babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » Codex Alimentarius

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Codex Alimentarius
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 25 June 2005 06:56 PM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Do any babblers know anything about this?

I understand there are a lot of people against it, and I'm not quite sure why. I've only heard plans to protest it, but no information on what it's about. It appears to be an EU based harmonization of food standards, establishing minimum standards for quality and requiring testing of supplements.
Codex Alimentarius homepage

Canadian Gov't page on it

The only negative link I could find was from a "natural health" magazine that is dead set against regulation of vitamins and other supplements as drugs. I have a hard time having problems with this, as I see people draining their wallets buying ridiculous supplements instead of getting their vitamins from fresh fruits and vegetables which would also provide much needed fibre.

Finally here's a short article on it from Medical News.

I can see some knee-jerk reaction against this because it could be considered "globalization": but globalizing the EU's food standards - if that's indeed what this does - would probably be a huge improvement over, at least, North American food standards. Yey positive integration! Down with negative integration!


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Agent 204
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4668

posted 25 June 2005 07:54 PM      Profile for Agent 204   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kurichina:
I have a hard time having problems with this, as I see people draining their wallets buying ridiculous supplements instead of getting their vitamins from fresh fruits and vegetables which would also provide much needed fibre.


I suspect the people who are most against it are those who sell the supplements, and those who have been influenced by those people.

[ 25 June 2005: Message edited by: Agent 204 ]


From: home of the Guess Who | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 25 June 2005 07:59 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
To the best of my knowledge the Codex is simply an encyclopedia of compounds and standards. There's a gazillion of them.

It's not as elegant as the Periodic Table of Elements but it's a useful world wide undertaking. Public health matters might also fall under a similar category.

[ 25 June 2005: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 25 June 2005 08:37 PM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm not an expert on this issue, but my understanding of Codex is that it's an attempt by the Pharmaceutical industry to take over the nutraceutical industry (which is not just vitamin supplements) by influencing the creation of legislation that will make it so expensive and difficult to produce herbal, natural, nutritional and nutraceutical supplements that only the big transnational drug companies will be able to afford to do it.

I've emailed a friend whose mom who has a nutraceutical company; I hope she'll weigh in on this issue which is more about protecting big Pharma than it is about protecting consumers.

[ 25 June 2005: Message edited by: Anchoress ]


From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 26 June 2005 05:57 AM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thanks for that Anchoress. While I'm sceptical about "alternative medicine", I know that the large pharmaceutical companies are hardly above criticism as well. So, I'd be interested to hear her perspective.
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 26 June 2005 09:07 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
In other words, we have to be alert on at least two fronts at once: against quackery on the one hand and against the genuine threat that an international mechanism like the Codex could be commandeered by Big Pharma.

Those are, both of them, serious problems. Western governments, especially but not only the U.S., are now as heavily indebted to Big Pharma as they are to the arms industries, and the implications are serious, up to and including the way that any illness of yours may be diagnosed in the first place.

But I agree with kurichina that most people most of the time get the health benefits they need from real food and a balanced diet, not from supplements, and that our standards for supplements have been lax, their availability outside a system of medical or pharmacological scrutiny sometimes dangerous.

What to do, what to do ...


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 26 June 2005 09:24 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
As I understand it, the new regulations require that every company producing these supplements publish toxicity information about the supplements. Most simply can't afford and don't have the time remaining, to fund and publish toxicity research into substances that frequently are non-toxic in any concentration. Vitamin C would be a good example--the excess consumed is simply excreted.

I'm sceptical about some alternative medicines, but, I'd rather not have to get a doctor's prescription to buy a bottle of vitamin C tablets, thank you very much. However, I had originally thought this was stemming from new regulations within the EU, not a worldwide thing.


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 26 June 2005 09:29 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
aRoused, I was surprised to learn that many of the biggest of the Big Pharma firms are based in Europe, not the U.S., although they are also, of course, multinationals, and their dealings with the U.S. government tend to become ways of spreading the misery ... I mean, pressuring other governments to conform.

Must find Marcia Angell's article again. Everyone must read Marcia Angell.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tehanu
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9854

posted 12 July 2005 12:15 PM      Profile for Tehanu     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There has also been quite a bit of discussion around Codex and food biotechnology. This is part of a larger argument around whether genetically engineered foods should be considered "novel" or "substantially equivalent" to non-GE foods (which haven't had genes from other species inserted into them!!) Needless to say, GE companies say their food is substantially equivalent, and by Codex agreeing with this, then there are potential issues around individual WTO countries' right to label or ban GE food.

I was following this closely a few years ago but haven't kept up (it's a pretty tangled regulatory issue).


From: Desperately trying to stop procrastinating | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 13 July 2005 02:42 AM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Noticed this article in The Scotsman today about the EU version of this regulation. I'm still not clear whether the EU regulations are to copied worldwide in the UN's codex or if it will be modified or watered down, but it's probably still useful to know both.

quote:
The affected products are mostly high-dosage vitamin supplements sold through health food stores rather than everyday tablets available at High Street pharmacies. Antioxidants such as selenium and minerals such as boron which are sold in tablet form will be affected.

So it seems at least that your normal vitamin C or multivitamin tablet won't be effected, although stores like GNC might see their inventory cut back.

I still find the idea of a "health food industry" somewhat oxymoronic.


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca