New Bills threaten DSHEA and your access to supplements

http://www.coalitionforhealthfreedom.org/action.html

ACT NOW to preserve your access to nutrients, effective vitamins and minerals, and nutritional medicine!


What you can do TODAY! listed below:

New Bills threaten DSHEA and your access to supplements
Send letters to Congress with one click


http://www.coalitionforhealthfreedom.org/action.html#B1

Thank you to everyone who contacted Congress during the campaign against CAFTA in July.

If you called or faxed, please email us if you have not already done so.
We will follow up with Representatives, to make sure they hear enough about Codex.

Scroll down to read more from the CAFTA campaign and see how Representatives voted.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


New "Adverse Event" Reporting bill

Thanks to all those who faxed Sen. Michael Enzi. (This bill has no number as yet).

The Adverse Event Reporting bill has been successfully postponed and allows time for the bill to be scrutinized. Introduced by Sen. Harkin and Hatch, long time supporters of the supplement industry, the details of this bill are being awaited by manufacturers and health freedom groups to see if this presents a way forward.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Protect DSHEA from new domestic US legislation

Call your Representatives' office (recommended)
Congress: 1-866-340-9279 or 1-202-224-3121

Locate your House Representatives all you need is your zip code
If possible, take the time to visit their local district office in person.

or

Email your Representative with 2 clicks send a letter you can edit
The links may take a moment to display:


Click to take action on these bills and read more


SUPPORT HR 4282 Health Freedom Protection Act

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act concerning foods and dietary supplements, to amend the Federal Trade Commission Act concerning the burden of proof in false advertising cases, and for other purposes. Introduced by Rep. Paul [TX-14] 11/9/2005. Currently has 12 cosponsors. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. The Stop FDA Censorship coalition is working on passing this bill.


SUPPORT BILL HR 2352 Consumers' Access to Health Information Act

Sponsored by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). It has no cosponsors. This would allow full medical health claims to be made for dietary supplements. It was introduced on May 12th and would change the definition of a drug to exempt dietary supplements from the definition if fully medical claims were made in labelling about them.


Support HR 4011 Mercury in Dental Fillings Disclosure and Prohibition Act

To prohibit after 2008 the introduction into interstate commerce of mercury intended for use in a dental filling, and for other purposes. Introduced by Rep Watson [CA-33] 10/6/2005. Currently has 14 cosponsors. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. See International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology http://www.iaomt.org


Support HR 2485 DSHEA Full Implementation

To ensure that the goals of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 are met by authorizing appropriations to fully enforce and implement such Act and the amendments made by such Act, and for other purposes. Introduced by Rep. Burton [IN-5] 5/19/2005. Currently has 1 cosponsor. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.


Oppose HR 3156

US Representative Susan Davis (D-CA) has introduced HR 3156, "The Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act", that proposes to revise the "unreasonable risk" clause of DSHEA by significantly altering FDA's burden of proving that an ingredient is unsafe for use in dietary supplements. This bill ss co-sponsored by Henry Waxman (D-CA) and John Dingell (D-MI).

This new bill is the same as one introduced in the last Congress with the addition of one new section that appears to be a direct response to a recent decision by the U.S. District Court to overturn portions of FDA's 2004 ban of ephedra).

In that case the Court was asked to rule on FDA's use of risk-benefit analysis and on its reliance on data about one dose of ephedra to ban smaller amounts.


Oppose S.729/ HR 1507 Safe Food Act of 2005

Sen. Richard Durbin (Asst. Minority Leader for the Democrats) has reintroduced SB729 under the pretext of the need for food safety protection, thereby creating a new federal food safety agency. Currently has 1 cosponsor (Sen. Clinton).

This is very dangerous legislation for consumers of dietary supplements as it would repeal the DSHEA Act of 1994, and if signed into law, as currently proposed, dietary supplements would be reclassified and regulated like drugs. The companion bill, HR 1507, was introduced by Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro. Both introduced similar legislation at the end of the last Congress. This "Food Czar" legislation needs your opposition.


Oppose S.1137 and HR 3937 To include dehydroepiandrosterone as an anabolic steroid

Stop Congress from banning DHEA.
Sponsor: Senator Grassley, 3 Cosponsors Sen. Allen, Kyl, McCain


OTHER BILLS

Adverse Event Reporting (AER) for Dietary Supplements Bill
(not yet introduced.) Summary by AAHF:

A June 21 2004 debate on the Senate floor between Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) resulted in an agreement to collaborate on legislation during this session of Congress creating mandatory adverse event reporting (AER) for dietary supplements. Spurred by Durbin's introduction of a Department of Defense (DOD) authorization bill amendment which would require companies selling certain dietary supplements on military bases to report serious AERs to the government. Harkin and Hatch immediately introduced an alternative amendment that would have required the Department of Health and Human Services to develop a national AER reporting system and report back to Congress within six months. The debate went from Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), enforcement by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to ephedra and androstenedione and then to other dietary supplement topics. The debate concluded with an agreement to withdraw the amendments and work together to add a mandatory AER system to pending legislation classifying steroid precursors as controlled substances. The promised "AER Compromise" bill never happened in the 108th session so Sen. Durbin kept introducing his amendment to DOD authorizing bills as leverage to get the AER compromise bill going.

Well that time is about now. Sen. Harkin & Hatch are drafting with the assistance of HELP (Health, Education, Labor And Pensions) Chairman, Enzi an Adverse Event Reporting bill. Why are long-time supporters of dietary supplements Hatch & Harkin working with one of our most vocal opponents? Sen. Durbin has gained a lot of power in Congress by becoming Minority Whip (Democrat's second in command). Durbin needs Hatch & Harkin because he's not on the HELP committee (and they are) and he needs their support to get ANY type of AER bill through the committee. Any HELP Committee mark-up on the Harkin, Hatch, Durbin, Enzi FDA AER for Supplements bill is off the agenda until next year. No further negotiations have been held. As soon as we have more information on this bill, we will let you know.


S.722 (108th Congress) Dietary Supplement Safety Act
(not yet introduced)

A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require that manufacturers of dietary supplements submit to the Food and Drug Administration reports on adverse experiences with dietary supplements, and for other purposes. Introduced by Sen. Durbin with 4 cosponsors. His office have stated that they will be reintroducing this bill in early 2006 and that they are adding new language. They have a list of organizations that support it and are working on gaining more support. Sen. Durbin may not reintroduce this bill if he finds that Sen. Harkin & Hatch's "compromise" AER bill (see above) meets his requirements.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CAFTA

How they voted: Vote Tally - find your Rep and Lists



For the record

We are leaving the CAFTA campaign information here for your reference:




Here is a script with points which you can use if you wish:
I wish to point out that the FDA has been participating in Codex, continually in violation of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 that exempts suppplements from harmonization. Congress has not been enforcing this law. The FDA has repeatedly stated that it intends to harmonize the USA to Codex. Codex is cited in CAFTA by treaty and by name.

Those who say that CAFTA will not affect supplements have been grossly misled by the trade associations and the policy brief of the U.S. Trade Representative. I urge you to read the refutation of this brief at http://www.coalitionforhealthfreedom.org/issues.html



I wish to urge my Representative to Vote No to the CAFTA agreement, for all the reasons many have given against it, but also due to a crucial detail in this treaty that is not being mentioned.

There is a clause in CAFTA that subjects the US to Codex. This will devastate our current laws concerning access to vitamins, supplements and to health freedom and, as a result, destroy thousands of small businesses, home businesses and health practitioners.


Small businesses are recognized by the government as the leading creator of private sector jobs. There are now hundreds of thousands of small businesses related to health and supplements, some run from home by self-employed people. Destruction of these would be a totally unacceptable consequence.

I do not support CAFTA because it contains (in Section 6) stipulations that would require the United States, as a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), to revise our food laws and regulations, based on decisions made by the Codex Alimentarius (International Food Code) Commission, or Codex. The WTO has adopted Codex Guidelines as the standards for international regulation for WTO members.

WTO tribunals have ruled against the USA in 42 out of 48 cases. Many of these have been very costly to our economy.

Passage of CAFTA would force the “harmonization” of our dietary supplement laws and regulations to international standards, as established by the supranational Codex Commission. Doing so would drastically infringe on the quality of dietary supplements and access to supplements that people like me are used to.

The passage of CAFTA could effectively override the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994. CAFTA would restrict our health freedom of choice, destroy thousands of small businesses in the health foods and dietary supplement fields, and negatively impact health care practitioners and the 150 million regular consumers of dietary supplements like myself.

CAFTA is bad for jobs, small businesses, health stores, health freedom, the environment and human rights.

It is passionately opposed by the populations of all the CAFTA countries! It will only benefit very few.

The small benefits would be vastly outweighed by the negatives. It has been shown that arguments for it have been based on very distorted numbers, and extraordinary assumptions that the US will not import significantly more from Central America.

Since 70 percent of the US population use dietary supplements, and 40 percent use them on a regular basis, this is a significant constituency, which should not be underestimated.

Any arrangement that leads to the banning of thousands of safe products cannot remotely be described as "free trade". There are better ways to promote regional trade. If this cannot be done without threatening my basic right to have access to nutritional choices then we should scrap CAFTA and start over. I appreciate your consideration of my views and look forward to knowing your position on this treaty.

Sincerely,





CAFTA - BAD for jobs, small businesses, health stores, health freedom read on..

In the fine print the US is being signed up to global regulations that override US supplement laws.



What has the Central American "Free Trade" Agreement got to do with my health store?

Why Stop CAFTA?

CAFTA contains fine print to let strict new global food laws (Codex) into America.


This is NOT "Free Trade"!
Thousands of safe products could be banned in the USA!

Today in Germany, zinc is $54 a bottle. Woman arrested in France for selling 500mg of vitamin C! UK health consumers, even after submitting over a million signatures on petitions, realized they “woke up” too late.

CAFTA is the latest treaty carving new trade areas in the world, moving us faster toward the FTAA – FREE TRADE AREA OF THE AMERICAS – an area like the European Union, here - in North and South America. Our borders are becoming irrelevant! Thanks to NAFTA, CAFTA, and next the FTAA!

These agreements are drawn up by big businesses and bureaucrats. They already have a track record of destroying protections for small businesses (which create the most jobs), labor, the environment, - and now our health choices.

Very low dosage limits are already law in many countries, and this is gradually working it’s way across the globe. There are heavy restrictions on almost all supplements in Europe, Canada and Australia, where many are regulated as drugs. And they cost from five to ten times what it cost before the restrictions were implemented a few years ago. Herbals will not be available.

Read "Who Says Whatever Happens at Codex Doesn't Affect US Law and Why Do They Say It?" at The Law Loft.

Even if you are not opposed to CAFTA for other reasons, please call Congress to protest the fact that it makes US supplements vulnerable. There is a better way to do globalization. If they can't do it without threatening our health freedom, then we must scrap the these international rules and start over.

You might consider this article by Public Citizen, that shows how the numbers from the previous treaty, NAFTA, have been distorted to hide the costs of CAFTA: "Fool Me Twice?"

Unless you and I act NOW to stop these treaties – virtually irreversible once passed - products could start disappearing from U.S. shelves over time, smaller cutting-edge companies could be driven out of business, many nutrients and new breakthroughs could become illegal or super expensive. If we allow these irreversible treaties now, it won’t matter how much we protest later!

In the fine print, CAFTA makes the US subject to the "SPS Agreement": another treaty to adopt world food standards (called Codex). Article 3 of SPS states: “To harmonize sanitary and phytosanitary measures on as wide a basis as possible, Members SHALL base their food safety measures on international standards, guidelines or recommendations.” This makes the supposedly “voluntary” Codex standard for vitamins and minerals MANDATORY for all nations who are members of the World Trade Organization. Since these standards are being adopted everywhere these "free trade" areas exist, there are also many other economic reasons US supplements will be restricted.

Republicans, Democrats, liberals, conservatives, trade unions, citizen advocacy groups, and other countries, are part of a great opposition to CAFTA.

This treaty is in trouble! But it could still pass… as there’s a big campaign to lobby Congress this week to push it through! There are many Representatives, especially Republicans, who have not yet made up their mind. Every call, fax and email counts!

- Let's show them this time they've gone one step too far.

Make your access to health freedom a reason CAFTA fails!



Action Alert: CAFTA vote count

July 21, 2005

"With just two weeks to go until the August recess, Republican House leaders are possibly facing do-or-die time for the Central America Free Trade Agreement(CAFTA). The Republican whip operation is running at full throttle, making deals on China policy and textile production at a fast clip in the hopes of wooing just enough members off the fence to pass the pivotal trade pact." (The Hill newspaper, July 20, 2005)

Yes, time is running out. Closed-door deals are being made. Arms are being twisted. Pressure builds as not-so-subtle taxpayer-funded bribes are offered.

"At a closed-door meeting of House Republicans yesterday, Rep. Bill Thomas (Calif.)sidled up to the lectern and hinted that the leadership might look more favorably on lawmakers’ requests for highways and bridges if they vote for the Central American Free Trade Agreement, according to three GOP witnesses." (The Washington Post, July 21, 2005)

In other words, "Want that highway project back home? You had better vote for CAFTA. Want that new bridge? You had better vote for CAFTA even though you know it is bad for America."

One of the first House members to be bought off was Congressman Phil English(R-Penn.). Mr. English had always opposed CAFTA, but just a few days ago he soldout. He now says he is "comfortable" voting for CAFTA. This puts the pro-CAFTA forces one critical vote closer to having the 218 votes they need to pass it in the U.S. House.

What's the vote count? According to Congress Daily, 105 House members will vote "yes" or are leaning to vote "yes" on CAFTA with 166 members who will vote "no" or are leaning to vote "no." That leaves 163 House members who are undecided or aren't saying. To stop CAFTA, we must convince at least 53 of those 163 members to vote against CAFTA.

The House will likely vote on CAFTA Wednesday or Thursday of next week. The vote will be extremely close -- just like the vote was on the Medicare prescription-drug bill where House leaders were willing to resort to bribes and out-right threats to win.

"According to the administration and House aides, the White House has authorized Republican leaders to secure votes with whatever is at hand, from amendments[read pork-barrel projects in their respective districts] to the highway and energy bills to the still incomplete appropriations bills." (The Washington Post, July 21, 2005)

So, between now and next week, the pro-CAFTA forces are working overtime. Deals are being made on highway projects, bridges, committee chairmanships, rides on Air Force One, dinners at the White House, campaign contributions, and countless pork projects that have nothing whatsoever to do with CAFTA or true free trade.

Faced with all this, what can we do? Representatives who change their vote to support CAFTA in return for the promise of pork-barrel projects in their district or rides on Air Force One think they will impress the voters back home by "bringing home the bacon." You are that voter back home. It's up to you. Are you impressed?

Only hearing from you can convince your representative that politics as usual won’t work this time. In fact, it stinks.

Will you let your representative know there will be a price to pay for selling out? You do that when you contact his office and let him know you are informed and watching. That’s the only language most of our elected officials seem to understand.

And that's why what you do right now is so important.

Do you want to know where your U.S. representative stands on CAFTA? Check the recent Congress Daily vote check posted at http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/caftavotecount.htm.

Now take action. If your representative is against CAFTA, tell him "thank you, don't bend under pressure, I support you!" If he is for CAFTA, urge him to change his mind -- it is important you make it clear that you oppose CAFTA.

If your representative is undecided, convince him to vote against it and tell him no matter what payoff he might be offered, there is nothing worth the damage CAFTA will do to America.

CAFTA can be defeated in the U.S. House next week, but you must act. More than ever, what you do matters. ...

Also, please spread the word. Share a copy of this message by forwarding this message.

Thank you for your help!

Kent Snyder

The Liberty Committee


Use the link at the top of this page to send an E-mail message to your U.S. representative. Then call your U.S. representative. The U.S. Capitol switchboard phone number is 202-224-3121 or use our directory above.





LATEST VOTE TALLY: http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/caftavotecount.htm

Phone/fax available at
http://www.congress.org or by calling the above toll free numbers.



27 July '05 possibly final day

For the New York, New Jersey area, it is advisable for people to focus on:

Timothy Bishop, (D-NY 1st District), undecided
Phone: (202) 225-3826 Fax: (202) 225-3143

Sherwood Boehlert, (R-NY 24th District), undecided
Phone: (202) 225-3665 Fax: (202) 225-1891

Gary Ackerman, (D-NY-5th) District, no response
Phone: (202) 225-2601 Fax: (202) 225-1589

Vito Fossella, (R-NY-13rd) District, no response
Phone: (202) 225-3371 Fax: (202) 226-1272

Sue Kelly, (R-NY-19th) District, no response
Phone: (202) 225-5441 Fax: (202) 225-3289

John Kuhl, (R-NY-29th) District, undecided
Phone: (202) 225-3161 Fax: (202) 226-6599

Frank LoBiondo, (R-NJ-2nd) no response
Phone: (202) 225-6572 Fax: (202) 225-3318

Carolyn McCarthy, (D-NY-4th) leaning No,
Phone: (202) 225-5516 Fax: (202) 225-5758

John McHugh, (R-NY-23rd) 23rd District, undecided
Phone: (202) 225-4611 Fax: (202) 226-0621

Gregory Meeks, (D-NY-6th) District, undecided
Phone: (202) 225-3461 Fax: (202) 226-4169

Donald Payne (D-NJ-10th) District, leaning No
Phone: (202) 225-3436 Fax: (202) 225-4160

Thomas Reynolds, (R-NY-26th) District, no response
Phone: (202) 225-5265 Fax: (202) 225-5910

Steven Rothman, (D-NJ-9th) District, leaning No
Phone: (202) 225-5061 Fax: (202) 225-5851

Jim Saxton, (R-NJ-3rd) District, no response
Phone: (202) 225-4765 Fax: (202) 225-0778

Christopher Smith, (R-NJ-4th) District, no response
Phone: (202) 225-3765 Fax: (202) 225-7768

John Sweeney, (R-NY-20th) District, no response
Phone: (202) 225-5614 Fax: (202) 225-6234

Edolphus Towns, (D-NY-10th) District, undecided
Phone: (202) 225-5936 Fax: (202) 225-1018

James Walsh, (R-NY-25th) District, undecided
Phone: (202) 225-3701 Fax: (202) 225-4042

Scott Garrett, (R-NJ-5th) District, declined to answer
Phone: (202) 225-4465 Fax: (202) 225-9048

Steve Israel, (D-NY-2nd) District, undecided
Phone: (202) 225-3335 Fax: (202) 225-4669



It will take a lot of pressure, and many more calls and letters to raise this issue of the international threat to supplements. Many in Congress have not yet heard of Codex.
Please follow this site for further information.

If opposition succeeds in delaying CAFTA, it could still come back for a vote later.

Calls need to number in the millions if we are to make this a 'third rail' issue. It is
going to take sustained involvement by the public over a long time, to achieve
adequate status for natural medicine.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Details you don't have to get into when you write:

Here is the text of the treaty: CAFTA-DR, Office of the US Trade Representative.

Section 6 broadens and deepens the U.S. commitment to Codex under the World Trade Organization SPS agreement: "The objectives of this Chapter are to.. enhance the Parties’ implementation of the SPS Agreement."

Read the Agreement itself, not the Act, to find the sections of concern to U.S. consumers of dietary supplements.


H.R. 3045 is the Implementation Act (of CAFTA-DR), passed by the House.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Caution Many healthstores will not have heard of this issue, or tell you that to oppose CAFTA is unnecessary. Many have had advice from their trade associations that Codex is not a problem. The NNFA, IADSA, CRN and well-known doctors are all saying this. This is unlikely to change. They all chose to overlook (and now downplay) the fine print mentioned above and the WTO adoption of Codex as worldwide standards. Even Codex delegates are still being told the supplement Guidelines are optional by the Codex panel, who privately have admitted the opposite to observers.

The vitamin trade associations have been misled, while several of their members are actively working in Codex in the interest of accessing wider markets, with reduced quality for greater profit. These trade associations were the first thing the pharmaceuticals had to influence, in order to fulfil their aims. Many of the supplement companies and their suppliers of raw materials are now owned by pharmaceuticals.

If and when the products on the shelves change, the legislation will have been long in place. But the framework is being put in place now.

Please note that some former members of the NNFA strongly disagree with that organization's position, which is the result of a legal opinion which others find to be inadequate.

Everyone who is aware of the issue and who has no connection with pharmaceutical interests or funding is concerned about Codex.