Does Codex Alimentarius Threaten Your Freedom to buy Vitamins?

I have received several emails asking me to sign a petition (below).

I've done a swift bit of Googling into the issues.

The controversy seems to have been raging for some years. The search results tend to be either very official looking and a bit impenetrable, or people saying it's all about Big Pharma trying to remove our freedom of choice and pocket the profits on vitamins.

Whoever wrote the Wikipedia article on it sounded a bit defensive and was definitely trying to discredit the opposition, making it sound like a raggle-taggle band of fringe lunatics and people who want to profiteer from vitamins loosely tied together in the 'health freedom movement'. It even states: "Some health freedom campaigners would like adults to be free to choose marijuana for personal or medical use without criminal penalty." Blimey, what's that got to do with it? The neutrality of that article is under dispute anyway.

So do I sign the petition or not?

Thinks out loud ...

Well, the Code is important in that it seems to be about regulating food safety and quality, for example what goes into babies' formula milks and salt levels. Herbs, vitamins, minerals and food supplements are only one of its concerns. But presumably those are already regulated or you'd have an uproar over people getting ill and dying from taking Sanatogen (for example).

Besides which, there are Recommended Daily Amounts (RDAs) and therapeutic doses and dangerous doses of just about anything - you can die from drinking too much water. The active ingredients in these products are clearly labelled and controlled so probably the worst that could happen is paying a lot of money for something that doesn't help your health.

The distinction seems to arise over whether herbs, vitamins, minerals and food supplements are really foods if you use them therapeutically - eg, taking extra Vitamin C when you have a cold or Valerian to help you sleep.

But if they're not foods, do they then become drugs and therefore should they only be available on prescription from someone medically qualified? And how much would he or she actually know about nutrition as medicine or the therapeutic qualities and dosages of herbs? Would you have to be tested to see if you were actually deficient in something before you could get it on prescription?

On the other hand (assuming they're safe to consume and can't do any harm), why shouldn't we just be allowed to buy them if we think we need them or taking them helps our health by supplementing nutrients we don't get in our daily diets or need more of under certain circumstances like illness, convalescence, pregnancy, menopause?

People self-medicate with lots of things and some of those are a bit dodgy healthwise if you over-consume: alcohol and cigarettes spring to mind. We're free to buy those and read the health warnings and take responsibility for that choice.

I think I've talked myself into signing it. Thought I'd post it here for your consideration.

Dear Friend

Here is a petition to the Prime Minister to oppose the adoption of the Codex Alimentarius (WHO/UN) proposals for restriction of the presently freely available herb/vitamin/mineral food supplements.

Margaret Rothwell, the petition creator, adds:

"The principle of self medication with herbal/vitamin/mineral food supplements would be restricted to 'prescription only' status, if the Codex Alimentarius is applied in this country.
Since the NHS priorities are ill health diagnosis and treatment, the good health preservation that supplements provide will be inaccessible to the majority of our population and the cost to the NHS will increase, and the health of the population will decline."

If you feel inclined to sign the petition, please go to:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Vitamins/


Sign up for my free newsletter!