Natural Solutions Foundation
The Voice of Global Health Freedom™
Report from the Codex Alimentarius Commission Meeting
July 7, 2010
Ractopamine™ is a dangerous drug called a Beta Agonist. It is too dangerous for use in – or contact with – humans. Contact must be prevented, according to the FDA, by protective gear, careful post-use washing, and other cautions.
Yet, somehow, the US, along with 24 other nations, allows Ractopamine™ to be fed to cattle, pigs, turkeys, etc., up to the moment of their slaughter. Why? Because they put on a great deal of weight very quickly increasing the price paid for each animal to their industrial, factory food growers. The FDA says that, magically, Ractopamine™ is safe for use in food animals.
China and 159 other countries disagree. Those countries include the 27 members of the EU, whose Food Safety Agency determined that the cardiac, cancer and reproductive risks are far too great to allow it to be used in food animals.
Since the US, serving its corporate constituency, is the dominant force in Codex, it comes as no surprise that Codex wants to approve Ractopamine™ over the strenuous objections of China, the EU and other nations.
To make sure that China did not have a level playing field on which to voice its objections, the US actually went so far as to deny the Chinese delegate a visa to attend the Codex Committee on Food Additives meeting at which the groundwork was laid for approval of this toxic additive. Later the Chinese were told since they had not objected at the meeting at which they they had been excluded, their objections were not valid. Logical, yes?
Applying its customary pressure, the US managed to get the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives to approve Ractopamine™ and produce 4 Maximum Residual Limits (MRLs) for ratification here at this CAC meeting today.
Objection was enormous and meeting after meeting was held outside of the regular hours to twist arms. Of course, it helps in this arm twisting that the Codex Chair, Karen Hulebek, is from the US.
Here, first, is the debate up to the dramatic moment when Codex make it clear that it really, really does not want us — the public observers from the Natural Solutions Foundation — here. Of course, that tells us how very important it is for us to BE here!
Chair: Can CAC adopt the 4 Ractopamine™ MRLs?
China: “We opposed MRLs on the first day [of this meeting]. Now the Chair proposes to adopt them. In order to facilitate this, China has made the greatest possible concession on the basis of a footnote which we were willing to have adopted. We have made lots of consultations and compromises over the last several days. We have not reached consensus on the footnote and some people could not approve the footnote.
Your view [Madam Chairwoman], anyhow, is a combination of the views of several countries. Even on that basis we failed to reach consensus, given that China’s minimum objections have not been met, we do not have any other option than to oppose the adoption of the Ractopamine standards.”
EU: “As we were on Monday, we are still opposed to the MRL adoption on ractopamine. We have had very constructive and productive discussion but we did not achieve a consensus and must oppose adoption of MRLs.”
US: “Earlier this week we heard clearly from JECFA that the issue to adopt the MRLs is no longer a food safety issue. After years of study, JECFA and CCCF have said that there is no food safety issue. Countries should not be allowed to stop adoption of standards on the basis of their own political agendas. However, we did hear a scientific problem with lung MRL [from China on Monday, noting that lung is consumed in China and is very high in Ractopamine™-treated animal] so work should go forward on this standard [to adopt the MRLs]. For the US the answer is clear: we support adoption of all Ractopamine™ MRLs without any footnotes.”
Canada: “We, too, note the decision that this commission took at its last session. We appreciate the significant work undertaken by JECFA and commend our Chinese colleagues submitting data to JECFA. However, JECFA has made it clear that the proposed MRLs are appropriate and in that context we support that adoption.
We have, however, heard the objections of China and others and draw attention to [a Codex standard] which recognizes that where a member government has a view different from that of Codex, while it should follow Codex, it can base its standards on something different and for those who opposed this standard, we encourage the application of these principles.”
[REL: this is, of course, the Codex Two-Step Process that we’ve reminded the nations of the world can protect them against political gaming such as with Ractopamine™]
Norway: “Norway will associate with ourselves with the statement made by China and the EU. We appreciate the work to reach consensus on a footnote. We are in opposition to the adoption of the MRLs.”
Mexico: “We recognize the Codex Alimentarius as a scientific decision-based body. Codex has said there is no problem [with Ractopamine™ MRLs] and therefore we support adoption.”
Korea: “We believe that Codex assures food safety to domestic market. We feel that further delaying adoption of Codex standards of Ractopamine is only a war of attrition. It is better to have Codex standards than not so we support adoption.”
Brazil: “We believe that adoption should be conducted on scientific position so we support adoption.”
Russia: “We stated our opposition on Monday. Today we received instruction from our government and are strongly opposed to adoption of residual levels of Ractopamine™. We believe that the principle here is to protect consumers and not harm them. So we propose to postpone adoption until further information makes it clear that it is safe. We have to reach real consensus.”
Japan: “Considering the discussion so far, we are of the view that it is time to reach certain consensus on this matter.”
Switzerland: “We have the opportunity to express our position on Monday. We are strongly opposed to the adoption of the standard on Ractopamine™.”
Chile: “We are eager to strengthen the Codex process. Now the Codex is in doubt because we are denying a scientifically based determination of MRL. WTO says that if we have a scientific basis for an MRL we MUST adopt it. There is a scientific basis and we can adopt the standard now.”
Croatia: “we strongly support position of EU [opposing Ractopamine™ MRLs).”
South Africa: “When we spoke on Monday we tried to bring to this august house that we consistently said that we base decisions on some scientific advice. I always think of a case when a country exports on the basis of its results from a lab and when the results are saying something else, it questions the laboratory. Here we are consistently questioning the advice of JECFA. Today we want to question the science. JECFA has advised [Codex] since 2008, and last year we said based on additional information we would put the decision [to approve Ractopamine™] off for another year, so take the information from China to JECFA and still their answer is the same. So now the question is whether JECFA is good enough to give us scientific advice. If I question it now, then I am saying JECFA is not good enough for us. We believe that the right decision would be for all of us to adopt these MRLs.”
Philippines: “We sustain our support for the proposed JECFA MRLs for Ractopamine™. This is consistent with established daily intake.”
Dominican Republic: “We supports what has been said by Chile, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil and we support approval of MRLs where JECFA is our scientific basis. Were we to ignore it , we would be ignoring the scientific progress brought to us by JECFA.”
Rwanda: “Let us be guided by science rather than by conscience of emotion. JECDFA was commissioned by this house so let us respect the work that was done.”
Zambia: “A lot has already been spoken. I just wish to repeat what I said on Monday. Codex created JECFA……
INTERRUPTION BECAUSE SEVERAL GUARDS CAME AROUND AND DEMANDED THAT GENERAL STUBBLEBINE AND I LEAVE OUR SEATS, WHERE WE HAD BEEN FOR 3 DAYS, AND INSISTED THAT WE LEAVE TO SIT IN A TOTALLY EMPTY SECTION RESERVED FOR THE – OTHER THAN US – NON EXISTENT PUBLIC OBSERVERS!
WHO DID NOT WANT US HERE AND WANTED TO SHOW THAT WE WERE NOT APPRECIATED? PERHAPS DR. CLAUDE MOSHE, A FORMER CHAIR OF THE CODEX COMMISSION WHO GLEEFULLY ANNOUNCED THAT OUR APPLICATION FOR OBSERVER STATUS HAD BEEN TURNED DOWN AT A PREVIOUS CAC MEETING DESPITE THE FACT THAT NSF MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR NGO OBSERVE STATUS?
PERHAPS KAREN HULLEBECK, THE CURRENT CHAIR OF THE CAC WHO MAY NOT HAVE LIKED OUR COMMENTARY IN WHICH SHE COMPARED HER SELF AND HER WORK TO THAT OF MOTHER THERESA, MUCH TO OUR SCORN AND DERISION? PERHAPS THE VERY POWERFUL US DELEGATION WHICH MAY NOT TAKE KINDLY TO THE IDEA THAT WE ARE ACTIVELY SEEKING TO GET THE US OUT OF CODEX?
OR COULD HAVE BEEN THE AMERICAN LAWYER WHO HOLDS ONTO THE “HEALTH FREEDOM” SEAT AT CODEX AND WHOSE EMAIL LIST, SOME SAY, HAS AS MANY AS 15,000 PEOPLE WHO WOULD TRY, AGAIN, TO DEMONSTRATE HOW ‘POWERFUL’ HE THINKS HE IS?
COULD BE ANY OF THEM.
I guess being relegated to this empty zone is better than what happens in Rome where we, alone of all participants of any type, are met with armed guards (!!) to prevent us from talking to delegates (our friends among the health-conscious countries find us anyway). Could be some other admirer of our effective work. Dunno, but it is a tribute to the fact that we are saying what Codex does not want said. And God knows that what they want hidden needs to be said, loudly and frequently. This is a genocidal organization in its roots and, tragically, in its fruits. See “Nutricide” for more on its founding and reason for being: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5266884912495233634#
Who else is saying what they do not want you to know? No one.
Codex, like the current US administration, touts their love of, and commitment to, “transparency”. Well, throwing us out of the computer-enabled seats we had been occupying, meeting us with guards and treating us like lepers is certainly transparent, but not in the way they mean it when they [mis]use the word.
Do you doubt that Codex is determined to create endless suffering and preventable death? Do you doubt it that Codex is committed to, at best, the profit picture of Big Pharma, Big Agribiz, Big Chema, Big Biotech and Big Medica, at best, and all of that plus population reduction at worst? Then consider the junkiest of junk science devoted to creating the totally bogus, but now widely accepted “big lie” of nutrients being dangerous enough to treat as toxins and use “risk management” to “control” and “protect” populations. What that means is that first the Codex Guidelines on Vitamins and Minerals was ratified on July 4, 2005 (Rome, Italy) which stated that nutritional supplements in international trade could not contain more than 115% more of the nutrient than the unchanged food from which it was derived. Then, not satisfied with a level of under-nutrition which WHO /FAO themselves estimate will kill about 3.5 billion people by 2050 due to what they call the preventable, non communicable degenerative diseases of under nutrition, Codex has moved further.(Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases: report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation, Geneva, 28 January — 1 February 2002).
Creating the “voluntary” Nutrient Reference Values or “NRVs” first for labeling purposes to get consumers used to the concept of super low requirements of nutrients by having that information on all food labels, the intent is then, explicitly, to make the NRVs part of the legislative/regulatory global standard. The levels are intended to be so low that no one is impacted by them – in any way. This is worthy of the renowned Dr. Megele!
NRVs are but one of the schemes to degrade and damage your food, your fertility and your survival. The Codex meetings are chock full of ‘em.
Which takes us right back to Ractopamine. Despite the more-scientific-than-thou reliance on the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and it oh-so-incorruptible “science”, the strong opposition of China and the others gave the US another one of its infrequent black eyes. Never mind that European and Chinese studies show that it is dangerous and its use constitutes animal cruelty (to say nothing of human poisoning when consumed). JECFA, the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives, says it’s OK to use this since the US says it’s OK to use it without any safety studies in humans. But, undaunted, after acknowledging that there was, indeed, no consensus about the use of Ractopamine, Chair Karen Hulebak decided to convene a Friends of the Chair group which would give her the results that she wants: adoption of Ractopamine as an additive NEXT year. In fact, she said as much. Remember that this dangerous drug, forbidden in 160 countries has NO PURPOSE in animal rearing other than to fatten the animal through toxic response to the drug and so bring it to market weight sooner. So because 25 countries, including, of course, the US, approve it, and China, the largest producer and consumer of pork, bans it, Codex, a corrupt and dishonest organization, presumes to assert that there could possibly be consensus on its use!
Here is what the FDA package inserts on Ractopamine, which is banned for animal use in 160 countries, say:
No withdrawal period is required in swine or turkeys when treated according to the label.
When mixing and handling Paylean 20, use protective clothing, impervious gloves, and a dust mask. Operators should wash thoroughly with soap and water after handling. If accidental eye contact occurs, immediately rinse thoroughly with water.
The active ingredient in Paylean 20 is ractopamine hydrochloride. Ractopamine hydrochloride is a beta-adrenergic agonist. Individuals with cardiovascular disease should exercise special caution to avoid exposure.
“Appropriate Personal Protective Equipment should be worn, e.g.
laboratory coat, gloves, safety glasses and mask.”
But wait! There’s more!
Here is what Health Freedom Alliance has to say about Ractopamine, its history and the irrational and dangerous approval that the US has given for its use in animals:
FDA approved a livestock drug banned in 160 nations and responsible for hyperactivity, muscle breakdown and 10 percent mortality in pigs, according to angry farmers who phoned the manufacturer. The beta agonist ractopamine, a repartitioning agent that increases protein synthesis, was recruited for livestock use when researchers found the drug, used in asthma, made mice more muscular says Beef magazine. But unlike the growth promoting antibiotics and hormones used in livestock which are withdrawn as the animal nears slaughter, ractopamine is started as the animal nears slaughter.
As much as twenty percent of Paylean™, given to pigs for their last 28 days, Optaflex™, given to cattle their last 28 to 42 days and Tomax™, given to turkeys their last 7 to 14 days, remains in consumer meat says author and well known veterinarian Michael W. Fox.
Though banned in Europe, Taiwan and China–more than 1,700 people were “poisoned” from eating Paylean™-fed pigs since 1998 says the Sichuan Pork Trade Chamber of Commerce– ractopamine is used in 45 percent of US pigs says Elanco Animal Health which manufactures all three products.
How does a drug marked, “Not for use in humans. Individuals with cardiovascular disease should exercise special caution to avoid exposure. Use protective clothing, impervious gloves, protective eye wear, and a NIOSH-approved dust mask” become “safe” in human food? With no washout period?
The same way Elanco’s other two blockbusters, Stilbosol™ (diethylstilbestrol or DES), now withdrawn, and Posilac™ or bovine growth hormone (rBST), bought from Monsanto in 2008, became part of the nation’s food supply: shameless corporate lobbying. A third of meetings on the Food Safety and Inspection Service’s public calendar in January 2009 were with Elanco, a division of Eli Lilly–or about ractopamine.
In fact, in 2002, three years after Paylean™’s approval, the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine’s Office of Surveillance and Compliance accused Elanco of withholding information about “safety and effectiveness” and “adverse animal drug experiences” upon which ractopamine was approved, in a 14-page warning letter.
“Our representatives requested a complete and accurate list of all your GLP [Good Laboratory Practices] studies involving Paylean® (Ractopamine hydrochloride), including their current status as well as the names of the respective study monitors. In response, your firm supplied to our representatives multiple lists which differed in the names of the studies and their status. In addition, your firm could not locate or identify documents pertaining to some of the studies. This situation was somewhat confusing and created unneeded delays for our representatives,” wrote Gloria J. Dunnavan, Director Division of Compliance.
Where was mention of the farmer phone calls to Elanco reporting, “hyperactivity,” “dying animals,” “downer pigs” and “tying up” and “stress” syndromes, asks the FDA letter. Where was the log of phone calls that included farmers saying, “animals are down and shaking,” and “pig vomiting after eating feed with Paylean™”?
But, not to worry. Despite ractopamine’s dangers and the falsified approval documents, the FDA approved ractopamine the following year for cattle–and last year for turkeys.
According to Temple Grandin, Professor of Animal Science at Colorado State University, the “indiscriminant use of Paylean® (ractopamine) has contributed to an increase in downer non-ambulatory pigs,” and pigs that “are extremely difficult to move and drive.” In Holsteins, ractopamine is known for causing hoof problems, says Grandin and feedlot managers report the “outer shell of the hoof fell off” on a related beta agonist drug, zilpateral.
A article in the 2003 Journal of Animal Science confirms that “ractopamine does affect the behavior, heart rate and catecholamine profile of finishing pigs and making them more difficult to handle and potentially more susceptible to handling and transport stress.”
Nor can we overlook the effects of “adding these drugs to waterways or well water supplies–via contaminated animal feed and manure runoff– when this class of drugs is so important in treating children with asthma,” says David Wallinga, MD of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.
The FDA’s approval of a drug for food that requires impervious gloves and a mask just to handle is reminiscent of the bovine growth hormone debacle.
Like rBST, ractopamine increases profits despite greater livestock death and disability because a treated animal does the work of two in a macabre version of economies of scale.
Like rBST, food consumers are metabolic, neurological and carcinogen guinea pigs so that agribusiness can make a profit. And like rBST, “Mothers Of Growing Children” was not marked as a visiting group on the Food Safety and Inspection
But wait! There’s even more! “No clearance period prior to slaughter mandated for ractopamine”
Animals can dine on ractopamine-laced feed right up until they enter the slaughtering chute. There is no required clearance period for this drug as there is with other drugs used by producers. If a clearance period were required for ractopamine, the animals’ unnaturally produced weight gain would evaporate and so would the extra profits. Other drugs used on hogs and cattle require a clearance time of two weeks before the animal can be turned into steaks and chops. This relaxation of clearance time is in the face of industry research which has shown it takes a full seven days for 97% of Paylean to be excreted following a one-time typical dose in pigs. This means that every time one of the traditional American favorite hot dogs or hamburgers is eaten, the person doing the eating will be ingesting ractopamine.
Ractopamine is cardiac stimulator and possible carcinogen
Ractopamine belongs to the class of beta-adrenoceptor agonists. This class of drugs binds to beta-receptors in the heart. The overall effect of beta-agonists is cardiac stimulation, including increased heart rate and systemic dilation of blood vessels. Other drugs in this class have been found to be carcinogenic.
Although there have been no long term studies of the effects of ractopamine in humans and no data exists to determine the outcome of long-term exposure to the chemical, short-term animal studies have shown destabilization of heart rate, reduced testicular and uterine weight, and heart weight increase. Studies using rats have shown reduction in mean litter size and an increase in total number of fetuses that fail to develop.
Since some beta-adrenoceptor agonists have been found to be carcinogenic, Dr. L. Ritter of the Bureau of Veterinary Drugs at Health and Welfare Canada has recommended studies of Paylean’s genotoxicity and pharmacology, and surveys of all non-therapeutic effects of long term use of the drug class in humans. He sees this as essential in the prediction of the consequences from long-term intake of ractopamine residues by consumers of treated products.
In April of this year, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) concluded that the metabolic fate of ractopamine hydrochloride is similar in pigs, cattle, laboratory animals, and humans. Their Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed found from an acute study in dogs that tachycardia and peripheral vasodilatation occurred. Their report specified that NOAELS (no observable adverse effect levels) derived from pharmacological repeated dose studies should not be regarded as a meaningful basis for establishing an acceptable daily intake (ADI) because of the observed down regulation of lung beta-adrengergic receptors. They explained that when evaluating hypothetical risks for consumers, data from acute pharmacological studies would better reflect the consumer situation after intake of a single meal containing ractopamine residues.
According to this panel, significant subpopulations which may be at higher risk for adverse events after beta-adrenergic stimulation require particular consideration when estimating the safety factor. Attempts to derive an ADI so far have not sufficiently taken into account these population subsets at higher risk. The panel concludes that 5 mg, the lowest administered dose, cannot be considered a no-effect dose. Human study cannot be taken as a basis to derive an ADI as previously purposed, and no MRL could be established. The Committee for Medical Products for Veterinary Use concurred with this conclusion. This is in conflict with the Codex Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives which says ractopamine is a safe treatment for all concerned.
Others studying ractopamine have concluded that it may be more toxic after its first pass through the liver because metabolites have their own individual profiles. Ractopamine has not yet been studied after passage through animal livers in the form in which it would be present in the tissues of animals fed with it.
Paylean label says it’s not for human use
There may be no clearing period required before turning ractopamine fed animals into dinner, but the Paylean label suggests significant hazards for humans using the substance. It clearly warns that individuals with cardiovascular disease should use special caution to avoid exposure. Persons mixing and handling Paylean are advised to use protective clothing, impervious gloves, protective eyewear, and NIOSH approved dust masks, as well as to wash themselves thoroughly immediately after handling Paylean.
Other countries say no to ractopamine
Only 24 counties support the use of ractopamine. It is banned in 160 countries including the EU, China and Taiwan, where punishment for its use includes fines and imprisonment. Imported meat is tested and turned away if traces of ractopamine are discovered.
U.S. based Smithfield Foods, the largest slaughter plant in the world, supplies pork to China. A recent industry article announcing a large Chinese order from Smithfield explains how that order will be filled. Since Smithfield has full control over their swine production, they will stop feeding Paylean for three weeks until the pigs test clear. This is an industry admission that fully three weeks of clearance time is needed to export meat that will pass the standards of China for being ractopamine free, a conclusion that is inconsistent with the stance of Codex.
Even the U.S. may be wising up
Smithfield subsidiary, John Morrell has just announced contracts with several large swine farms to supply them with pork that is free of both Paylean and antibiotics. Until this announcement, only small niche slaughtering plants have been interested in processing Paylean and antibiotic free hogs.
Use of ractopamine is cruelty to animals
Animals pay a great price for the chance to boost their producer’s bottom lines. One of the swine producers contracting his Paylean free hogs to Morrell says that Paylean has the effect on pigs that steroids have on body builders. It makes pigs walk like arthritic old men, and act just as crotchety. Pigs on Paylean become emotional, mean and stubborn, and have to be beaten to get them loaded for market and into the chutes for processing.
Chris Birky of Birky Farms says Paylean makes animals extremely agitated and miserable. They become aggressive toward each other, and the people raising them. They lose their ability to cope with stress and can turn purple, shake and even fall down dead of heart attacks during any stressful event. At the same time, their bodies are flooded with stress related hormones that can end up in tissues.”
Wait! The day is not over. The report of the folks who work with Codex to bring you unlimited irradiation for your food stated, just moments ago, that they are working on special irradiation programs for sick people, those with compromised immune function, transplant patients and others who are vulnerable (how about young infants, who do not have a well developed immune system?) so that they can eat more food after it has been irradiated. Oh, joy! And irradiation to make food traceable! And irradiation to make sure that food is clean of filth, like insects. Like insects that were approved by Codex on Monday to comprise not more than 5% of a shipment of apples, perhaps?
There is pseudo logic in Codex. There is pseudo science. There is real insanity and there is real evil. There is, in effect, a globalization of the worst food supply in the entire world: the US food supply.
The US must be taken out of Codex so that we can control our own food supply and get our damaging hand out of the food supply of the rest of the world.
And, oh, by the way, we must gain control of the dangerous, corrupt and deadly FDA which, through its dangerous drugs and dangerous food is killing us at an astounding rate. A little death could be a mistake. A wholesale (and retail!) slaughter is no mistake!
Rima E. Laibow MD
Natural Solutions Foundation