Welcome! As our most recent visitor, you're location should correspond to the red dot in the map below:
Geo-location by Web-Stat web page counters - Map by Green-Acres (Landes property) : Loading Map ...

The following is a one page publication put out by the
Office of the United States Trade Representative, entitled
CAFTA Policy Brief - July 2005

The portions in black are the entirety of the document,
while those in red are my own commentary.
Quotations from the Act, and the SPS Agreement, are in blue.

The Real 
CAFTA Facts 
CAFTA and Dietary Supplements

(This publication of the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is a big lie – a piece of propaganda undoubtedly influenced and inspired by the pro-Illness forces of the Pharmaceutical Industry)

  • The CAFTA-DR will not limit consumer access to dietary supplements in any way, nor will it change the way the federal government or U.S. states regulate dietary supplements.
CAFTA (HR 3045)  SEC. 102 (a) starts out with the deceptively reassuring:

No provision of the Agreement ... which is inconsistent with any law of the United States shall have effect. 

But then slips in the following nasty little caveat:

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to amend or modify any law of the United States, or to limit any authority conferrd under any law of the United States, unless specifically provided for in this Act.

What about the United States law known as DSHEA, unanimously passed by Congess to confer upon every American citizen  the right to have access to nutritional supplements on the same basis as access to food – i.e. freely, without prescription, and with no upper limits on nutrient content? Let’s see what is “specifically provided for in this Act” that will require the United States" to amend or modify" THAT law.

Keep in mind that what this is saying is: if some provision of Cafta/SPS/Codex IS "inconsistent with any law of the United States" then that law MUST be "amended or modified" to MAKE it consistent.

  • Chapter Six of the CAFTA-DR (Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures – SPS), which some have claimed could limit access by American consumers to dietary supplements, does not create any substantive rights or obligations. It merely:

    •  
    • Says the seven governments do not intend the CAFTA-DR to change their existing SPS rights and obligations under the WTO.
    Chapter Six Article 6.1, Affirmation of the SPS Agreement, states:

    The Parties affirm their existing rights and obligations with respect to each other under the SPS Agreement.

    Chapter Six DOES NOT authorize the “seven governments” to continue ignoring their existing obligations, as they may well have been doing in the past.  Indeed, it emphasizes their responsibility to get serious about abiding by their SPS obligations. So let’s see which of those obligations will result in “limiting the authority” of the United States to continue enforcing the provisions of DSHEA.

    – Note: WTO rules, in effect since 1995, have had absolutely no impact on the regulation or availability of dietary supplements in the United States.

    Well, duh! Do you think that might have something to due with the fact that the Codex Vitamin and Mineral Guidelines were only finalized (Step 8) in Rome last month (i.e. in July 2005)?

  • Establishes an inter-governmental committee to discuss SPS issues of mutual interest.


    • Chapter Six  Article 6.3, Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Matters, states

    The objectives of the Committee shall be to help each Party implement the SPS Agreement … consulting on issues, positions, and agendas for meeting of theWTO SPS Committee, the various Codex committees (including the Codex Alimentarius Commission) …

– The SPS committee will not seek to harmonize national SPS regulations governing dietary supplements. In fact, Chapter Six does not require, recommend, or even mention harmonization.

One-fourth true. Chapter Six does not “mention” harmonization – but that doesn’t mean harmonization is not required by other provisions. And it is false that there is any explicit provision preventing this SPS committee from “seeking to harmonize”.

    – The committee will simply work to assist the seven governments in carrying out their obligations under the WTO SPS Agreement.

    And so what is the SPS Agreement obligation directly affecting (nullifying) DSHEA?

  • Contrary to assertions some have made, the CAFTA-DR will not require the United States to

    •  
    • apply the recently adopted Codex Alimentarius Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Supplements. In fact, the agreement imposes no obligations regarding Codex standards or guidelines.

      •  
    • change the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), which regulates dietary supplements in the United States.
Zero per-cent true – the WTO is the “requiring”, i.e. enforcing body for countries refusing to adopt Codex guidelines.  Any country resisting “harmonization” is subject to TRADE SANCTIONS.
  • 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 supplement consumed.


    • This is like saying that our laws against criminal activity are merely voluntary guidelines. Yes, they do not prevent criminals from ignoring those laws, but they do impose penalties if those laws are broken. Likewise, countries are free to ignore the Codex Guidelines. But if they do there will be penalties to pay! Under the threat of economically ruinous WTO sanctions, legislatures will cave in and favor abrogating the citizens' hard won liberties in preference to alienating special corporate trade interests.
     

  • The Guidelines do NOT establish upper limits for vitamins and minerals in supplements.
    • This is another incomplete truth designed to anesthetize the American Congress and the public against the dangers to health freedom posed by the Codex Vitamin and Mineral “Guidelines”. These Guidelines DO establish incredibly low upper limits for vitamins and minerals in supplements – those which will be allowed to be sold over the counter (Vitamin C at dosages greater than 200mg will be as illegal as heroin). The ONLY WAY supplements having any kind of meaningful potency will be available is with a doctor’s prescription! And in both cases the prices will be astronomical, as we know by the experience of Norway, Germany, and other countries which have already harmonized with Codex.
    • Nothing in the WTO SPS Agreement will require the United States to adopt the Codex Guidelines.
    EVERYTHING in the WTO SPS Agreement will require the United States to adopt the Codex Guidelines.
    And while the attack on U.S. sovereignty, and on Americans’ right to have free access to dietary supplements, continues to be mounted with ever increasing ferocity by these "globalizing", one-world government, international forces, a concommitant and fully coordinated domestic legislative attack is well underway to soften up the target:

    There is only ONE pro-Health Bill pending in the 109th Congress, Ron Paul’s HR 2352, Consumers Access to Health Information Act, which is currently stalled in the Subcommittee on Health. 

    Meanwhile there is a barrage of pro-Illness Bills, designed to gut DSHEA and thus pave the way for the United States to become fully CODEXed:

    HR 3156 Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act

    SA 1379 attached to S 1042

    S 3 Protecting America in the War on Terror Act 

    HR 2485 DSHEA Full Implementation and Enforcement Act

    HR 2510 Dietary Supplement Regulatory Implementation Act


    - Richard Brodie

    http://www.codexalimentarious.com/