Category Archives: codex alimentarius

Codex Alimentarius: A Serious Threat To Your Health

Codex Alimentarius

Imagine a world where you need a doctor’s prescription (and thus, health insurance), to buy your every-day organic health supplements.

Imagine a world where some of your most-trusted vitamins and supplements are not even on the market!

If this sounds like a bad scene from Big Brother, think again. Our government may be advancing towards giving more and more power to the Codex Alimentarius trade commission, an organization created to limit and control the freedom to buy every day supplements, vitamins, minerals, and even organic foods.

What is Codex Alimentarius?

Codex Alimentarius is a “trade commission” created by the UN in attempt to control all aspects of how food and nutritional supplements are exchanged through buyer and consumer networks.

In Latin, “Codex Alimentarius” literally translates into “food rules.” And even though the UN claims that the goals of Codex Alimentarius are geared towards “protecting the health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade, and promoting coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations,” it is clear that this organization is more about control and multi-national profits, than protecting the average consumer.

It is important to understand that this organization is not a consumer protection agency, nor a human rights agency, nor a public health organization. This organization is a trade-based commission, whose goals are clearly profit-focused. In fact, the basis of the Codex Alimentarius poses a huge threat to our basic freedoms of choice in terms of health and well-being.

What are the future plans of Codex?

Codex plans to bolster extreme opposition against natural forms of medicine and nutrition. One standard which was approved in 2005 was called the Codex Alimentarius Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG), a document which has the power to ban many powerful vitamins and mineral supplements under the basis of for-hire studies.

This means, the organization pays scientists and doctors to tell them what is most profitable to hear. From there, more money will go to the pharmaceutical industry over natural remedies. One measure even bans Vitamin C to servings of only several milligrams.

Other Frightening Codex Standards Include:

  • Steep laws governing food and nutritional supplements
  • Laws governing our rights to grow organic seeds
  • Laws governing our rights to buy organic produce
  • An increase on tight FDA rules on food and supplements

Why is the Government Trying to Control Our Supplements?

The natural health and supplement industries represent a growing sector of the economy. As profits on natural living increase, big pharmaceutical companies, as well as big-Agro businesses, are beginning to feel threatened.

If they can enact stricter laws controlling supplements, consumers like yourself, will have less freedom to choose a pro-active approach to health and healing. In this sense, these laws could potentially endanger our ability to care for ourselves naturally.

Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM has studied natural healing methods for over 20 years and now teaches individuals and practitioners all around the world. He no longer sees patients but solely concentrates on spreading the word of health and wellness to the global community. Under his leadership, Global Healing Center, Inc. has earned recognition as one of the largest alternative, natural and organic health resources on the Internet.

Hot Times In Geneva

Scott Tips arguing against rBGH, as shown on the Codex big screen. July 8, 2015

Scott Tips arguing against rBGH, as shown on the Codex big screen. July 8, 2015

How to Force More Drug Ill-Effects on Billions of People and Make Tons of Money.

Most people would not think of Geneva, Switzerland as an uncomfortably hot city. But each and every time I’ve been here, it has been. The city was so hot this most recent trip that I actually saw two trees fighting over a dog.

Still, the reason for braving the heat here was a good and necessary one: The 38th session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission was being held this week of July 6-11, 2015 and one of the most important items to be debated on its agenda was the adoption of a Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) for recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) or recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST).

It might sound inconsequential, but it isn’t. As I have mentioned before, obtaining an MRL at Codex for rBGH is the marketing equivalent of a drug company being handed the “Keys to the City.” It is a license to sell the vet drug throughout the Codex member-state world, with World Trade Organization (WTO) sanction power behind it. Many Codex members and member states—such as the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, India, Russia, and China—have banned this genetically modified veterinary drug’s use on animals under a very sensible health policy that prohibits drug use on animals for anything other than therapeutic purposes. The vet drug rBGH, injected into cows, is not therapeutic; it is used to increase milk production. Yet, if an MRL is approved at Codex, then the Europeans and many others would be faced with a dilemma: Acquiesce to its introduction into their food supply or else pay heavy trade sanctions imposed upon them by the WTO.

Industry Science Supposedly Says rBGH is Safe

The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) has conducted three safety reviews of rBGH and its representative keeps insisting to the Codex delegates that these safety reviews have shown the veterinary drug to be safe, with no noticed increase in mastitis (udder infections) or antimicrobial residues from rBGH use. The JECFA representative at this meeting took the same position as she had expressed at the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods held in Costa Rica last April, that JECFA’s “systematic review of the literature published since the 50th JECFA [1998] did not find any significant difference in the incidence of mastitis … [nor] specific studies correlating the use of rbST with the development of antimicrobial resistance.”

Pro-rBGH delegates at the current meeting were not shy about repeatedly pointing out that this was JECFA’s third review of rBGH for safety. How could anyone, they hypnotically demanded time and again, possibly have an issue with three JECFA reviews that found no safety concerns for rBGH? And besides, they added, since this Codex standard has been on hold for fifteen years, we would be harming Codex’s credibility were we to turn our backs on JECFA science and refuse to adopt the MRLs for rBGH that JECFA assures us are safe.

Every Western Hemispheric country but Canada (which had to sit silently on its hands since Health Canada had declared rBGH unsafe) was in favor of adopting this MRL. Most African countries and many Asian countries declared the same, along with every two-bit Pacific or Caribbean island that the U.S. could fly in so as to add weight to the clamor for adoption.

So, What’s the Problem?

Only that the Codex delegates representing more than half of the World’s population do not believe that the JECFA risk assessment was either sound or scientific. Indeed, many thought the risk assessment was very political and industry-influenced. The NHF had also strongly argued at the previous meeting that JECFA had overlooked negative study results from the industry itself, and even the product warning labeling for Monsanto’s rBGH product (Posilac), which cautions users about a possible increase in mastitis in cows injected with Posilac.

Curiously enough, during its own first two reviews, JECFA had specifically excluded any consideration of mastitis issues, claiming that these safety problems were outside the scope of the JECFA review. So, contrary to pro-rBGH claims, there had not really been three JECFA reviews of all the issues.

My fellow NHF delegate, Robert Cohen – an expert on rBGH and its many dangers – argued that the goalposts for antibiotic use to treat mastitis had been moved so dramatically as to render them almost useless as a measure of antibiotic harm. It turns out, Cohen says, that FDA employee Dr. Margaret Miller (formerly with Monsanto) arbitrarily raised FDA’s allowable antimicrobial level 100 times from one part per hundred-million to one part per million. This has allowed more antibiotics to be passed along to humans in cow’s milk, with a resulting increase in antimicrobial resistance (i.e., pathogens resistant to antibiotic use by humans to kill those bad bugs).

In addition, Cohen pointed out that a herd of Holstein cows injected with the genetically engineered bovine growth hormone presented extremely shocking results upon autopsy, which the FDA and Monsanto did not make public. It was only upon publication in a dairy magazine that consumers learned that rBGH-injected cows lost an average of 100 pounds after six months, but that their hearts and spleens and other stressed organs had grown abnormally large.

NHF delegate Robert Cohen & NHF Delegation Head Scott Tips

NHF delegate Robert Cohen & NHF Delegation Head Scott Tips

Dr. Michael Hansen of Consumers International (CI) was at this meeting and argued, among other things, that studies have shown that: (1) rBGH use significantly increases mastitis rates; and (2) the average length of treatment for a case of mastitis is almost six times longer in the rBGH-treated cows compared to untreated cows.

Because some dairy farmers deliberately use off-label and other antibiotics that are not tested for by the government and use them for longer periods of time, antibiotic use in cows is far greater than reported by the government or industry. Given that rBGH-injected cows need more antibiotics to cope with their greater health problems, such hidden use is not surprising. If the milk coming from these dairy farms exceeds even the lax antibiotic levels permitted by the FDA, then the dairy farmers face huge economic losses as their milk is rejected for sale. Unfortunately, though, the bottom-line is that rBGH-injected cows have more health issues, which in turn results in more antibiotic use, which in turn results in humans developing antimicrobial resistance (AMR, as Codex puts it) to harmful pathogens.

Yet, despite this and an enormous amount of other evidence out there, JECFA and its worshippers at Codex continue to insist that rBGH is safe. With AMR, JECFA has even twisted the lack of data on AMR into a conclusion that AMR is not an issue with rBGH use! As every true scientist knows, an absence of data means scientists wait to draw conclusions until they have the data.

Too, we suspect that JECFA’s expert body on AMR may not be as disinterested as they should be in making their risk assessments of rBGH. An NHF investigator found that one of the Codex Antimicrobial experts, Y. Tamara, was working for Mead Johnson’s GMO division in 2004 where he obtained a U.S. patent for a GMO grain.

The truth is that alarm bells are ringing everywhere, and have been for decades, about the dangers of this non-medical drug use on animals; and, yet, our supposed scientific authorities sit there and act as if nothing is wrong at all. Others, conditioned to blindly accept “scientific” pronouncements no matter how badly based, shore up these rickety pronouncements with their unthinking support. If JECFA were truly doing its job, then it would be ruthless about tracking down each and every hint of evidence that rBGH poses a human and animal health problem. But, sadly enough, JECFA’s reviews were third rate.

The Codex Dog-and-Pony Show

It happens every time. It happened with ractopamine, GMO labeling, melamine, and now rBGH. The countries and trade groups that want to make money off of some drug or food product will present their “science” showing how incredibly safe it is and how we would all be idiots if we didn’t accept the product immediately. It is then up to us to show that they are wrong and that the science indeed shows health risks. If they are able to snag JECFA on their side, then they will also argue that Codex must not insult Codex and appear stupid for not following its own body’s scientific risk assessment. The arguments go back and forth until one side wins.

The problem, though, is that Codex-system inertia and bias is on the side of any proposed standard. “We need this standard,” the Burkina Faso delegate said about rBGH. “We will lose our credibility [look stupid] if we do not pass a standard,” Brazil chimed in. Many others agreed. Typically, the countries and industries pushing the standard only think in one direction: Push the standard forward to completion. As I argued at the meeting, they are like drivers who have taken a wrong turn and are now claiming that the only way out is forward, not a retracement of the route, otherwise the driver will “look stupid.” No, as we all know, the driver will look stupid if he or she continues forward on the wrong path, just as with this rBGH standard.

Codex venue in Geneva, Switzerland

Codex venue in Geneva, Switzerland

Codex Steps Back From the Brink

With the rBGH standard having been held at Codex’s final Step 8 for fifteen years, the United States and its minions had pulled out all of the stops at this year’s meeting to give this standard a final push over the edge and get it adopted. In anticipation of forcing a rare vote on the standard, they had flown in every small and large country they could, with who-knows-what promises – a free vacation in Geneva, free mastitis for life, or maybe a simple promise not to wire-tap its leaders’ communications. We don’t really know, but we do know that, otherwise absent from Codex meetings, these “now-you-see-them, now-you-don’t” delegations mysteriously seem to appear on cue for any meetings where a vote might be taken. And they always support the U.S. position.

If adopted at the final Step 8 at this Commission meeting, then the rBGH standard would be a done deal, ready for use as a weapon by the United States, Mexico, Brazil, and others who chose to export rBGH-doped milk into other Codex countries that actually care about their citizens’ health. It was the European Union, India, Russia, China, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, Uganda, Botswana, Georgia, Consumers International, and the NHF against the Western Hemispheric countries, plus most African countries, New Zealand, and the ICGMA (International Council of Grocery Manufacturers Associations). Cuba, Costa Rica, and Brazil were the most outspoken in favor of adopting the rBGH standard, while the European nations, India, NHF and CI were the most adamant against its adoption.

India, which has a reputation for making the timeliest interventions, opposed adoption, stating that its own recent study showed problems with rBGH use in cows. It also argued that with 36 standards already having been adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission at this session, Codex was hardly at risk of having its credibility questioned if it refused to adopt this one.

NHF’s first intervention against adoption was spoken by Robert Cohen, who proceeded to lambast the FDA for its position on rBGH. It was so strong that, after the day’s session and while waiting for me to complete a radio interview, he was confronted by three FDA personnel who expressed their anger and hostility towards him. And the next day, when I “flagged up” again for NHF to speak, the Chairwoman, Awilo Pernet, was extremely hesitant to call upon me to speak, only doing so after I had spoken privately with their legal counsel and as the very last delegation to speak.

The conference room in Geneva for the Codex meeting

The conference room in Geneva for the Codex meeting

With the debate spread over two days and seemingly inexhaustible, the Australian delegate (who expressed support for rBGH) wisely suggested that in light of an unmentionable previous experience (the adoption of a standard for ractopamine) where a standard had been forced down the throats of a majority of the World’s population by a mere one-country vote majority (remember, Tonga’s vote carries the same weight as China’s), the rBGH standard should be “parked” at Step 8 until such time as consensus could be reached. What Australia was telling everyone without saying it is that Australia did not support taking this up for a vote, which would be devastating for Codex and its member states politically. Weighing the cost, Australia very astutely found it wanting. Perhaps Australia had already felt the domestic heat from its ractopamine position, or perhaps Australia was simply being politically savvy. Regardless, the Australian position set the tone and any fervor by the pro-rBGH camp to vote on this standard evaporated, except for a few diehards such as Tonga.

The Chairwoman proposed a face-saving compromise that the MRLs for rBGH continue to be held at Step 8 and revisited at each annual meeting until consensus could be reached. Because it was a slap in the face to JECFA for this Commission not to adopt a standard that JECFA had found safe, the Chairwoman couched her compromise with a soothing opening sentence that “The Commission recognized the validity of JECFA’s risk assessments as the sound scientific basis for its deliberations on rbSTs.” This sentence was not true, though, as many delegations had challenged JECFA’s risk assessment as incomplete; and when finally given the chance to speak on this compromise, I was the only one to state this fact.

In the end, however, the Chairwoman had her way; and the rBGH standard was “parked” at Step 8, to be battled over in a future meeting. The World had won a reprieve.

Sanitized Codex Reports

Codex brags about its transparency. But its Commission and Committee reports say otherwise. Try to find out which delegation took a particular position on an issue. Good luck, because 95% of the time you won’t. The names have been omitted. NHF has protested this non-transparent practice across time and in many meetings, as the World should know what positions delegations have taken. Unfortunately, our protests have fallen on deaf ears.

The Final Reports are deficient in other ways as well: They are scrubbed clean, sanitized. One egregious example occurred on Saturday, July 11th, during the reading and correction of the Report of this meeting, when I asked for the floor so that NHF’s last comment about not agreeing with the validity of JECFA’s risk assessment could be inserted into the Report. I pushed the microphone button so that the Chairwoman Awilo Pernet would see NHF on her screen, along with those other delegations asking for the floor. I propped our name sign up so it was also visible. The Chairwoman called and kept calling on everyone but NHF. At strategic moments, I cancelled my computer-system request for the floor and pushed the request button again so that it would flash on her screen, again. I was still ignored. I even grabbed our NHF name placard off of its stand and waved it at arm’s length wildly above my head. Nothing. Thirty minutes in all had passed and the Chairwoman had still refused to recognize me at all.

The Chairwoman clearly feared that I would want to insert something negative about JECFA into the Report, but her refusal to recognize me to speak was absolutely inexcusable conduct on her part. And it is being protested and publicized far and wide as an example of misconduct. Even others came up to me afterwards and expressed their surprise at how we had been handled.

The bottom-line on Codex Reports is that they cannot always be trusted as a complete record of what transpired at the meetings. Future historians, as yet unborn, will have to mine articles such as this one to determine the substance of what really happened at these food-standard meetings.

rBGH Science is the Tartan Bag

In a hugely funny skit done by the British comedians Bill Bailey and Simon Pegg, the skit opens with Bill Bailey sitting on a stool at his baggage-claim counter at some indeterminate airport. The phone rings, and rings. Bailey lazily picks up the phone and answers in his most disinterested tone, “Lost luggage.” “Have you seen my tartan bag with green tags?” the voice at the other end desperately asks. Without moving off his stool, Bailey slowly looks to his right and down and then turns and does the same to his left. “No,” he eventually answers, “we haven’t found it.” And he hangs up.

The scene changes to Simon Pegg, the fresh blood, now sitting on the same stool at the same counter, with his hand eagerly hovering over the phone, just waiting for it to ring. It barely rings before Pegg scoops it up and gets the same query as before, “Have you seen my tartan bag with green tags?” “Green tartan bag!” he barks back, “I’m there!” He leaps off his stool and is already running by the time his feet are barely on the ground. Pegg runs through the airport, hounding passengers, commandeering the public announcement, riding the baggage carousel and throwing off bags, until eventually hours later he finds the tartan bag. He triumphantly takes it back and plunks it down on the counter in front of Bailey, who, now sitting at the lost-luggage counter, then phones the owner and claims credit for having found it.

In this modern-day parable, we have JECFA as Bill Bailey and NHF, India, the European Union, and CI as Simon Pegg. We run around and find all of the evidence for the considerable health risks of rBGH while JECFA barely glances around and sees nothing. Yet, mark my words, when JECFA does eventually come around and sees the light, everyone will be acclaiming and applauding JECFA for its thorough search. And the funny thing is that we will be among those applauding, because, after all, one more health risk will have been removed from our food and they can get the credit just so long as we get the health.

Scott C. Tips is President of the National Health Federation. Scott is a California-licensed attorney, specializing in food-and-drug law and trademark law, but also engages in business litigation, general business law, and nonprofit organizations, with an international clientele. Since 1989, Scott has been the General Counsel for the National Health Federation, the World’s oldest health-freedom organization for consumers, as well as the Editor In Chief of its magazine, Health Freedom News. In 2007, he became NHF President, and has been a frequent speaker for the organization and for health freedom on several continents. As legal columnist, Scott writes a monthly column for Whole Foods Magazine called “Legal Tips,” a column he started many years ago. Currently, he is primarily occupied with health-freedom issues arising from national governments’ and such international organizations as the Codex Alimentarius Commission’s attempts to limit individual freedom of choice in health matters. In that capacity, he has compiled, edited, and published a book on the subject entitled Codex Alimentarius – Global Food Imperialism. He also attends Codex meetings worldwide and has attended more Codex meetings than any other health-freedom activist.

Pressure Applied On The U.S. Codex Office Regarding GMO-Contaminated Infant Formula

gmo infant formula

The National Health Federation (NHF) participated in an FDA-arranged conference call earlier this week in preparation for the U.S. position to be taken at the upcoming meeting of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses to be held in Bali, Indonesia, this late November. The topic was the proposed draft Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs) for labeling purposes in the guidelines on nutrition labeling. This is a joint FAO/WHO food standards program purportedly designed to protect children at risk from malnutrition and wasting by using fortified infant formula, follow-up formula, cereals, and also to set NRVs for infants and children. Unfortunately, Codex is allowing “fortification” with GMO-contaminated ingredients and that turned out to be the focus of the conference call.

There were only 21 present on the call despite the fact it is open to the general public. This conference call was conducted using the same protocol as in regular Codex meetings and participants were invited to speak at the end of reviewing the various sections up for debate.

Sadly, Fluoride is up for consideration to receive an NRV. Most likely, it will not receive an NRV in this Codex committee; but Fluoride will be reviewed for assignment of an NRV for Non-Communicable Diseases by a Working Group that the United States is working on. NHF will continue to follow this issue as our documented position has always been that Fluoride is toxic at any of the levels and for any of the purposes being considered by Codex.

As an accredited INGO at Codex, NHF participates in the electronic Working Group (eWG) for special dietary foods like infant and follow-up formula (FUF). FUF is designed for children from 6-36 months when transitioning from breast milk to a regular diet. Codex is concerned with wasting and malnutrition and these formulations are supposed to prevent both. Others have expressed the opinion, also noted in the Codex record, that FUF is primarily related to creating a market for a product targeting a certain demographic and that it is unnecessary. NHF agrees.

During the call, NHF made the comment, noted in the record, that NHF does not only feel that follow-up formula is unnecessary but that it is actually harmful, as the first ingredients listed are GMO ingredients such as corn, corn syrup, corn maltodextrin, and soy and/or soybean oil depending upon whether the FUF is milk-based or soy-based. Of course there are other problems with FUF, but today’s focus was on GMO and the fact it is not needed and is actually harmful.

Ingredients in the Nestle® version of FUF:


NHF advised the conferees that the focus on the NRVs (essentially, recommended daily allowances of vitamins and minerals) should not be the only concern but that the safety of the product must be considered. This formulation, we argued, will cause the very wasting and malnutrition it is designed to protect against (by the alteration of GI bacteria and the resultant inflammation). I asked if this aspect was able to be considered at this stage of the Codex process. Silence….

Next, there was a call by the Chairwoman for anyone else on the line familiar with or expert in GMO to comment. It was completely silent once again. Next, a request was made for NHF to state the GMO (contaminated) ingredients, so I ticked off the list: corn, sugar, and soy (which held the lion’s share) in the product and mentioned that these would be fed to infants and young children around the World. Again, the silence was deafening.

It is amazing that considering the GMO aspect should appear such a novel concept; no one seemed to be able to recite the macro-ingredients forming the largest percentage of FUF and acknowledge that they were GMOs. It was a case of “can’t see the forest for the trees” by only seeing the NRVs and not realizing that no amount of good nutrition was going to offset the disaster at the start of the formulation. Next, there followed an invitation to NHF that formal comments in regards to GMO in follow-up formula be submitted prior to the regular meeting in November. NHF already planned to submit research and comments on this topic as well as the NRVs, but now has this added incentive to do so.

Many other infant formulas have the same problem with GMO contamination. Last year, Abbot Laboratories shareholders voted to retain the GMO in Similac® despite the fact that it clearly has multiple GMO contaminations. Similac® soy formula has even more GMO content than Similac Sensitive®, probably more than 70% since the first few listed ingredients include 42.6% corn syrup, 14.7% soy protein isolate, 10.1% sugar (if beet sugar), and 8.4% soy oil.

This is why it is vital for NHF to be present at every level, protecting the consumer and speaking in defense of health and health freedom particularly for those who cannot speak to defend themselves. The issue of contamination with GMOs was totally ignored prior to our broaching the subject. Granted, it is the job of the Codex Committee on Food Labeling (CCFL) to handle that issue. But, we cannot ignore this. If NHF achieves getting it sent back through the CCFL for consideration, then we will have made progress. It might take some time but we are in it for the long term.

Whether researching, submitting comments, participating in eWGs as with this week’s phone conference, or appearing at international Codex meetings, NHF has the power to shape policy globally. It is unlikely that Nestle and the other big-name producers will stop making follow-up formula even though these children upwards of six months of age for whom it is designed need to be weaning to indigenous foods versus eating contaminated products.

NHF will continue to educate consumers and apply pressure in order to clean up these formulations and protect the health-integrity of growing children worldwide. If you would like to make your voice carried with us to the Codex Nutrition Committee this November, then please donate by helping underwrite a portion of NHF’s expenses at: and know your decision to help is impacting billions of the World’s children.

Kat Carroll is Associate Editor of the National Health Federation’s magazine, Health Freedom News, and is on the Board of Directors of the National Health Federation Canada. She also writes for several blogs, magazines, and is currently compiling a book on Codex Alimentarius based on first-hand experience attending International Codex meetings. Kat is a Nutritional Therapy Practitioner and Clinic Administrator at her and her husband’s Optometry clinics. Additionally, Kat enjoys hosting guests at Adytum Sanctuary, their Pacific Northwest retreat. [email protected].

What Is The World Health Organization?

The World Health Organization, or WHO, was officially established in 1948 by the United Nations. It was created with the goal of standardizing international health policies and practices to achieve “the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.”

WHO is the organization behind the curtain (or one of such) that pushes flouridation around the world as a means of eugenics. Since the organization is so large and has public support around the world, they have been very successful.

The WHO is very corrupt – the global mother of USA’s AMA. You see, big pharma, FDA, CDC, USDA, DHS (Department of Human Services) are becoming entwined and somewhat merged, causing a complete breakdown of our medical, health and human services systems.

I speculate that the deterioration of all of these organizations from the top down, is due to the WHO’s influence and control in round-about ways. The WHO is just another moving part of the New World Order (NWO); a branch of it, if you will – of which I am sure many will come to me and call me a conspirator for saying such ‘nonsense’. Any organization that seeks global dominance in any way is a dangerous organization, which we should all scrutinize. Not only does WHO wish to control our healthcare, they also wish to control our food supply. This is one avenue where Monsanto comes in. Monsanto is much bigger than most people think and the history goes way back.

As every nation in the world marches forward to a completely integrated and globalized society, the control of food is an absolute necessity for those who seek to accelerate amalgamation. It is for this reason that we see an increase in domestic legislation that mirrors the guidelines and demands of international standard-setting organizations. These attempts at harmonization of national laws, specifically those regarding food, are coming in daily from all sides of the globe.

Whether it’s the GMO fight in the United States, as well as other countries, or the question of the level of vitamins and minerals in supplements, the Biotech Corporations are continually winning most of their battles with the help of mass ignorance, national governments, the World Trade Organization (WTO) and similar entities.

Indeed, when one begins to examine many of the debates regarding food and food regulation, one name appears over and over – Codex Alimentarius.

For those who may be unaware of what Codex Alimentarius is, I refer you to a book called  Codex Alimentarius – The End of Health Freedom, or you can read it, via this website. Briefly speaking, however, Codex Alimentarius is an agency created under the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and the WHO, and thereby functions under direction of the United Nations (UN).

Codex Alimentarius sets the standards by which the World Trade Organization implements its dispute settlements and international trade policies. Codex Guidelines, once agreed upon, are enforced by the WTO and other related treaties. Essentially, Codex Alimentarius sets the standards for the world regarding food, vitamins and minerals, GMO’s, and almost everything else that humans consume.

Although the influence of Codex Alimentarius can be seen the world over, New Zealanders were targets of the international standard-setting organization via a food bill titled Food Bill 160-2 in 2011.

Similar to legislation passed in the United States, the New Zealand Food Bill essentially turns the right to grow food and share it with others into a regulated and controlled privilege. Food Bill 160-2 would also allow for the control of seeds (specifically heirloom seeds), and the creation of Food Safety Officers that would serve to police the newly designated and loosely termed “food producers.” It would also effectively end the ability of individuals to become and remain self-sufficient. “Control the food supply; control the people”.

For instance, the bill defines food so as to include any plant or animal (living or dead by the definitions set forth in the bill) intended for human consumption, as well as: any ingredient or nutrient or other constituent of any food or drink, whether that ingredient or nutrient or other constituent is consumed or represented for consumption on its own by humans, or is used in the preparation of, or mixed with or added to, any food or drink; and anything that is or is intended to be mixed with or added to any food or drink.

Furthermore, giving broad and alarming levels of power to the Governor-General, “anything that is declared by the Governor-General, by Order in Council made under section 355, to be food for the purposes of this Act” will also fall under the jurisdiction of Bill 160-2.

So much is included in just the “Definitions” section of the bill one could almost write a twenty-page article just on the connotations provided by Section 8 alone. Regardless, as one can clearly see from reading the small portion of the bill quoted above, the terms of the bill are all-encompassing.

Herein, food is defined literally as anything that can be consumed by humans and it retains this definition at whatever the stage of its development.

Therefore, corn may be considered food whenever it is being sold at a market. It may be considered food when it is being shucked, and it may be considered food when it is being grown. It is also considered food before being grown — in seed form.

Not only that, but because many seeds themselves are consumed by humans, seeds naturally fall under this tyrannical legislation as much as anything else.

As a result of the new policies to be implemented as a result of Food Bill 160-2, anyone then engaged in producing and distributing food would be subject to the regulation and monitoring of the new authorization program. Of course, the classification of “food producer,” applies to individuals who grow two or three tomato plants for their own consumption as much as it does to major Agri-businesses.

That being said, there are clearly financial concerns with the new bill, as well. Obviously, Big-Agra would easily be able to pay the monitoring fees for the new Soviet program while small farmers, where they still exist, could not. In addition, individuals would certainly no longer be able to continue selling their food at the local farmers market, local restaurants, or even to other individuals.

True to form, the questions regarding the new legislation are being brushed off by the New Zealand government, particularly those individuals in the New Zealand government who have been pushing the bill from the start.

For instance, Kate Wilkinson, New Zealand Minister of Food Safety stated that concerns over the Food Bill were part of some kind of “conspiracy theory” and that she didn’t understand where all this “conspiracy theory” was coming from.

Before I continue, I must ask if all this doesn’t sound eerily familiar. It certainly does to me. (That phrase is getting so played out by now)

In 2010 when the United States Congress was busy passing S.510, a bill that was very similar if not identical in scope to the New Zealand Food Bill, we heard the same cat calls of “conspiracy theory” launched at anyone who criticized the impending legislation. Now, after the U.S. government is constantly publicly raiding organic food shops, raw milk distributors, the Amish, small farmers, nutrition supplement shops, etc. etc. with guns drawn by clownish looking SWAT teams, the name-calling is a bit harder to justify.

The similarities between the law in the United States and New Zealand are quite striking, so much in fact that they can scarcely be considered a coincidence — especially when both of these bills are themselves disturbingly similar to Codex Alimentarius Guidelines and recommendations. Indeed, upon closer examination it appears that there is more of a pattern than some members of national governments would have us believe. No doubt this is almost always the case.

But, back to Miss “Conspiracy Theory” Kate Wilkinson for a moment. To answer her question as to where all the “conspiracy theories” have come from, perhaps she should look at her own statements.

In a letter to Green MP, Sue Kedgley, who has expressed some attenuated level of criticism toward the bill, Wilkinson wrote:

“The barter or selling of propagation food seeds and food seedlings is in scope [of the Bill] . . . However the sale or exchange of seeds for propagation, and seedlings (whether this occurs in the context of a garden center, a market, or between those in a community of interest), is not intended to be captured.”

Wilkinson openly admits that seeds can and will be controlled under the new food bill. Hardly a conspiracy theory when the antagonist actually admits it to be true.

Of course, before one gets their hopes up in regards to the Green Party, one should bear in mind that politics are politics and the theater of public opinion is much the same in New Zealand as it is in the United States. The Green Party itself initially voted for this bill. The organization states, “Ignore the Green Party dog-and-pony show propaganda. The Greens, who voted for the Bill at first reading, know the truth is coming out now and are dissembling for extra election votes).” Obviously, the political climate is exactly the same in every country with exactly the same result.

In the end, there should be no mistake as to the goal of these new laws, whether they be in the United States, New Zealand, or anywhere else for that matter. As the world marches faster and faster toward totalitarianism, the ability of individuals to become self-sufficient must be destroyed before the control system can fully assert itself. This, in fact, is an integral part of the system in the first place. This is causing manufactured famines in areas and thus leading people to believe we are running out of resources, due to overpopulation. Just what the green parties and our governments want you to believe, to condone the eugenics programs.

The UN’s Agenda 21 is already making its way into every city, under the guise of “sustainable development”, also being pushed by the green parties, eco-friendly organizations and the Centers for biodiversity. Next, we will lose our rights to own property and procreate – it will be left to those with certain bloodlines. These organizations are merely the domestic ground-level implementation of international policy handed down from Codex Alimentarius, the WTO, WHO, and the United Nations, entities that are themselves nothing more than tools in the Great Work known as the New World Order.

The National Betrayal Of Dr. Harvey Bigelsen


By Joshua Foster with Katherine Carroll, Associate Editor NHF –


SUPPORT DR. BIGELSEN and visit Just as the FDA and Codex are stripping away your ability to use nutritional supplements with therapeutic levels so are your alternative practitioners being attacked in a vicious attempt to force them out leaving you at the hands of an outdated medical model and Big Pharma. 

We often hear the tremendous respect and gratitude for men and women in our armed forces.  The ones who survived and the ones who were not as fortunate.  They are considered by many to be the front-line defenders of our freedoms and our liberties.  Often, though, they come home to find out that both their freedom and their liberties are in jeopardy on home turf; their enemy is domestic, not foreign.  They also find out that the respect and gratitude fade fast once back in the U.S.

Harvey Bigelsen, M.D. witnessed the Vietnam War from a viewpoint many of us would not wish on our worst enemy.  His work as a trauma surgeon specializing as an Ophthalmologist allowed many to see family trees continue to flower. Dr. Bigelsen was on the front lines where triage was concerned, literally holding lives in his hands and in his quick, expertly trained, decision-making process. This impeccable medical judgment was service at the very highest level, no matter your perspective on war.  He saved the lives of people who were sentenced to death and on death’s door when they came to him.  Legally.

Fast forward in the doctor’s life past years of experience at the highest levels of healing and the highest levels of understanding the human body deepening his education and embracing other disciplines as time passed.  Fast forward past four enlightening books he authored.  You will inexplicably and inevitably arrive at the recent charges and confiscations that plague Dr. Bigelsen in his hometown of Nevada City, California.  It is one of the most notorious cases of Nation turned traitor – the ultimate payback for years of dedicated service – namely betrayal at the hands of the medical mafia. His presumed weapon? Darkfield microscopes used to examine blood samples. His crime? A lot of menial accusations over nutritional supplement and homeopathic labeling that were not initiated by Dr. Bigelsen. Yet, he is facing jail for others’ product labels … a war hero turned criminal healer.

In Dr. Bigelsen’s own words, “On March 20, at approximately 11:00 a.m., seven uniformed officers came into my office and confiscated two microscopes. I was pretty overwhelmed and wanted to know why they took the microscopes, however they did not tell me. I stood at the doorway and said, ‘This is my personal property,’ and they physically shoved me out of the way. I called the local police and they came over; however, they sided with the uniformed officers. They placed a couple of slips of violations on my counter in the office and left.” Strangely, the charges brought against Dr. Bigelsen, for which he could be jailed as a felon, had to do with labeling of healing remedies, for which he was not directly responsible.

He faces the medical tyranny he swore an oath to defend us against.  If it is believed that a silver lining always exists, the newest investigations into his work may be his greatest validation.  If it did not embody what he claims or its truth could not stand on its own, would it still be met with such great resistance?  In a case of simple quackery, one is usually debunked with a heavy dose of factual evidence against ones hypothesis.  Apparently when a rebuttal is unavailable suppression is substituted.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident.”  You cannot cast doubt on a self-evident truth.  You must eliminate its availability to the public.    “Over the course of his 25 years of research, Harvey Bigelsen has learned how to interpret images created by the blood in order to understand a person’s total health. He has found that blood, like water, is a messenger of a person’s emotion and consciousness. This is exciting and spectacular research and my hope is that it will be shared with the world!  Dr. Masaru Emoto, who needs no introduction, leaves only monumental praise for Dr. Bigelsen.  This type of against-the-grain, revolutionary research, though, often finds itself with few allies.  Extraordinary minds reaching each other is like preaching to the choir.  But reaching the mind of the 100th monkey is a task often defended to the dying breath of the one profiting from withholding the vital, healing truth.

As this reaches you, NHF is helping to defend Dr. Bigelsen to not only protect his truths but to bring them to you as well. But that means taking on the battle of a humble healer, Dr. Bigelsen, to fight for his professional life like he fought for the lives of relatives of yours perhaps. NHF has been fighting for alternative practitioners, like our battle in the 60s to help chiropractors become legally licensed in over 40 states.

In the meantime, please visit Dr. Bigelsen on Facebook and the “I Stand Behind Dr. B” Facebook page:  We are stronger together and Dr. Bigelsen’s whole story you will feel the same duty as NHF to defend his work.  A short video of Dr. Bigelsen telling his story and the impassioned work he’s done over the years since his Vietnam tour can be viewed at: 

The following are some of the key allegations made against Dr. Bigelsen:

(1) Bigelsen allegedly manufactured products without a license from the California Department of Public Health, Food and Drug Branch. They said he was manufacturing products labeled as Lung, Liver, Female, when in fact he was not.

(2) Bigelsen allegedly relabeled the products unlawfully without stating the accurate contents and the quantity and adequate directions for its use.

(3) Bigelsen allegedly sold a product that was labeled “Pleo Rec and the label was misleading as it had an over label on it listing some company as a distributor. Pleo Rec is already labeled when Dr. Bigelsen receives it!

(4) Bigelsen allegedly unlawfully labeled products that were called “Ney Calm,” “Anti-focal,” and “Aorta Heart” and Bigelsen allegedly did not mark down the quantity or any details about it.  Interestingly enough, those names were the company’s own names.

He could go to jail for those things. All of the charges are false and intended simply to stifle someone who was working through a naturopathic practitioner to help people become well without harmful drugs.

There comes a time when we know the right thing to do is to give back. We’ve had access to a caring healer for decades. Now he needs access to your help to survive this medical tyranny. If you would like to donate to the Bigelsen Defense Fund, please visit the donation link on the National Health Federation website at Just as the FDA and Codex are stripping away your ability to use nutritional supplements with therapeutic levels so are your alternative practitioners being attacked in a vicious attempt to force them out leaving you at the hands of an outdated medical model and Big Pharma. Are you going to stand by and leave Dr. Bigelsen with his back against the firing squad wall without coming to his aid as he came to so many of your family member’s aid during the war?

This is war folks. And we of the health freedom community at NHF stand by our own. Just $25 or more donated at using PayPal or phoning your credit or debit card number into Tina at NHF’s main office at 1.626.357.2181 will strip the blind-folder off the FDA and force down their guns aimed at Dr. Bigelsen right now. NHF has hired the top legal minds in this country and along with the legal guidance of our President and General Counsel, Scott Tips, Dr. Bigelsen – and YOU – have a fighting chance to defend your right to choose the alternative practitioner and the modalities of healing that you want.

But choose to do nothing and don’t come complaining when you lose your practitioner to the reign of medical tyranny. Move into the front lines now. Get off the sidelines please and help not only Dr. Bigelsen but set the precedent for the FDA letting them know that NHF’s health freedom warriors don’t abandon their own, we don’t stand down, and we will never surrender and tolerate this medial mafia harassment!

Kat Carroll is Associate Editor of the National Health Federation’s magazine, Health Freedom News, and is on the Board of Directors of the National Health Federation Canada. She also writes for several blogs, magazines, and is currently compiling a book on Codex Alimentarius based on first-hand experience attending International Codex meetings. Kat is a Nutritional Therapy Practitioner and Clinic Administrator at her and her husband’s Optometry clinics. Additionally, Kat enjoys hosting guests at Adytum Sanctuary, their Pacific Northwest retreat. [email protected].

Money, Markets, And “Get Out Of Our Way”

The National Health Federation at Codex Committee on Food Additives in Hong Kong 

scott tips

NHF President Scott Tips at Codex Food Additives meeting in Hong Kong, preparing to speak.

The National Health Federation (NHF) returned again to Asia in mid-March 2014, to attend the Codex Committee on Food Additives (CCFA) Forty-Sixth Session in Hong Kong, China. [1] Last year’s CCFA meeting, held amidst the death-smog of Beijing, yielded a great victory as NHF reduced neurotoxic aluminum by 50% in many food products and completely eliminated it in others.

NHF’s goal was the same this year: To eliminate more aluminum and aspartame too, particularly based on a plethora of new studies on this killer-sweetener, some of which called for “urgent re-evaluation of aspartame[2] by international regulatory agencies (Such as the Codex Alimentarius Commission) and to consider re-evaluation an urgent matter of public health. So when the Codex Chairman parroted the Codex party line ad nauseam, We have full acceptance of aspartame by JECFA. [3] This meeting is not about safety. Aspartame’s safety is a Global standard in a Global marketplace,” NHF found it nearly unbearable to endure this bureaucratic ignorance.

Later, in a side admission to me by a country delegate, NHF learned that this delegate was threatened with having his office “torched” if he spoke out against aspartame at this CCFA meeting! Regardless of whether this would have happened or not, NHF takes its share of risks in representing you. In a room of hundreds of country and industry delegates, NHF is oftentimes your only Voice for health and health freedom – literally.

NHF is one of five consumer groups at Codex (none of the others were in attendance) and the only health-freedom organization able to speak, submit arguments and supporting research, and fully participate. You were well represented against International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs) such as the Calorie Control Council (aspartame group), the International Sweeteners Association (ISA) (another aspartame front group), the International Food Additives Council (aluminum industry), and others. Many INGO and country delegates have never had a nutrition course in their lives and seemingly attend for one reason: Ensuring financial success and keeping trade open among countries. The CCFA meeting was again marked by greed fueling industries’ bottom line while World trade remained unfettered as most country delegates joined in a “Wall Street Wolf” frenetic elevation of commerce over health, despite Codex’s stated goal of protecting the consumer via food safety.

Codex Alimentarius (Latin for “Food Code”) opted to continue approving its Member States’ (and, importantly, their industries’) export of health-killing goods like aspartame- and aluminum-laden products, among other additives. Even additives to food additives – all at the expense of your health.

The Greedy Shipping Lanes of Codex Alimentarius

The bustling Hong Kong harbor is the quintessential image of trade and the nicer aspect of what CCFA’s unspoken but clearly evident goal is: Greed-based exports, much of it unfit for human consumption, and World Trade remaining open to neatly “harmonized” countries, which, in a nutshell, means loss of national sovereignty. CCFA’s hot debate swirled around the infamous Note 161, a footnote to the aspartame food-additive standards, guaranteeing every country’s right to decide whether to permit the sale of toxic aspartame and at what levels. Those industries and their country supporters (U.S., Canada, Australia) who love aspartame view Note 161 as a barrier to their Nazi-like plans for world-market conquest. “Get rid of Note 161 and the World is ours, ours,” you can just hear them cackling. Since NHF supports the right of countries to choose, we opposed these cacklers.

Unfortunately, Note 161 was destined for oblivion as the European Union agreed to a compromise permitting world-wide sales of aspartame-laden products under certain, prescribed circumstances (for energy-reduced foods and foods with no added sugar only). Even those limits were too much for greedy U.S., Australia, Canada, and its aspartame-industry concubines, who demanded no restrictions whatsoever. The debate over Note 161 continues.

You’d have thought that the NHF delegation had walked into the wrong room and were at the UN/World Trade Conference as health and food safety were conspicuously absent. “Money, markets, stand out of the way of our moving forward” was the mantra of the more than week-long CCFA meeting.

The delegates were only allowed to comment on the technical necessity of food additives – not their safety. Why is aspartame technically necessary when a safe substitute could be employed? NHF President Scott Tips argued that “it’s about health and safety, not World trade,” to which Physical Working Group (pWG) Chairman Honigfort replied, We have full acceptance of aspartame by JECFA. This meeting is not about safety. Aspartame’s safety is a Global standard in a Global marketplace.

Time and again Scott Tips argued, “We can use alternative sweeteners like stevia.” But Note 161 was the key issue and the aspartame proponents were adamant that each country not have the right to decide on the sweetener issue but that we reach agreement harmonizing aspartame’s use globally.

Codex’s stated goal of providing safe food for consumers yielded to the gluttonous orgy of unfettered World trade. Later, when eating with scientist Taher Shoukry, Scientific Regulatory Affairs Manager at Coca Cola’s Dubai branch, he reiterated the same market mantra regarding aspartame in Cola products, “Consider the marketplace.” Forget health. Just reach consensus in selling Coke worldwide, will you?

NHF’s Adaptability in Battle

Since Codex has considered aspartame “safe” based upon JECFA’s ignorant, outdated assessment, NHF changed tactics fighting to lower the maximum allowable level of aspartame. Despite repeated challenges by Scott Tips, the toxin’s defenders prevailed, relying upon JECFA’s “safety” assessment as their shield. NHF has argued at nearly every meeting that current, unbiased science from panels other than JECFA must be admitted to the Codex process.

The entire scientific process of Codex needs revamping to continually monitor health-damaging issues and admit real-time, breaking research studies for consideration. The review and implementation lag, while great for trade, is disastrous for health. One might even think Codex strategically designed to financially leverage and exploit these information-deficit lags. Even plenary-session Chairman Dr. Junshi Chen admitted that JECFA needs help getting more up-to-date studies to base their decisions upon but meantime instead of employing the precautionary principle and withdrawing aspartame and other excitotoxins like MSG from the Global marketplace, it’s full steam ahead because there is money to be made.

ISA argued that we “need to find consensus to move forward as we have had international trade problems over this …. The bigger issue [disregarding health notwithstanding] is not moving forward.” When Scott Tips brought up the fact that we cannot just rubber stamp these standards for the sake of expediency, “moving forward,” and keeping World trade open at the expense of health, this wisdom was sacrificed in the wake of commerce chugging along to the next port with its deadly cargo.

The bold truth is that there are untapped markets and populations to consume these poisonous additives first, and then pay into the medical system later with their loss of health, even their lives.

Sales First, Science Later

CCFA discussed acceptance of a “tentative” group of food additives like Advantame. As the debate went on, (JECFA) admitted, “We have a real need to receive updated data on these substances.” Amazingly, the head of food science is asking the delegates, many of whom have zero interest in health or research, to research. The Chairman confessed, “They are called ‘tentative specs’ because of the lack of information on these substances.” Sales first, science later.

NHF joined an electronic working group that will meet throughout the year to discuss sweeteners like just-mentioned Advantame, Sweetmyx, and others, and to further debate the successor to Note 161. Sweetmyx, which was recently approved for use in food and beverages, is an artificial sweetener to which PepsiCo holds the exclusive rights. Watch for variations on the theme as aspartame is now simply being rebranded as AminoSweet and other attractive names.

In the largest study of its kind, new research from Iowa State reveals aspartame’s implication in increased heart-attack and stroke rates among women, occurring with two or more diet drinks daily in normally healthy, postmenopausal women. [4] Anti-aspartame research studies continue to be published, yet JECFA, like the FDA, continues to put its seal of approval, based upon outdated studies, on aspartame to the detriment of its scientific reputation without considering new research. A compelling new study is available stating the carcinogenic effects of aspartame and the urgent need for re-evaluation. [5]

In the dawdling, dysfunctional Codex process, emerging research must be resubmitted to JECFA, who amazingly fails to conduct itself in real-time despite holding the power to make decisions that affect the health of the billions world-wide. After it is re-evaluated by JECFA, aspartame will continue its dangerous launch into Global markets, ditching its bad reputation in favor of newer, brighter, and more deceptive names now smoothly hiding its toxic tendencies.

The fall of aspartame’s favor and resultant decline in the diet-beverage industry’s bottom line currently match the low 1995 levels. Time Magazine recently reported a decline of nearly 7% in sales of diet drinks. The public is getting savvy. Suppliers are running scared.

Outside the large conference room, the constant roar of traffic, horns honking, chatter of thousands is relieved by the seemingly placid water surrounding multitudes of high rises and skyscrapers, but even this is a deception; a steady stream of cargo ships and heavily laden barges head to the open waters of the China Sea as World trade glides by in the busy harbors. The CCFA Chairman smoothly steers his agenda through in our conference room at the Regal Airport Hotel; the proverbial spoon of medicine followed with a shot of humor to make the Committee feel it was all good.

kat carroll

NHF delegate Katherine Carroll on the day of the reading of the Report.

Hong Kong is Agenda 21 in action, with its stacked cubical housing in oftentimes old, sooty skyscrapers impossibly close together – sometimes 10 people to 500 square feet per unit – their laundry hanging out open windows; homogenous, white medical-masked school children in identical uniforms, and crushing waves of people working very long hours without much to show for it except eating out, which is a national many-times-daily pastime here engaged in with the fanatical commitment of sports fans at the Superbowl. The smells of good Asian cooking, cigarettes, and sadly, sewage, tinged the hazy air. For all of this, Hong Kong is clean. SARS taught them well. The people are also kind and respectful, no pushing and shoving despite the ever-present thick crowds mincing along with their characteristic “Hong Kong shuffle.” It’s just too densely populated to take a decent stride and subways so crowded it is impossible to see the signage for the stops.

What is More Disruptive to World Trade?

NHF has made a commitment to attend Codex meetings from their initial pWG launch to their landings (reading of the Final Report) unlike most of the attendees, so we attended the pWG prior to the plenary where Chairman Paul Honigfort from the U.S. Delegation used the loaded word “disruptive” many times in asking repeatedly, “What is more disruptive to international trade?”  “Disruptive.” This is a manipulative and loaded word-choice, as if disruption should be the main concern of the delegates.

“Disruptive technology” instantly comes to mind; the power of an upstart to upset tradition and “the way things are” in a bold move to seize the market. The pWG Chairman was warning against this type of eddy that could sink the powerful old warships of the U.S., Canada, Australia, etc., floating dangerous goods to unsuspecting buyers, by repeatedly asking this loaded question.

Then he pleaded with the attendees as he tried to reach consensus on sweeteners, “Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. What is more disruptive of World trade – or more importantly, our need to achieve a spirit of compromise?” Sweet words with all of the appeal of the mental and physical destruction wrought by the very aspartame they sought to advance. Again, he restated for the third time, “What is more disruptive to World trade?” Clearly he was anticipating a battle in which NHF would initiate the cannon fire once again as we did last year and also at the Vet Drug Residues in Food Codex Committee meeting that Paul Honigfort chaired and that NHF attended in August 2013 where Scott Tips, along with others, spoke successfully to aid in the ban of 9 out of 10 veterinary antibiotics with residues in foods.

Meantime, hundreds of Country delegates listened for hours while country and industry delegates spoke. The International Council of Beverages Associations (ICBA) said they were disappointed about trying to respond to public officials’ call to reduce calories in products, “We have a problem with natural sweeteners. We have a tool already – aspartame [for calorie reduction].” What is so deceptive, though, are the “studies” cited in Conference Room Documents (CRDs) tying calorie reduction through the use of artificial sweeteners to weight loss; junk science at its finest hour.

This is a myth and the reverse is actually true as artificial sweeteners stimulate more eating by dysregulation of our appetite-satiation mechanism. The room, however, continued focusing in the wrong direction, aiming for “energy reductions of 25%” using a dangerous carcinogen linked to brain tumors, heart attack, stroke, and a neurotoxin powerful enough to destroy neurons and rewire our brain; all of which was possible because JECFA has deemed it safe while ignoring true, recent science.

Since there are volumes of recent research demonstrating the damaging effects of aspartame in particular, it was a lesson in frustration to gloss over excitotoxins like MSG and aspartame in food. Did you know that some frozen peas given to a teething child contain added MSG? The same MSG that destroys neurons and attacks an area of the brain that has no blood-brain-barrier protection at all, the same MSG that can literally rewire a brain? Codex thinks that this additive and the same pirate aspartame are equally suitable for your children and you. Additives are big money. Watch them on the market news. Follow the projections for sales increases.

Co-Regents of Codex

There are two reigning demi-gods at Codex: The World-Trade God and the JECFA Junk-Science God, who are co-regents. Junk science is one thing but this science is expediently driven by the market and greed; a selective, biased “Wall Street Wolf” kind of science. Remember now, don’t disrupt World trade…

If you believe the stated aim and goal of Codex, then you’re lost in the fog of illusion. “China has always been concerned with food safety,” stated the Vice Minister of Health, Dr. Xiaohong Chen in his opening speech (China’s version of the head of the FDA). Actually, Chinese industry is known for deceptive food practices, many of which have been humiliatingly plastered over the media for years.

China is simply a microcosm of Codex Alimentarius and, therefore, a fit setting to stage this latest CCFA meeting where food additive standards are winked on through in favor of not upsetting Global financial markets. The Country member delegates and Industry representative delegates are the courtiers in this Global kingdom, most of whom are set upon securing their own allies to support and advance their position, which is, in many cases, anti-health and anti-health freedom.

Some delegates do care deeply but must uphold their industry’s or country’s position. When delegates are threatened by industry and industry delegates are subject to their company’s financial interests and are basically forced as paid representatives to set personal commitments to a position aside in order to keep their job, you can see that it is difficult for Codex to align itself with anything other than a debased financial “Wall Street Wolf” styled orgy where health is sacrificed as innocence lost.

NHF takes personal risk in faithfully and accurately reporting exactly what transpires in the Codex conference halls. The internet is full of Codex conspiracy-conjecture and health-freedom writers who have never once spoken out to represent you before Codex much less even attend as silent observers. Astoundingly, there are rarely if ever reporters at Codex. Amazingly, for all the health-freedom organizations that write, speak, and ask for your donations continually, they are not present at these meetings typically. They aren’t even in the parking lot holding up a sign…. And if they were present, they would be absolutely impotent and powerless to do anything but listen.

NHF alone is able to provide this vital research that can and will change the course of aspartame’s ill-history of health abuse globally, and then speak to defend you and your family. Why do you think we were told at last year’s Codex meeting that NHF was hated? When queried why, “Because you cost the World money. Every time you speak, we [industries or countries] have to change something – equipment, the way we manufacture or process goods.” Well, better hated than selling out to the global-greed bacchanalia we witness at these meetings, which are supposed to protect consumers.

The intellectually heady food scientists and health ministers are naïve when they place blind faith in the verdicts of the JECFA Junk-Science God’s presumed logic. The aim and goal of Codex to protect the consumer and ensure food safety is nothing more than the verbal finery covering the disease-provoking process with an insatiable appetite to open World trade in the guise of helping consumers and developing countries.

Despite the latest studies showing increases in lymphoma and leukemia[6] with aspartame ingestion, this current science is not considered unless someone brings it to JECFA’s attention but then how long will it take for the cherry-picked scientific board to consider it? Last year in Beijing the discussion on aspartame was pushed forward to this year. How many years will this filibustering tactic continue while the trading World rakes in the ill-gotten gain from it? No amount of pressure seems to create any opening in the black hole of their cherished position. At some point we have to call it for what it is: A sell-out to Global Trade. An industry shill is too soft a word when nearly all of the 250 country and industry delegates present at CCFA can look the other way and allow their children or grandchildren’s brains to get rewired – yes, literally – by excitotoxins like aspartame and MSG, which are overly prevalent in the food, beverage, chewing gum, and even supplement supply chain.

NHF was successful again this year in reducing and eliminating one form of aluminum food additive, finishing the work begun in Norway, and not selling out under pressure but firmly holding a steady course for health and health freedom – for you! Isn’t it time you deepened the level of your commitment to your health and health freedom? Join us at and help to underwrite research, education, and Codex attendance by your donation at It is your chance to make a difference to billions in the World.

© 2014 Katherine A. Carroll

[1] The NHF delegation consisted of Scott C. Tips, as the Head of Delegation and spokesman for NHF, and Katherine A. Carroll. For the writing of this article, Scott C. Tips provided the Note 161 written portions. He also wrote and submitted to CCFA the NHF’s latest Conference Room Document (CRD) on aspartame based upon the research of Dr. Betty Martini, NHF’s in-house aspartame expert. Other important research was provided by NHF Advisory Board Member Sayer Ji (of Green Med Info) and Jonathan Middleton (UK researcher).

[2] Morando S, Padovani M, Tibaldi E, Falcioni L, Manservisi F, Belpoggi F, “The Carcinogenic Effects of Aspartame: The Urgent Need for Regulatory Re-Evaluation,” American Journal Of Industrial Medicine 57:383–397 (2014).

[3] The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Food Additives

[4] Vyas A, et al., “Diet drink consumption and the risk of cardiovascular events: A report from the Women’s Health     Initiative,” American College of Cardiology 2014.

5 Ibid.

[6] Schernhammer ES1, Bertrand KA, Birmann BM, Sampson L, Willett WC, Feskanich D, “Consumption of artificial sweetener- and sugar-containing soda and risk of lymphoma and leukemia in men and women,” Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Dec;96(6):1419-28. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.111.030833. Epub 2012 Oct 24.

Kat Carroll is Associate Editor of the National Health Federation’s magazine, Health Freedom News, and is on the Board of Directors of the National Health Federation Canada. She also writes for several blogs, magazines, and is currently compiling a book on Codex Alimentarius based on first-hand experience attending International Codex meetings. Kat is a Nutritional Therapy Practitioner and Clinic Administrator at her and her husband’s Optometry clinics. Additionally, Kat enjoys hosting guests at Adytum Sanctuary, their Pacific Northwest retreat. [email protected].

The FDA’s New Food Label Guidelines – A Sneak Attack On Your Dietary Supplements

      By Scott C. Tips, President NHF

fda protects big pharma

In a glitzy roll-out last month featuring First Lady Michelle Obama and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg, the FDA proudly announced its first major changes to nutrition and supplement labeling in 20 years.[1]  If the FDA gets its way, you will see a large number of formatting and placement changes made to the current Nutrition Facts panel on food labels and to the Supplement Facts panel on dietary-supplement labels.[2]  The FDA’s example of their proposed changes appears below.

nutrition labels

But while the food industry and everyone else is focusing on the format changes, new wording, and the snazzy design set forth in the 109 pages of the FDA’s Proposed Rulemaking, there – hidden in plain view like the Purloined Letter – is the real danger to our health: The FDA is harmonizing our vitamin-and-mineral levels down to the same ridiculous levels of Codex Alimentarius that NHF has fought at Codex for more than a decade.  Not 100% harmonization, but mostly.  Those dirty sneaks.

NHF First to Call Attention to This Danger

NHF was the first to raise the alarm about this danger with my article in Whole Foods Magazine,[3] which drew the striking parallel between the FDA’s proposed new Reference Daily Intakes (RDIs) for vitamins and minerals and the Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs) being pushed globally at the Codex level.  The FDA’s sneaky harmonization of vitamin-and-mineral daily levels downward to, in most cases, those miserably insufficient levels that the National Health Federation has fought at Codex meetings since 2004 is the biggest of all dangers in the new FDA Proposed Rulemaking for Food Labels.

It is heartening to see that other health-freedom organizations have read my words, taken them to heart, and then repeated my warning message to the general public.  We need more people to jump on the bandwagon.  This danger must be recognized, publicized widely, and stopped completely; and NHF encourages everyone to spread the word by sharing this article.

The Danger

Ever since the National Health Federation’s victory at the 2009 Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU) meeting (where an Australian-led attempt to reduce, across the board, vitamin-and-mineral NRVs was rebuffed), Australia and other Codex delegations have continued pushing their anti-nutrient agenda. Conspicuously silent during these debates has been the U.S. delegation.  Now we know why.

Interestingly enough, Codex Alimentarius is mentioned in the FDA’s Proposed Rulemaking multiple times.  And with this Proposed Rulemaking, the FDA wants to dumb down our RDIs to the abysmally low Codex levels with no fewer than eight vitamins and minerals, while one (folic acid) already matches the Codex NRV and two others are within spitting distance.  In the case of Biotin, FDA proposes to cut its Reference Daily Intake by 90% in order to match the Codex value![4]

The FDA’s Table 2 reveals the details:

Nutrient Current RDIs Proposed RDIs
Biotin 300 micrograms 30 micrograms.
Choline 5501milligrams 550 milligrams.
Folate 400 micrograms 400 micrograms DFE.
Niacin 20 milligrams 16 milligrams NE.
Pantothenic acid 10 milligrams 5 milligrams.
Riboflavin 1.7 milligrams 1.3 milligrams.
Thiamin 1.5 milligrams 1.2 milligrams.
Vitamin A 5,000 International Units 900 micrograms RAE.
Vitamin B 6 2.0 milligrams 1.7 milligrams.
Vitamin B 12 6 micrograms 2.4 micrograms.
Vitamin C 60 milligrams 90 milligrams.
Vitamin D 400 International Units 20 micrograms.
Vitamin E 30 International Units 15 milligrams.
Vitamin K 80 micrograms 120 micrograms.
Calcium 1,000 milligrams 1,300 milligrams.
Chloride 3,400 milligrams 2,300 milligrams.
Chromium 120 micrograms 35 micrograms.
Copper 2.0 milligrams 0.9 milligrams.
Iodine 150 micrograms 150 micrograms.
Iron 18 milligrams 18 milligrams.
Magnesium 400 milligrams 420 milligrams.
Manganese 2.0 milligrams 2.3 milligrams.
Molybdenum 75 micrograms 45 micrograms.
Phosphorus 1,000 milligrams 1,250 milligrams.
Potassium2 3,500 milligrams 4,700 milligrams.
Selenium 70 micrograms 55 micrograms.
Zinc 15 milligrams 11 milligrams.

As you can see, a few RDIs have actually been raised, such as those for Vitamin C, Calcium, and Magnesium.  In a few years, however, if the FDA has its way in implementing its Proposed Rulemaking, we can promise you that the FDA will work to conform the other Nutrient Values to those of Codex – either trying to force the Codex values up to FDA levels or else reducing FDA levels down to Codex ones.

You can find support for this promise by going back to at least the FDA’s October 11, 1995, pronouncement in the Federal Register, where the FDA made no secret of its intention and desire to harmonize its food laws with those of the rest of the World. This current Proposed Rulemaking with its label changes simply proves that this intention is still very much alive.

Were those Global standards for vitamins and minerals higher than our own, then such a change might be advisable, even admirable.  But we all know that most of the rest of the World despises supplementation, either separately or in foods, and since these proposed label changes for daily values apply equally to the Supplement Facts panel as they do to the Nutrition Facts panel, they are very dangerous changes indeed for the supplements that consumers rely upon.

There is a definite connection between these proposed daily values and maximum upper permitted levels, with harmonized global standards paving the way for overall reduced vitamin-and-mineral levels whether in pill form or food form.  This is my 15th year of actively following and arguing about dietary-supplement and general-food standards and guidelines at Codex meetings and I have seen the trend.  Believe me, the trend is not your friend, not here.

These Are Proposed Changes      

You will not see these changes right away.  First of all, they are proposed, not final. Secondly, the FDA is accepting comments from the public for a ninety-day period, which ends on June 2, 2014.  You should weigh in with your opinion, now.

We ask that everyone opposed to this Proposed Rulemaking send their comments electronically to the FDA at!submitComment;D=FDA-2012-N-1210-0002 or in writing to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5360 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Mention Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1210.

Feel free to use, and embellish upon, the following wording from here to paste into your e-comment on the FDA website: “On Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1210, I am adamantly opposed to your proposed reduction of vitamin-and-mineral Reference Daily Intakes as shown in your Table 2, on page 11931.  At a time when toxin intake is increasing and nutrient intake is decreasing, Americans need more vitamins and minerals on a daily basis, not less. Your unsupported goal of harmonizing our food laws to Codex standards and guidelines has been specifically prohibited by Congress, and I demand that you obey the law and immediately withdraw Table 2 and all supporting paragraphs of your Proposed Rulemaking for revision in line with modern nutritional science, which shows that we need a higher daily intake of  B and other vitamins as well as more magnesium and other minerals such as selenium.  Please act immediately to correct your serious errors.”

Keep in mind that even if the Proposed Rulemaking becomes final, food manufacturers will have two years to bring their labels into compliance with the final rule.  The FDA estimates that it will cost the industry approximately $2 billion to comply, but NHF has never known the government to be even remotely correct about the true and final costs of compliance.

The FDA has dressed up its anti-nutrient label changes with all manner of accessories. But don’t be fooled by the bling, for at the core lay the FDA’s ignorance about and antipathy towards the benefits of vitamins and minerals.  Tell the FDA exactly how you feel and how wrong it is.


[1] FDA News Release, “FDA proposes updates to Nutrition Facts label on food packages,”

February 27, 2014, at:

[2] See “Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels,” 79 Federal Register 11879-11987, March 3, 2014, at:

[3] Scott Tips, “Living in the Past, Undermining Our Future,” Whole Foods Magazine, published earlier this month and posted online at:; see also

[4] 79 Federal Register, Table 2 at page 11931, which reveals all.


By Scott C. Tips

© 2014 Scott Tips

Scott C. Tips is President of the National Health Federation. Scott is a California-licensed attorney, specializing in food-and-drug law and trademark law, but also engages in business litigation, general business law, and nonprofit organizations, with an international clientele. Since 1989, Scott has been the General Counsel for the National Health Federation, the World’s oldest health-freedom organization for consumers, as well as the Editor In Chief of its magazine, Health Freedom News. In 2007, he became NHF President, and has been a frequent speaker for the organization and for health freedom on several continents. As legal columnist, Scott writes a monthly column for Whole Foods Magazine called “Legal Tips,” a column he started many years ago. Currently, he is primarily occupied with health-freedom issues arising from national governments’ and such international organizations as the Codex Alimentarius Commission’s attempts to limit individual freedom of choice in health matters. In that capacity, he has compiled, edited, and published a book on the subject entitled Codex Alimentarius – Global Food Imperialism. He also attends Codex meetings worldwide and has attended more Codex meetings than any other health-freedom activist.

Success In Norway: Aluminum Eliminated As A Food Additive For Fish

By Scott C. Tips, NHF President


scott tips

Chairman Bjorn Knudtsen and Scott Tips, 18 Feb 2014

Despite Winter’s frosty embrace, the Sun and the Norwegians conspired to overwhelm the cold and provide a warm reception for the nearly 180 Codex delegates gathered here in Bergen, Norway in mid-February 2014 for the Thirty-third meeting of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (CCFFP).

Chairman Bjorn Knudtsen – a tall drink of water but one who never seemed to look down at others – ran the CCFFP meeting very professionally and with friendliness but little slack.  Although the National Health Federation (NHF) has been attending Codex meetings for nearly 20 years now, this was the first CCFFP meeting that NHF attended, primarily because it has been typically of only marginal importance to us.  (We had bigger fish to fry, so to speak.)

This year, however, NHF saw an opportunity to build upon its success at the March 2013 Codex Food Additives Committee meeting in Beijing by swooping in to this Norwegian meeting and ensuring that sodium aluminum phosphate was eliminated as a food additive from fish and fish batters. NHF’s delegation – local NHF-Norway leader Ilse Van de Wiele and I – succeeded in that task and at a cheap cost, so attending the meeting was worth the $750 it cost us.

It is important to remember that the European Union (EU) is also to be thanked for the elimination of aluminum food additives from our global food standards.  The NHF has worked with the EU to ensure aluminum’s removal at every opportunity and the EU delegation has been adamant that this dangerous food additive must be removed.


Radisson Blu Hotel, Codex Meeting location

Animals Should be Treated Humanely

Codex is blind to the humane treatment of animals.  It is not in the Codex mandate to even consider whether fish and other animals are treated humanely prior to slaughter.  As the U.S. argued in its written submission, “Codex has a mandate to protect the health of consumers and promote fair trade practices. Animal welfare is not part of the Codex mandate (it is within the purview of the World Organization for Animal Health), so there is no rationale for including consideration of the ethics of fish slaughter in a Codex document.”

While this is technically and superficially correct, NHF argued in its own written submission that this is short-sighted thinking and a mis-application of the Codex mandate to ethical animal slaughter for the following reasons: “(1) Animals (including fish), in anticipation of imminent slaughter, will produce elevated cortisol (stress hormone) levels that spike and are then absorbed into the animal tissue; (2) Humans then will consume this cortisol, which has been shown to be detrimental to human health; and (3) Therefore, it is clearly within the Codex mandate of protecting the health of consumers that animals be slaughtered in as humane a way as possible so as to minimize cortisol and other dangerous stress compounds in animal tissue that is then consumed by consumers. Perhaps most ironically, then, the ethical treatment of animals inevitably leads to better health for those humans. Therefore, there is most definitely a rationale for including consideration of the ethics of fish slaughter in this Codex document.”

The NHF’s written submission was the only written document arguing for the “humane” handling and slaughter of animals for food.  In essence, NHF argued that humane treatment of animals was in humanity’s own best interest. This paper was read by the delegates and we received some very positive feedback on it.

Ilse Van De Wiele

Ilse Van De Wiele


Carrageenan is a sulfated polysaccharide food additive derived from red seaweed and commonly used in processed foods.  In its degraded form, however, it has been shown to be dangerous to human health, and is implicated in cancer.  In the U.S.-chaired Working Group meeting that week, NHF also strongly argued for the elimination of carrageenan and received an open-minded reception from the WG chairman as well as others; but, in the end, we were referred to the Food Additives Committee since the CCFFP takes its direction on carrageenan from that Committee.  NHF intends to address this issue there.

Other Issues

The “hot topic” issue at the meeting, however, was not aluminum but rather scallops and the development of a Code of Practice for scallop products.  Much debated by the delegates, this agenda item consumed an appreciable portion of the Committee’s time and energy.

Biotoxin assays were equally at play here, and the United States delegation led the way for a compromise that will see a Codex standard for detecting biotoxins in shellfish adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission at its next meeting.

All in all, the trip was a very cost-effective success for NHF.  The Committee plans to conduct electronic Working Groups to continue work on additives, histamine, and other issues in preparation for the next CCFFP session; and NHF will continue to monitor the topics that concern its members.


By Scott C. Tips

© 2014 Scott Tips

Scott C. Tips is President of the National Health Federation. Scott is a California-licensed attorney, specializing in food-and-drug law and trademark law, but also engages in business litigation, general business law, and nonprofit organizations, with an international clientele. Since 1989, Scott has been the General Counsel for the National Health Federation, the World’s oldest health-freedom organization for consumers, as well as the Editor In Chief of its magazine, Health Freedom News. In 2007, he became NHF President, and has been a frequent speaker for the organization and for health freedom on several continents. As legal columnist, Scott writes a monthly column for Whole Foods Magazine called “Legal Tips,” a column he started many years ago. Currently, he is primarily occupied with health-freedom issues arising from national governments’ and such international organizations as the Codex Alimentarius Commission’s attempts to limit individual freedom of choice in health matters. In that capacity, he has compiled, edited, and published a book on the subject entitled Codex Alimentarius – Global Food Imperialism. He also attends Codex meetings worldwide and has attended more Codex meetings than any other health-freedom activist.

Will Codex And The Drug Companies Raid The Spice Rack To Steal Your Eyesight?



By Kat Carroll

Culinary Indian spices are rising superheroes of the nutritional World. When most of us were growing up, these spices were not a regular part of many of our diets.  Today, though, they are commonly available high-profile healers of the highest order. But if history repeats itself, we can anticipate a raid on powerful molecules found in your spice rack, turning them into drugs available only by prescription or subject to unnecessary regulation. This is one of the reasons the National Health Federation (NHF) opposes Senator Dick Durbin’s Dietary Supplement Act – in this case, to protect manufacturers who encapsulate spices in therapeutic formulations designed to heal serious eye disease and more. As Codex Alimentarius has decided to add a new committee to its roster with the Codex Committee on Spices and Culinary Herbs (CCSCH) in February 2014, the potential for unnecessary regulatory control has NHF concerned.

Curcumin is the main curcuminoid of the popular Indian spice turmeric, which is currently enjoying exalted status as a true panacea for modern-day ills as an anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and antitumor spice.  Zeaxanthin-rich saffron, the most expensive of spices at $500 a pound, is a proven star in both the Eastern and Western healing traditions for treating macular degeneration. It takes nearly 150 flowers to produce a single gram of dried saffron threads.[1] Even ordinary rosemary is being touted as one of the healing modalities for the potentially blinding diseases of macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa.

Several studies of these spices have shown their effective use in the potentially blinding diseases macular degeneration, retinitis pigmentosa, and cataract development as well. In a December 2013 study, “Curcumin: Therapeutical Potential in Ophthalmology,”[2] curcumin proved itself effective against several ocular diseases, such as chronic anterior uveitis, diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, and dry eye syndrome. “Unfortunately, because of its low solubility and oral bioavailability, the biomedical potential of curcumin is not easy to exploit; for this reason more attention has been given to nanoparticles and liposomes, which are able to improve curcumin’s bioavailability. Pharmacologically, curcumin does not show any dose-limiting toxicity when it is administered at doses of up to 8 g/day for three months.”  Black pepper and lecithin also improve bioavailability.

But to truly impact absorption of the healing spices and creating a remedial response, restore the proper balance of bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract which is potentially the greatest source of inflammation in the body. Microbial imbalance leads to increased inflammation, oxidative stress, and impaired immune response and more—which are foundational to potentially blinding eye diseases. A January 2014 study in Cell[3] researched life extension and the diseases related to age-related changes in the gut flora. When bacteria in the gut are in balance, not only is one’s life span extended, but the diseases common to the elderly decrease, leading to a higher quality of life.

From tumors and cancer to cataracts there is little turmeric cannot heal. Speaking with an Indian delegate to Codex recently, a food scientist from the Spices Board, she said that even a poultice made of turmeric and applied overnight would resolve most ulcers and abscesses on the body. Many East Indians eat pickled turmeric daily; NHF wants to ensure that it remains available as a nutritional supplement for those who don’t eat it daily as a part of their dietary pattern.

In another study from PubMed republished on GreenMedInfo’s database in 2008, diabetes was induced in rats but the subsequently administered curcumin-and-turmeric treatment appeared to have countered the hyperglycemia-induced oxidative stress.[4] Blindness is a complication of diabetes. Curcumin will make an effective addition to a diabetic protocol on several counts.

In the July 2012 issue of Evidence Based Complementary Medicine, a longitudinal follow-up study of saffron supplementation in early, age-related macular degeneration reported sustained benefits to central retinal function.[5] Lastly, lowly rosemary comes to the forefront in retinal protection[6] in macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa, which has no known therapeutic treatments, so this is exciting indeed.

If you don’t think the drug companies are anxious to swoop in and snatch up these ancient spices and herbs to patent them out of your reach, just look at how GlaxoSmithKline reacted in 2010 when resveratrol’s incredible healing powers were rising and its impact on multiple myeloma was creating excitement for the next super-drug.[7] Observing the incredible potential of resveratrol, GlaxoSmithKline pursued this molecule, skewing its molecular structure in order to patent what was being touted as a “poly-pill” capable of curing anything. What they most likely did not factor in was dose-dependency and ended a trial when their presumably high dose created kidney failure; they may very well have missed their aim of patenting a natural substance that still holds its place well, impacting an important cross section of diseases. But the pharmaceutical model stands as a threat to health and health freedom today as common spices are exhibiting radical healing potential on their own without the structural skewing and we have access to them directly and much more cheaply due in large part to NHF’s protective stance in regards to nutritional supplements at Codex.

It puts NHF on high alert when Codex Alimentarius decides to insinuate itself into your kitchen spice rack by adding a new Codex committee meeting in India in February 2014.[8] According to Sanjay Dave, Codex Chairman, the first meeting will be to frame strategies for quality of culinary spices and promote harmonization to facilitate World trade.  As far as the spice quality is concerned, that deals with issues like physical characteristics, uniformity in color, size, appearance, and packaging, which come under quality parameters.

Safety parameters in spices focus on pesticide residues, mycotoxin contamination, microbiological such as Salmonella, E. coli, and other contamination that is harmful to health. When these issues arise in relation to quality regulation, which again is simply addressing color, size, appearance, and packaging, they will be referred to the appropriate Codex committee responsible for them, such as the Food Labelling, Food Additives, Food Hygiene, Pesticide Residues, Contaminants, and so on, most of which the National Health Federation participates in. This initial Codex committee meeting on Culinary Spices will begin the tedious process of sorting every culinary herb into monitoring pathways handled by appropriate Codex committees on all of the issues from quality to safety. For example, the Pesticide Residue Codex Committee will determine appropriate parts per million or maximum upper limits of pesticide residues which will be adopted globally for purposes of creating harmonization in World Trade when that particular spice is exported.

According to the Spices Board of India, countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany, and Netherlands have laid down cleanliness specification for spices.  The European Spice Association (ESA), comprising members of the European Union, has come out with the “quality minima for herbs and spices.” This serves as a guideline with specifications for member countries in European Union. The European Union has yet to finalize the cleanliness specification for spices and spice products.[9] It is too bad this governing body was not able to achieve a clean, relatively standardized export product without Codex involvement. So while there are some decidedly good aspects to Codex’s goal of harmonization by promoting the assurance that imported spices are clean and free from contaminants, where spices are concerned that have been proven in scientific research to heal many diseases, of the eyes in particular, NHF sees a pathway directly from the kitchen spice rack right to the revolving door of the Pharmaceutical industry in the hopes of patenting these healing spices. This will reduce the power of the average person to control their own health by using these spices for treating disease as World trade and the potential for profits and increased regulatory control at the expense of health reigns supreme.

The threat is not only drug companies lobbying to regulate common, but powerfully healing, kitchen spices but irradiation is an issue as well, which lowers the nutritional content of foods. India is having a problem currently with a lack of integrity in the cleanliness of their spices. Like China, once you gain a reputation for releasing impure product in world trade, you are forever suspect. They are wise to adopt standards and guidelines in many respects if they wish to increase their economy by trading globally. This could have been achieved apart from Codex, however, and should have been achieved nationally. But they have adopted this course and the National Health Federation intends to have a say in how it’s managed as we see the potential pitfalls and loss of control of healing spices currently labeled “culinary.”

Perhaps the most important part of the Indian spice issue is just what happened when GlaxoSmithKline tried to get a patent on resveratrol for use in diabetics. This action threatened to take a valuable healing tool out of the reach of the consumer and leave drug companies and doctors in full control of access and availability. The same could happen with the developing spice market being so effective in healing potentially blinding eye disease with curcumin, turmeric, saffron, and rosemary being potentially regulated as drugs. If NHF can stave it off, so much the better for us all who feel our eyesight is too precious to brook the interference of excessive and unnecessary regulation. NHF appreciates your support ( as we attend many Codex meetings in 2014 to protect you and your family.

[1]  See “Saffron Stamens” page on Mountain Rose Herbs website:, accessed on December 27, 2013.

[2] Pescosolido NGiannotti RPlateroti AMPascarella ANebbioso M, “Curcumin: Therapeutical Potential in Ophthalmology, ” Planta Med., 2013 Dec 9.

[3] “PGRP-SC2 Promotes Gut Immune Homeostasis to Limit Commensal Dysbiosis and Extend Lifespan” ; publishing January 12, 2014 in Cell

[4]  Suryanarayana PSaraswat MMrudula TKrishna TPKrishnaswamy KReddy GB,   National Institute of Nutrition (ICMR), Hyderabad, India, “Curcumin and turmeric delay streptozotocin-induced diabetic cataract in rats,” Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci., 2005 Jun;46(6):2092-9.

[5] Piccardi M, Marangoni D, Minnella AM, Savastano MC, Valentini P, Ambrosio L, Capoluongo E, Maccarone R, Bisti S, Falsini B, “A longitudinal follow-up study of saffron supplementation in early age-related macular degeneration: sustained benefits to central retinal function,” Evid Based Complement Alternat Med., 2012;2012:429124. doi: 10.1155/2012/429124. Epub 2012 Jul 18.

[6] Tayebeh Rezaie1, Scott R. McKercher1, Kunio Kosaka2, Masaaki Seki1, Larry Wheeler3, Veena Viswanath3, Teresa Chun3, Rabina Joshi1, Marcos Valencia1, Shunsuke Sasaki4, Terumasa Tozawa4, Takumi Satoh1,4 and Stuart A. Lipton1, “Protective Effect of Carnosic Acid, a Pro-Electrophilic Compound, in Models of Oxidative Stress and Light-Induced Retinal Degeneration,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., November 27, 2012 vol. 53 no. 12 7847-7854, Published online before print October 18, 2012, doi: 10.1167/iovs.12-10793.

[7]Allan Haberman , “GlaxoSmithKline Stops Development Of Resveratrol Drug SRT501,” Haberman Associates

Consulting for Effective Life Science R&D and Partnering Blog, December 1, 2010.

[8] See“Uniform standards would help improve trade in spices,”, accessed Monday, October 07, 2013.

[9] See “Quality Specifications,” on Indian Spice Board website at:


Kat Carroll is Associate Editor of the National Health Federation’s magazine, Health Freedom News, and is on the Board of Directors of the National Health Federation Canada. She also writes for several blogs, magazines, and is currently compiling a book on Codex Alimentarius based on first-hand experience attending International Codex meetings. Kat is a Nutritional Therapy Practitioner and Clinic Administrator at her and her husband’s Optometry clinics. Additionally, Kat enjoys hosting guests at Adytum Sanctuary, their Pacific Northwest retreat. [email protected].


Magnesium Miracle, Medical Mafia And Codex Alimentarius (VIDEO)

codex alimentarius

Dr. Carolyn Desn joins the Bob Tuskin Show to talk about health.

Carolyn Dean is not only a medical doctor, but also a naturopath, herbalist, acupuncturist, nutritionist, lecturer, consultant and author or co-author of over 30 books. Carolyn has been in the forefront of health issues for over 30 years. We’ll mainly focus on her book The Magnesium Miracle. Magnesium is the unsung hero and is a key nutriceutical that everybody needs to know about. Carolyn explains how magnesium functions in the body and talks about the myriad of health ailments associated with being deficient in this vital mineral. Magnesium even has the power to unbind fluoride from cells and can aid the body to detox heavy metals. She’ll also explain the delicate relationship between magnesium, vitamin D and calcium.

Bob Tuskin

The National Health Federation: Global Watchdog – Taking The Bite Out Of Medicated Meat While The U.S. Position Betrays The World


scott tips

Scott Tips speaking at CCRVDF Working Group meeting

If Americans were relying on the U.S. government delegate to represent them at Codex, then they have been betrayed once again.

Minneapolis turned up the heat for the National Health Federation’s (NHF) arrival for Codex Alimentarius’ 21st session on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods (CCVRDF) during the week of August 24-30, 2013. Held in searing Minnesota with tropical humidity and 90-95 degrees Fahrenheit daily, locals admitted that they’d never experienced such a Summer. Schools cancelled and sidewalk cafes were closed “due to extreme heat,” a timely illustration for the hot topic of veterinary drug residues and their metabolites in food. NHF, your consistent, truthful Voice for health and health freedom at Codex Alimentarius helped expose the U.S.’ pathetic argument repeatedly as pointless regarding their insistence on retaining the widest possible options for veterinary-drug residues in foods. Speaking consistently for health, NHF opposed each of the ten veterinary drugs and recommended a Global ban on their use in animals.

Among other things, the veterinary drugs being reviewed for use or discontinuance of use were Chloramphenicol (a carcinogen potentially leading to aplastic anemia, a precursor to leukemia), Malachite green (a carcinogen that acts genotoxically), Carbadox (growth promoter and antimicrobial agent, another carcinogen that acts genotoxically), Furazolidone, Nitrofural (causes tumors and testicular degeneration via an endocrine-mediated mechanism), Chlorpromazine (Thorazine, tranquilizer and reproductive-system disrupter), Stilbenes (e.g., diethylstilbestrol), Olaquindox, and the Nitroimidazoles (antimicrobial and antiprotozoal agents such as Dimetridazole, Ipronidazole, Metronidazole, and Ronidazole).

Unfortunately, world-trade-prompted greed at the expense of health is rampant at Codex. NHF President Scott Tips had the foresight to move up as early in the decision-making process as we could get by participating in the Physical Working Group (PWG) before the plenary Committee session. He spoke out vehemently, passionately defending our right dozens of times to have access to meat free of residues of drugs designed for animals. NHF demanded a moribund class of veterinary antibiotics and other drugs for Global ban as they are associated with cancer, tumors, leukemia, aplastic anemia, and more, and do little to actually aid the animals who receive them.  Even in the United States, all but one of the above-mentioned vet drugs (Carbadox) are banned; however, illogically, the U.S. accepts residue tainted meat as imports.

The outcome of this Codex meeting was unexpectedly positive as the majority of the World reached consensus upon two things:

  1.  There is not enough current data to make an intelligent decision assuring us that these vet drugs will not result in residues of toxicological health concern. Drug manufacturers are not coming forth with fresh studies but are instead withholding current research to maintain the status quo.
  2. The determination was made that there are no safe levels of antibiotic vet drug residues because maximum residue levels cannot be established due to lack of current data so they are recommended to be banned, erring on the side of safety.

True to form, the U.S. delegation opposed consensus, parroting their impotent argument repeatedly that because there were scientific data gaps (current studies) on these drugs, no one could really say that they were harmful to humans (forget the animals, as only NHF discussed animal welfare here). By attacking the method of decision-making instead of the facts (i.e., considering the residue’s toxicity and lack of recent studies), the U.S. merely succeeded in slowing consensus at Codex against these vet drugs while at the same time strangely ignoring the United States’ own laws against the drugs.

One of the vet drugs debated, Carbadox (which is employed in pigs), is still in use. While the Codex Committee largely opted for discontinuance of Carbadox, the U.S. disagreed, contending that “a 2003 report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) meeting confirmed it as a carcinogen in tissues but couldn’t determine the level that it wouldn’t be carcinogenic.

Studies report, though, that “Carbadox may induce adverse effects on the adrenal in growing pigs at therapeutic (100 to 150 ppm) and feed-additive doses (50 ppm). Even at lower doses (25 ppm), mild lesions were found. The grade of lesions was positively correlated with the duration of exposure to this growth promoter.”  (See

Perhaps opening up the potential huge profits by getting dangerous vet drugs back into the U.S. meat supply, in which 9 of its 10 drugs have been discontinued for some time, is a consideration, as the United States once again demonstrated the exact same kind of greed-induced intent that led last year to its and its allies’ shoving the dangerous steroid-like vet drug Ractopamine down the rest of the World’s throats just so farmers could make $3-$4 more per porcine head. “Wealth over health” seems to be the U.S. mantra every time. They argued everything but the real issue: whether vet drug residues and their metabolites are harming us.  Ah, but there’s the money to be made . . . .

Brazil wisely noted, with NHF agreement, No risk management measures should be recommended for substances without sufficient information to conclude whether there is a specific human health risk associated.”  This kind of recommendation leaves no other alternative than the best one: a complete Global ban on these dangerous drugs in food-producing animals.

When the issue of Concern Forms (a procedure for Codex members to express their concerns about Vet Drugs) arose, Scott Tips’ perspective as a food-and-drug law specialist attorney fostered a unique critique of the limiting wording proposed for inclusion in the official Codex Procedural Manual.  He successfully argued – and had to repeatedly argue so as to preserve its inclusion – particular wording that would ensure that Codex members had more flexibility in raising concerns over vet drugs.

Zilpaterol’s proposed addition to the priority list of veterinary drugs for evaluation by JECFA was strongly opposed by the European Union, the NHF, and a number of other delegations. But, in the end, the anticipated debate on a standard for Zilpaterol (marketed as Zilmax) – the most controversial steroid-like vet drug (along with Ractopamine) – was pushed to the next CCRVDF meeting in 2015. Remember, in the United States, doped meat is marketed as “Natural,” so beware. It is FDA and USDA deception at its finest. As with the Ractopamine issue before, the Federation will fight strongly to remove these toxic, steroid-like vet drugs from the Global food supply.

Overall, Chairman Steven Vaughn was a fair and positive force keeping the Committee moving forward to resolution without rancor. Despite a Pharisaical debate literally over every “jot and tittle,” the Global food regulators reached consensus on recommending that the Risk Management Recommendations (RMRs) for the above-mentioned drugs be generally worded as follows (example given for Chloramphenicol):

In view of the JECFA conclusions on the available scientific information, there is no safe level of residues of chloramphenicol or its metabolites in food that represents an acceptable risk to consumers. For this reason, competent authorities should prevent residues of chloramphenicol in food. This can be accomplished by not using chloramphenicol in food producing animals.”

This is strong wording.  Unfortunately, at the insistence of the United States and New Zealand, and over the objections of the European Union and NHF, exceptions to the above wording were made with watered down language about “insufficient data” for the vet drugs Nitrofural, Chlorpromazine, Olaquindox, and the Nitroimidazoles, sending them all on to Step 5/8 out of 8 in the Codex process for approval at the higher-level Commission meeting next year.

In the meantime, if you are a meat eater, NHF recommends consuming only organic meat. Probably for the rest of your life – if you value your health.

Kat Carroll is Associate Editor of the National Health Federation’s magazine, Health Freedom News, and is on the Board of Directors of the National Health Federation Canada. She also writes for several blogs, magazines, and is currently compiling a book on Codex Alimentarius based on first-hand experience attending International Codex meetings. Kat is a Nutritional Therapy Practitioner and Clinic Administrator at her and her husband’s Optometry clinics. Additionally, Kat enjoys hosting guests at Adytum Sanctuary, their Pacific Northwest retreat. [email protected].

EPA Documents Show U.S. Goal to Harmonize with Codex Alimentarius

codex alimentarius

In many of the articles I have written regarding Codex Alimentarius, as well as in my book Codex Alimentarius – The End of Health Freedom, I have mentioned the stated goals of Codex Alimentarius, national governments and, hence, government agencies to harmonize domestic laws, regulations, and policies as the Codex guidelines are established.

Yet, while some may doubt the veracity of this claim, it can be no clearer than the statement provided by the EPA in their own Reregistration for Eligibility Decision documents for pesticides that harmonization with Codex guidelines is the intention of the U.S. government.

Although virtually all of the Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) documents contain essentially the same prescripts and tangential information, one need only to take a look at one of the documents – the document dealing with Acephate for the purposes of this article – to locate the statement of purpose to harmonize Codex guidelines and those of the EPA. It says,

The Codex Alimentarius Commission has established several maximum residue limits (MRLs) for residues of acephate in/on various plant and animals commodities. The Codex MRLs are expressed in terms of acephate per se. Harmonization of expression/definition between Codex MRLs and U.S. tolerances will be achieved when the residue definition of the U.S. tolerances is changed from combined residues of acephate and the metabolite methamidophos to acephate per se. A numerical comparison of the Codex MRLs and the corresponding reassessed U.S. tolerances is presented in Table 16. Recommendations for compatibility are based on conclusions following reassessment of U.S. tolerances (see Table 15.)[1]

This statement of intended harmonization with Codex standards is included in virtually every one of the Reregistration for Eligibility Decision (RED) documents.

Interestingly enough, these statements not only openly announce their intentions of harmonization, but clearly state that the U.S. will amend its standards to meet those of Codex Alimentarius. These pesticides are continually reassessed for these reasons.

Indeed, the charts presented in the RED documents contain figures for the “reassessed” MRLs in comparison to those of Codex. But while changing scientific conclusions for political purposes is not only unscientific, it is also highly deceptive and unethical. Yet this is what the EPA admits to doing in its own documents.

Obviously, neither the science nor the evidence will change simply because governments have entered into an agreement. However, it appears that the methods used to achieve such conclusions, as well as the conclusions themselves will do just that.

Continuing with Acephate as an example, one can see harmonization in action. When one looks at the MRLs set by Codex and those set by the EPA, two things are readily apparent. First, in this particular case, the MRLs of Codex are set much higher than those of the EPA. Second, many of the “reassessed” U.S. MRLs are compatible with those of Codex.

The following values are expressed in ppm. Once converted, ppm is the same value as the mg/kg designation that Codex uses.

Codex and EPA MRLs for Acephate
    • Brussels Sprouts = EPA 3.0/CODEX 5
    • Cattle Fat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1
    • Cattle Meat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1
    • Cauliflower = EPA 2.0/CODEX 5
    • Cotton Seed = EPA 0.5/CODEX 2
    • Eggs = EPA 0.1/CODEX 0.1
    • Lettuce, Head = EPA 10.0/CODEX 5
    • Milks = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1
    • Pig Fat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1
    • Pig Meat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1
    • Poultry Fats = EPA 0.1/CODEX 0.1
    • Poultry Meat = EPA 0.1/CODEX 0.1
    • Soya Bean (dry) = EPA 1.0/CODEX 0.5[2]

Here, compatibility exists in three categories (eggs, poultry fats, and poultry meats). With the exception of lettuce, all Codex MRLs are higher than the EPA limits. All of the EPA limits have been “reassessed” after the introduction of Codex MRLs. The differences in the upper limits are attributed to “differences in agricultural practices in the U.S. upon which the residue data were developed.”[3]

This may be true, of course, but it is also a convenient excuse. As stated earlier, it appears that true scientific practice is taking a backseat to political considerations in the arena of pesticide MRLs and Codex harmonization.

Yet even with the stated goal of harmonization, it appears that the levels of “acceptable” pesticide residues in food will not go down. That is, at least from the EPA’s standpoint. When one observes the MRL list for substances such as Dicofol, a pesticide in which the EPA’s tolerances are generally higher than that of Codex’s own, the EPA tends to remain resolute in its position.

For instance, Codex sets a Dicofol MRL of 0.1 while the EPA sets an MRL of 0.5.[4] However, whereas the EPA “reassesses” its tolerances for substances such as Acephate as demonstrated above, in this case it states, “Data do not support a lower US tolerance, with field trial residues as great as 0.4 ppm.”

For dry hops, Codex sets the MRL at 50 mg/kg. The EPA sets the value at 65 ppm.[5] In this case as well, the EPA remains firm saying, “Data indicate that the tolerance cannot be decreased.”[6]

Apparently, the EPA is capable of standing up to Codex when it comes to harmonizing its own standards to higher acceptable levels of contamination, but not for lower ones. As I have discussed in previous articles, this opens the door to the WTO dispute resolution mechanism to address pesticide MRL’s. It may be in the WTO “court” that the issues of MRLs for pesticide residues are resolved.

While such disregard for the welfare and concerns of consumers is to be expected of Codex, it is nonetheless still hypocritical. This is most evident by examining the procedures being followed for pesticide residues when compared to those used when assessing vitamin and mineral supplements.[7]

However, some telling comments were made by the (Food and Agricultural Organization) FAO on its own website regarding the Revised Guidelines for Predicting Dietary Intake of Pesticide Residues.

In reference to these guidelines it states, “The use of these guidelines should significantly reduce the number of cases where exposure assessments cause unnecessary concern.”[8] While few would argue that this statement is unreasonable, it is without doubt a completely different mindset than that guiding the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods For Special Dietary Uses[9] (CCNFSDU) in regards to natural supplements.

Indeed, it seems that the purpose of the CCNFSDU is to “cause unnecessary concern” regarding vitamins and minerals. When it comes to pesticides however, the standards are quite a bit looser.

Again, in regards to the Revised Guidelines for Predicting Dietary Intake of Pesticide Residues, the same document continues by saying,

The Guidelines explicitly state that a worst-case estimate is a gross overestimate of true exposure and that more refined calculations should be performed using other relevant data. However, some Members of CCPR reject MRLs when this additional data is not available. Others rely, for instance, on monitoring data, which may demonstrate that no exposure problems are to be expected.[10]

This statement, taken on its own, might not seem like a reason for consumers to rise up in arms. However, not only does it downplay what it considers to be the worst-case scenario but it also admits to a potential bias toward conclusions that determine there are no exposure problems. It is also quite misleading to suggest that a gross overestimate of true exposure of pesticides is a trivial matter. To overestimate the exposure of populations, such as in the Global Expectable Average Daily Diet[11] for vitamins and minerals,[12] is to overestimate the tolerances (depending on which scientific model is chosen) of those populations, possibly leading to even higher MRL and acceptable tolerances of pesticide residues in foods.

Ultimately, however, whether the acceptable levels of pesticide residue in foods are moved up or down, it cannot be argued that the goal is to harmonize domestic U.S. standards with the international Codex Alimentarius Guidelines. After all, such a goal has been stated by the EPA itself within its own RED documents.

With this in mind, it would be wise for all American consumers to more closely monitor the decisions of their domestic regulatory agencies.


[1] “Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Acephate.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs. p. 44. Accessed April 6, 2010. P.44
[2] “Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Acephate.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs. p. 44. Accessed April 6, 2010. P. 45
[3] Ibid.
[4] Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Dicofol.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs. p. 120.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Turbeville, Brandon. “Codex Alimentarius: The Global Fallout of Health Tyranny.” Activist Post. January 26, 2011. Accessed on July 29, 2013.
[8] “Current risk management practices in the codex alimentarius commission, its subsidiary bodies, and advisory expert committees.” Accessed March 23, 2010.
[9] Turbeville, Brandon. “Conflicts of Interests and Personal Agendas at The Heart of Codex Alimentarius Health Tyranny.” Activist Post. December 29, 2010. Accessed on July 29, 2013.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Turbeville, Brandon. “Conflicts of Interests and Personal Agendas at The Heart of Codex Alimentarius Health Tyranny.” Activist Post. December 29, 2010. Accessed on July 29, 2013.
[12] Turbeville, Brandon. “The Methods of Health Tyranny: Codex Alimentarius ‘Risk Assessment’ of Vitamins and Nutritional Supplements.” Activist Post. December 24, 2010. Accessed on July 29, 2013.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over 200 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV.  He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) 

10 Ways to Commit Nutritional Anarchy

10 Ways to Commit Nutritional Anarchy

Once upon a time, if we felt we needed to, we could go to the pharmacy or department store, select a bottle of vitamins, and feel pretty confident about the actual contents of the bottles.

Nowadays, real vitamins are so hard to track down that they might as well be on the endangered species list.  In fact, most of what is sold as “vitamins” in the United States actually contains toxic ingredients and nutritional content that isn’t readily bio-available, not to mention most of it is synthetic.  And matters may soon get even worse, as the US government “harmonizes” with an overbearing set of rules called Codex Alimentarius.

Just going to the drug-store and buying one of the brightly colored bottles off the shelf may actually be worse for your health than being bereft of the nutrient.  Before spending your hard-earned money on candy flavored chewables or much-advertised over-the-counter vitamin imposters, do some research. Recently, Sayer Ji of Green Med Info wrote about the hazardous chemicals found in a popular brand of children’s vitamins:

Kids vitamins are supposed to be healthy, right? Well then, what’s going on with Flintstones Vitamins, which proudly claims to be “Pediatricians’ #1 Choice”?  Produced by the global pharmaceutical corporation Bayer, this wildly successful brand features a shocking list of unhealthy ingredients, including:

On Bayer Health Science’s Flintstones product page designed for healthcare professionals they lead into the product description with the following tidbit of information:

82% of kids aren’t eating all of their veggies1. Without enough vegetables, kids may not be getting all of the nutrients they need.

The implication? That Flintstones vitamins somehow fill this nutritional void. (Click HERE to learn more about this deceptive product.)

Unfortunately it gets even worse than the deception waged by Fred, Barney, Betty, and Wilma.  With the approach of a world governed by Codex Alimentarius, natural supplements will become regulated to the point that you will no longer be able to acquire a therapeutic amount  without taking nutritionally pillaged vitamins by the handful.

In the United States, the FDA is in charge of implementing the standards. Over the next two years, with the Food Safety Modernization Act, they will be doing just that.  According to a Natural News article by Dr. Gregory D’Amato, these irrevocable standards are on their way of being implemented to allow the US to “harmonize” with Codex.

* All nutrients (vitamins and minerals) are to be considered toxins/poisons and are to be removed from all food because Codex prohibits the use of nutrients to “prevent, treat or cure any condition or disease”

* All nutrients (e.g., CoQ10, Vitamins A, B, C, D, Zinc and Magnesium) that have any positive health impact on the body will be deemed illegal under Codex and are to be reduced to amounts negligible to humans’ health

Basically what it all boils down to is that we are on our own to provide nutrients. Soon legitimate vitamins will not be readily available – only the toxic Big Pharma options will be sold.  Because of this, it is imperative that we figure out how to provide these things for ourselves.

One article suggests that once Codex is fully implemented, most vitamins and nutritional supplements will require a prescription.

Drug companies can exploit this process by trying to patent common dietary ingredients as drugs before supplement companies have an opportunity to submit their NDI notifications. Once a drug company investigates an ingredient for drug purposes and publishes their findings, the ingredient can no longer be used in supplements.

This has happened before – it happened with the pyridoxamine form of vitamin B6 we mentioned above. In other words, what was once a supplement available to consumers at low cost will now be an expensive prescription-only drug, if it is available at all. (And it’s not only the drug that costs more: you’ll need to pay your doctor for an office visit just to get the prescription!)

The draft guidance also states that a synthetic copy of a supplement constituent, or an extract of an herb or other botanical, is not considered a dietary ingredient at all (much less an NDI). Isn’t this good – isn’t it better not to be an NDI? No. If the FDA says it is not an NDI, that means they are saying it can only be sold as a drug – period. This could knock out a number of important supplements currently sold.

The guidance discusses at length the evidence required for a notification (approval) – and the requirements are extensive, including a strong recommendation to include human studies. We sometimes forget that human studies, in addition to being very costly, do not always fit supplements. (source)

Here’s how to commit to nutritional anarchy.

The most important thing we can do for our health right now is to learn about nature’s vitamins in preparation for the day that choosing our own supplements is against the law. For example, did you know that a cup of rose hip tea contains staggeringly high amounts of Vitamin C?  Or that a cup of dandelion greens contains three times the RDA for Vitamin A?

Anarchy is defined as the non-recognition of authority. If nutrition becomes regulated by a bunch of bureaucrats who, at best, don’t really care about people, and at worst, hope to depopulate the globe, you must have the plans and weapons in place to live a life of nutritional anarchy.  Take these steps to prepare for the day when real vitamins might be completely inaccessible without a prescription.

  1. Educate yourself on which foods provide the most nutritional bang for the buck
  2. Plant nutrient dense flora in your garden
  3. Learn to identify edible plants and locate wild sources of nutrients, like a field of dandelions (make sure they are not sprayed with pesticides)
  4. Learn small space gardening methods to make the most of urban locations
  5. Consider hydroponics and/or aquaponics
  6. Purchase heirloom seeds to put aside for the future, when they may no longer be available
  7. Learn how to properly save and store seeds from your own plants for future gardening endeavors
  8. Learn how to harvest and preserve the bounty from your own property
  9. Practice preparing delicious meals using the most nutritious  foods available
  10. Experiment with multiple ways to use the in-season bounty from your garden to prevent boredom

These are the actions that will provide our independence from those who would have the audacity to regulate good nutrition.

When you stock your pantry with vitamin-laden goodies straight from nature, you don’t have to question whether  you are providing your family with what they need or just buying into the Big Pharma marketing scam. Big Pharma executives are rubbing their greedy hands together, just waiting for the day that we have been “food modernized” and can no longer purchase nutritional supplements without a visit to a physician, a trip to the pharmacy, and all of the costs (and risks) associated with those things.

In the case of Codex Alimentarius and the nutritional dictatorship the document portends, Mick Jagger had it right when he said:

Anarchy is the only slight glimmer of hope.

Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor.  Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at [email protected]

The Great Australian Health Mystery


Why is there a Great Divide between the Australian People and Their Government on Health?

Australia is the continent-nation that we all know is full of healthy, sun-loving, active people who once tamed a continent and now bask in the glory of their sun-drenched outdoor world. When someone mentions Australia to us, do we automatically think of their cities?  Of unhealthy urban masses?  No.  Absolutely not.  We think of outdoorsmen and -women who go for a morning swim, run a marathon, drop a charging hippo with a single shot at 500 paces, and all while carrying a baby on their hips.  Well, perhaps the baby-carrying part is a bit of an exaggeration; but Australians are thought of by the rest of the World as generally healthy and health-oriented individuals.

And this view is not without a basis, for Australians themselves try to do the right thing when it comes to health.  As of the year 2000, Australians spent AU$1671 million on dietary supplements, herbal medicines, and natural products, which exceeded the expenditure on pharmaceutical drugs.[1]  Last year that figure reached at least AU$1.8 billion.[2]  Clearly Australians are interested in maintaining their health.

So, why is it that the Australian government consistently pursues and pushes policies that would reduce Australians and the rest of the World to ill-health?  It is amazing, really, to see the dichotomy between the Australian people and their government on this issue.

The Australian Government Track Record

The Codex Alimentarius Commission was created fifty years ago by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) to create food standards and guidelines that the World would use in international food trade.  Australia was one of the original founding members of Codex and has very actively participated in its numerous meetings over the years.

So, what lofty and noble accomplishments can the Australian Codex Office claim?  Let’s see … from personal observation on my part at the meetings I have attended over the last fourteen years, these are Australia’s accomplishments for health:

  1. Successfully opposed labeling of Genetically Modified/Genetically Engineered (GM/GE) foods at the Codex Committee on Food Labelling in Canada, so that consumers could not make informed choices about whether or not to buy GM foods.[3]
  2. Successfully pushed Ractopamine-doped meat products on the rest of the World through a forced vote at the Codex Alimentarius Commission meeting in Rome, in July 2012.[4]  (Ractopamine is a steroid-like vet drug, the residues of which remain in the slaughtered animal to then be consumed by meat-eaters, and which is banned or prohibited in most countries because of its likely carcinogenicity and harm to animals.)
  3. Successfully pushed for maximum upper limits on “dangerous” vitamin-and-mineral supplements in actual contravention of what was allowed in Australian health-food stores at the time.[5]
  4. Unsuccessfully pushed for a “the sky’s the limit” industry exemption for infant-formula contamination by the proven-killer contaminant Melamine in the 2009-2011 sessions of the Codex Committee on Contaminants in Foods, to be thwarted only by the National Health Federation and an ad-hoc alliance of Central and South American countries at the very last minute.[6]
  5. Partially unsuccessfully opposed removing toxic Aluminum as a food additive at the Codex Committee on Food Additives meetings, the most recent of which took place in Beijing, China, in March 2013.[7]
  6. In a contest not yet resolved, has strongly and repeatedly pushed for the “dumbing down” of Nutrient Reference Values for vitamins and minerals[8] from already abysmally low levels to even lower levels that will prove nutritionally worthless for consumers.[9]

The above list of Australian government positions on health is by no means exhaustive.  If I were to take the time, I could easily come up with at least another half-dozen instances of anti-health stances taken by Australia at Codex meetings – and that is just at Codex.  That does not include any other health-organization meetings. [10]

australian health

Time for Some Answers

In fact, I cannot recall ever having seen Australia push any pro-health agenda at Codex.  Australia seems to always be on the wrong side of the health issues at all Codex meetings.  Put more bluntly, Australia has never met an unhealthy Codex standard that it did not love.  What’s up with that?  Is it ignorance or is Australia simply the point man for the United States or Big Industry on all of these issues – an eager lap dog that goes out and does the Empire’s bidding?

It is time that Australians found out.  Why can the pro-health Australian people not bring the Australian government to heel?  Is Australia just another one of those hollow democracies that parades around the World talking as if it were democratic when in fact it is all just a charade?  Are certain government people in the pocket of Big Industry or are they simply ignorant of basic nutritional and toxicological science and do not care what harm befalls the Australian people?[11]

I suggest writing anyone and everyone in the Australian government who is responsible for this travesty and demanding to know exactly why the Australian government representatives – particularly those in the Australian Codex Office – are not (1) supporting the removal of toxins and contaminants from our foods, (2) supporting the labeling of GM food products, and (3) supporting the increase of healthy vitamins and minerals in our diets at the precise time when we need them the most with modern diets that are full of toxins and already lacking in nutrient content that was present in our grandparents’ day.

Before contacting your Member of Parliament or the Australian Codex Office, I would suggest that you read Bill Sardi’s excellent article, “Here We Go Once Again,” which deconstructs the Australian government position favoring lowering nutrient values in foods and supplements.  (See  You can cut and paste at will from his arguments (and mine) in order to make your own to your government officials.

Contact Information

First of all, let me emphasize that I am only asking Australians to exercise their right as Australian citizens to petition their own government.  Please do not threaten, cajole, or even be impolite.  Janine Lewis, for example, is a smart, personable woman who, like the rest of us, will respond more positively to polite and well-thought out critiques than to threats or rants and rages.  So, in your letter, e-mail or call, please be polite, make your point as succinctly as possible, and then bid them a good day.  Don’t get me wrong, what the Australian government is doing in health regulation is absolutely infuriating; but, as they say, “you’ll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.”

Australian Codex Office.  The Australian Codex Office resides within the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.  The main actors in its office appear to be Ms. Janine Lewis and Dr. Paul Brent.[12]  There are others, but these two will do as they seem to currently attend the most Codex meetings.  Their bosses would also be appropriate contacts, but I do not have their names at present.  The contacts that I do have, though, are:

food standards

   Ms Janine Lewis – Principal Nutritionist –

Codex Australia – Food Standards Australia New Zealand –

GPO Box 858 – Canberra BC ACT 2601 Australia

Tel.: +61 (2) 62 71 22 45

Fax: +61 (2) 62 71 22 78

E-Mail: [email protected]

Dr Paul Brent – Chief Scientist –

Codex Australia – Food Standards Australia New Zealand –

Tel: +61 (2) 62 71 22 22

E-Mail: [email protected]

General E-Mail: [email protected]


Parliament (Senate and House).  The Australian Government makes it very easy for you to contact your Senator and Representative.  Simply go to and you can find their current (as of July 2013) contact information.  Properly set-up address files are there so you can even print out sheets of labels on Avery labels.  To search your particular Member of Parliament, try also:

Solve the Mystery, Cure the Problem

So, again, one asks why the disconnect between the Australian people and its own health ministers and bureaucrats?  Why does the Australian government promote a sickness agenda at every turn?  We would love to know.  And we would love to change Australia’s position, at Codex and at all World food forums everywhere.

For those Australians reading this article, inform yourself intelligently on this issue and then contact your government representatives and officials alerting them to this disconnect and your displeasure with it.  Be polite but firm.  Above all, be persistently vocal.  After all, they are supposed to be your servants, not your masters.  They should be doing your bidding, not some secret masters’.

If you are not Australian, then please still distribute and post this article where it will be widely seen and read by Australians.  Urge them to take action.

Yes, there are other bad players at Codex.  The United States and Canada are two of them.  The arguments made here could – and do – apply just as equally against the U.S. and Canadian government positions.  But this article has been written for Australians because Australia has been the driving force for pushing through the “dumbed down” Nutrient Reference Values for vitamins and minerals, which values are still in play at Codex.

Finally, in interacting with Australian officials, you might come across some important information about their motivation or their string-pullers that could help us understand why Australia acts the way it does at these Codex meetings.  Any such information should be sent to me immediately, please.  You can never tell, what you found out might just be important enough to make a health difference for all of us.

[1] Brownie S, “Predictors of Dietary and Health Supplement Use in Older Australians,” Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2006, Vol.23, No.3, at p.26, at

[2] Euromonitor International, Vitamins and Dietary Supplements in Australia, March 2013, at p. 42, at

[3] See Scott Tips’ article “The Codex Committee on Food Labelling Meets in Quebec,” May 20, 2010, at  After the GM-labelling guideline could not be agreed upon due to strong opposition, the two opposing camps compromised on an “each country can do what it wants” document.

[4] See Scott Tips’ article “The Death Star Arrives” at

[5] See NHF News Release “Codex Alimentarius Commission (28th Session) Rome, Italy NHF Update on Codex Proceedings Currently in Session,” July 5, 2005, at

[6] See NHF News Release “Codex Sends Melamine Back to the Drawing Board,” July 16, 2011, at also NHF News Release “Victory at Codex on the Melamine Issue,” March 27, 2012, at

[7] See Scott Tips’ article “Who Needs Healthy Food When We Can Eat Cash?,” April 27, 2013, at

[8] The Codex NRVs proposed by Australia are: Vitamin A (dropped from 800 mcg to 550 mcg); Vitamin D (5 mcg or 200 IUs); Vitamin E (8.8 mg); Vitamin K (60 mcg); Vitamin C (dropped from 60 mg to 45 mg); Thiamin (dropped from 1.4 to 1.2 mg); Riboflavin (dropped from 1.6 mg to 1.2 mg); Niacin (dropped from 18 mg to 15 mg); Vitamin B6 (dropped from 2 mg to 1.3 mg); Folate (raised to 400 mcg); Vitamin B12 (2.4 mcg); Pantothenate (5 mg); Biotin (30 mcg); Calcium (raised from 800 mg to 1000 mg); Magnesium (dropped from 300 mg to 240 mg); Iodine (150 mcg); Iron (14.3-43.1 mg depending upon bioavailability); Zinc (dropped from 15 mg to 3.6-11.9, depending upon bioavailability); Selenium (30 mcg); Phosphorus (700 mg); Chloride (2.3 grams); Copper (900 mcg); Fluoride (3.5 mg); Manganese (2.1 mg); Chromium (30 mcg); and Molybdenum (45 mcg).

[9] See Scott Tips’ article “Codex Nutrition Committee Chooses Malnutrition,” December 14, 2012, at  The Australian delegate specifically told the author that she had arrived at the proposed value for Vitamin C (at 45 mg/day) because it was the “halfway point between no Vitamin C and tissue saturation,” essentially then, the halfway point between Death and Life!  Yes, let’s just compromise to arrive at a “healthy” number!

[10] Keene N, “Bad Habits Feeding Our Soaring Obesity Rate,” The Telegraph (, July 18, 2012, at

[11] See, e.g., Sepp Hasslberger’s well-done article, “Australia, New Zealand – Codex Alimentarius and Trans-Tasman Harmonization,” May 9, 2005, at, which incorporates Eve Hillary’s excellent article, “Codex – The Sickness Indu$try’s Last Stand,” April 1, 2005.

[12] For an example of Food Safety Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) and its thinking, see Brent P, “From the Desk of the Chief Scientist – Building Food Safety Across the Globe,” FSANZ website, March 2013, at

By Scott C. Tips

© 2013 Scott Tips

By Scott C. Tips, President of the National Health Federation

Scott is A California-licensed attorney, he has specialized in food-and-drug law and trademark law, but also engages in business litigation, general business law, and nonprofit organizations, with an international clientele. Since 1989, Scott has been the General Counsel for the National Health Federation, the World’s oldest health-freedom organization for consumers, as well as the Editor In Chief of its magazine, Health Freedom News. In 2007, he became NHF President, and has been a frequent speaker for the organization and for health freedom on several continents. As legal columnist, Scott writes a monthly column for Whole Foods Magazine called “Legal Tips,” a column he started many years ago. Currently, he is primarily occupied with health-freedom issues arising from national governments’ and such international organizations as the Codex Alimentarius Commission’s attempts to limit individual freedom of choice in health matters. In that capacity, he has compiled, edited, and published a book on the subject entitled Codex Alimentarius – Global Food Imperialism. He also attends Codex meetings worldwide and has attended more Codex meetings than any other health-freedom activist.

Brave Benin

codex in rome

FAO Building and Codex Meeting Place – July 2013

How one small African country made a brave stand at Codex 

“There is no wealth but life.”  – John Ruskin 

Monday morning in Rome began as only summer mornings in that city begin, with cerulean blue skies blemished only by the merest wisps of clouds.  An early, cooling breeze swept the streets as I made my way to the opening day of the 36th session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission meeting in Rome, this first week of July 2013, held once again in the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) building.

Vitamin and Mineral Values

Those who have been following the National Health Federation’s efforts at Codex since the mid-1990s already know that at the Codex Nutrition Committee meeting in Dusseldorf, Germany in 2009, the NHF singlehandedly launched the opposition that stopped the Australian delegation and others from “dumbing down” these Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs).[i]

Australia and its supporters had wrongly proposed that lower NRVs be adopted for certain important vitamins and minerals, including Vitamin C.  For example, the “Proposed Draft Additional or Revised NRVs for Labelling Purposes in the Codex Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling” suggested reducing the Vitamin A NRV from 800 micrograms down to 550 micrograms, Vitamin C down from an already abysmally low 60 milligrams to 45 milligrams, Thiamin down from 1.4 milligrams to 1.2 milligrams, Niacin from 18 milligrams down to 15 milligrams, Magnesium down from 300 milligrams to 240 milligrams, and so forth.[ii]

These values are already at subsistence levels; and in order to enjoy optimal and robust health, most consumers need far more than the miserable amounts that Codex would parsimoniously dole out to them.  Yet Australia and its supporters are so fixated on reducing the values even more that they have blinded themselves to the real science showing the absolute need for more nutrient intake, not less.

Fortunately, thanks to NHF and its key supporters India and Iraq at the 2009 meeting, the Committee wisely chose not to move forward with any of those proposed NRVs and instead held the work back for further review and study.  Nearly four years have passed since we first stopped these NRVs from being adopted, and each year of non-adoption has been a victory for NHF, and for you.  Unfortunately, that winning streak has come to a dead stop.

It started with last year’s Nutrition Committee meeting in December 2012, where three women (the Chairwoman and the Australian and U.S. delegates) decided to split the vitamins and minerals into two groups: One that was considered “suitable” for adoption; and a second group that was considered “unsuitable” and would need further work.[iii]  The Chairwoman ignored the strong objections of five delegations (Malaysia, Iran, South Africa, the International Dairy Federation, and the NHF) to decide that “consensus” existed and the “suitable” list could go to the Commission for approval.[iv]

Seven Months Later

It has continued with the Commission meeting this first week of July.  The cooling breeze that had helped propel me on my way to the meeting became instead a steady stream of hot air as Codex delegates discussed the “suitable” NRV standards for vitamins and minerals. It was one of many such standards and guidelines being considered for adoption by the Commission, but it became one of the most contentious.

This time Australia was completely silent.  In a kind of hidden tag-team maneuver, it was now the United States’ and the European Union’s turn to push forward the worthless NRV standard.  The U.S. delegate said that it was in favor of the standard being adopted at Step 5/8 (i.e., just short of final adoption at Step 8), the EU said it supported the United States, as did the ever-eager American lapdogs Chile and Costa Rica.  The Chairwoman of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU), Pia Noble, was asked her opinion and of course said that the CCNFSDU had carefully considered the science and recommended its adoption.  This was a lie.  Seven months earlier, three women had pushed the standard forward while three women (and NHF and IDF) had opposed it, all while the rest of the Committee sat on their hands.  Hardly “careful consideration.”

 The NHF naturally spoke up in opposition to approval of the NRVs, arguing that they called for a reduction across the board of 20% to 66% of the B vitamin NRVs, increased Calcium NRVs in the face of a reduction in Magnesium NRVs (the exact opposite of what modern nutrition tells us should be done), and promotes, at best, subsistence nutrition when optimal nutrition is called for here.  “These are standards that would only allow consumers to put one foot before the other, barely avoiding slipping into the grave, as they shuffle through life.  Consumers deserve better, they deserve optimal nutrition that allows them to maximize their potential and quality of life,” I said to the delegates.

Only the International Dairy Federation (IDF)[v] spoke up alongside the NHF against advancing the NRV standard, based primarily upon the increase in the calcium NRV to 1000 milligrams, which would result, IDF argued, in the curious paradox of milk no longer being able to be promoted as a “rich source of calcium.”  The delegates seemed unmoved by this argument.

So, seeing no country delegations supporting the NHF and IDF position, Chairman Sanjay Dave (pronounced “Dah-vey”) was on the verge of declaring the vitamin-and-mineral NRVs adopted at Step 5/8 when NHF interrupted with a request for the floor.

Mr. Chairman, NHF would propose that since the Commission seems determined to advance the NRV standard here at least the calcium portion of the standard be withheld and sent back to the Committee to be considered along with magnesium.  Magnesium and calcium are twin minerals and it is absurd to determine one value without determining the other at the same time.  They should not be separated like this.

When Chairman Dave asked if there were any country delegations supporting NHF’s proposal, there was a long silence as he slowly looked around the room.  Papers rustled and stirred as some delegates shifted uncomfortably in their seats.  I looked around the room too and wondered what had happened to our previous supporters.

            Malaysia? Silence.

            Russia?  Nyet.

            Iran?  More silence.

            South Africa?  Nothing.

            India?  अनध

            Anybody?  I could hear crickets chirping, as I slowly twisted in the wind, unsupported.

Dr. Yacouboutoure to the Rescue

            “Benin please.”

            My head snapped around to see where the delegation of Benin was seated.  The Chairman had just recognized Benin’s request for the floor.  What were they going to say?

Benin supports the previous delegation, NHF.  We agree with them that Codex cannot consider calcium alone without taking into account magnesium levels, as these two minerals go together.  Calcium should be withheld from the standard here and sent back to the Committee.”

It was Dr. Idrissou Yacouboutoure, the smartly dressed and well-spoken head of delegation and Director of Benin’s Ministre Agriculture, Elevage et Pêche.  Out of all of the delegations with whom I had spoken about this issue, here was one with whom I had not.  NHF’s sole supporter among the country delegations. Talking good sense.

But no one was listening ….  Dr. Yacouboutoure spoke good sense, but minds were already made up – mostly to sit on the sidelines.  That is what really decides most issues at Codex, unfortunately: the Uninterested Majority.  Or, maybe some are interested but the debate at Codex is proceeding too quickly for them to stop and check with their bosses as to which way side they may take on an issue.  Fortunately, Dr. Yacouboutoure was his own boss and could decide on the spot what was the right thing to do.

Do you want to reserve your objection for the Report?” the Chairman asked Benin, clearly signaling that Benin and NHF’s effort to at least cut calcium from the herd had failed.

Oui, Monsieur Président,” replied Dr. Yacouboutoure, clearly signaling in return his country’s displeasure with the result.[vi] 

codex meeting

Scott Tips and Dr. Yacouboutoure, July 3, 2013

The worthless NRV standard was, in this typical Codex fashion, advanced to the next rung without any real consideration of what was being done or the ill effects that it would visit upon consumers.  A very few co-conspirators – who had orchestrated amongst themselves their plan to mislead consumers worldwide by foisting upon them worthless vitamin levels as the “recommended daily requirement” – had succeeded, thanks largely to those who stood by and did nothing while consumers were mugged and left for near dead.  The EU, which had been so steadfast at protecting consumers from the dangers of ractopamine residues, aluminum, and GM foods at previous Codex meetings, went Broken Arrow at this meeting, miserably deserting the best health interests of its 500 million citizens without even an explanation.

What delegations such as the EU fail to understand is that there are two main ways to harm human health.  One is to flood our bodies with toxins and other contaminants, such as ractopamine, aluminum, and GM foods; the other way is to weaken the body and its immune system through sub-optimal nutrition, thereby making humans much more vulnerable to lower levels of toxins and contaminants.  It is merely two sides of the same coin; but in the EU’s one-dimensional world, they are blind to the coin’s flip side.

The fight over these NRVs will go on, at this November’s CCNFSDU meeting.  As long as there are intelligent, outspoken delegations such as Benin’s, there will be strong obstacles to adopting any standards that will harm consumers.

Saturated Fats vs. Polyunsaturated Fats

Immediately prior to the vitamin-and-mineral NRV fight, the Commission debated adopting a Nutrient Reference Value for saturated fatty acids that would limit them to supplying no more than ten percent of the consumer’s daily energy needs.  Trapped as they are in 1970s nutritional science, many Codex delegates think saturated fats are nothing but heart attacks waiting to happen.  Such ignorance has pushed Codex into adopting this limited dietary role for saturated fats while favoring more dangerous vegetable oils.

Malaysia, the Philippines, IDF, and the NHF all opposed setting too low of an NRV for saturated fats, with NHF arguing that more strokes and nervous-system disorders would result.  The Commission, however, adopted the NRV over our objections.

The Codex Strategic Plan

After much discussion, the Commission adopted a new six-year strategic plan for the years 2014-2019, which emphasizes more food controls, standards and guidelines for “consumer protection.”  Nowhere appear the words “optimal health” or even “promoting nutritious food.”  With the collective power of its bureaucratic mindset having already laid waste to consumer nutrition like Attila the Hun descending upon Europe, Codex anticipates continuing the tradition for the next six years.

 Fortunately, just when it seems as if the dimmest light is about to go out, Codex startles and surprises us.  At one point, the Latin American countries gathered together and sallied forth in an attempt to limit consumer concerns only to matters of protection of their health.  They were sharply routed and defeated.  So, the new strategic plan retains at least some consumer-friendly breadth to it.

“Keep Doing God’s Work”

The week-long session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission ended Friday evening at 8:30 p.m.; and as I wearily shut down my laptop and was putting away my piles of papers and writings, many delegates filed past me on their way home.  One, a former Chairperson, came up to me, took my hand, and kindly encouraged me with the hortatory words, “Keep doing God’s work.”

Since the Codex meeting ended, I have had ample time to reflect upon those simple but powerful words of encouragement.  At the same time, playing in the background, the mainstream media trumpets the many health successes of Codex during its 50 years.  And to be fair, there have been some.  But any Codex successes have been eclipsed by the failures – such as the NRV standard that reduces vitamin-and-mineral levels from ridiculous levels to worthless levels.

As it celebrates its 50th year of existence, Codex focuses upon its structure and its output, the abundant standards and guidelines that it has created and disseminated.  It forgets, however, that its most important structural underpinnings are the delegates themselves.  Without adequate awareness and knowledge of health, and a true desire for health, by the delegates, all the standards and guidelines in the World will be worthless because they will have sprung forth out of ignorance and disinterest.

Sadly, with the exception of Benin and a few precious others, the delegates simply do not “live” nutrition.  And as the jazz saxophonist Bird once said, “If you don’t live it, it won’t come out your horn.”


[1] Not to be confused with Maximum Upper Permitted Limits, NRVs are nothing more than souped-up RDAs.  These are numerical values assigned to specified nutrients that will supposedly cover 98% of the population’s nutritional needs for that nutrient. By referring to the NRV for a vitamin or mineral, the consumer is supposed to know whether he or she is getting an adequate intake of that nutrient, even if, as in the case of Vitamin C, 100% of the NRV is defined as 45 milligrams! These values are claimed to be set according to rigorous scientific evidence; but, in reality, “science” at Codex levels is often nothing more than a flimsy set of assumptions and erroneous conclusions cobbled together to justify keeping consumers “safe” from “dangerous” vitamins and minerals.

[1] The proposed Codex NRVs are: Vitamin A (dropped from 800 mcg to 550 mcg); Vitamin D (5 mcg or 200 IUs); Vitamin E (8.8 mg); Vitamin K (60 mcg); Vitamin C (dropped from 60 mg to 45 mg); Thiamin (dropped from 1.4 to 1.2 mg); Riboflavin (dropped from 1.6 mg to 1.2 mg); Niacin (dropped from 18 mg to 15 mg); Vitamin B6 (dropped from 2 mg to 1.3 mg); Folate (raised to 400 mcg); Vitamin B12 (2.4 mcg); Pantothenate (5 mg); Biotin (30 mcg); Calcium (raised from 800 mg to 1000 mg); Magnesium (dropped from 300 mg to 240 mg); Iodine (150 mcg); Iron (14.3-43.1 mg depending upon bioavailability); Zinc (dropped from 15 mg to 3.6-11.9, depending upon bioavailability); Selenium (30 mcg); Phosphorus (700 mg); Chloride (2.3 grams); Copper (900 mcg); Fluoride (3.5 mg); Manganese (2.1 mg); Chromium (30 mcg); and Molybdenum (45 mcg). 

[1] See CCNFSDU document number CX/NFSDU 12/34/8. 

[1] Note that in 2009, CCNFSDU Chairman Grossklaus had found a lack of consensus with only four delegations opposed, as compared with five here. 

[1] In my opinion, the IDF is one of the good industry groups in frequent attendance at Codex meetings. While of course promoting its industry’s interests, as it should, IDF has never been known to be untruthful or to take unfair advantage.  In fact, in many instances, IDF has spoken up for consumer interests as well as the dairy industry’s. 

[1] For those of you who actually read the endnotes, and who care, I would encourage you to convey your thanks to Dr. Yacouboutoure (preferably in French, but if not, English will suffice) by writing him a brief thank you e-mail at [email protected]

By Scott C. Tips

© 2013 Scott Tips

By Scott C. Tips, President of the National Health Federation

Scott is A California-licensed attorney, he has specialized in food-and-drug law and trademark law, but also engages in business litigation, general business law, and nonprofit organizations, with an international clientele. Since 1989, Scott has been the General Counsel for the National Health Federation, the World’s oldest health-freedom organization for consumers, as well as the Editor In Chief of its magazine, Health Freedom News. In 2007, he became NHF President, and has been a frequent speaker for the organization and for health freedom on several continents. As legal columnist, Scott writes a monthly column for Whole Foods Magazine called “Legal Tips,” a column he started many years ago. Currently, he is primarily occupied with health-freedom issues arising from national governments’ and such international organizations as the Codex Alimentarius Commission’s attempts to limit individual freedom of choice in health matters. In that capacity, he has compiled, edited, and published a book on the subject entitled Codex Alimentarius – Global Food Imperialism. He also attends Codex meetings worldwide and has attended more Codex meetings than any other health-freedom activist

The Pyramid of Our Society


The intent of this article is to put in general terms what our fabricated society has been transformed into, how it happend and all of the nuts and bolts that are currently holding this system together. I won’t get into the details of each point I make, but I have included many links for easy researching.

I challenge you to open your mind and look beyond the national borders, races and religions. The world around us is an illusion. Instead of evolving naturally, it has been socially engineered to suit one goal: power and control. Have you ever wondered why things are the way they are? In recent decades life has changed so dramatically that you would not recognize it, but because it has been done incrementally it appeared as though it happened naturally. The technical progress is astonishing and things one could not think about became our reality, but there is a dark side to this progress; it all facilitates further control. Cameras, cell phones, computers and television made our life simpler, fun and more effective, but they also brought us in a tighter web which has a greater ability to influence our lives and spy on us. Everything is recorded, analyzed and could be invoked if needed.

The whole system of today’s society is designed like a spider web and a pyramid. Like any company, the whole world is run like a giant corporation. Our society is compartmentalized and people are small parts of a larger system. The government fully controls every aspect of human life from birth, to children’s education, welfare, healthcare, licensing and eventually death.

Almost everything you do, you need a license before you are allowed to do it. We are slaves of the system and are serving the system to pay off the loans taken from banks, trying to make ends meet. It was not always like that. People used to be able to work and feed the whole family without borrowing from banks. How did we come to this? A group of people with a lot of money has changed the system through corrupt politicians and introduced the laws to advance their agenda. They first took control of the media and used it to make us susceptible to those changes and believe that this is natural evolution.

The Federal Reserve Bank (which happens to be a private bank) prints out money and the U.S. government borrows this money and pays interest using the money collected as taxes. Banks are allowed to lend 10 times more money than they actually have in their reserves and charge interest on money they don’t have. It’s an intentional system of debt to keep the serfs in check. All banks are aware of this and “play” the game. There is not enough money to pay the interest and the debt grows and there is default and a bailout and then government pays more of our money to the banks. Why do governments do this?

It is because people who took over the system, control everything including the government. Some call it the “shadow government”.  It is not our government, ‘by us for us’, but one of their global system departments to run us. How is it possible to coordinate all of this on a global scale? Here comes the United Nations to run the legislation, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to police the enforce the agenda, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) to regulate the global financial system, and the elusive Bilderberg Group meeting once a year who are the obvious puppet masters. Then, all of the smaller departments (our governments, media, banks and corporations) carry out the agenda. Here the pyramid comes in place.

The human society is being destroyed on all levels. The false values the system fed us all these decades through the media made us complacent to the agenda and everything else is ridiculed. The family institution is destroyed through feminism, abortions, homosexuality and pornography; the international law is twisted – sovereign counties are being invaded, pillaged and the population killed on false pretexts; social values have degraded through the media and sex-loving empty culture of feminine-like wimpy men who act tough and women who act like men, all of them acting like children. That is the end of the society and its complete degradation and mayhem.

The agenda is depopulation, via “slow kill” It’s less noticeable than other previously tried methods. The food is being poisoned with genetically modified organisms and chemicals, our drinking water with fluoride, vaccines with unspecified viruses, chemicals, gmos and other toxins, Big Pharma literally trying to drug up the whole population and chemtrails laced with heavy metals and poisons are polluting our skies. The rate of various deceases and illnesses are skyrocketing. We live in a habitually sick society. Billions of dollars are spent on wars and conquering other countries and in the meantime, the American Healthcare System is at the brink of collapse and millions of people die each year worldwide form hunger and preventable deseases. Now, we have ObamaCare to “save” us.  It seems like nobody cares, but in fact the reality is more sinister – it is actually the plan to destroy the human population through various means. One aspect to this madness to consider is Agenda 21 working alongside Codex Alimentarius. I won’t get into the details of these two sinister programs, but they are intended to control every aspect of your life.

Man-made global warming is nothing more than a fraud to collect more taxes and make us more enslaved through new regulations. Bailout is a fraud. Euro zone is at the brink of collapse and so is the dollar. There will be a new currency and the new system. The system being implemented is called the New World Order.rulers

The only way for us to take back our lives and have control of our future is to create a global awareness about the programs set forth right in front of our faces and say, “Enough is enough!” Power and control are only illusions and can only be had if one submits him/herself to the corrupt system. You have more power than you know.

Wendy Blanks is an entrepreneur, independent  researcher, journalist and activist. She is the Founder of TruWire Productions, LLC., and the Owner/Chief Editor for The Sleuth Journal.  Wendy also owns Organic Market Classifieds; a platform to buy/sell organics. She has done investigative research in multiple fields and has a passion for sharing true news, whether it be natural health, government corruption, politics, civil/human rights and freedoms, technology, our environment and other important issues that plagues our society. Wendy is also Co-Founder & COO for a Health IT Firm and was previously the President & Chief Executive Officer of a National DME company. The Sleuth Journal streamlines groups of like minded individuals and organizations with different expertices who are ‘awake’ and create a massive knowledge base for a ‘conscious awakening’ of what is really going on in today’s matrixical, oligarchy pyramid that we call ‘society’. So many people are zombies by media, television and other means of mass brainwashing and we need to reverse that and give the people their minds back and in return, their power and will to change and challenge the system. Help support the cause by shopping at The Sleuth Journal online store at Like The Sleuth Journal on  Facebook. Follow The Sleuth Journal on Twitter. Join The Sleuth Journal group on Linkedin. Like Drone Patrol on Facebook. Join our Drone Patrol group on Linkedin and be sure to visit our site to report drone sightings and keep up to date with sightings.

Who Needs Healthy Food When We Can Eat Cash?

eat money 

Industry Insensitivity to Health Drives Codex Agenda

 The hazy, smoggy skies over Beijing during these March days are emblematic of the Codex meetings that the National Health Federation (NHF) has been attending for many days here in China. The Sun only shimmers as a strange, pale orange globe, casting an ethereal, almost futuristic “Bladerunner” look to the cityscape while city residents glide silently past with white face masks and we Codex delegates and staff work inside overheated rooms on international food-additive standards.  Given what has transpired, the setting seems apt.

Throughout the week of March 18-22, 2013, the Codex Committee on Food Additives (CCFA) met at the Asia Hotel in Beijing, China, chaired by Dr. Junshi Chen of the China National Center for Food Safety Risk Assessment, to consider hundreds of food additives, some of which are innocuous, even healthful, others of which are most decidedly toxic.  The problem is that many of the Codex delegates cannot discern the difference between the two, the haziness of their thinking working in some sort of bizarre parallel to the opaque weather outdoors.

As the only consumer group present at this meeting, and the working group that preceded it, the NHF offered a unique perspective on what its members consider healthful and what it does not.  To us, aluminum-containing food additives and aspartame are self-evidently toxic and should be removed from the food supply.  However, to the trade organizations here, and their foot servants in too many of the regulatory agencies that sit in as the country-member Codex delegates here, such food additives are simply vehicles of manufacturing convenience and health be damned.  In fact, I rather suspect that had these same businesses been manufacturing leaden drinking vessels during the heyday of the Roman Empire, then they would have similarly defended such vessels’ use as vital and indispensable tools of commerce, no matter that the users were slowly being poisoned by the deadly, leaching lead.

Ubiquitous, Dangerous Aluminum

Scientists have known that aluminum is toxic since at least 1911.  Even the first commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Dr. Harvey Wiley, admitted, in his 1929 book History of Crime against the Food Laws, that “From the earliest days of food regulation, the use of alum [aluminum sulphate] in foods has been condemned.  It is universally acknowledged as a poison in all countries.  If the Bureau of Chemistry had been permitted to enforce the law … no food product in the country would have any trace of … any aluminum or saccharin.”  Dr. Wiley was the major force behind the first pure food law in the United States, but he resigned in disgust because the laws were not being enforced. To this date, aluminum has never been tested for safety by the FDA.

Aluminum is a known neurotoxin, easily crossing the blood-brain barrier, and it interferes with ATP enzymes, which carry out the important function of energy transfer among brain cells.  Aluminum worsens the effects of other toxins, such as pesticides, herbicides, mercury, cadmium, fluoride, lead, and glutamate.  It also detaches highly oxidizing iron in the bloodstream from its protective carrier transferrin.  This greatly increases the toxicity of iron and is at least one of the mechanisms by which aluminum is toxic to the brain.  Warnings about the toxic effects of aluminum could, and do, fill volumes.

Aluminum ammonium sulfate, aluminum silicate, calcium aluminum silicate, sodium aluminum phosphates, and sodium aluminosilicate are the food additives that Codex was reviewing this session.  They can be found in practically as many foods as you can imagine: vegetables, soybean paste, crackers, pastas and noodles, bagels, English muffins, pita bread, bread and baking mixes, chewing gum, milk and cream powder, processed cheeses, flours, batters for fish and poultry, dairy-based drinks such as eggnog, beverage whiteners, dried-whey products, salt, seasonings and condiments, soup and broth mixes, and sauces.  And do not think that you can always look at labels and see them disclosed there because often the aluminum compound is hidden within a particular product identity.

The Working Group

One of the things you learn early on at Codex meetings is the importance of the various ad-hoc working groups that the Codex Committees form from time to time to deal with specific food topics.  These working groups either take the form of “electronic” Working Groups (eWGs) or “physical” Working Groups (pWGs).  In the same way that the Codex Committees perform the grunt work for the parent Codex Alimentarius Commission, the working groups perform the dirty work for the Committees.  If a delegate wants to have an impact at Codex, it is important to start at the bottom of the food chain and work one’s way upward.

At the Physical Working Group (as opposed to the Electronic Working Group) on the Codex General Standard for Food Additives (GSFA) that met on Friday, March 15-16th, and which was chaired by Mr. Paul Honigfort (a Consumer Safety Officer with the FDA), the NHF and the European Union repeatedly and harshly criticized aluminum-containing food additives and called for their removal.  At various times the delegations of Iran, Japan, Brazil, and even China helped us by joining us in that call.  But, we were opposed by the usual Codex suspects, the ones whom you would really think knew better – the delegations of Australia, the United States and Canada – and their handlers, those front organizations that masquerade as trade organizations, such as the International Food Additives Council (IFAC).  Playing tag-team with IFAC on this issue was the International Council of Grocery Manufacturers Associations (ICGMA), another industry apologist for keeping aluminum in food additives.

In dishing out scorching criticism of aluminum and its proponents, NHF came under return fire from Australia, IFAC, and the Working Group Chairman! The arrogance of Australia was particularly notable since Australia seems to always be on the wrong side of the health issues at all Codex meetings. What’s up with that? Is it ignorance or is Australia simply the point man for the United States on all of these issues? To my memory, Australia has never met an unhealthy Codex standard that it did not love.  And “in your face” discussions by Katherine Carroll (a member of the NHF delegation) with Australia only confirmed Australia’s intransigence and lack of interest in health.

As the delegations tangled and argued over the aluminum food additives, the essence of the debate was not over the danger of the additives but over the need of the industry for aluminum in producing its foods and drinks.  Supported by Australia, IFAC, along with its sidekick ICGMA, cried out constantly that the “Industry” just could not make its products without aluminum food additives. Their members’ spraying equipment “might overheat and catch fire,” IFAC lamented. When NHF suggested that this was a not a genuine issue and that the industry has enough clever engineers to easily innovate its way out of this “problem” and create non-overheating equipment, NHF was sharply rebuked by the Chairman for suggesting that IFAC might not be telling the truth.  Yet, really, in a World full of engineers, how long would it take to fashion a solution to the spraying-equipment fires, if any, that IFAC successfully interjected as a reason to keep some aluminum food additives?  Monkeys in a zoo could solve this problem.  Or, maybe not – if they had consumed too much aluminum.

At one point, the ICGMA representative stated that the aluminum food additive was the “best” for the job.  Speaking immediately next, I started out with the retort that “’Best’ obviously did not include any consideration of health.  It only included consideration of what was best to manufacture the product.”  It would seem that for these food-additive companies, whatever is best for them must be best for the rest of us.  Which is sort of like saying that if you kick someone enough times for you to feel good, then it must be good for the victim too.

Still, by the end of the first day and after I had spoken out some two dozen times, the success of the EU and NHF could be tallied by the numerous uses of aluminum food additives that the Working Group would suggest be discontinued to the full Committee meeting.  Although there were also many food-additive uses that still remained – no thanks to the interventions of voluble Australia, the U.S., Canada, IFAC, and ICGMA – they were at greatly reduced levels, usually cut in half or more.  So, progress was made; and most delegates agreed that Codex’s goal was the eventual elimination of all aluminum food additives.

On the issue of aspartame as a food additive, which was the subject of a Conference Room Document (CRD 12) drafted by the Federation, neither the working group nor the full Committee had the time to debate this additive and the can was kicked down the road, to be considered at next year’s meeting.

With minor adjustments of no real import, the overall recommendations of the working group were accepted by the full Committee and referred up to the Codex Commission.

The Opposition

It seemed self-evident that the main country delegations pushing aluminum additives had received their marching orders from industry.  The real key, then, was industry itself, represented as it was at Codex by trade groups that, in some cases, might be more properly called front groups for big players like Monsanto and DuPont.  They seemed to be calling the shots, but who is really behind them?

Dr. Joseph Mercola, in particular, recently and very helpfully wrote, “[I]’m making public IFAC’s list of officers and board members as of 2011. It wasn’t easy to find this list, primarily because IFAC isn’t a regular 501(c)(3). In fact, it isn’t a 501(c)(3) at all. Actually, it’s a 501(c)(6) – an IRS classification for nonprofit “commercially oriented” organizations such as football leagues, chambers of commerce and, apparently, groups like IFAC.  Once you know its non-profit classification, you can find its 990 forms – which all non-profits must file, complete with lists of officers and directors. I obtained IFAC’s 990s for the years 2004-2011. And there I learned the truth. Except for two, who I couldn’t find any information at all on, all of IFAC’s officers and directors are linked to processed foods and additives in some way, with at least six of them having direct or business links to Monsanto and/or DuPont. That’s right. Six of IFAC’s governing board members are linked to the largest GMO producers in the world.”

And in looking at the large IFAC delegation, one can see names linked with Solae LLC (which used to be known as DuPont Protein Technologies), Innophos Inc. (leading producer of phosphates), Ashland China (BigAg), and the Kellen company (which manages so many of these front groups).  The paw prints of these anti-health companies is all over the industry trade group INGOs at Codex, just as they are over certain Codex delegations.  The NHF was the only consumer group present at the CCFA meeting – the David against these Goliaths.

scott tips

Scott Tips, President of The National Health Federation

Speech in Moscow

Still, the National Health Federation has gained enough respect over its many years at Codex, and after so many vocal battles with Chairmen, Chairwomen, and other delegations in arguing for health and health freedom, that while at the CCFA meeting in Beijing, I was asked by the Chairman of the Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food (CCCF) to give a speech for NHF on behalf of all consumers worldwide on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the founding of Codex.  The speech was to be given in Moscow, Russia on April 10th during a special session of the meeting.  I accepted.

That acceptance, though, meant flying back through California, New Jersey, and France, and then on to Moscow in time for the meeting and speech.  Stubborn snow, carefully scooped up off the streets and sidewalks into neat piles, slowly melting in the Sun, greeted me as I arrived there.  I prepared my speech during the trip and while there in Moscow, and on that clear Wednesday day, presented it.

There were seven speakers in all, four country delegations, the NHF for consumers, and then two industry speakers, in that order.  Sitting at the head table before more than 200 delegates, I was right next to the podium, and speakers as they each spoke in turn.  I could see them up close and they all spoke well, using PowerPoint, and about their country/industry’s involvement in Codex.

When it was my turn to speak, I spoke instead, without PowerPoint, about my experiences in arguing against melamine at my first CCCF meeting; about the essence of Codex being to protect the consumer by ensuring access to a healthy diet; about consumers being suspicious of Codex and its cozy relationship with industry; about the ease with which regulators can get caught up in “standard making” and forget the human faces and costs behind these rules and standards; about ”science based” evidence being nothing more than a word that can be twisted and used in the wrong way as it was once used against Galileo; about “old errors being more popular than new truths”; about us all being consumers with families and lives, and that it is important for us to always remember that there are real people, real human faces, affected by the decisions made at Codex; and about the delegates’ duty to them.

It was not the firebrand, head-clubbing speech that some there had feared I would make (or that others not there had hoped I would make), but it was spoken to win hearts and not smash them.  Seemingly, the message was received.  Perhaps in time it will even be acted upon.

By Scott C. Tips, President of the National Health Federation

 Scott is A California-licensed attorney, he has specialized in food-and-drug law and trademark law, but also engages in business litigation, general business law, and nonprofit organizations, with an international clientele.  Since 1989, Scott has been the General Counsel for the National Health Federation, the World’s oldest health-freedom organization for consumers, as well as the Editor In Chief of its magazine, Health Freedom News.  In 2007, he became NHF President, and has been a frequent speaker for the organization and for health freedom on several continents.   As legal columnist, Scott writes a monthly column for Whole Foods Magazine called “Legal Tips,” a column he started many years ago.  Currently, he is primarily occupied with health-freedom issues arising from national governments’ and such international organizations as the Codex Alimentarius Commission’s attempts to limit individual freedom of choice in health matters.  In that capacity, he has compiled, edited, and published a book on the subject entitled Codex Alimentarius – Global Food Imperialism. He also attends Codex meetings worldwide and has attended more Codex meetings than any other health-freedom activist.