Health Matters
From "Maple Street Co-op News", Feb/Mar 2004

Natural Health Products – Guilty Until Proven Innocent? Part 1
by Kathryn Alexander, DThD

The complementary medicine/natural healthcare industry is huge. Worldwide it nets billions of dollars annually, and in developed countries more than half the population is increasingly turning to complementary medicine as their preferred treatment.

Given these statistics, it is hardly surprising that governments wish to rationalise the industry along similar lines to the medical industry.
Currently, there is very little legislation in place that sets the standards for practitioner training or practice management (standards and monitoring tend to be under umbrella organisations that represent practitioners), and most health-related products tend to be listed rather than registered.

A lack of regulation does not mean that there is risk to the public from these products or services; it simply means that the industry has few guidelines at legislative level. However, governments are now looking to set up international standards which will then be adopted and transposed into the national law of each country. When an international standard is applied, this then technically reduces duplication of processes at national levels, lifts some restrictions and improves trading. For the healthcare market, this could facilitate availability of products and therapeutic advances.

What more could we hope for? Most consumers want guaranteed quality service and products. We want to know that what we buy works and that we are not wasting our money. We want safe products and ready access to them.

What we don't expect to see are products such as vitamin C, which has been used for well over 25 years at doses greater than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of 50 mg/day, stripped from the shelves and placed into a drug/medicine category which may become a prescription-only item at double the cost plus a consultation fee. Most people would be incredulous at this prospect.

Food supplements to be classed as drugs?

We all know that vitamin C is not a drug – or is it? Well, let's look at definitions of what a drug is.

The pharmaceutical classification of a drug or medicine is any product that "restores, corrects, or modifies physiological functions" in the body.[1] So technically, all our food supplements, herbs and other natural health products for which any therapeutic claims are made (on the label, through advertising or via educational articles) could be classified as drugs.

In Australia, the political stance of the National Medicines Policy 2000 of Australia[2] states that "The term 'medicine' includes prescription and non-prescription medicines, including complementary healthcare products".

In the UK, food supplements come under a Food Directive (as opposed to a Pharmaceuticals Directive), but they are still defined as "substances with a nutritional or physiological effect".

If the pharmaceutical lobby pushes ahead to have its broad definition enshrined in law, then there will be plenty of hair-splitting over products that have been used safely and effectively by a large percentage of the community over many years.

The Codex Commission – our protector!

We are told that we are being protected. Our interests are represented by various government and industry bodies at the Codex Alimentarius Commission,[3] an international organisation of 146 nations (backed by the World Health Organization under the UN), established in 1962 with the aim of setting international standards and codes for foods.

The majority of representations are from the pharmaceuticals industry, with little input from consumer groups or the natural healthcare industry. Via a series of meetings, regulatory frameworks are drawn up by the Commission through delegate consensus.

Bringing you up to date on activities, on 4 November 2003 the Codex Commission met to discuss a science-based framework to establish upper limits on vitamin and mineral supplement dosage, where any finalised recommendations become the international standard. It announced a positive outcome which would pave "the way for the global sale and marketing of dietary supplements based on objective standards that will simultaneously preserve consumer safety and fair trade".[4]

However, the Codex Alimentarius Commission deals with food regulations, and its stance is that under their specific Directive you cannot make statements that ascribe a therapeutic action or even the prevention of disease to a food or food supplement, as the two do not go together. In simple terms, the Codex stance is that as soon as a therapeutic action is attributed to a product or a food, it becomes a medicine.

So we have an organisation that is going to regulate the industry according to the view that vitamins and minerals must only be sold in amounts to prevent deficiencies and be designed to be taken as small-unit quantities. Easily obtaining your large dose of vitamin C, which you take when you get a common cold, could become impossible in the future.[5]

To the consumer who knows through personal experience the value of natural health products, this ruling appears to be ridiculous. However, it is happening now. The European Union is currently harmonising its regulations among its member states, who are transposing them into national law. Germany has already passed laws to reclassify all supplements and herbs as drugs; as an example of these restrictions, the current upper limit on vitamin C, available as an over-the-counter product, is 50 mg. Iceland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark have also implemented similar regulations, and these governments will actively pursue suppliers who break the law.[6]

ANH: fighting the EU's restrictions

A professional, UK-based, pan-European international campaign and advisory organisation, the Alliance for Natural Health (ANH, http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/) is currently fighting EU legislation in an attempt to maintain continued access to and supply of safe, innovative and effective dietary supplements.

If it hadn't been for the ANH lawsuits[7] lodged against the Food Supplements Directive, then probably all food supplements in Europe would now be classified as drugs. Already the EU has passed a law, which will come into effect in 2005, to ban the sale of 300 nutrient forms from the list of 420 that are currently available. This will affect over 5,000 products (85% of vitamin/mineral products).

The nutrient forms that have been banned are the more bio-available, food-derived forms that have appeared over the last decade or so as a consequence of innovative research. In short, we will be back to low-potency, inorganic, synthetic nutrients such as those sold in supermarkets and available for years.

The banned items include natural vitamin forms such as the mixed tocopherols (natural vitamin E), carotenoids and methylcobalamin (B12), selenomethionine (the common form of selenium found in foods, but the list does allow inorganic selenium such as sodium selenate and sodium selenite, which are known to be more toxic and deliver less-beneficial results), all forms of sulphur (no MSM!), boron, vanadium, silicon and most trace elements, the most readily absorbed and safest forms of calcium, magnesium, zinc, chromium and molybdenum, and many chelated and plant-derived forms.

The EU is planning to apply similar restrictions by 2007 to other nutrient groups such as fatty acids (no more fish oils?), amino acids, fibre and plant extracts.

The ANH began its challenge against the legality of this Directive in October 2003. It argues that the law is irrational from both scientific and economic standpoints, and that it will devastate the industry – the innovators, retailers and practitioners. It also says the ban is unlawful and not necessary for the achievement of the Food Supplements Directive's stated purpose, i.e., to harmonise legislation relating to food supplements across the 15 EU member countries in order to facilitate trade in and availability of these supplements.[8]

As agreements are made via consensus within the Codex Commission, and as there is an unfair representation strongly biased towards the pharmaceuticals industry and the European Union (the EU carries 15 votes), it is not surprising that the Codex can be used as a tool to force all natural health products out of the Food Directive and into the Pharmaceuticals Directive.

If this occurs, then the Codex Commission has fulfilled its purpose of banning globally "The distribution of health information concerning vitamins, amino acids, minerals and other natural products for the prevention and treatment of diseases…the sale of vitamins and other natural products which exceed the guidelines of this Codex Commission… [and] countries that fail to apply these laws will be punished by international economic sanctions".[9]

A new definition of "first do no harm"

Many would argue that this type of rationalisation of the industry may be a good thing, as we would be guaranteed the same rigorous controls applied to drugs to ensure safety, quality and efficacy of the products we buy.

However, in most countries, the safety and quality of natural health products is not the issue: international GMP (good manufacturing practice) standards prevail and government agencies such as the TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration, Australia) have enormous powers to enforce regulations or to remove licences as appropriate – as we saw in last year's recalls of various Pan Pharmaceuticals products.

Endnotes
1. ANH, http://www.alliance-naturalhealth.org/index.cfm?action=news&ID=56
2. National Medicines Policy 2000, http://www.nmp.health.gov.au/pdf/nmp2000.pdf
3. Jackie Buchanan, "Codex Alimentarius and what it means to you", American Holistic Health Association, http://ahha.org/codexbuchanan.htm
4. Council for Responsible Nutrition, "Codex Committee Backs Science-Based Safety Standards for Vitamin and Mineral Supplements", http://www.crnusa.org/shellnr110403.html
5. Scott Tips, "Rearranging the Deckchairs on the Titanic", Whole Foods Magazine, January 2004, http://www.thenhf.com/codex_09.htm
6. Eve Hillary, "TGA Skeletons – Who Privatised the Regulator?", http://users.bigpond.com/spiney.norman/tga.eve.hillary.htm
7. ANH, "ANH lodges lawsuit against the Food Supplements Directive", http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/index.cfm?action=news&ID=35
8. ibid.
9. Dr Rath Foundation, "The Documentation about Codex Alimentarius: What are the Aims of the Codex Alimentarius Commission?", http://www4.
dr-rath-foundation.org/PHARMACEUTICAL_
BUSINESS/health_movement_against_codex/health_movement02.htm


[Kathryn Alexander is a local nutritional healing and detoxification expert and is available for personal consultations and workshops. She can be contacted by phone on (07) 5435 8138 or 0414 702520 or via her website, http://www.getalife.net.au. The complete text of this article is available at the webpage http://www.getalife.net.au/mag/NHP_html.]

[From "Maple Street Co-op News", February/March 2004; published by The Maple Street Co-operative Society Ltd, 37 Maple Street, Maleny, Qld 4552, Australia, tel (07) 5494 2088, email maplest.coop@serv.net.au,
website http://www.maplestreetco-op.com.au]

Address: 37 Maple Street, Maleny Qld 4552, Australia
Telephone: (07) 5494 2088 (int'l +61 7 5494 2088)
Fax: (07) 5499 9246 (int'l +61 7 5499 9246)
Email: info@maplestreetco-op.com.au, or maplest.coop@serv.net.au
Website: www.maplestreetco-op.com.au
©The Maple Street Co-operative Society Ltd.  Add us to your favourites.
www.maplestreetco-op.com.au