CODEX Update
July 6, 2005
Rome, Italy
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
The Natural Solutions Foundation, sponsor of HealthFreedomUSA.org
It’s hot and stuffy in the large meeting room of the FAO Building (Food and Agriculture Organization) and the seats for the public have so little leg room that an average size person sitting there for a whole day endures physical discomfort nearly equal to the intellectual discomfort created by what is going on.
Since I wrote my last blog update yesterday at noon, here is what has happened in the CODEX chamber during the deliberations of “the world’s most important food standards body”:
1. The CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission (CAC) Chairman notified the CODEX body of the serious lack of finances available to the CAC and noted that the nearly $6M US supplied by the FAO was matched by less than $2M from the World Health Organization (WHO) and noted that this put significant pressure on the CAC to carry out its work. He appealed to Committees and other CODEX structures to use the wide range of scientific resources available to them only sparingly since they consume resources quickly. Interestingly, CAC defends its actions with its mantra that CODEX is “Science Based” so this restriction has a direct bearing on the ability of its work to be, in fact, “Science Based”
2. The WHO Under Secretary for Food Safety addressed the Chairman’s remarks by noting that the way to get money was not “to gripe about it here in the meeting” but to pressure the WTO member nations to demand more money for CODEX. She shared the fact that the amount of money allotted by the WTO in their annual budget amounted to about 2% of the total WHO budget. Then the Undersecretary went on to note that the WHO was not particularly convinced that CODEX was making much of a contribution to world health and unless and until that were true, it would not be easy for CODEX to get much more money out of the WHO.
As interesting as this was to hear, it gets much more interesting below. Keep reading!
3. When CAC resumed this morning, the first substantive discussion successfully avoided an attempt to define consensus. CAC operates on consensus and only when all attempts fail to reach consensus (or when a member calls the question and demands a vote) is actual voting used. Voting, in CODEX land, is seen as destructive to the process. (Of course, I thought that democracy involved voting and then going along with what the winner wants. Just goes to show you what I don’t know!) In fact, later in the day when Singapore did just that, demanded a vote, immense pressure was used to urge him to change his mind.
Now, in CODEX land, everything possible is decided by consensus: theoretically everyone agrees to whatever and we are just a happy family. Oddly enough, given the loosey-goosey nature of its decision-making, the other part of the CODEX mantra, besides “CODEX is science-based” is that it is “rule based”. But it is an odd rule base which does not define what serves for rules in CODEX.
In the wonderful and wacky world of CODEX, consensus has at least 3 meanings. In my world, it means everyone is comfortable enough with a particular choice that they are willing to go along with it. In CODEX land it can mean that everyone has been heard (once) or that there is no sustained opposition. Or it means something else entirely, depending upon the needs of the moment. Of course, since the chair has to push the button to turn on your mike or otherwise recognize you, if he/she does not do that, there is consensus because you were not heard from in the example in which everyone does what they are told and you never get to speak.
So, after a lot of fancy footwork and avoidance of the delegations which wanted to define CODEX since CODEX runs on consensus and there was a series of strongly non-consensual issues coming up, the Chairman managed to get himself a victory by skillfully avoiding the issue of of consensus (which could throw a monkey wrench in the works if people knew what it was and could thus judge for themselves if there were a consensus or not!)
4. In 2002 the WHO and FAO apparently decided that they were spending a very large amount of money to support CODEX and they were not at all sure that they were getting much for their money and were not convinced that CODEX was doing much for world health. So they commissioned a study by a group of consultants and the consultants came up with 20 recommendations. Here is No. 18:
The [CODEX ALIMENTARIUS] Commission should consider carefully whether nutrition should play a role in CODEX, and if so, what that role should be.
Take a moment to go back and re-read that recommendation. The world’s leading food standard setting body, charged with the full food safety and food regulatory responsibility of the world is asked by a group of consultants nearly 40 years after its founding, if it has any relationship to nutrition and, if it does, to please figure out what it might be.
Fair takes away my breath, that one!
Now, in CODEX land, countries make their remarks on paper and at the time of the meeting. Here is what the Republic of Korea has to say to this recommendation:
“The Republic of Korea believes that the report underestimated the role of Nutrition by focusing its role on nutrition labeling and foods for special dietary use. We would like to stress that Nutrition works are important in CODEX in relation to the protection of Consumer’s health and all of these works are not related to either labeling or foods for special dietary use… Therefore we assert that both CCNFSDU (The only CODEX Committee dealing with nutrition and the one where the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline was passed without dissent yesterday) and CCFL (the CODEX Committee on food labeling) stand together in CODEX and each committee had better carry out its role and works continuously. Bet we believe that it is necessary to clarify demarcation of Nutrition work between CCNFSDU and CCFL before new work will start.”
Another show stopper. Food, nutrition, food, nutrition. Hmmmmm. Do you think they might have some relationship? Maybe we need a scientific commission to study the proposition, as several countries suggested.
After lunch, CAC devoted its attention to, as Monty Python says, “Something completely different!!”
When CAC reconvened, it was time for the Great Parmesan Debate, Take 5 (or 6, perhaps). Here’s the deal: The Vitamin and Mineral Guideline passed without a whimper (well, China did say that nutrition should be left to nations based on diet and need and a Non Governmental Organization spokesperson pointed out procedural violations to the body ruled by science (forget individual biological variation and need) and rule (forget procedural irregularities). But parmesan cheese, now THERE is something really important!
The Great Parmesan Debate has been going on for more than 5 years. The problem? Italy owns the term (“Intellectual Property” ) and if someone else, say Bolivia, makes Parmesan and calls it that, then the consumer will not be protected. I kid you not!
On this issue of monumental significance, the entire body was in an uproar for hours and hours. The European Community would not allow the name to be used but would allow the “Extra Hard Grating Cheese” standard to go ahead. No go. We want “Parmesan!” You can’t have it! It’s mine! and on and on and on.
Finally, Singapore had had enough and called the vote. Stillness descended and since it was Singapore’s procedural right to have the vote today, the Chairman asked if Singapore would allow the definition of today to extend until tomorrow so the various sides could try again to reach consensus (still undefined) and avoid a “destructive” vote. Destructive vote? Didn’t we learn that voting is part of democracy? Wrong Civics Class, I guess.
And so to consensus and perhaps to bed.
What does all this mean? It means the bureaucrats running this process for their countries have been hoodwinked. It means that they are being herded down paths that lead straight to food disaster and they do not know it.
Why do I say they do not know it? Remember, the mantra is “Science based, Rule based”. And CODEX needs to think about whether it has a relationship to nutrition.
Stir that in with the bias of the committee which has been doing all the heavy lifting around so-called “nutrition” and you realize that the delegates have been sold a bill of goods by being told that “Risk Assessment” can be used to determine appropriate nutritional levels. It is “science”, after all. So it must be “OK” to use it.
Well, one of the things I have been doing is creating rapid relationships with delegates and pointing out to them what Risk Assessment means to their people. Their eyes widen in genuine horror and, when they get it, they really get it.
One of the other things I realize is that CODEX is a vulnerable institution. We will pursue that awareness but you can understand that I would rather not say much about that at this point.
What can you do? Simple, use our online tools to WRITE TO CONGRESS AND TELL CONGRESS THAT YOU WANT YOUR HEALTH FREEDOMS PROTECTED! If you have already used the form letter we provided, change it and send another version of the same message. And carry out the other 5 action steps, too.
We can win this one but only if you and everyone you know takes the task of telling Congress (and signing the Citizen’s Petition) very, very seriously. Grass roots will keep CODEX from our lives. It is not too late. For the sake of everyone you love, act now. Oh, yes, you’ll have more to do as the battle progresses, but we need you right now to simply take action to flood Congress with the message that CODEX ALIMENTARIUS is an usurpation of our individual liberties! Congress will be coming back into session next week. Let’s send them a summer surprise: activated constituents!
Yours in health and freedom,
Rima E. Laibow, MD
P.S. Help keep HealthFreedomUSA.org running with your donations. Your donations are our only source of funding.
CODEX On-Site Report
Rules of the Game: CODEX Rules! CODEX Say “Countries May Not Look Out for Their Own interests: it undermines CODEX Credibility!”
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Rome, July 3, 2005
It is hot in Rome and General Stubblebine have now been awake for about 40 hours straight. So it was annoying, but hardly surprising, that I found it almost excruciating to keep my eyes open and my mind focused on the dry, niggling items which the US Delegation pre-CODEX meeting ground slowly over. You know how it feels when you know that you have to be sharp and your mind feels like a bowl of overcooked pasta. But I snapped out of my semolina snooze when I heard that a document to which the US Delegation was committed was being passed around when Dr. Ed Scarbrough, the US CODEX Manager, noted that this document had been agreed to at the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission pre meeting at which agenda items were adopted. Hence, this document represents part of the US’s CODEX Policy. Here it is, in full (with my emphasis added):
Rules Based Decision Making
It is critical for the integrity of CODEX that we abide by the rules and procedures we have set for ourselves.
CODEX’s primary objective is the protecting of the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade and not stopping existing trade.
To do this we must rely on sound science and objective criteria in the establishment of standards.
No member or group of members should be allowed to block the work of CODEX or the acceptance of science-based standards solely de to political/economic considerations.
If we allow this to happen, we undercut the credibility that we have worked so long and hard to establish. It is this credibility as a science based organization that led the membership of the WTO to give CODEX its special status in the realm of global trade.
Two concrete examples are before the CAC this week. First is the consideration of the CMMP proposal to begin new work in the elaboration of a new standard for Parmesan Cheese.
International trade in parmesan cheese exceeds all the criteria agreed upon by the CMMP for the elaboration of individual cheeses standards.
Parmesan cheese also meets all the criteria for new worked applicable to commodities as defined in the CODRX procedural Manual. FAO and WHO legal counsel agree that geographic indicators should not restrict CODEX decision making.
Decisions made by CODEX should follow the rules and procedures established by CODEX. In the case of parmesan cheese, these criteria clearly have been met.
Unfortunately, some CODEX members have tried to block the elaboration of this standard.
Instead, they would try to introduce new principles related to intellectual property right into the CODEX decision making process. Such considerations are not appropriate for an independent, science-based and rules-based standards organization.
Similar thinking has blocked the inclusion of a particular species of sardines in the sardine standards, despite overwhelming evidence that it should be considered as an analogous species that fits well within the existing standard.
It is unacceptable to allow the political motivations of a subset of CODEX members to block the elaboration of the standards which meet the criteria established by CODEX members.
Rather, we need to follow the rules and procedures we ourselves have established.
Otherwise, we will undercut the high level of credibility that we have earned over the years.
End
What does that all mean?
Problem 1: It means that CODEX ALIMENTARIUS is beginning throw its considerable weight around to force nations to abandon what is good for them because although what is good for CODEX may NOT good for a nation and “It is unacceptable to allow the political motivations of a subset of CODEX members to block the elaboration of the standards which meet the criteria established by CODEX members.” Unacceptable to whom?
CODEX is telling WTO member nations that is it bad form for nations to protect themselves, their industries and their own health, political and economic well being lest “we undercut the credibility that we have worked so long and hard to establish….” Oh, I get it: CODEX’s credibility is more important than jobs, industries, cultural integrity and income of people. What is wrong with this dangerous picture?
From where I sit, looking out for their own political, economic and domestic good is exactly what nations are supposed to do. If you take that away from countries, you take away their sovereign rights to govern and regulate themselves. Now why would CODEX want to forbid that? See “Who is Behind CODEX” at www.HealthFreedomUSA.org for a clear picture of why, and by whom, nation states are being urged to give up their ability to manage and protect themselves lest it undermine the credibility of CODEX [sic].
Problem 2. You will also note that early on the document states, “CODEX’s primary objective is the protecting of the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade and not stopping existing trade.”
Note that the second paragraph says, “CODEX’s primary objective is the Protecting of the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade and not stopping existing trade.” But reading through the document, CODEX’s mission is clearly stated by saying, “No member or group of members should be allowed to block the work of CODEX or the acceptance of science-based standards solely de to political/economic considerations.
If we allow this to happen, we undercut the credibility that we have worked so long and hard to establish. It is this credibility as a science based organization that led the membership of the WTO to give CODEX its special status in the realm of global trade.”
So we are not talking about consumer protection or health enhancement, we are talking about trade regulatory power through the muscle of the World Trade Organization (WTO) regardless of whether the involved countries agree that it will be acceptable to them. If a World Government body were making this declaration, it could sound no more universally compelling or self righteous than this document to which the US CODEX Manager has committed the US.
The document also makes it clear that new concepts and intellectual property rights which might arise in international or domestic trade basis (or a domestic one, for that matter) have no place in CODEX. Circumstances are not permitted to alter cases in CODEX Land.
Problem 4. Oh, yes, one other thing: the premise of the entire document (and CODEX itself) is that CODEX is based on science and so is irrefutable. Well, it is based on science, all right: JUNK SCIENCE (commonly knows by some as tobacco science. Risk Assessment science works well for toxins but had to be retooled to fit nutrients even slightly.
Risk Assessment work fine for toxins: As far as nutrients go, it has no place in their evaluation. So if the whole CODEX deal is that it must go forward because it is science feeling See Risk Assessment and Nutrients, A Toxic Brew on www.HealthFreedomUSA.org for more information.
Tomorrow we can expect the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (which is based on this junk science and nothing else) to come up for ratification. Rest assured that I will let you know what happens because I will be there.
Remember, the Natural Solutions Foundation brings you up to the minute news from the 28th CODEX ALIMENTARIS Commission meeting via
1. our Daily CODEX Update blog
2. Live broadcast July 6 and 13 on our internet radio show, FREE U.S./FREE US! 7-8 PM Eastern at www.FICAA.org.
And remember, Congressional support is building. Please visit www.HealthFreedomUSA.org/action and take the 6 easy steps (which include two urgently important letters to Congress urging them to follow US laws to keep America CODEX –FREE!
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Laibow
Natural Solutions Foundation
The latest campaign at HealthFreedomUSA consists of a letter urging Congressmen and Congresswomen to take action on the illegal pro-CODEX policy of the U.S. CODEX Office. People can send this letter via this link.
And boy, have people sent the letter!
The response has been astounding. In just one week, we have over 1000 letters sent from our web site by Americans concerned about CODEX ALIMENTARIUS, to Congressmen and Congresswomen across the country. At the time of writing, our activism software shows that 1167 letters have been sent.
This is wonderful! We at the Natural Solutions Foundation thank everyone who has taken action so far.
If you haven’t take action yet, simply click here and fill out the boxes, hit the send button, and you’re done. It’s very simple, yet very powerful. Your voice counts. Everytime a Congress representative reads a letter about CODEX, we all move one step closer to fortifying the wall to protect health freedom from the CODEX threat.
We must work together, you and us at the Natural Solutions Foundation, to build a fortress that cannot be breached, and if breached, we must be able to launch a massive media and legal campaign to expel the invader. We are currently laying the groundwork, and your help is crucial.
By now, because of grass-roots action taken via HealthFreedomUSA.org and other health freedom web sites, there is probably not one member of Congress who does not know about the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS threat to health freedom.
And most Congress representatives are hopefully by now aware that CODEX as “consumer protection” is a blatant fabrication by those who stand to profit from CODEX . CODEX serves the interests of certain industries, and it is time that this fact was known by as many Americans as possible.
Our web site shows that people will act when given the facts and when inspired to take action where there is hope that their action will make a difference.
Is there something else you can do, if you’ve already sent that letter to Congress? Yes, there are two things you can do right now:
1. Spread the word – tell at least 10 people today about HealthFreedomUSA.org. Don’t worry about what to say (I know CODEX can be tough to explain). Instead of trying to explain the CODEX problem simply refer them to the web site and let it take care of the rest. That’s what the web site is for! Go to your email inbox right now, and from your address book, drop in 10 or more email addresses into the BCC line, and send the link to HealthFreedomUSA.org, asking your contacts to visit the site. It is a good idea to also ask them to take action on the 6 Easy Steps.
2. Help us continue our work to protect your health freedom. Support our work with your much needed donations.
And keep the faith strong. We at the Natural Solutions Foundation stand firm and ready for whatever is coming. And I feel confident knowing that many of you reading this are with us, by our side in spirit.
Yours in Health and Freedom,
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation (sponsor of HealthFreedomUSA.org)
P.S. We will be in Rome next week as observers of the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission meeting. Italy, here we come! We will be broadcasting radio, live from location, as well as writing frequent blog updates. Stay tuned for more information. Make sure you are subscribed to our mailing list for updates in your inbox.
Every cloud has a silver lining. We in the health freedom movement might just have been blessed with one.
China, Australia and Venezuela want to make itty, bitty changes to the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG) before it is ratified next July. Not that they mind it being ratified, you understand. They still want the VMG to be ratified. But, according to the Food Navigator, each of the three countries wants to introduce minor changes (a single word in one case) and this may be our silver lining!
Here’s how it could work: the CODEX Committee on Nutrition and Food for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU) which includes special foods like baby formula containing Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and trans fats, is intending to do the same harm to our dietary supplements. Restricting them to ultra low doses of very few nutrients and making all others illegal globally is perfectly fine with those three countries. However, they need to make some bureaucratic changes to make the death and chronic degenerative illness they are regulating into existence a bit more precise.
Here’s where we start to see that silver lining, folks: having reached step 8 of the process, the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG) is ripe and ready for ratification (those are the CODEX University 3 R’s: ripe, ready, ratify) at the upcoming CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission (CAC) meeting.
But wait!
If the guideline is changed at all, so much as by a jot or a title, it may not be approved at the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission meeting. It may have to go back to the CCNFSDU committee to be re-approved!
YES!
That’s our opportunity. If it is sent back to committee because of the demands of China, Australia and Venezuela, it cannot come back around for ratification for at least another year, probably two.
And what can we do with that year or more? Just think. We have already mounted a significant legal challenge in the form of our emergency Citizen’s Petition which was presented to the US CODEX Office on June 1, 2005. Three Congressmen sent a bipartisan joint Congressional Letter to the US CODEX Office in support of that Citizen’s Petition. You have joined in, too, haven’t you? No? Click here and do it right now. It’s more important than ever and I’ll explain why.
You see, the US CODEX Office has announced its illegal policy to support the VMG in Rome next month. It has been warned by the Natural Solutions Foundation that this is an illegal policy (because it would go against established U.S. law such as DSHEA) but it has adopted it anyhow. The US CODEX Office is knowingly breaking the law and encouraging its delegates to do the same by supporting the VMG in Rome!
What does Congress have to say about the fact that we are sending a delegation of people to an international meeting with instructions from the United States Government to break US law?
Well, that’s where you come in.
Every single US Senator and Representative has been notified by the Natural Solutions Foundation that the US CODEX Office is pursuing an illegal policy, that they have been notified of the illegality of the policy and that they are breaking the law by doing so. And we have urged Congressional overview on the matter. Now here’s your part: go to www.HealthFreedomUSA.org/congress-stop-codex/ and follow instructions to send a letter to your local Congress representative. And then send the action page to everyone in your email address book using the “Email to Friend” button on the page itself.
What an opportunity: there are 3 countries who support the Vitamin and Mineral Standard who are delaying the ratification process. Let’s get our Congress to help them! Let’s give the US CODEX Office a “climb down” position: “OK, we’ll stop pushing for ratification this July. We know that it is illegal. We’ll help get the measure back to committee so we can sneak it over on you next time!” That’s fine with me, Ladies and Gentlemen of the CODEX Delegation. Just watch what we can do in the time before the next ratification attempt.
But right now, you need to tell Congress that it is NOT OK for the US CODEX Office to pursue an illegal policy and that you (and we) will be watching how they safeguard our health freedom.
Don’t delay: go to www.HealthFreedomUSA.org/congress-stop-codex/ and follow instructions to send a letter to your local Congress representative. And then send the action page to everyone in your email address book using the “Email to Friend” button on the page itself.
Oh, and by the way, we will be in Rome to observe the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission meeting and we need your financial support to do that: it is expensive but very important that we are there to see, and report accurately what happens.
Yours in Health and Freedom,
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
P.S. Make sure to donate to support the work of the Natural Solutions Foundation in protecting your health freedom.
(PRWEB) June 14, 2005 — The Natural Solutions Foundation’s Medical Director, Rima E. Laibow, MD, announced that Congressional support is building to compel the U.S. to follow its own laws in adopting policy and directing delegates to the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission meeting in Rome next month. Although the U.S. has announced its intention to support the restrictive Vitamin and Mineral Guidelines, members of Congress urged the U.S. to oppose or postpone the adoption of the CODEX Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG) since the US is legally forbidden from harmonizing with any international law which violates U.S. law. The VMG violation of the 1994 Dietary Supplements Health Education Act (DSHEA). Under DSHEA, limits cannot be set on for nutrients which are treated as foods, not drugs.