Cafta's effect on our right to free access

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Ann - 10 Aug 2005 19:57 GMT

I received a letter today from my congressman who was one of the 217
who voted in favor of CAFTA.

His letter to me reads in part:

"The Codex guidelines provide voluntary guidance to governments
relating to the composition of vitamin and mineral supplements and
criteria for establishing maximum amounts of vitamins and minerals per
daily portion of the supplement consumed. The guidelines do not
establish upper limits for vitamins and minerals in supplements. I hope
this information is helpful to you."

Is it just me or is this "fuzzy" talk ?

To see how your congressman voted, there is a link here:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll443.xml

Ann

Reply to this Message

TC - 10 Aug 2005 20:11 GMT

> I received a letter today from my congressman who was one of the 217
> who voted in favor of CAFTA.
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Ann

That seems clear enough. The govt can choose to follow the Codex
"guidelines" or not. It is up to the govt to establish upper limits or
not.

TC

Reply to this Message

Ann - 10 Aug 2005 20:42 GMT

You missed the point here. Of course it's clear that the guidelines are
supposed to be voluntary (at this point).

Reply to this Message

John Sankey - 11 Aug 2005 11:19 GMT

"The Codex guidelines provide voluntary guidance to governments
relating to the composition of vitamin and mineral supplements and
criteria for establishing maximum amounts of vitamins and minerals per
daily portion of the supplement consumed. The guidelines do not
establish upper limits for vitamins and minerals in supplements. I hope
this information is helpful to you."

That's correct, in Canada too. In short, skip the panic posts -
the USA and Canada are still sovereign nations.

Reply to this Message