What's Happening With Codex?

Imagine needing a prescription to buy vitamin C. Imagine paying $100 for a 90-tablet bottle, as opposed to $10 to $15 today. Imagine each tablet being only 225 milligrams, when they’re now as high as 1,000 mg. Imagine the vitamin C being synthetic, not naturally sourced.

This scenario might not be far off, warn consumer groups.

A silent but serious threat to health freedom, Codex Alimentarius already affects countries such as Norway and Germany, where availability of natural supplements has dwindled. Those that remain, such as vitamins B, C, and E, are manufactured by pharmaceutical companies in paltry dosages, yet are sold at exorbitant prices.

But that’s Europe, you may think. Well, Canada is a Codex country. Recent Codex initiatives on food supplements, coupled with the state of Canadian natural health regulations, make policy watchers fear the European predicament will spread here–and soon.

What is Codex?

The Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) is a United Nations organization for establishing food safety guidelines on food trade issues. To implement an internationally unified position on food supplements, a special committee was formed more than a decade ago.

In the early 1990s, plans were also afoot in Canada. Then, supplements fell under the food–not drug–category of our Food and Drugs Act. Health Canada began a process to reclassify supplements as drugs. Consumer groups protested. The natural health industry took sides. Public forums were held to protest; presentations to Health Canada were invited.

The government and “drug category” advocates argued changes would improve product consistency and safety. The “foods are not drugs” side pointed out that, compared to drugs, supplements are safe and should be regulated separately, in a third category.

Finally, in January 2004, all supplements were shuffled under the “drug” category, placing our supplements industry in harm’s path because our regulatory framework now mimics Codex’s encroaching, more draconian standards.

How much easier is it now to slipcover Canada with Codex’s Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Supplements, slated for final Commission approval in July 2005? More than a whim, Canada is obligated via the World Trade Organization and the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas to adopt Codex decrees or face sanctions.

Europeans Protesting Guidelines

Meanwhile, the clock is ticking in the 25 European Union countries where the Codex-approved EU Directive Relating to Food Supplements goes into effect August 1, 2005.

On a “negative list?pretty much every vitamin and mineral you can think of–won’t be available unless they have “scientifically proven,” maximum safe levels. On the “negative list” are essential fatty acids and enzymes, which will be completely pulled off the market until the EU’s scientific committee decides whether they’re “safe.”

One has but to look to Norway and Germany to witness the results of Codex’s reign.

The European consumer group Alliance for Natural Health has challenged the EU Directive as a violation of the European Union constitution. Results from the European Court of Justice are expected this month.

So what are the broader implications? Although not yet as detailed as the EU Directive, Codex Guidelines also address the concept of maximum dosage levels, which draws scorn from natural health experts for its antiquated take on nutrition for disease prevention and treatment.

Notes Paul Anthony Taylor, a natural health campaigner from the UK who attended the Codex committee talk last November, “It is now clear that the overall plan is to add the most controversial aspects of the vitamin and mineral restrictions one step at a time, in the hope that if the Codex Alimentarius Commission proceeds slowly enough, consumers will not be roused into any significant forms of opposition until it is too late.”

Here in Canada, consumers now have that chance to rouse.

Call to action

Bill C-420, a proposed amendment to our Food and Drugs Act, would undo much work on natural health product laws, critics argue. Proponents say this is desirable because supplements don’t require drug-type regulation.

Such a Bill could help protect against Codex, at least temporarily. “Codex’s current threat applies to supplements in the ‘drug’ category,” says Bayne Boyes, president of Health Action Network Society (hans.org), a Canadian consumer group. “This is why Bill C-420 is so important to reclassify supplements again but in a way that would still allow them to be available in their present form on a non-prescription basis but with better labelling.”

For now, the future of Canada’s supplements remains uncertain. We’re watching Europe’s court battle against Codex and waiting to see if Bill C-420 passes second reading. Still, if every consumer wrote a letter, an irrefutable message would be sent to policy makers.

To get involved, read up on Bill C-420 and Codex at: alliance-natural-health.org, ahha.org/codexWTOoverview.htm, and codexalimentarius.net.