate. Any information submitted for such purpose by the manufacturer after the expiration of the applicable period under the preceding sentence may not be considered by the Secretary, except to the extent that the Secretary requests the manufacturer to provide additional information after such period.

`(B) COMPLETION DATE OF DEMONSTRATION- A demonstration under paragraph (1) shall be considered complete on the expiration of the applicable period under subparagraph (A), or on such earlier date as the manufacturer informs the Secretary that the manufacturer has completed the demonstration, or on such earlier date as the Secretary reasonably concludes that the manufacturer has no further information to provide to the Secretary as part of the demonstration or that the manufacturer is not in substantial compliance with the order under paragraph (1).

`(4) REVIEW BY SECRETARY- Once a demonstration under paragraph (1) by a manufacturer is completed, the Secretary shall review all relevant information received by the Secretary pursuant to the demonstration or otherwise available to the Secretary and make a determination of whether the Secretary considers the dietary supplement involved to be adulterated under section 402(f)(1). Such determination shall be made not later than 180 days after the completion of the demonstration.

`(5) REQUIREMENTS REGARDING DEMONSTRATIONS- The Secretary may, by order or by regulation, establish requirements for demonstrations under paragraph (1).

`(6) RELATION TO OTHER PROCEDURES- In the case of a dietary supplement with respect to which the Secretary has not issued an order under paragraph (1), this subsection may not be construed as preventing the Secretary from acting pursuant to section 402(f)(1) to the same extent and in the same manner as would apply in the absence of this subsection. In the case of a dietary supplement with respect to which the Secretary has issued an order under paragraph (1), a determination under paragraph (4) that the supplement is not adulterated under section 402(f)(1) does not prevent the Secretary from making a determination, on the basis of additional information obtained by the Secretary, that the supplement is so adulterated.

`(f) Sales to Minors; Significant Risk-

`(1) CRITERIA- Not later than the expiration of the two-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of the Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act, the Secretary shall by regulation establish criteria for making a determination that a dietary supplement may pose a significant risk to individuals who are under the age of 18 (referred to in this section individually as a `minor').

`(2) PRODUCT DETERMINATION; PROHIBITED ACT- The Secretary may, by order or by regulation, make a determination described in paragraph (1) with respect to a dietary supplement. Effective upon the expiration of a period designated by the Secretary in publishing such determination in the Federal Register, the act of selling the dietary supplement to a minor shall be deemed to be an act which results in such supplement being misbranded while held for sale. During the two-year period referred to in paragraph (1), an order making such a determination may be issued notwithstanding that criteria have not yet been established in accordance with such paragraph.

`(g) Recordkeeping on Safety Issues-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall by regulation require manufacturers of dietary supplements to maintain records regarding reports of serious adverse experiences under subsection (c) and records regarding compliance with section 402.

`(2) RETENTION PERIOD- Regulations under paragraph (1) shall specify the number of years for which records required in such paragraph are required to be retained, except that, if under section 402(g)(1) the Secretary makes a determination that expiration date labeling is necessary for dietary supplements, records regarding dietary supplements in a lot shall be retained for not less than one year after the expiration date of supplements in the lot.'.

(b) Prohibited Acts-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 301 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(hh) The failure of a person to comply with any requirement under section 416, other than an order under subsection (e)(1) of such section.'.

(2) ADULTERATED DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS-

(A) ORDER REGARDING DEMONSTRATION OF SAFETY- Section 402 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 342) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(i) If it is a dietary supplement and the manufacturer of the supplement fails to comply with an order of the Secretary under section 416(e)(1) that is issued with respect to the supplement.'.

(B) CERTAIN COURT PROCEDURES; DETERMINATION OF UNREASONABLE RISK- Section 402(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 342(f)) is amended--

(i) in subparagraph (1), by striking the matter after and below clause (D) of such subparagraph; and

(ii) by adding at the end the following subparagraph:

`(3)(A) For purposes of clause (A) or (B) of subparagraph (1), the Secretary shall consider a dietary supplement or dietary ingredient as presenting an unreasonable risk of illness or injury if the Secretary determines that the risks of such product outweighs its benefits, as indicated by a relative weighing of the known and reasonably likely risks of the product against its known and reasonably likely benefits. In the absence of a sufficient benefit, the presence of even a relatively small risk of a serious adverse health effect to a user may be considered by the Secretary as unreasonable.

`(B) A determination by the Secretary under clause (A) with respect to the risk of a product may be made on the basis of any science-based evidence of risk, without the need to prove that the substance has actually caused harm in particular cases. The Secretary shall consider any relevant evidence including but not limited to scientific data about the toxicological properties of a dietary ingredient or its mechanism of action; known effects of pharmacologically related compounds, including those regulated as drugs; the results of clinical studies, including observational studies; and adverse event reports.

`(C) A determination that a product presents an unreasonable risk may be made under clause (A) by the Secretary even though there are uncertainties as to the levels of a dietary ingredient that may present a risk.'.

(3) TRADE SECRETS- Section 301(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331(j)) is amended by inserting `416,' after `414,'.

(c) Inspection Authority- Section 704(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 374(a)) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting after the second sentence the following: `In the case of any person who manufactures, processes, packs, transports, distributes, holds, or imports a dietary supplement with respect to which an order under section 416(e)(1) has been issued, the inspection shall extend to all records, files, papers, processes, controls, and facilities bearing on whether the dietary supplement is adulterated under section 402(f)(1).'; and

(2) in paragraph (2), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking `third sentence' and inserting `fourth sentence'.

SEC. 3. EDUCATION PROGRAMS REGARDING DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS.

(a) Health Care Professionals-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Health and Human Services (referred to in this section as the `Secretary'), acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, shall carry out a program to educate health professionals on the importance of reporting to the Food and Drug Administration adverse health experiences that are associated with dietary supplements.

(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- For the purpose of carrying out paragraph (1), there is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, in addition to any other authorization of appropriations that is available with respect to such purpose.

(b) Consumers-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, shall carry out a program to educate consumers of dietary supplements on the importance of informing their health professionals of the dietary supplements and drugs the consumers are taking.

(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- For the purpose of carrying out paragraph (1), there is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, in addition to any other authorization of appropriations that is available with respect to such purpose.



Follow Ups:


Re: Interesting update reference Codex in California

Posted by gabriella [180.890] on July 17, 2005 at 12:21:01:

In Reply to: Interesting update reference Codex in California posted by cezanne [1073.1463] on July 17, 2005 at 05:28:52:

Thanks so much for letting us know about this Cezanne!!! I summarized the most important points of your post and added clickable links for the websites to contact congress and to see the sample letter. I hope you don't mind, just want to make it as easy for people to act as possible.

gabs

~~~


SUMMARY:

California Congresswoman Susan Davis has introduced a new bill into the US House of Representatives that could hurt you and your loved ones.

Bill HR 3156 gives the FDA astonishing power to remove nutrients from the market if there is ANY risk associated with their use.

HR 3156 allows nutrients to be removed from the marketplace even if no harm has been caused by them and despite any benefit they may provide to consumers!

And the bill would cost an estimated $5 million per year. You are supposed to pay for a bill that could remove your supplements not only with your tax dollars, but also by giving up your health rights provided by the Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act (DSHEA) passed by unanimous consent by Congress in 1994!

DSHEA classifies nutritional supplements as food, and thus prevents the implementation of upper limits on nutrients. DSHEA is the key legislation that safeguards health freedom and access to natural health products.

HR 3156 would destroy DSHEA.

If allowed to become law in the US, HR 3156 would allow the elimination of nutrients from the marketplace, which would:

Shorten your lifespan and that of your children and parents
Increase your likelihood of developing cancer
Increase your likelihood of developing diabetes
Increase your likelihood of developing Parkinson's disease
Increase your likelihood of developing Alzheimer's disease
Increase your likelihood of developing potentially lethal allergies
Increase your likelihood of developing osteoporosis
Increase your likelihood of developing macular degeneration and
Increase your likelihood of developing and dying from chronic disease

Contact Your Congressional Delegation
and Tell Them to Oppose HR 3156
As shown by the list above, HR 3156 is not in the best interest of the people of America, and make sure that they understand that voting for this tyrannical bill will mean the end of their political career.

To locate House of Representatives
Find your House of Representative contact

To locate Senators
Find your Senate contact

Please take action now and send this quick letter, Send this sample letter to Congress about Susan's HR 3156.


P.S.
Susan's district seems to be swarmed with pharmaceutical and biotechnology firms, and her father and husband are doctors. This would explain her orientation.



Follow Ups:


Re: Interesting update reference Codex in California

Posted by Mary [4028.1989] on July 17, 2005 at 22:17:58:

In Reply to: Interesting update reference Codex in California posted by cezanne [1073.1463] on July 17, 2005 at 05:28:52:

Thank you, Cezanne! Have you seen the National Health Federation's website on Gov/t Legislation?

Mary

Follow Ups:


Re: Interesting update reference Codex in California -- Archive.

Posted by Walt Stoll [93.1889] on July 18, 2005 at 06:23:23:

In Reply to: Interesting update reference Codex in California posted by cezanne [1073.1463] on July 17, 2005 at 05:28:52:

Thanks, Cezanne.

Political medicine at it's finest!

Walt

Follow Ups:


Re: Interesting update reference Codex in California

Posted by Happygal [2062.2033] on July 18, 2005 at 06:40:17:

In Reply to: Interesting update reference Codex in California posted by cezanne [1073.1463] on July 17, 2005 at 05:28:52:

Hi,

This is crazy! How come nobody is introducing bills protecting supplements and legislating freedom of choice????

Best wishes,
Jan

Follow Ups:


[ CODEX Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!