Subject: Is Snopes Lying?

[Guest guest]

c

Sat, 9 Apr 2005 22:44:35 -0700

 

 

Is Snopes Lying?

 

I have noted in a couple of other snopes articles that the people or

references used to debunk some stories, were directly associated with

the alerts in the first place. You know, the police policing the

police type of complaint handling.

 

I know that Barbara has stated, in her website at one point in time,

that she has and always will vote party-liner Republican, so that

toss's out any objectivity in area's of that concern.

 

So check it out, google CODEX and see what the rest of the world

thinks, not just Barbara Mikkelson. Several countries are already

suffering from the covert assimilation into a one world government and

laws that are senior to their countries own laws.

 

Scott

 

Oh, I forgot to mention, Barbara Mikkelson never bothered to respond

to this letter, though there is a link to CODEX on her web site

referencing this article. I am sure they appreciate the loyalty.

 

 

 

 

Snopes is saying CODEX is a hoax!

 

Dear Ms. Mikkelson:

 

It was with a great degree of upset, anger, and frustration that I

read your posting on Snopes regarding the CODEX issue as a hoax.

 

I sincerely hope that Snopes and you are simply misinformed and you

will correct your flawed analysis of the CODEX issue. On the other

hand, it could be that you are acting on behalf of certain interest

groups, which I hope is not the case. The truth will come out

depending on how you respond to this and other emails that if you are

not getting now are surely coming soon.

 

I take issue with many points you argue, but most important is your

claim that CODEX has no power to force its will on any nation. " Codex

standards are voluntary, which means if the U.S. doesn't adopt them,

they will not govern the regulation of vitamins, minerals, or dietary

supplements in the USA. " THIS IS NOT TRUE!!

 

The US signed the SPS and TBT Agreements, which are subsections of

GATT. Codex standards and guidelines were voluntary up until the

Uruguay Round of GATT, which created the WTO that has enforcement

power via a new international court that doesn't follow our rules of

evidence- the Dispute Settlement Body. The WTO has put the mechanisms

in place to override any national law that interferes with

multinational corporate profits, and that is why Congressman Ron Paul

tried to remove us from the WTO in 2000 via House Joint Resolution 90.

 

Several WTO rulings have gone against US law, forcing Congress to

change our law under threat of cross sector trade sanctions against

broad sectors of our economy, the most recent and publicized of these

was the situation regarding our steel industry and tariffs. If they

can force the US to change policy over such a vital national interest

as our steel industry, the dietary and herbal supplement industry will

be easy.

 

Next is your claim that " this is another case of an issue that is now

largely moot due to outdated information. Back in 2003, two versions

of a bill that proposed the regulation of dietary supplements (S. 722,

the " Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2003, " and H.R. 3377, the

" Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act " ) were introduced to

Congress. Neither of these bills was ever voted upon, much less

passed. They both expired with the end of the 108th Congress in 2004

and have not been reintroduced to the currently sitting 109th Congress. "

 

If you had bothered to do some research and verification of your

information, you would have discovered that both Sen. Durbin's and

Sen. Davis's offices have indicated that they fully intend to

reintroduce both bills, with slight changes, under new bill numbers,

sometime in this new congress. Both of these members of Congress are

currently re-writing these bills with the full intention of

reintroducing them under new numbers. When they are reintroduced, we

will not be able to take either one lightly.

 

Next, you also state " Under current law, dangerous supplements get

onto the market and stay there, with serious physical harm resulting

among those who use them, as was the case with ephedra, which caused

strokes, heart attacks, and upwards of 150 deaths before the Food and

Drug Administration was finally able to get it out of the stores. "

 

These statements are false and are not backed up by any solid

evidence. Again, if you had taken the time to research and verify this

statement you would have seen by referring to

http://www.laleva.cc/supplements/medical_injury_law.pdf that the risk

of ingesting prescription drugs, the risk of dying from a bee sting,

the risk of being hit by lightening, the risk of dying from ingestion

of food in common form, are all higher than any risk posed by use of

vitamins and other dietary supplements. This is a GROSS misstatement

and one that needs to be corrected.

 

You go on to talk about problems with tryptophan and ephedra. The

problems with tryptophan were caused by the contamination of one

producer in Japan, but instead of sanctioning that company until the

problems were corrected, the FDA jumped on the issue with much

misinformation and banned all tryptophan products, while also making

an effort to demonize the entire supplement industry. Similarly, the

ephedra issue was exaggerated to the point of being a total lie,

because any honest examination of the data gathered by the National

Association of Poison Control Centers will indicate that there are

very serious problems associated with deaths caused by Ephedrine, but

there have been very few and minor problems caused by ephedra.

Meanwhile, the FDA allows dangerous drugs such as celebrex and vioxx

on the market, which have proven deadly side effects for thousands, if

not hundreds of thousands of people. There are no dangerous dietary

supplements, only dangerous pharmaceutical drugs. These are just two

examples of the " witch hunt mentality " that is already present in the

FDA who acts more like a trade association for the pharmaceutical

corporations because there is a revolving door between their employees

and the drug companies. Public record will easily reveal that.

 

You also support your arguments by stating that supplement sales

totaled $18.7 billion in 2002.

 

This is a trivial amount compared to pharmaceutical sales that totaled

$430.3 billion in 2002. Whom do you think has the power and

motivation to bring dietary supplements and vitamins into the realm of

prescription drugs? Statistics regarding the rise in prices of

supplements in countries that have adopted the CODEX " guidelines " show

why the pharmaceutical companies are in favor of CODEX and why it's

adoption would detrimentally impact the health of US citizens.

 

The drug company backed proposals call for the following:

 

1.) No vitamin, mineral, herb, etc., can be sold for prophylactic

(preventative) or therapeutic reasons.

2.) Natural remedies can be sold as food but they must not exceed the

potency (dosage) levels set by the commission. This means that

consumer access to dietary supplements will be limited to the RDA

dosage as a maximum limit for vitamins (vitamin C - 60 mg, vitamin E -

15 mg, etc.). Supplements without an RDA (e.g. coenzyme Q10) would be

illegal to sell because they would all become drugs.

3.) Codex regulations for dietary supplements would become binding,

eliminating the escape clause within the General Agreement of Tariffs

and Trade (GATT) that allows a nation to set its own standards. This

applies to all member countries of the U.N. Any nation that does not

accept and apply these new standards will be heavily fined by the

World Trade Organization (WTO), creating the potential for crippling

entire sectors of the nation's economy.

4.) All new supplements would be banned unless they went through the

Codex approval process.

 

CODEX now applies to Norway and Germany, among others, where zinc

tablets rose from $4 per bottle to $52. Echinacea (an ancient

immune-enhancement herb) rose from $14 to $153 (both examples are now

allowed by prescription only). They are now " drugs " . Vitamin C above

200 mg, niacin above 32 mg, and vitamin B6 above 4 mg - all are banned

over-the-counter and considered as drugs. No amino acids (arginine,

lysine, carnitine, etc. (these are essential amino acids!), essential

fatty acids (omegas 3, 6, 9, etc.), or other essential supplements

such as DMEA, DHEA, CoQ10, MSM, beta-carotene, etc. are allowed.

 

According to Dr. Matthias Rath, researcher and author who discovered a

correlation between vitamin C deficiency and heart disease, the three

drug companies pushing so hard for the German proposal - Hoechst,

Bayer and BASF - are also manufacturers of heart drugs. Here you can

clearly see the connection to drug company interests as there are many

inexpensive natural products that promote health, which is at odds

with their highly profitable companies which need diseases to " treat "

with dangerous drugs. Obviously, with the health supplement and

vitamin competition gone, nothing will stop their profits.

 

By the way, these are the three drug companies formed when the

Nuremberg War Trials disbanded IG Farben, manufacturer of the poison

gas used in Nazi concentration camps. Although IG Farben may have been

disbanded, none of its directors were ever penalized for their actions

during the war. They simply divided what remained from the company and

split into three separate entities.

 

These three Nazi-originated German drug companies have stated their

main purpose as being to " ...create a set of international standards

to guide the world's growing food industry and to protect the health

of consumers. " If you really believe that, I have a bridge to sell you

in Brooklyn.

 

Snopes has just done the public a serious disservice with their

misinformation, creating confusion, and misleading Americans.

 

Codex regulations for dietary supplements would become binding,

eliminating the escape clause within the General Agreement of Tariffs

and Trade (GATT) that allows a nation to set its own standards. This

applies to all member countries of the U.N. Any nation that does not

accept and apply these new standards will be heavily fined by the

World Trade Organization (WTO), creating the potential for crippling

entire sectors of the nation's economy.

 

 

We cannot protect our supplement laws in the USA unless we can kill

ratification of the global trade standard for vitamins and minerals

which stands to be ratified at the Codex meeting in Rome between July

4-9th 2005 or withdraw from the WTO.

 

My interest in this matter is not purely altruistic. I have personally

experienced some " miraculous " cures through natural remedies and

natural medicine, not the least of which was a complete remission of

extremely debilitating endometriosis through the administration of

homeopathic products. I continue to manage my everyday health and the

health of my family with dietary supplements. I just recovered from

what could have been a very debilitating influenza with the use of

Echinacea, goldenseal, and germanium 132. I had very mild symptoms for

3 days as compared to others I know who had severe symptoms,

contracted secondary infections, and had illnesses that lasted from 10

days to 2 weeks. I have animals that consistently far exceed their

natural life spans by as much as 50% and live that life with the vigor

and health of animals half their age. So you see my interest is very

personal and I am very committed to stopping CODEX.

 

I would very much appreciate a response from you to this letter. I

will gladly provide you with source material I used in this letter

and any other additional credible source material you may need or request.

 

Sincerely,

 

Donna Cinelli