Hello Everyone.


There have been a number of "alerts" regarding our access to nutritional supplements. Not being that knowledgeable in legislative politics I have forwarded on some of them myself, with little more than a quick glance at the details, until I received an email asking my opinion about a major controversy surrounded these mailings. I cannot pretend to have a firm handle on this matter, but after a great deal of research this last week, I feel it is important to share what I've managed to find out. It is a complex issue, and in the hopes of clearing up some confusion out there, I'm summarizing here without addressing some of the political nuances. If anyone notices any glaring errors, or has some deeper insights, please do share them:

There appear to be 3 issues brought up in these alerts:

1. One alert urges us to participate in a letter writing campaign to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in protest of a Guidance document regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) products, which includes dietary supplements.

2. Another alert urges us to participate in a letter writing and phone calling campaign to the U.S. Senate in protest of the proposed FDA Revitalization Act of 2007, Bill S1082, which claims to be about drug safety regulations, but would apparently expand regulatory powers of the FDA over such things as dietary supplements by creating a drug company within the FDA.

Originally both of these issues had the same public comment deadline, but the FDA comment period appears to have been extended to May 29. However, my understanding is that the Senate Bill S1082 PUBLIC COMMENT DEADLINE IS STILL MIDNIGHT TONIGHT. To act on this issue NOW, just barely in time for the Senate vote tomorrow (Monday 4/30) afternoon, please scroll down to the bottom of this email for the immediate action link, and phone numbers to call in the morning.

3. The alert regarding S1082 also warns of legal maneuvering of the FDA's Trilateral Cooperation Charter, which could apparently result in "harmonizing" U.S. laws regarding dietary supplements with the more restrictive international standards of CODEX Alimentarius, set by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization (FAO/WHO). The action asked regarding this broader issue is to sign an ongoing petition calling for congressional oversight of the Trilateral Cooperation Charter.

The controversy surrounding these issues appears to be as follows:

The FDA letter campaign is being criticized by the Senate letter campaign and the oversight petition campaign, claiming that its proponents are panic mongering over the non-issue of a "guidance" document with no legal teeth which has basically already been in effect for some time, in an attempt to distract from immediate legal threats to our right to alternative health care.

Some people figure that all three issues are serious, and need to be addressed right away. But it appears that the FDA letter campaign may in fact have confused people enough, that many people cannot tell the three campaigns apart, and most people are responding to only one of them, without proper understanding of the priorities. As a result of this and prior controversies within the Health Freedom Movement involving the proponents of the FDA letter campaign, their intentions and agenda are being put in question.

The proponents of the FDA letter campaign are the Natural Solutions Foundation (NSF), founded by Major General Albert Stubblebine and his wife Rima Laibow. Mike Adams of News Target is one of the supporters of this campaign. Dr. Mercola and the Organic Consumers Association, among others, have both made statements that they do not agree with it.

The proponents of the Senate letter campaign are the International Advocates for Health Freedom (IAHF), founded by John Hammell. Mike Adams of News Target also supports this campaign, as does Dr. Mercola, and others in the Health Freedom Movement. The oversight petition is also by the IAHF.

The email that alerted me to this controversy originated with the IAHF, and even though I had some difficulty with the tone of the email, and politically strongly disagree with some of the broader conclusions reached by the links included, I was far more creeped out by what I found out about the founders of the NSF.

Stubblebine is a retired military man, and his wife Laibow is a psychiatrist for UFO-abductees. Both have disturbing ties to government "intelligence", including on the issues of psychic phenomena and mindcontrol. Apparently one of Stubblebine's claims to fame is his belief that he can walk through walls, but does not belief that a plane could have fit through the hole in the World Trade Center before it collapsed (If anyone wants more details on what I found, get in touch and I'll send you links, or simply google these people yourself). In terms of the issue before us, they are very focused on CODEX, but there is no mention whatsoever about S1082 on their site, nor the Trilateral Cooperation Charter. Considering their history of working with complex government issues, this strikes me as a suspicious oversight. They also appear to have sued another opponent of CODEX, Kevin Miller, for putting anti-globalist politics into his film about CODEX.

I have come across one blog with the conclusion that neither the NSF nor the IAHF should be trusted, as they may each represent trade industries, in the case of the NSF, Big Pharma, and in the case of the IAHF, the dietary supplement industries. John Hammell very openly describes himself as a Legislative Advocate, and the IAHF as a "Consulting firm to the dietary supplement industry on legislative issues with a large grass roots component..." It is unclear to me if that means that he should be considered in the pockets of that particular industry, or whether advising the industry on legislative strategy is simply part of his political strategy.

It should be noted that no one, on either side of the argument, is denying that CODEX is a threat. The conflict is about factual discrepancies, timing of actions, interference with other activists, and avoidance of larger issues by NSF (For anyone interested in delving deeper than the following links take you, get in touch and I'll share whatever research I have).

I want to reiterate that I'm not in any way endorsing any of these actions or organizations, in fact have major differences with them all. Without evidence to the contrary I have to say that I do not believe Stubblebine and Laibow are trustworthy, and that this is one of my more urgent reasons for writing to you all. I also don't agree enough with the petition to sign it. At this time I have chosen to participate only in the protest against S1082.

Some relevant links:

The action link for comments on S1082, which includes a form letter already written and is a quick way to comment: http://www.lef.org/featured-articles/consumer_alert_042707.htm
(Text of S1082: http://help.senate.gov/Hearings/2007_04_18_E/S1082.pdf)

You can also contact your local government "representatives" directly about S1082 by finding their contact info here: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
or by calling the U.S. Capitol Switchboard in the morning at 202-225-3121, 800-828-0498, 800-459-1887, or 800-614-2803

The FDA docket, open until May 29, for anyone who wants to comment, but wants to avoid association with NSF: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/oc/dockets/comments/COMMENTSMain.CFM?EC_DOCUMENT_ID=1451&SUBTYP=CONTINUE&CID=&AGENCY=FDA
(You might want to read the actual text of the document you're commenting on: http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/E7-3259.htm)

The Petition for Congressional oversight of the FDA's Trilateral Cooperation Charter: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/373269232?ltl=1177432290

About the campaign against S1082, and a critique of the FDA letter campaign, represented on the website of Dr Mercola, including a statement by a lawyer who defends against attacks by the FDA, and a lengthy public discussion which sheds some more light on the controversy: http://v.mercola.com/blogs/public_blog/New-FDA-Initiative-Circulating-the-Net-Does-Not-Warrant-Alarm-or-Action-12707.aspx

The statement against the FDA letter campaign by the Organics Consumers Association: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_4803.cfm

The NSF: http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php

The IAHF: http://www.nocodexgenocide.com/nocodexgenocide.html


Good Luck, and Be well,
Isis

---

Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos.