I am experiencing significant technical difficulties so I will give you the news fast and quickly: At the very end of today’s deliberations, the WHO, one of the parent bodies of CODEX, made it clear that CODEX had done little to advance health during its 42 years of existence and that was about to end. The WHO Global strategy for diet, exercise, nutrition and health WOULD be implemented by CODEX and, in order to do that, the two committees of CODEX which could deal with nutrition WOULD deal with nutrition. The focus and mandate of the CODEX Committee on Food Labeling (which prohibits claims of any health benefit) and the CODEX COMMITTEE on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (Dr. Grossklaus’ committee) are going to change their Terms of Reference (focus and mandate) to include nutrition and CODEX will make a yearly report to the World Health Assembly about its progress in implementing the WHO Strategy!
No choice, no way out for CODEX out of this one. Unless, of course, the Bigs (Big Pharma, Big Agra Biz, Big Chema, Big Biotechna and Big Medica) get to twist some arms and fill some pockets.
The battle is not over, by any means, and the war is not won BUT we have some heavies, who, by the way, hold the purse strings for CODEX, on the side of health freedom. Now we need to lobby, support Congressional pressure on the process, become strongly useful to the WHO and FAO in shaping their policies and help the US CODEX Office turn into a bunch of heroes who help CODEX change direction and adopt DSHEA as the international standard.
It can be done. Let’s do it together!
We are already working on strategies domestically and internationally to make sure we do not lose this golden (and totally surprising) gift to our side.
Have you ever heard of anything in the health and health freedom arena which is such sudden, surprising and unexpected good news? I haven’t. This is unprecedented! Let’s make sure we don’t let this wonderful opportunity slip away either through complacency or inaction.
How do we make sure this is made the most of?
Tell everyone you know and, if you have not already done so, follow the six easy steps to protecting America from CODEX and turn up the volume. It seems the WHO and FAO are playing our tune, the tune of health freedom! Let’s all dance!
Yours in Health and Freedom,
Dr. Laibow, in sveltering Rome
P.S. Help keep HealthFreedomUSA.org running with your donations. Your donations are our only source of funding.
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.
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. Me 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” 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 3. 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 (CODEX ALIMENTARIUS uses Risk Assessment science).
Risk Assessment work fine for toxins. As far as nutrients go, it has no place in their evaluation. So the whole idea that CODEX must go forward because it is science, is actually nonsense. See Risk Assessment and Nutrients, A Toxic Brew on www.HealthFreedomUSA.org/additional 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,
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
P.S. Support our trip to Rome with your donations.
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
John Vidal and Tim Radford just published an article in the Guardian (UK) noting that one country in 6 is facing world food shortages this year because of severe drought following climate change (you know, the global warming that the Bush Administration changed the data to disappear it — THAT global warming) and that, since it is the climate that is growing warmer and drier, those are likely to become “semi-permanent” droughts.
They note that the worst hit are “Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Eritrea and Zambia, a group of countries where at least 15 million people will go hungry without aid. The situation in Niger, Djibouti and Sudan is reported to be deteriorating rapidly” according to the Food and Agriculture Organization and the US government. Then they note, “Severe droughts have also badly affected crops in Cuba, Cambodia, Australia, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Morocco, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. According to the UN’s famine early warning system, 16 countries, including Peru, Ecuador and Lesotho, face ‘unfavourable prospects’ with current crops.
In Europe, one of the worst droughts on record has hit Spain and Portugal and halved some crop yields. Both countries have applied to the EU for food assistance. In Morocco the same regional drought has devastated farming and the government fears an influx of people into the cities.
How is that connected to Health Freedom, you might ask? Very simple: under pre Vitamin and Mineral Guideline rules when a famine hit, which the UN Famine Early Warning System Director, Henri Josserand, says we are heading toward, the developed nations of the world would send food and nutrients to feed the famine victims. The afflicted countries would provide nutrient dense bars, powders, mea, biscuits or other items designed to deliver enough food to sustain the starving in a small volume, high nutrient-value delivery system.
Next week, the 28th meeting of the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission is set to ratify the restrictive and, in situations like the one above, absolutely deadly, Vitamin and Mineral Guideline.
Deadly? How can a Guideline kill people?
Here’s how: CODEX standards, guidelines and regulations govern first international trade and then, through a complex mechanism (complex mechanism) domestic laws in counties like ours that have the resources to create our own standards. But countries like the ones named above which do not have those resources are urged to adopt CODEX standards as their domestic law.
So let’s look forward in time a little to the drought-ridden, starving lands of Africa or Central America. These countries have adopted the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline, which makes nutritional density illegal above that determined by Risk Assessment, a discipline of toxicology, to have zero effect on any human being.
(Risk Assessment, by the way, is good for assessing toxins, but it is not the proper science to assess nutrients with – simply because nutrients are not toxins.)
So if the countries experiencing starvation want to provide the nutrient dense nutritional support that keeps their people alive in disaster conditions, that would be against their own laws. Where would they get the nutrients from, by the way, since any company making or marketing those nutrients would have either been shut down or would have converted to making sawdust and sand nutrients: no active principal worth taking, but filler to make up the volume of the tablet or capsule?
Ok, they say, we don’t have the nutrient dense bread or bars or flour or biscuits here in our starving, drought-ridden country, but the developed nations do. Let’s go ask them. Well, the developed nations, for example the US, always like to help out when people are starving and we can feel good about feeding them so we say, “Sure, we’ll send cargo ships or planes or whatever full of nutrient-dense foods to your country.”
Oops! Not so fast!
Remember, this is post Vitamin and Mineral Standard Earth and the international shipment of those items is forbidden. Not only that, but once they got to starving wherever, they would be contraband product, illegal material because, you remember, I am sure, that material which contains anything above the nutrient density chosen by the Risk Assessment people to be unable to produce any discernable effect in the human body is forbidden. Forbidden. Think about that: anything which carries meaningful nutrition is forbidden under the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline. What is it a guideline to?
So now we have one country in 6 facing devastating drought and, if it is ratified next week in Rome, the likely prospect of vast numbers of those people starving to death in horrible suffering brought about by CODEX ALIMENTARIUS’ insane Vitamin and Mineral Standard.
Who lives? Who dies? Who decides? Do you really think that the sponsors of CODEX will not have their own sources of clean, unadulterated food and nutritional supplements? How about the starving children in ____________ (fill in the blank).
So the predictions of the two agencies responsible for creating CODEX at the behest of the UN, the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization, that implementation of JUST the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline ALONE will result in a minimum of 3 billion deaths begins to make a little more sense. The papers and reports of these UN-organizations predict at least one billion people dying through starvation and at least two billion more through the chronic degenerative diseases of under-nutrition legislated by the Vitamin and Mineral Standard.
And your US government has chosen to support this heinous policy for ratification. We believe this is an illegal position, to say nothing of an immoral one, and have entered a Citizen’s Petition to compel them to abandon this insanity.
I will be in Rome next week along with General Stubblebine to observe the US CODEX meeting and will be reporting to you daily on the process and progress.
We have created a special web page for the Rome trip, with links to radio and blog, which you can visit here.
I cannot urge you strongly enough to take action NOW on CODEX ALIMENTARIUS. If the deadly Vitamin and Mineral Guideline is passed, the US Congress will need your pressure and support to undo it: Guidelines and Standards CAN be reopened “if there is scientific basis for doing so”. There certainly is such a basis: it is called Nutritional Science, a branch of Biochemistry.
We need your support to help Congress buck this money-tide of death and suffering, and the way to do something is to take action via the 6 easy steps.
And, oh by the way, if you imagine that the effects of this restriction will spare America, (already under-nourished and over-fed, with a weak collective immune system and dying from drugs and the chronic degenerative diseases they are meant to, but fail to, treat) think again.
When all of your food is adulterated with hormones, antibiotics and veterinary drugs and the residue levels are incredibly high and your food contains DNA from things humans have never eaten before as part of that food (or never eaten before at all) and nuked in a reactor, what do you think your health status will be like? You won’t have nutrient-dense supplements, either. So drought or no drought, we are all on the same earthship.
The CODEX Vitamin and Mineral Guideline is a planet-wide disaster.
The Natural Solutions Foundation is shaping a health defense program for you. Help us to help you by telling everyone you know about this problem and sending them to our action page so they can take action, too. (take action)
And, oh, by the way, please make as generous a donation as you can to support health and health freedom. We are working for you. Consider a monthly pledge. We appreciate it.
Make sure to tune in to our Internet radio show, FREE U.S./FREE US, live from Rome, 7-8 Eastern on www.FICAA.org. July 6 and 13.
The Vitamin and Mineral Guideline may or may not be a “happening thing” but the Natural Solutions Foundation will be in Rome to tell you what is going on.
Yours in Health and Freedom,
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
P.S. You can support the trip to Rome with a donation.