Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Alternative / April 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

The Risk of CODEX to Public Health

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
PeterB - 19 Apr 2007 16:13 GMT
Thanks to Brent for bringing this up.  He suggested posting flyers at
health food stores raising public awareness about CODEX.  It's an
excellent idea, but more is needed to get this in front of people and
the Internet is the best way of doing that.  If you are willing to
incur a small printing cost, here is what you can do to get the
message out.  Print up business cards and place them on the
windshields of cars in the healthfood store parking lot (get the
store's permission), and ask the store to throw one into each and
every customer shopping bag.  Have the following message imprinted on
the card:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­-----------------------
YOUR DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS ARE UNDER ATTACK
Visit the Alliance for Natural Health website and support your Right
to purchase the Dietary Supplements of Your choice before CODEX is
implemented.  This is Your number One Health Freedoms issue for 2007.

www.alliance-natural-health.org
email: i...@alliance-natural-health.org

(small print) The Alliance for Natural Health is a not-for-profit
company limited by Guarantee Reg No 4438769
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­-----------------------

It would be a good idea to have a chat with your health food store
manager, explaining that CODEX will supercede existing trade law in
WTO-member states, including the USA.  The purpose of CODEX is both
parity and standardization in global trade under WTO.  England and
Germany have already experienced a substantial reduction in their
health product availability related (mostly) to an early
implementation under the EU Food Supplements Directive (Directive
2002/46/EC.)   The directives are being tailored as an on-ramp for
CODEX and the rule-making process is nearing completion.  DSHEA in the
US will have no means of circumventing international trade policy once
CODEX is finalized unless America rescinds its WTO membership.  That
isn't going to happen.  Both supplement makers and health food store
owners will be the unwitting casualty of these market-busting efforts
if they don't alert their customers quickly.  This has become a legal
battle and donations are needed.  Fight now or cry later.

PeterB
keystone@mark.com - 19 Apr 2007 17:00 GMT
As we are warned on a regular basis industry trolls working to serve the
commercial interests of a multi billion a year industry spam the
newsgroups from time to time.  Consider:

"It would be a good idea to have a chat with your health food store
manager, explaining that CODEX will supercede existing trade law in
WTO-member states, including the USA.  The purpose of CODEX is both
parity and standardization in global trade under WTO.  England and
Germany have already experienced a substantial reduction in their
health product availability related (mostly) to an early
implementation under the EU Food Supplements Directive (Directive
2002/46/EC.)   The directives are being tailored as an on-ramp for
CODEX and the rule-making process is nearing completion.  DSHEA in the
US will have no means of circumventing international trade policy once
CODEX is finalized unless America rescinds its WTO membership.  That"

The above is illogical and false on its face.  Any rules the members of
the european union agree to have in common do not apply to the wto and
even less to usa.  Our rules in turn do not apply to the eu and ours are
not enforceable using the wto regarding health and safety topics
elsewhere.

The industry has the best congress money can buy.  As long as sen. hatch
et al from the states with a huge industry presence remain, along with
his son who is a player in the industry, the current rules are unlikely
to change in any meaningful way.

At present the industry is not required to report any adverse effects
from their products, show they work or are minimally safe or contain
what the label says are the contents, just like the pet food industry.
With the recent food problems in the pet sector, only the now almost
free from oversight and poorly administered rules for the industry will
remain.
PeterB - 19 Apr 2007 19:47 GMT
On Apr 19, 12:00 pm, keyst...@mark.com wrote:
> As we are warned on a regular basis industry trolls working to serve the
> commercial interests of a multi billion a year industry spam the
> newsgroups from time to time.  Consider:

A review of the history of my posts shows my time here is devoted to
promoting health, consumer choice, risk disclosure, and dismantling
the FDA.  The "Warning" post at
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_frm/thread/a1a08ed
23766bc72/?hl=en
#
documents what you and those of your ilk are about.

> Consider:
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> the european union agree to have in common do not apply to the wto and
> even less to usa.

Your statement is bizarre.  The purpose of CODEX is parity and
standardization in global trade, otherwise it would have no meaning.
Movement of product formulations among WTO-member states in violation
of those standards will be settled through a WTO dispute settlement
process (probably in response to a more compliant member citing lack
of parity with another member.)  WTO's own website agrees [ref.
http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm4_e.htm],
saying that "member countries are encouraged to use international
standards, guidelines and recommendations where they exist. When they
do, they are unlikely to be challenged legally in a WTO dispute..."
And, of course, the CODEX initiative is referenced on the WTO website
as an officially sanctioned standard for WTO members.  So you are
simply wrong.  Anyone who says the US will not be impacted by such
global trade initiatives is either being naive or is doing PR
gruntwork for those with a vested interest in the outcome (the drug
makers.)  Also see Dr. Robert Verkerk's paper at
http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHwebsiteDoc_129.doc.

> Our rules in turn do not apply to the eu and ours are
> not enforceable using the wto regarding health and safety topics
> elsewhere.

Babbling only demonstrates your ignorance.

> The industry has the best congress money can buy.

If you mean the US Congress, are you aware that implementation of The
North American Union will effectively erase the sovereign borders of
the USA?  Or do you, like so many, still have your head stuck in the
sand?

> As long as sen. hatch
> et al from the states with a huge industry presence remain, along with
> his son who is a player in the industry, the current rules are unlikely
> to change in any meaningful way.

DSHEA is an excellent (rare) consequence of US legislation on behalf
of the American public.  Unfortunately, the Act is under threat due to
assaults on its national sovereignty.

> At present the industry is not required to report any adverse effects
> from their products...

That's because FDA conceds the fact that dietary supplements
"represent no unreasonable risk to public health."  And consumers are
free to report such events on their own, which they do.  As proof,
look at the Poison Control data from Washington DC [ref.
http://www.aapcc.org/poison1.htm.]  Do you see the various products
listed under dietary supplements?  Now compare the number of
hospitalizations for those to those of prescription drugs in the same
report.  Do you see how much more dangerous drugs are by comparison?
Many people don't know that more deaths are attributed to NSAIDS in
one year than to the entire spectrum of dietary supplements over the
past decade.  In fact, the law requires FDA to prove harm caused by a
dietary supplement before the product can be banned, yet this has
happened only twice in two decades.  In one of those cases, the
primary ingredient implicated was pharmaceutically manufactured
ephedrine, not the naturally occuring herb ephedra.  In the other
case, a contaminated batch of L-tryptophan, not the amino acid itself,
was the culprit.  As proof, hospitals continue to use L-tryptophan in
managed health care, recognizing the value of this nutrient in human
health.

, show they work...

Dietary supplements are considered an adjunct to the diet, so there is
nothing for them to prove.  However, if you want to be an informed
consumer, you will want to evaluate your diet and study nutrition
sufficiently to make intelligent choices.  99% of all human disease
can be attributed to nutritional deficiency or insufficiency, so it is
better to supplement than not to supplement.

> or are minimally safe or contain
> what the label says are the contents, just like the pet food industry.

A substantial number of reputable manufacturers comply with GMPs and
provide product assays to customers on request.  Many are now publicly
traded and accountable to shareholders, and some are engaging in
clinical trials.  Don't forget that FTC has full enforcement rights to
file suit against companies making false claims if there is evidence
the product has been falsely advertised.  The real problem in the US
is that FTC fails to cite the drug makers for false claims commonly
made to consumers through direct advertising.

PeterB
Mark Probert - 23 Apr 2007 04:57 GMT
> As we are warned on a regular basis industry trolls working to serve the
> commercial interests of a multi billion a year industry spam the
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> free from oversight and poorly administered rules for the industry will
> remain.

CODEX is a conspiracy by BigSupplement and BigVitamin, with help from
BigHerb, to scare people into paying higher prices for their wares.
BrentB - 23 Apr 2007 15:19 GMT
On Apr 22, 10:57 pm, Mark Probert <markprob...@lumbercartel.com>
wrote:
> keyst...@mark.com wrote:
> > As we are warned on a regular basis industry trolls working to serve the
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> CODEX is a conspiracy by BigSupplement and BigVitamin, with help from
> BigHerb, to scare people into paying higher prices for their wares.

One thing for sure, whoever is behind this, the end effect is exactly
that. Cheaper quality supplements at exorbitant prices if not
downright illegalization of products (which really drives the prices
up). CODEX must be stopped...good point Mark!
Mark Probert - 24 Apr 2007 00:54 GMT
> On Apr 22, 10:57 pm, Mark Probert <markprob...@lumbercartel.com>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> One thing for sure, whoever is behind this, the end effect is exactly
> that.

Follow the money to BigSup, BigVitamin and BigHerb.

Cheaper quality supplements at exorbitant prices if not
> downright illegalization of products (which really drives the prices
> up). CODEX must be stopped...good point Mark!
bigvince - 19 Apr 2007 18:15 GMT
> Thanks to Brent for bringing this up.  He suggested posting flyers at
> health food stores raising public awareness about CODEX.  It's an
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>
> PeterB

I agree this is a backdoor assualt on our freedoms
BrentB - 19 Apr 2007 18:30 GMT
> > Thanks to Brent for bringing this up.  He suggested posting flyers at
> > health food stores raising public awareness about CODEX.  It's an
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> I agree this is a backdoor assualt on our freedoms

You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.
drceephd@insightbb.com - 19 Apr 2007 19:38 GMT
> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

As a WTO member we will get CODEX ALIMENTARIUS shoved where the sun
don't shine.  The key buzzword I read is "harmonization."  Codex A.
will supercede our laws, and our laws will have to be harmonized to
fit into the One World Government's plans.

DrCee
bigvince - 19 Apr 2007 20:04 GMT
On Apr 19, 2:38 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:

> > You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> DrCee

Codex is a backdoor assault on our right to make our own decissions
The One True Zhen Jue - 19 Apr 2007 20:38 GMT
> On Apr 19, 2:38 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Codex is a backdoor assault on our right to make our own decissions

Backdoor Assault, huh?  I guess you've been hanging out with Peterb
too long.

Instead of repeating Peterbs' lies, you are directed to tell the world
how Codex
is a GOOD thing. I encourage all the other MHA paranoids to have an
adult help them
understand the following:

Here's an excerpt of the unvarnished truth; the rest is available on
the link below.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/vitamins.asp

Claim:   American consumers risk losing their right to purchase and
use vitamins, minerals, and dietary supplements.
Status:   Multiple - see below:

-- In June 2005 the USA will be forced to accept Codex regulation of
vitamins, minerals, and dietary supplements:   False.

-- Bills proposing the regulation of dietary supplements are
currently before Congress:   Not any more.

<excerpt>
However, what it seeks and what it can do are very different things.
It has no power to force its will on any nation. Codex standards are
voluntary, which means if the U.S. doesn't adopt them, they will not
govern the
regulation of vitamins, minerals, or dietary supplements in the USA.

<excerpt>
The e-mailed exhortation to rise up against Codex claims that
commission's guidelines regarding dietary supplements "will over ride
U.S. law."
That's just plain wrong. United States law governs trade within the
United
States.  Codex standards come into play only when American
manufacturers of
dietary supplements look to vend them on the international market, and
even
then only when the other nations involved have incorporated Codex
guidelines into their food laws.
bigvince - 20 Apr 2007 04:53 GMT
On Apr 19, 3:38 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > On Apr 19, 2:38 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 57 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Actualy there will be pressure to comply or be in violation of the
treaty. We need not give our rights up.
Mark Probert - 23 Apr 2007 04:58 GMT
> On Apr 19, 2:38 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Codex is a backdoor assault on our right to make our own decissions

Backdoor is the shortest way to the thinking center of those who believe
this.
GMCarter - 20 Apr 2007 12:09 GMT
>> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
>> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>As a WTO member we will get CODEX ALIMENTARIUS shoved where the sun
>don't shine.  The key buzzword I read is "harmonization."

Well, then the US will have to Harmonize its healthcare access and
like the rest of Europe, provide a single payer healthcare system.
This will be MUCH less costly in terms of GDP and provide coverage to
47+ million of us lacking healthcare.

        George M. Carter
PeterB - 20 Apr 2007 15:15 GMT
> >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> This will be MUCH less costly in terms of GDP and provide coverage to
> 47+ million of us lacking healthcare.

Neither harmonization nor universal coverage will bring you adequate
healthcare: commodization of your diseases does not represent
successful medicine.  These efforts are designed to improve economies
of scale for the drug makers who want to further profit from your
illnesses.  If you believe in the value of an international regulatory
body for human health, see the tooth fairy.

PeterB
bigvince - 20 Apr 2007 23:31 GMT
> > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

To be against codex is to be against international regulatry for human
health. Vince
PeterB - 23 Apr 2007 17:58 GMT
> > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> To be against codex is to be against international regulatry for human
> health.

> Vince

That's true, but since we can't stop it, we need to affect the outcome
so it reflects the best possible science, which means supporting the
legal efforts of ANH.

PeterB
PeterB - 23 Apr 2007 18:05 GMT
> > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> To be against codex is to be against international regulatry for human
> health. Vince

That's true, but since we can't stop Codex, we need to affect the
outcome to reflect the best possible science, which means supporting
the legal efforts of ANH.

PeterB
BrentB - 23 Apr 2007 20:21 GMT
> > > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>
> That's true, but since we can't stop Codex,

Peter is this your POV or fact?
The One True Zhen Jue - 23 Apr 2007 22:55 GMT
> > > > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Uh, Brent, when has Peterb ever posted any facts?
You remember his tirade about the top 10 pharma companies having a
greater revenue, profit, and ROI than
all the other 490 members of the Fortune 500...

You don't have ANYTHING to fear from Codex, unless you have a problem
with manufacturers properly labeling their produce and dietary
supplements.
BrentB - 24 Apr 2007 00:51 GMT
On Apr 23, 4:55 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > > > > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > > > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
> with manufacturers properly labeling their produce and dietary
> supplements.

BS...I'm alive because of a product (colloidal silver) that is not on
the "positive" list under CODEX and is being harmonized in many
countries (made illegal). Even our own EPA has gotten into the act
claiming silver a "pesticide". Now you're telling me I have nothing to
fear! Until the FDA is sitting where Gonzo is for passed sins I'm not
believing it. The question is not if it's harmful but if it's a done
deal.
The One True Zhen Jue - 24 Apr 2007 01:37 GMT
> On Apr 23, 4:55 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sigh, you can't even accept that a non-issue is not a problem.
You can get Colloidial silver and you will continue to be able to get
it.
You will have to settle for it in non-lethal doses, but you can always
make
your own to whatever concentration your argyria desires.

(Incidentally, do you care to tell us how collodial silver saved your
life?)

Can you name one country where Codex has made collodial silver
illegal?
I don't know of any, but lets consider that it is possible....

I've heard tales that one can't buy Vitamin C in the EU and that in
Germany (FDR)
you can only buy vitamin C in doses of 500mg or less.  I know that is
a lie and a quick
online search of German vitamin vendors proves that.

So, do tell what countries have banned collodial silver or other
products due to Codex.
BrentB - 24 Apr 2007 02:27 GMT
On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > On Apr 23, 4:55 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 73 lines]
> So, do tell what countries have banned collodial silver or other
> products due to Codex.

http://tinyurl.com/3yytcu

it's been discussed before.
Peter Bowditch - 24 Apr 2007 05:12 GMT
>On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 80 lines]
>
>it's been discussed before.

And the very first message revealed at the link says "Proposed Codex
guidelines will not impact on the way vitamin and mineral supplements
are regulated in Australia".

Nothing about colloidal silver being banned because of Codex. It is
not approved by the TGA in Australia because the suppliers either
won't or, more probably, can't prove its safety and effectiveness. In
fact, they don't even have to prove effectiveness to be listed as a
legally saleable product. The fact that they haven't bothered suggests
that either they know it can't be proved safe or they feel that being
able to claim a conspiracy is a marketing advantage.

Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

BrentB - 24 Apr 2007 18:11 GMT
> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 94 lines]
>
> --

The suppliers cannot prove its safety even after the TGA has allowed
its use to disinfect water. ie drink on a daily basis. Nope...nothing
funny going on here.

"The TGA undertook action to change the Order so that all products
which may have a use in the purification or treatment of drinking
water but which are marketed with therapeutic claims are not excluded
from the requirements of the Act.

The TGA consulted with the peak complementary medicine industry
bodies, the water quality industry and relevant government agencies
that might be affected by the proposed change. There was broad support
for the TGA's proposal, with the proviso that the genuine use of
colloidal silver for water purification purposes should not become
captured under the Act."
Peter Bowditch - 25 Apr 2007 00:16 GMT
>> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 110 lines]
>colloidal silver for water purification purposes should not become
>captured under the Act."

Sodium hypochlorite is approved as a disinfectant for water. Please
drink any amount of it you like.

Elemental chlorine is approved as a disinfectant for water. Please
breathe any amount of it you like.

The TGA does not regulate water purification chemicals, therefore a
statement by the TGA that it doesn't regulate a particular water
purification chemical, when that chemical is used solely to purify
water, is meaningless in the context of medicinal or therapeutic use
of the chemical.

When are the people who claim that internal ingestion of colloidal
silver can treat human diseases or disorders going to start applying
for listing on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods? We all
know that it kills germs in vitro. So what? So does methanol, but I'm
not about to drink it. So does thimerosal, but alternuts seem to think
that it is highly dangerous.


Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

BrentB - 26 Apr 2007 15:15 GMT
> >> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> >> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 136 lines]
> Australian Skepticshttp://www.skeptics.com.au
> To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

ASAP has proved both safety and efficacy (especially against malaria
and TB).  Why is it their studies are not up to TGA or FDA standards?
IF the trials are subpar shouldn't the governments be funding this
research for better trials? Is it not the public they serve? They do
not...clearly their loyalties are NOT "we the people".
JohnDoe - 26 Apr 2007 15:45 GMT
>>>>>On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 142 lines]
> IF the trials are subpar shouldn't the governments be funding this
> research for better trials?

NCCAM has got a bag of money available precisely for such research.
Apperantly, these folks can't even convince the pro alt-med folks at
NCCAM. Now what does that tell you?

> Is it not the public they serve? They do
> not...clearly their loyalties are NOT "we the people".
Jan Drew - 26 Apr 2007 18:27 GMT
>>>>>>On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 165 lines]
> Apperantly, these folks can't even convince the pro alt-med folks at
> NCCAM. Now what does that tell you?

That YOU are a *gang* member who as usual does not know what you are talking
about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_for_Complementary_and_Alternative_M
edicine


http://aaas.sciencecareers.org/js.php?lookid=aaas&q=clinical+research

>> Is it not the public they serve? They do
>> not...clearly their loyalties are NOT "we the people".
Peter Bowditch - 26 Apr 2007 21:42 GMT
>>>>>>>On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 170 lines]
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_for_Complementary_and_Alternative_M
edicine

And just why is this evidence that someone from the *gang* (TIN*G*)
doesn't know something?

>http://aaas.sciencecareers.org/js.php?lookid=aaas&q=clinical+research
>
>>> Is it not the public they serve? They do
>>> not...clearly their loyalties are NOT "we the people".
>
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

David - 26 Apr 2007 23:04 GMT
"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote in message
Some more BS
Jan Drew - 27 Apr 2007 01:47 GMT
>>>>>>>>On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 185 lines]
> And just why is this evidence that someone from the *gang*
> doesn't know something?

Read  harasser, read...

Research Results
     Spotlight on New Research Results
       a.. Tai Chi Boosts Immunity to Shingles Virus in Older Adults
       The study is the first rigorous clinical trial to suggest that a
behavioral intervention, alone or together with a vaccine, can help protect
older adults from the varicella virus, which causes both chickenpox and
shingles. April 2007
       b.. Study compares year-long effectiveness of four weight-loss plans
       The Atkins diet may contribute to greater weight loss than higher
carbohydrate plans without negative effects such as increased cholesterol.
March 2007
       c.. Garlic Does Not Appear to Lower "Bad" Cholesterol
       A study casts doubts on the effectiveness of garlic to lower LDL
(low density lipoprotein) cholesterol levels in adults. February 2007
       d.. Herbal Supplement Fails To Relieve Hot Flashes
       Black cohosh, used alone or with other botanicals, did not relieve
hot flashes. December 2006
       e.. Omega-3 fatty acids may be helpful in psychiatric care
       Omega-3 fatty acids may hold promise for use in psychiatry,
particularly for depression and bipolar disorder. Journal of Clinical
Psychiatry. December 2006
       >> More Research Results
     Additional Sources
       a.. Search for NCCAM-funded publications
       (National Library of Medicine)
       Search for journal articles by NCCAM grantees.
       b.. CAM on PubMed (National Library of Medicine)
       c.. Staff Publication List
       d.. International Bibliographic Information on Dietary Supplements
(IBIDS) Database (Office of Dietary Supplements)
       e.. Annual Bibliography of Significant Advances in Dietary
Supplement Research (Office of Dietary Supplements)

>>http://aaas.sciencecareers.org/js.php?lookid=aaas&q=clinical+research
>>
>>>> Is it not the public they serve? They do
>>>> not...clearly their loyalties are NOT "we the people".
BrentB - 26 Apr 2007 19:27 GMT
> >>>>>On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> >>>>>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 146 lines]
> Apperantly, these folks can't even convince the pro alt-med folks at
> NCCAM. Now what does that tell you?

Tells me the NCCAM is as completely corrupted as the FDA and other
lapdog agencies..
Herman Rubin - 26 Apr 2007 19:50 GMT
>>>>>>On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>wrote:

>>>>>>>>On Apr 23, 4:55 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:

            ..................

>NCCAM has got a bag of money available precisely for such research.
>Apperantly, these folks can't even convince the pro alt-med folks at
>NCCAM. Now what does that tell you?

The "bag of money is probably nowhere as big as you claim.

Also, if the people there do not believe that colloidal
silver should be tested, ...
Signature

This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558

Herman Rubin - 26 Apr 2007 19:47 GMT
>> >> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>> >> >wrote:

>> >> >> > On Apr 23, 4:55 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>> >> >> > wrote:

            ................

>> >The suppliers cannot prove its safety even after the TGA has allowed
>> >its use to disinfect water. ie drink on a daily basis. Nope...nothing
>> >funny going on here.

How do you "prove" safety?  It cannot be done.  The claim,
"safe taken as directed", should not even be allowed.

>> >"The TGA undertook action to change the Order so that all products
>> >which may have a use in the purification or treatment of drinking
>> >water but which are marketed with therapeutic claims are not excluded
>> >from the requirements of the Act.

Those who make claims should have to document them.  However,
the current requirements for "establishing claims" are FAR
too stringent, and too STUPID, to be invoked.  

            ................

>> When are the people who claim that internal ingestion of colloidal
>> silver can treat human diseases or disorders going to start applying
>> for listing on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods? We all
>> know that it kills germs in vitro. So what? So does methanol, but I'm
>> not about to drink it. So does thimerosal, but alternuts seem to think
>> that it is highly dangerous.

At this time, I would not use colloidal silver.  Unless
the use of colloidal silver puts people other than those
who use it in danger, at most a warning should be given.
I am assuming that the colloidal silver is properly
labeled, with at least references to claims given.  The
current misuse of statistics is not a valid procedure.

>ASAP has proved both safety and efficacy (especially against malaria
>and TB).  Why is it their studies are not up to TGA or FDA standards?
>IF the trials are subpar shouldn't the governments be funding this
>research for better trials? Is it not the public they serve? They do
>not...clearly their loyalties are NOT "we the people".

Whether it is worth carrying out such trials is a matter
of debate.  But no reasonable argument has been given to
banning it.

These trials are EXPENSIVE.
Signature

This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558

Peter Bowditch - 26 Apr 2007 21:40 GMT
>> >> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>> >> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 142 lines]
>research for better trials? Is it not the public they serve? They do
>not...clearly their loyalties are NOT "we the people".

Have they submitted an application to the TGA? If not, why not? If
they have, they will have documentation copies to prove it.

The US government does fund trials. Have ASAP applied to NCAAM?
http://nccam.nih.gov/research/

If not, why not? (I know the answer - because negative results have to
be publicised.)
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

BrentB - 27 Apr 2007 21:36 GMT
> >> >> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> >> >> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 151 lines]
> be publicised.)
> --

You mean these results? the ones reported to congress...

Congressional Testimony

Washington DC - April 26,2005

Presented to Members of The House International Relations Committee
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights, and International
Operations

William D. Moeller Chairman of Clifton and President of American
Biotech Labs (ABL) was invited to testify before the Congressional
House International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Africa,
Global Human Rights, and International operations. Mr. Moeller
testified concerning the ability (according to three completed human
studies) of ABL products to help patients recover from malaria in an
average of just 5 days. Other groups who testified at the hearing
included, The World Health Organization, USAID, and the Roll Back
Malaria Partnership etc.

http://www.americanbiotechlabs.com/ASAPhealthMax30.html
BrentB - 27 Apr 2007 21:56 GMT
> > >> >> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> > >> >> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 173 lines]
>
> http://www.americanbiotechlabs.com/ASAPhealthMax30.html

Compared to the NCCAM. The best we get are a list of reviews? Not ONE
lousy study?!?

3. Do colloidal silver products work?

Reviews in the scientific literature on colloidal silver products have
concluded that2-5:

   * Silver has no known function in the body.
   * Silver is not an essential mineral supplement or a cure-all and
should not be promoted as such.
   * Claims that there can be a "deficiency" of silver in the body
and that such a deficiency can lead to disease are unfounded.
   * Claims made about the effectiveness of colloidal silver products
for numerous diseases are unsupported scientifically.
   * Colloidal silver products can have serious side effects
(discussed further below).
   * Laboratory analysis has shown that the amounts of silver in
supplements vary greatly, which can pose risks to the consumer.

http://nccam.nih.gov/health/alerts/silver/index.htm
Peter Bowditch - 27 Apr 2007 23:21 GMT
>> > >> >> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>> > >> >> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 195 lines]
>
>http://nccam.nih.gov/health/alerts/silver/index.htm

See, even you can find the truth if you want to.
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Peter Bowditch - 27 Apr 2007 23:20 GMT
>> >> >> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>> >> >> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 153 lines]
>
>You mean these results? the ones reported to congress...

No, I mean the ones which would satisfy someone wanting to see
scientific evidence. Getting up in front of a group of politicians and
saying that something works is not producing evidence of any kind.

>Congressional Testimony
>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
>http://www.americanbiotechlabs.com/ASAPhealthMax30.html
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

BrentB - 24 Apr 2007 18:20 GMT
> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 99 lines]
> Australian Skepticshttp://www.skeptics.com.au
> To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

It can't be proved safe? You do realize the TGA has allows the sale to
purify water (that stuff which many people drink on a daily basis.) Be
sure to explain that bit of logic for me if ya could.
Peter Bowditch - 25 Apr 2007 00:18 GMT
>> >On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
>> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 103 lines]
>purify water (that stuff which many people drink on a daily basis.) Be
>sure to explain that bit of logic for me if ya could.

I just did, in my response to your other comment to the same effect.

Please drink a full glass of 5% sodium hypochlorite solution. It's
allowed to be sold to purify water.
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

The One True Zhen Jue - 24 Apr 2007 05:28 GMT
> On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 82 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

So, you haven't shown any country where colloidal silver has been
banned.
The thread merely states that no colloidal silver manufacturer has
even tried
to have their product approved.  That is not nearly the same as saying
that it is banned.

Once again, name a country that has banned supplement/herb product on
the basis of Codex.
Once again, explain why this Codex scare-mongering isn't just a warmed-
over version of
"The Sky Is Falling!"
BrentB - 25 Apr 2007 21:28 GMT
On Apr 23, 11:28 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > On Apr 23, 7:37 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 95 lines]
> over version of
> "The Sky Is Falling!"

Even if hundreds of thousands have petitioned against it and will do
anything to stop it, I've never read one word about it in mass media
therefore how can we scare monger that which does not exist?
Herman Rubin - 26 Apr 2007 18:48 GMT
            ....................

>Uh, Brent, when has Peterb ever posted any facts?
>You remember his tirade about the top 10 pharma companies having a
>greater revenue, profit, and ROI than
>all the other 490 members of the Fortune 500...

>You don't have ANYTHING to fear from Codex, unless you have a problem
>with manufacturers properly labeling their produce and dietary
>supplements.

You do, if they decide in their bureaucratic stupidity
that "megadoses" require prescriptions, or that certain
supplements are "too dangerous".  Governments should see
that information is provided, even if they do not agree
with the way people may use that information, except to
harm OTHERS.  

Signature

This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558

PeterB - 24 Apr 2007 15:02 GMT
> > > > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> Peter is this your POV or fact?

Brent, it's my view that CODEX can't be stopped.  What we have to work
for is a credible set of guidelines that provide balance to the
treatment of nutrients in trade.

PeterB
The One True Zhen Jue - 25 Apr 2007 22:03 GMT
> > > > > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > > > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Codex can't be stopped, but it is mostly devoted to Agriculture.

Codex will require the contents to match the label.
Codex will require claims to be substantiated.
Codex Protects the consumer from fraud, contaminants, & adulteration.
Codex isn't a threat to your supplements.

Deal with it!
PeterB - 26 Apr 2007 16:05 GMT
On Apr 25, 5:03 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > > > > > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > > > > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>
> Codex can't be stopped, but it is mostly devoted to Agriculture.

So?

> Codex will require the contents to match the label.

Since many supplement makers now conform to GMP standards and provide
product assays to customers on request, there is no reason for angst
over this issue unless one is buying off-shore or from other
questionable operations.  Incidentally, food-based supplements cannot
be precisely measured since they contain varying amounts of naturally-
occuring nutrients, thus values shown are averages.  Something to ask
yourself: When buying a head of lettuce, do you have any guarantee it
is exactly the weight or quality of all the others?  Will CODEX fix
that?

> Codex will require claims to be substantiated.

Then most prescription drugs will become illegal, unless by
"substantiated" you mean Codex will expand a fraudulent system of
oversight already responsible for the loss of millions of lives.

> Codex Protects the consumer from fraud, contaminants, & adulteration.

Wow, you must be psychic.  It hasn't even been implemented yet and
you're referring to it in the present tense.  Do you read tea leaves?

> Codex isn't a threat to your supplements.

All regulation is a threat to public welfare and consumer freedom.
We are trying to limit the damage that Codex is likely to do, and for
that to happen, readers should support the Alliance for Natural Health
in their presentation of independent science to the courts.  Also see
Dr. Robert Verkerk's paper at http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHwebsiteDoc_129.doc.

> Deal with it!

Why do you think I'm here?
Jan Drew - 26 Apr 2007 18:32 GMT
> On Apr 25, 5:03 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:

[Andrew Kingoff'/ilsa/ a host of other alias is far from being *one true*,
as his past record shows...]

>> > > > > > > >> On Apr 19, 12:15 pm, bigvince <Vince.Mirag...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > >> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 88 lines]
>
> Why do you think I'm here?
The One True Zhen Jue - 26 Apr 2007 20:53 GMT
> On Apr 25, 5:03 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 64 lines]
> Wow, you must be psychic.  It hasn't even been implemented yet and
> you're referring to it in the present tense.  Do you read tea leaves?

Many of Codex regulations have been implemented.  Very few have
anything to do with dietary supplements.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/y7867e/y7867e00.htm

http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/y7867e/y7867e02.htm#bm02

A SINGLE INTERNATIONAL REFERENCE POINT

The best traditions of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have
encouraged food-related scientific and technological research as well
as discussion. In doing so, they have lifted the world community's
awareness of food safety and related issues to unprecedented heights.
The Codex Alimentarius Commission, established by the two
Organizations in the 1960s, has become the single most important
international reference point for developments associated with food
standards.

GREATER GLOBAL AND NATIONAL AWARENESS

Throughout much of the world, an increasing number of consumers and
governments are becoming aware of food quality and safety issues and
are realizing the need to be selective about the foods people eat. It
is now common for consumers to demand that their governments take
legislative action to ensure that only safe food of acceptable quality
is sold and that the risk of food-borne health hazards is minimized.
It is fair to say that, through its elaboration of Codex standards and
its consideration of all related issues, the Codex Alimentarius
Commission has helped significantly to put food as an entity on
political agendas. In fact, governments are extremely conscious of the
political consequences to be expected should they fail to heed
consumers' concerns regarding the food they eat.

INCREASED CONSUMER PROTECTION

The Codex Alimentarius Commission has been supported in its work by
the now universally accepted maxim that people have the right to
expect their food to be safe, of good quality and suitable for
consumption. Food-borne illnesses are at best unpleasant - at worst
they can be fatal. But there are other consequences. Outbreaks of food-
borne illness can damage trade and tourism and can lead to loss of
earnings, unemployment and litigation. Poor-quality food can destroy
the commercial credibility of suppliers, both nationally and
internationally, while food spoilage is wasteful and costly and can
adversely affect trade and consumer confidence.

The positive effect of the Commission's work has also been enhanced by
the declarations produced by international conferences and meetings
that have, themselves, been influenced by the Commission's activities.
Over the past 20 years, national representatives to the United Nations
General Assembly, the FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals
in Food and Food Trade (held in cooperation with the General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade [GATT]), the FAO/WHO International Conference on
Nutrition, the FAO World Food Summit and the WHO World Health Assembly
have either encouraged or committed their countries to adopt measures
ensuring the safety and quality of foods. The Global Fora of Food
Safety Regulators have noted that the Codex system provides an
important opportunity for countries to work together to develop
international standards in a representative manner.

> > Codex isn't a threat to your supplements.
>
> All regulation is a threat to public welfare and consumer freedom.

Really?  That statement proves just how silly your arguments are.
You're saying that requiring drivers to be licensed is a threat to
public welfare.  Ditto for
MD's, DC's, L.Ac's, airline pilots, etc.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

> We are trying to limit the damage that Codex is likely to do, and for
> that to happen, readers should support the AMA
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Why do you think I'm here?- Hide quoted text -

To tell outrageous lies & discredit alternative health.
Its proven over and over in your own (tortured) words.

> - Show quoted text -
PeterB - 27 Apr 2007 15:28 GMT
On Apr 26, 3:53 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > > > > > > > Neither harmonization nor universal coverage will bring you adequate
> > > > > > > > healthcare: commodization of your diseases does not represent
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
> > is exactly the weight or quality of all the others?  Will CODEX fix
> > that?

No comment, I see.  How telling.

> > > Codex will require claims to be substantiated.
>
> > Then most prescription drugs will become illegal, unless by
> > "substantiated" you mean Codex will expand a fraudulent system of
> > oversight already responsible for the loss of millions of lives.

<chirp>

> > > Codex Protects the consumer from fraud, contaminants, & adulteration.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Many of Codex regulations have been implemented.  Very few have
> anything to do with dietary supplements.

The Codex is not in effect until finalized and implemented, probably
in 2010.  You are referring to various EU directives, which, though
complimentary, are not the same thing. The reason dietary supplements
have not been widely effected so far is because the science on "safe
upper limits" has yet to be worked out.  Both food supplements makers
and retailers in Europe have been restricted from marketing products
with nutrients not found in Annexes I and II of the corresponding
Directive since August 1, 2005.  Dietary supplements are being
impacted by EU law even before CODEX goes into effect, not surpising
since they were intended to overlap.  CODEX will not only impact the
nature of product formulation but also parity in global trade through
a WTO dispute settlement process with power to sanction violators.
The Alliance for Natural Health is deeply involved in presenting
legitimate food science to the courts in order to achieve a fair and
balanced CODEX.

PeterB
keystone@mark.com - 27 Apr 2007 17:53 GMT
"CODEX will not only impact the nature of product formulation but also
parity in global trade through a WTO dispute settlement process with
power
to sanction violators."

Proof of this if you please, not 'chicken little' speculation but exact
proof.  This is the scare tactics spin the industry puts upon it in an
attempt to attach it to the loose industry laws in the us and as a
preemptive strike for any reconsideration of those laws.  Health and
safety laws of any country do not define international trade for the
industrial products in question.

If the eu could attempt this, if they ever cared in the least in the
first place anyway, could the us in fact force current domestic law upon
the eu?  Better still, could mexico with seemingly no law enforce its
absence of law upon the wto members?
PeterB - 27 Apr 2007 19:17 GMT
On Apr 27, 12:53 pm, keyst...@mark.com wrote:

> "CODEX will not only impact the nature of product formulation but also
> parity in global trade through a WTO dispute settlement process with
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> proof.  Health and safety laws of any country do not define international
> trade for the industrial products in question.

You are displaying your ignorance again.  CODEX does not represent the
"health and safety laws" of a given country, it was created by FAO and
WHO in 1963 to "develop food standards, guidelines and related texts
for the primary purpose of ensuring FAIR TRADE [emphasis mine]
practice in food trade, and to promote coordination of all food
standards work undertaken by **international** governmental bodies..."
as per the FAO/WHO CODEX website.  The CODEX (under the auspice of the
UN) exists to ensure parity and standardization in global food trade,
whereas the movement of trade in violation of CODEX will be settled
through a WTO dispute settlement process (probably in response to a
more compliant member citing lack of parity with another member.)
WTO's own website agrees [ref. http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm4_e.htm],
saying that "member countries are encouraged to use international
standards, guidelines and recommendations where they exist. When they
do, they are unlikely to be challenged legally in a WTO dispute..."
Thus, violators can (and will be) subject to LEGAL challenge in the
WTO court, as necessary, to restore trade parity.  Anyone saying the
US will not be impacted by such global trade initiatives is either
being naive or is doing PR gruntwork for those with a vested interest
in the outcome (the drug makers.)  Also see Dr. Robert Verkerk's paper
at http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHwebsiteDoc_129.doc.

> If the eu could attempt this, if they ever cared in the least in the
> first place anyway, could the us in fact force current domestic law upon
> the eu?  

I'm sure you realize just how stupid that question is.  After
supporting the work of Dr. Robert Verkerk on behalf of human health
and consumer rights, please say hello to your sponsors for me.

> Better still, could mexico with seemingly no law enforce its
> absence of law upon the wto members?
keystone@mark.com - 28 Apr 2007 00:19 GMT
>> "CODEX will not only impact the nature of product formulation but also
>> parity in global trade through a WTO dispute settlement process with
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>> Better still, could mexico with seemingly no law enforce its
>> absence of law upon the wto members?

From the first url above:

"Again, the WTO does not set the standards itself. In some cases other
international agreements are identified in the WTOs agreements. One
example is Codex Alimentarius, which sets recommended standards for food
safety and comes under the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
and World Health Organization (WHO).

But there is no compulsion to comply even with internationally
negotiated standards such as those of Codex Alimentarius. Governments
are free to set their own standards provided they are consistent in the
way they try to avoid risks over the full range of products, are not
arbitrary, and do not discriminate."

Watch out, using the blunt force weapon above mexico will enforce its no
food health and safety laws upon all wto countries.

If the eu wants to set health and safety rules on the industrial
products at issue any other wto country does not have to follow it just
because the eu has done so.  If to protect us industry sources all eu
vitamin e products are refused import then the wto can be used to settle
the dispute.  If mexico wants to sell laetril to the eu the eu can go to
the wto to have its health and safety rules recognised as a valid reason
not to be forced to import it.

Personaly I think the wto sucks, along with other trading pacts.  But
the industrial fear spinning going on here is the industry doing a
'chicken little' move to head off us internal reexamination of the
current weak and unenforced regulation of the products of the industry.
PeterB - 24 Apr 2007 15:23 GMT
> > > > > >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> > > > > >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> Peter is this your POV or fact?

Brent, it's my view that CODEX cannot be stopped.  We need to work
with ANH to ensure the guidelines are balanced in their treatment of
nutrients.

PeterB
Herman Rubin - 25 Apr 2007 21:02 GMT
            ................

>> Neither harmonization nor universal coverage will bring you adequate
>> healthcare: commodization of your diseases does not represent
>> successful medicine.  These efforts are designed to improve economies
>> of scale for the drug makers who want to further profit from your
>> illnesses.  If you believe in the value of an international regulatory
>> body for human health, see the tooth fairy.

>> PeterB- Hide quoted text -

>> - Show quoted text -

>To be against codex is to be against international regulatry for human
>health. Vince

Which everyone should be.  We should be against even
domestic regulation of human health; regulation typically
decreases opportunities.  

Everything has risks and benefits, and unless risk to
others is involved, the individual, not the physician,
not the medical profession, not the government, not the
WHO, should be the one to balance them.  Different
people have different risks and benefits, and should
evaluate the SAME ones differently.
Signature

This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558

PeterB - 20 Apr 2007 15:16 GMT
> >> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
> >> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> This will be MUCH less costly in terms of GDP and provide coverage to
> 47+ million of us lacking healthcare.

Neither harmonization nor universal coverage will bring you adequate
healthcare: commodization of your diseases does not represent
successful medicine.  These efforts are designed to improve economies
of scale for the drug makers who want to further profit from your
illnesses.  If you believe in the value of an international regulatory
body for human health, see the tooth fairy.

PeterB
Herman Rubin - 25 Apr 2007 20:58 GMT
>>> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
>>> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -

>>> - Show quoted text -

>>As a WTO member we will get CODEX ALIMENTARIUS shoved where the sun
>>don't shine.  The key buzzword I read is "harmonization."

>Well, then the US will have to Harmonize its healthcare access and
>like the rest of Europe, provide a single payer healthcare system.
>This will be MUCH less costly in terms of GDP and provide coverage to
>47+ million of us lacking healthcare.

>        George M. Carter

Prepaid healthcare, coming out of taxes, is nothing but welfare
of the worst kind.  Instead, get rid of the administrators, and
put in the cheaper MSAs, with welfare for those who cannot
afford it.

Signature

This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558

GMCarter - 26 Apr 2007 11:26 GMT
>>>> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
>>>> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see guilt.- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>put in the cheaper MSAs, with welfare for those who cannot
>afford it.

What the hell are you on about? A single payer system can work QUITE
well. And MUCH better than the United States' absolute mess of
privatized horror, where infant and child mortality is dismal while we
are screwed into paying the largest amounts in the world for care that
essentially sucks.

These lines of pat, if convoluted and inchoate, right wing bullshit
just do not fly any more. And I've had a few too many friends die
because healthcare was denied to them.

I'll quite probably be next.

        George M. Carter
Herman Rubin - 26 Apr 2007 19:07 GMT
            ..................

>>Prepaid healthcare, coming out of taxes, is nothing but welfare
>>of the worst kind.  Instead, get rid of the administrators, and
>>put in the cheaper MSAs, with welfare for those who cannot
>>afford it.

>What the hell are you on about? A single payer system can work QUITE
>well. And MUCH better than the United States' absolute mess of
>privatized horror, where infant and child mortality is dismal while we
>are screwed into paying the largest amounts in the world for care that
>essentially sucks.

>These lines of pat, if convoluted and inchoate, right wing bullshit
>just do not fly any more. And I've had a few too many friends die
>because healthcare was denied to them.

>I'll quite probably be next.

>        George M. Carter

If you put in government-controlled healthcare, and this is
what will happen if the government has to pay, you will see
healthcare limited, even for those who can pay.

Unfortunately, we have to leave political and military
decisions to the government.  Also, the government is
needed in some other matters, like those health measures
which affect others, like controlling infectious diseases,
doing what is reasonable about pollutants, etc.  But if
money runs short, and it always does, things get cut.

Look at the VA hospitals, and even the government's TOP
military hospital.  Look at the National Parks.  Look
at the New Orleans levee fiasco.  Look at the space
fiasco; the future of mankind is not to be limited to
this planet.

If you can trust government, I cannot trust you.

Signature

This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558

GMCarter - 27 Apr 2007 12:22 GMT
snip>
>If you put in government-controlled healthcare, and this is
>what will happen if the government has to pay, you will see
>healthcare limited, even for those who can pay.

LOL...like 47 million uninsured and 67 million lacking drug coverage
isn't a "limitation."
David Wright - 21 Apr 2007 03:42 GMT
>> You couldn't have used a better word. Check mass media for an honest
>> debate CODEX and you will find nothing. When I see silence I see
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>will supercede our laws, and our laws will have to be harmonized to
>fit into the One World Government's plans.

Oh, not-really-a-Dr Cee, you aren't keeping your orgone generators
running, are you?  Or your tinfoil hat firmly attached.  Now you're
letting the nasty ol' One World Government worry you.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "HPV shots don't cause promiscuity.  Tequila shots do." -- Bill Maher
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.