Fwd: Pharma Takeover Pattern of Natural Products Industry to Be Revealed On the Air Tonight

[Guest guest]

12 Feb 2004 02:18:09 -0000

" IAHF.COM "

Pharma Takeover Pattern of Natural Products Industry to Be Revealed On

the Air Tonight

 

IAHF Webmaster: Breaking News, Whats New, Codex, EU FSD, All Countries, What to

Do

 

IAHF List: Lou Gentile will be interviewing John Hammell of IAHF on the air

tonight from 9-10 PM West Coast US time. The show can be heard world wide at

http://www.lougentile.com and will be archived.

 

In case you miss the show- Here is an outline of what I will be discussing:

 

PATTERN REVEALED OF HOW THE PHARMA CARTEL PLUS CORRUPT VITAMIN COMPANIES ARE

TAKING OVER THE DIETARY SUPPLEMENT INDUSTRY

 

On January 30th in London, I witnessed the following revealing spectacle:

 

After the Judge had given both NAHS/HFMA and ANH/Nutri-Link the referral

necessary to take both cases on to the EU Court of Justice, where BOTH groups

(presumably) genuinely hope to overturn the EU Food Supplements Directive, Ralph

Pike, Director of NAHS, was clearly feeling very DEPRESSED, and ANGRY.

 

In other words, he was not happy, or brimming over with joy as you might EXPECT

a man to be in those circumstances......

 

WHY was Ralph depressed?

 

WHY has NAHS/HFMA been sending out press releases claiming credit for this court

victory, (when it clearly was not theirs), and why have they been giving NO

MENTION of ANH in their press releases about the court victory?

 

Since the court victory on January 30th, why has NAHS/HFMA been pulling out all

the stops to try to maginalize ANH, to get them BANNED from both upcoming

vitamin trade shows in the UK, and why are they trying to have ANH blacklisted

by the vitamin industry trade press so that no mention of the victory that was

rightfully theirs will reach the public?

 

Could it be that NAHS/ANH are actually a controlled opposition group that

doesn't WANT ANH to win in court?

Could it be that NAHS/ANH are only going through the MOTIONS of defending this

industry?

 

Look at the following email sent by Scott Tips, JD, Legal Director of the US

based National Health Federation to Peter Aldis, chair of HFMA, and ceo of

Holland and Barrett (largest chain of health food stores in the UK which is

owned by Nature's Bounty, the largest vitamin company in the world):

 

SCT

hfma

Thursday, February 05, 2004 5:26 PM

Lawsuit in UK Against FSD

 

Dear Mr. Aldis:

 

I recently read on your website that your organization is taking credit for the

recent January 30th legal victory in London against the Food Supplements

Directive. Sadly, no mention is made anywhere in your article of the vital

leadership and participation of the Alliance for Natural Health and the fact

that its solicitors were responsible for that victory.

 

As legal counsel for an American-based international health-freedom

organization, The National Health Federation, and as the legal columnist for

Whole Foods Magazine since 1984, I would appreciate an explanation.

 

In my view, stealing credit for an achievement is on par with stealing money. I

would like to think that your organization is not a thief of achievement and

would give proper credit for this victory to the ANH, where it properly belongs

and would do it promptly. My column and the organization for which I work will

not fail to take note of your actions in this regard.

 

Thank you for your immediate attention to my query and request.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Scott C. Tips

General Counsel

National Health Federation

 

(Aldis sent a pile of GARBAGE in response to this which will be easily refuted

the moment we have access to the transcript of the case which shows exactly what

happened in the courtroom. The transcript will prove that ANH won the day, that

the Judge and UK attorney were only able to attack NAHS/HFMA's case.)

 

Given that Nature's Bounty (member of HFMA and NAHS) is the wealthiest vitamin

company in the world, (annual revenues in excess of one billion dollars), why,

if they REALLY want to overturn the EU FSD, would they hire only a top second

tier law firm with no experience in overturning EU Directives?

 

Why would their lawfirm use the same argument in the FSD case that caused them

to LOSE the Kava Case? (Proportionality)

 

Why would they not want to use the #1 lawfirm in Europe (Brick Court Chambers)

given their track record of overturning EU Directives, including the Tobacco

Directive, where they established the case law that must be followed in a

similar attempt vis a vis the Food Supplement Directive?

 

(ANH hired Brick Court Chambers, while NAHS/HFMA not only did NOT hire them, but

show every sign of trying to SABOTAGE ANH's efforts to go on to the EU Court of

Justice....

 

Clearly, vitamin consumers world wide are up against a group of large vitamin

companies in this industry that don't WANT the EU Food Supplement Directive

overturned.

 

These large companies only care about PROFITS, not about consumers. They view

the EU FSD as a way of expanding their markets throughout most of Europe, and it

doesn't matter to them that they'd have to reformulate product in England,

Ireland, Sweden, and Holland, the PROFITS that they'd make in the REST of Europe

would more than make up for losses in those four countries, even though those

four countries currently are the most lucrative countries for the sale of their

products.

 

Similarly, they don't CARE if that EU FSD adversely hammers the rest of the

world due to its impact at CODEX, because these big companies feel that they're

big enough to weather ANY STORM, and they welcome regulatory hurdle raising that

would drive smaller competitors out of the market...

 

IADSA has announced a special meeting to be held in May in Prague, Czech

Republic titled " The Future of Food Supplements in Europe "

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:sCdkS5lvNKUJ:www.ahpa.org/Prague2004Conferen\

ce.pdf+IADSA,Prague & hl=en & ie=UTF-8

 

To this meeting they have invited such perpeTRAITORS as John Hathcock of pharma

dominated CRN (formerly of FDA) who will be discussing so called " scientific

risk asessment " as a means of imposing so called " safe Upper Levels " to cap

allowable vitamin potencies.

 

The scientific fraudulence of what Hathcock, CRN, IADSA, HFMA, and all other

pharma dominated vitamin trade associations are trying to do via the EU FSD and

Codex is exposed via Alan Gaby, MD's article titled " Safe Upper Levels " for

Nutritional Supplements- One Giant Step BACKWARD

http://www.iahf.com/20040127.html

 

HFMA is a member of IADSA.

 

HFMA's Chair is Peter Aldis, who is ceo of Nature's Bounty Company Holland and

Barrett.

 

Nature's Bounty obviously doesn't care about consumers.

 

If they did, they wouldn't be backing a second tier lawfirm which is attempting

to employ a losing argument ostensibly to " try to overturn " the EU Food

Supplement Directive.

 

If they did care, they would be backing ANH's GENUINE legal effort to overturn

the FSD, the THMPD, and the PD.

 

WHAT YOU CAN DO

 

Get this to every vitamin company you buy product from and DEMAND to know what

they are doing to support the ANH lawsuit?

 

Donations can be made via http://www.alliance-natural-health.org ANH needs

around $350,000 US to go on to the EU Court of Justice, and your donations are

badly needed, especially if ANH is unable to get past the effort to shut them

out of the upcoming vitamin trade shows in the UK and to marginalize them in the

trade press.

For Health Freedom,

John C. Hammell, President

International Advocates for Health Freedom

556 Boundary Bay Road

Point Roberts, WA 98281-8702 USA

http://www.iahf.com

jham

800-333-2553 N.America

360-945-0352 World

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online