Wild Oats Misinforming Consumers on Codex Refutation detailed

[Guest guest]

IAHF Webmaster: Breaking News, Codex Emergency, Whats New, What to Do

IAHF List: Wild Oats Market is misinforming the vitamin consuming public

just as Whole Foods also is, and with a nearly identical argument. We're

currently attempting to learn who their information source(s) are. They appear

to be

CRN, NNFA and IADSA.

If you shop at Wild Oats, and share my concerns about how they're

misinforming the public, you can reach their Public Affairs Director Yasmeen

Sokal at

303-440-5220 ext 4788 or at <YSokol@...>

Please see my response to what Wild Oats is saying below. Due to the rapidly

approaching fast track vote on CAFTA, IAHF has no choice but to make this

communication public to the IAHF list right away. Please take the action

discussed below by going to

http://www.ymlp.com/pubarchive_show_message.php?jham+325 Visit two websites

and send a couple of form letters with just two mouse

clicks opposing CAFTA/FTAA.

Yasmeen- Please see response below and please let me know what source or

sources Wild Oats is using when making this statement to the vitamin consuming

public.

" Yasmeen Sokol " <YSokol@...>

<sbstraus@...>

Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 10:19 AM

Subject: RE: Question from Straus regarding Other

Dear ,

Thank you for your e-mail regarding CODEX. At Wild Oats, we were also

concerned with this news and have done a significant amount of research on this

subject. We found that there has been a great deal of confusion and

misinformation about CODEX in recent months.

In the US, maximum limits have not been set for vitamins and minerals sold

in dietary supplements. It can therefore look threatening that a global body

such as Codex is talking about maximum levels. For US companies operating

globally the advantages are obviously that maximum levels in other regions of

the world should increase as countries move away from the RDA (Recommended

Daily Allowance)-based approach. For companies who are operating solely or

mainly in the US and who are therefore only concerned about the impact of Codex

on US business, it is doubtful if there will be an impact. The US government

is unlikely to implement maximum levels unless there was strong domestic

pressure to do so (such as political, safety problems etc). It is understood

by

the industry that US authorities claim to have never changed laws or

regulations to conform to standards or guidelines adopted by Codex, and it

seems

extremely unlikely that Codex would stimulate any changes to DSHEA.

The key issue now is the process of establishing an approach to assessing

the risk of vitamins and minerals by WHO (World Health Organization), which

will be an outgrowth of the adoption of CODEX standards for upper limits for

vitamins and minerals. Until this is determined, Wild Oats will continue to

follow this issue and determine at the appropriate time whether we want to take

action with a consumer campaign. At this time, it does not appear that this

is necessary.

Again, we thank you for your support of Wild Oats!

Yasmeen Sokol

Consumer Relations

Wild Oats Markets

800-494-9453

www.wildoats.com

IAHF RESPONSE TO WILD OATS

303-440-5220 ext 4788 is Yasmeen's Extension, .

Yasmeen- I just tried calling you. Please let me know who your information

source is on the Codex issue.

The UK based Alliance for Natural Health, a pan European Health Freedom

organization that is in our new Coalition for Health Freedom, submitted this

detailed paper to the World Health Organization in response to their call for

comments. In their paper, which has been signed off on by such heavyweights as

Jeff Bland, PhD; Alan Gaby, MD and many others, ANH shreds any contention that

what the WHO is doing vis a vis " risk assessment " when it comes to dietary

supplements is the least bit " scientific " :

http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_121.pdf

Moreover, the supplement industry is being misled when they've been told

that the end point for so called " scientific " risk assessment is the " SUL " s

(Safe Upper Levels) generated by the US National Academy of Sciences. Those

numbers are NOT the end point, but they look good because they're comparable to

currently allowed potencies in the USA. Only one organization in the world, the

German Federal Institute of Risk Assessment has done the math called for in

the fine print at Codex to arrive at the second tier of risk assessment, and

as you can see from this table, they've arrived at numbers for " Maximum Safe

Permitted Levels " that are even LOWER than the RDAs in some cases:

http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_145.pdf

I just returned from Washington DC where I attended a conference on the

Codex issue sponsored by the American Association for Health Freedom, (formerly

the American Preventive Medical Assn) http://www.apma.net/aahf/default.asp

Representatives from several health freedom organizations, including

European organizations were in attendance and we have just formed the Coalition

for

Health Freedom, an umbrella group of health freedom organizations that

disagree strongly with a lot of the information coming from vitamin trade

associations on this issue.

I have been elected an officer in this new coalition.

Wild Oats should be circulating this one page alert which urges 2 very

simple actions which all of your customers should be taking right now:

http://www.ymlp.com/pubarchive_show_message.php?jham+325

Wild Oats is apparently buying in to spin on this issue emanating from CRN,

NNFA and IADSA.

These trade associations want one size fits all regulations: ( " approved

once, approved everywhere " ).

To call Codex a " non issue " as you have here totally ignores the reality of

globalization and the fact that the USA has entered into several trade

agreements through which we've agreed to enter into a constant process of

harmonizing our laws to international standards. See this article by Suzanne

, JD

Who Says Whatever Happens at Codex Does Not Affect US Law And Why Do They

Say It? http://www.thelawloft.com/Freedom/050125_us_law.htm

What you're saying ignores the reality of CAFTA and the FTAA. A fast track

vote on CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement) will occur either this

month (May) or in June. http://www.stoptheftaa.org also

http://www.citizen.org/trade/cafta/

CAFTA is a prelude to another fast track vote on FTAA (Free Trade Area of

the Americas) which would create the hemispheric eqivalent to the European

Common Market, which spawned the European Union.

The same architects of the EU want to create something called the WAU

(Western Atlantic Union) in our hemisphere into which every nation in our

hemisphere would be subsumed:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19960501faessay4202/charles-a-kupchan/reviving-the\

-west-for-an-atlantic-union.html

http://www.stoptheftaa.org

They intend to create a hemispheric wide currency called The Amero that

would be our hemisphere's equivalent to the Euro

http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/critical_issues/1999/amero/

The SPS (Sanitary Phytosanitary Measures) Agreement language thats in the

WTO is identical in NAFTA.

CAFTA and FTAA would broaden and deepen the impact of this language, and

this would be the primary means used to force harmonization upon the USA and

all

other nations in our hemisphere to Codex standards.

Its no longer a matter of debate that harmonization to Codex standards is

mandatory- this came out in the Codex meeting on General Principles which just

took place in Paris in July.

The information Wild Oats is dissemenating to the public on this issue is

seriously inaccurate.

You would have people believe that the so called " Scientific Risk

Assessment " process underway at Codex is in FACT scientific, but how CAN it be

when

they're ignoring BENEFITS and only taking a heavily BIASED look at supposed

" risks " in which they're looking at animal data in instances when far more

accurate human date is available, and when they're taking only a very biased

look

at the literature?

Please let me know where Wild Oats has been getting this inaccurate

information so that a dialogue may ensue.

For Health Freedom,

C. Hammell, President

International Advocates for Health Freedom

556 Boundary Bay Road

Point , WA 98281-8702 USA

http://www.iahf.com

jham@...

800-333-2553 N.America

360-945-0352 World

_____________________________

Unsubscribe: http://www.ymlp.com/u.php?jham+arnoldgoreaol

Hosting by http://www.yourmailinglistprovider.com

[Guest guest]

If Codex does not go through this year as Halama of the IAHF claims,

can we expect an apology from him for wasting so much bandwidth? Wild Oats

and the NNFA are spot on with there comments that CODEX is not going to go

into effect in the US this year. It is happening in the EU and other

countries but as I've said many times before it is not going to superceed

DSHEA.

RE: Question from Straus regarding Other

Dear ,

Thank you for your e-mail regarding CODEX. At Wild Oats, we were also

concerned with this news and have done a significant amount of research on

this

subject. We found that there has been a great deal of confusion and

misinformation about CODEX in recent months.

In the US, maximum limits have not been set for vitamins and minerals sold

in dietary supplements. It can therefore look threatening that a global

body

such as Codex is talking about maximum levels. For US companies operating

globally the advantages are obviously that maximum levels in other regions

of

the world should increase as countries move away from the RDA (Recommended

Daily Allowance)-based approach. For companies who are operating solely or

mainly in the US and who are therefore only concerned about the impact of

Codex

on US business, it is doubtful if there will be an impact. The US

government

is unlikely to implement maximum levels unless there was strong domestic

pressure to do so (such as political, safety problems etc). It is

understood by

the industry that US authorities claim to have never changed laws or

regulations to conform to standards or guidelines adopted by Codex, and it

seems

extremely unlikely that Codex would stimulate any changes to DSHEA.

The key issue now is the process of establishing an approach to assessing

the risk of vitamins and minerals by WHO (World Health Organization), which

will be an outgrowth of the adoption of CODEX standards for upper limits

for

vitamins and minerals. Until this is determined, Wild Oats will continue

to

follow this issue and determine at the appropriate time whether we want to

take

action with a consumer campaign. At this time, it does not appear that

this

is necessary.

Again, we thank you for your support of Wild Oats!

Yasmeen Sokol

Consumer Relations

Wild Oats Markets

800-494-9453

www.wildoats.com

IAHF RESPONSE TO WILD OATS

303-440-5220 ext 4788 is Yasmeen's Extension, .

Yasmeen- I just tried calling you. Please let me know who your information

source is on the Codex issue.

The UK based Alliance for Natural Health, a pan European Health Freedom

organization that is in our new Coalition for Health Freedom, submitted

this

detailed paper to the World Health Organization in response to their call

for

comments. In their paper, which has been signed off on by such heavyweights

as

Jeff Bland, PhD; Alan Gaby, MD and many others, ANH shreds any contention

that

what the WHO is doing vis a vis " risk assessment " when it comes to dietary

supplements is the least bit " scientific " :

http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_121.pdf

Moreover, the supplement industry is being misled when they've been told

that the end point for so called " scientific " risk assessment is the " SUL " s

(Safe Upper Levels) generated by the US National Academy of Sciences. Those

numbers are NOT the end point, but they look good because they're comparable

to

currently allowed potencies in the USA. Only one organization in the world,

the

German Federal Institute of Risk Assessment has done the math called for in

the fine print at Codex to arrive at the second tier of risk assessment,

and

as you can see from this table, they've arrived at numbers for " Maximum

Safe

Permitted Levels " that are even LOWER than the RDAs in some cases:

http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_145.pdf

I just returned from Washington DC where I attended a conference on the

Codex issue sponsored by the American Association for Health Freedom,

(formerly

the American Preventive Medical Assn) http://www.apma.net/aahf/default.asp

Representatives from several health freedom organizations, including

European organizations were in attendance and we have just formed the

Coalition for

Health Freedom, an umbrella group of health freedom organizations that

disagree strongly with a lot of the information coming from vitamin trade

associations on this issue.

I have been elected an officer in this new coalition.

Wild Oats should be circulating this one page alert which urges 2 very

simple actions which all of your customers should be taking right now:

http://www.ymlp.com/pubarchive_show_message.php?jham+325

Wild Oats is apparently buying in to spin on this issue emanating from CRN,

NNFA and IADSA.

These trade associations want one size fits all regulations: ( " approved

once, approved everywhere " ).

To call Codex a " non issue " as you have here totally ignores the reality of

globalization and the fact that the USA has entered into several trade

agreements through which we've agreed to enter into a constant process of

harmonizing our laws to international standards. See this article by

Suzanne , JD

Who Says Whatever Happens at Codex Does Not Affect US Law And Why Do They

Say It? http://www.thelawloft.com/Freedom/050125_us_law.htm

What you're saying ignores the reality of CAFTA and the FTAA. A fast track

vote on CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement) will occur either

this

month (May) or in June. http://www.stoptheftaa.org also

http://www.citizen.org/trade/cafta/

CAFTA is a prelude to another fast track vote on FTAA (Free Trade Area of

the Americas) which would create the hemispheric eqivalent to the European

Common Market, which spawned the European Union.

The same architects of the EU want to create something called the WAU

(Western Atlantic Union) in our hemisphere into which every nation in our

hemisphere would be subsumed:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19960501faessay4202/charles-a-kupchan/reviving

-the-west-for-an-atlantic-union.html

http://www.stoptheftaa.org

They intend to create a hemispheric wide currency called The Amero that

would be our hemisphere's equivalent to the Euro

http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/critical_issues/1999/amero/

The SPS (Sanitary Phytosanitary Measures) Agreement language thats in the

WTO is identical in NAFTA.

CAFTA and FTAA would broaden and deepen the impact of this language, and

this would be the primary means used to force harmonization upon the USA

and all

other nations in our hemisphere to Codex standards.

Its no longer a matter of debate that harmonization to Codex standards is

mandatory- this came out in the Codex meeting on General Principles which

just

took place in Paris in July.

The information Wild Oats is dissemenating to the public on this issue is

seriously inaccurate.

You would have people believe that the so called " Scientific Risk

Assessment " process underway at Codex is in FACT scientific, but how CAN it

be when

they're ignoring BENEFITS and only taking a heavily BIASED look at supposed

" risks " in which they're looking at animal data in instances when far more

accurate human date is available, and when they're taking only a very

biased look

at the literature?

Please let me know where Wild Oats has been getting this inaccurate

information so that a dialogue may ensue.

For Health Freedom,

C. Hammell, President

International Advocates for Health Freedom

556 Boundary Bay Road

Point , WA 98281-8702 USA

http://www.iahf.com

jham@...

800-333-2553 N.America

360-945-0352 World

_____________________________

Unsubscribe: http://www.ymlp.com/u.php?jham+arnoldgoreaol

Hosting by http://www.yourmailinglistprovider.com