Questions & Answers about Codex,
Australia and New Zealand
First and foremost allow us to direct your attention
to an article written by Eve Hillary. This article will give you a deeper insight as to the Therapeutic Goods
Administration (TGA) Government and regulatory bodies in
Australia. The second article is from Dr Rath of Germany,
it is an open letter to health food stores around the
world relative to Codex. Without reading these articles you will miss
important information which will render invalid your full
understanding of issues and the motives of groups such as
the TGA, ACCC, DOC's, etc.
Privatised the TGA:
Dr Raths Open Letter
Trade Organisation (WTO)
and Food Organisation (AFTO)
Trade Agreements (FTA's)
- Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Sanitary Phytosanitary Measures Agreement (SPS)
- Dietary Health Education
North American Free Trade
Free Trade Area of the Americas
Central America Free Trade Agreement
Maximum Permitted Limits
Recommended Daily Allowance
for Natural Health (ANH)
National Nutritional Foods Association
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ)
Traditional medicine Society (ATMS)
Healthcare Council (CHC)
Self Medication Industry (ASMI)
- Health Food Manufacturers Association (HFMA)
Level Marketing companies (MLM)
Trans Tasman Treaty (JTTT)
Trans Tasman Agency (JTA)
Secondly, when consumer health
advocates in Australia talk about Codex affecting
Australia they do not use Codex in its simplistic obvious
regulatory framework as Codex clearly pertains to foods.
In Australia our supplements are regulated as "Therapeutic
Goods" by the TGA and are treated in a similar regulatory
framework as drugs.
self styled experts in Australia present this difference
in regulatory frameworks as absolute evidence that Codex
can not affect our access to health supplements and
dosages. They are in error. These self styled experts know
little, if anything, about international free trade
agreements or WTO trade dispute settlement bodies.
Ironically this lack of expert knowledge has been
displayed during our signatory to the FTA with the United
States. These Australian self styled experts knew little
about the FTA either yet they all assume to have a solid
understanding of the future, because of the FTA Australia
has now been sold out to American interests. Now Australia has a
another major problem, with the price of health
supplements set to escalate dramatically in the coming
years and the dosage levels serverly reduced.
At this stage
if you are sceptical it may be of interest to read the
latest third party analysis below commissioned by the
Australian supplement company, BioCeuticals.
Codex isn’t a risk to nutritional therapy in Australia?
This article arose from recent conversations between the
Alliance for Natural Health and Michael and Alex Hall of
BioCeuticals. Michael and Alex remain unconvinced the
existing regulations for nutritional substances in
Australia will not be changed by future governments to
bring them in line with what is alarmingly occurring in
Europe. They believe it is imperative the Europeans resist
the implementation of what can only be called draconian
restrictions. In this article, Dr Robert Verkerk, ANH’s
Executive & Scientific Director, explains why he feels
Michael and Alex are right to be concerned.
for full article >>
Now moving further, technically
the USA do not have to be concerned about the Codex
standards either because firstly, like Australia and any
other sovereign country outside Europe they are
not obliged to conform to any international standards.
Secondly they have the DHEA, ratified in 1994, which protects
access to health supplements and dosages. But as you can
see below, even an astute Congressman or two in the USA
can see the writing on the wall....Not so in Australia,
the land of the not so astute! We ironically believe,
because of our isolation on this tiny island here in the
Pacific, that we are immune from world politics, free
trade disputes, FTA's and other influence...
the USA indeed have nothing to fear at this point in time
relative to Codex and the WTO then I doubt we would be
seeing the likes of Congressman Ron Paul becoming alarmed.
Granted that Australia has a different regulatory system,
but as already mentioned, this will not stop a trade
dispute being brought against us. And if the USA falls to
the WTO - Codex regulations then our free trade agreement
with the USA makes us even more vulnerable via the SPS
||The Codex Alimentarius Commission, an offshoot of the United Nations, is working to "harmonize" food and supplement rules between all nations of the world. Under Codex rules, even basic vitamins and minerals will require a doctor's prescription. As Europe moves ever closer to adopting Codex standards, it becomes more likely that the World Trade Organization will attempt to force those standards on the United States. This is yet another example of how the WTO threatens American sovereignty.
~ Congressman Ron Paul
you would like to understand our FTA with the USA more adequately
here ...... Please
ask the self styled Australian experts to read this book
also instead of just downloading the latest information
from the TGA website....which is not an act of
research...it is just repeating......and not researching.
before we go on lets tackle the introduction that precedes
most replies from politicians and health industry experts.
Codex Alimentarius, formed in 1962 is just an
inert and well intentioned international body set up by the
World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the Food and
Agricultural Organisation (FAO) to regulate
international food laws such as packaging, safety, labelling
and so forth? Yes and no. I wish everything
was this simple. On
the surface, yes, Codex seems harmless enough, various
people involved from many different countries are genuinely
working for the common good of the food industry but even the
history of how Codex was formed warrants caution and
suspicion...It seems the pharmaceutical interests have
always been in the driving seat with regards to Codex.
Please read the information on this link.... Click
here for more......At
the very least it makes you question the underlying integrity of
the pharmaceutical industries...
||Several hundred regular "participants" at Codex meetings are drawn from the ranks of government regulatory agencies; food, chemical, and pharmaceutical corporations; industry trade groups; and non-profit "watchdogs" with various political agendas. To date, Codex has established 250 sets of rules regarding the manufacture and distribution of a variety of foods, from sardines to peanuts to pineapples, and including food additives and infant formula. (It is illuminating to learn that Codex has approved the use of cyclamates and saccharine—artificial sweeteners long banned in the U.S. as health risks—as well as Monsanto's aspartame.) After more than a decade of wrangling over political aims and technical details—far removed from the public eye—the commission will likely approve the Draft Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Supplements in July.
The TGA says supplements are regulated as Therapeutic Goods and not
foods, and that everything in Australia will be ok.
If health supplements are regulated as Therapeutic Goods in Australia and not foods then
HOW can Codex affect us here in Australia?
supplements are regulated as "therapeutic goods"
here in Australia. The Therapeutic Goods category
regulates supplements similar to drugs. However Codex
legislation, in time could "indirectly" influence
Australian manufacturing and compliance costs, making
supplements prices prohibitive as well as removing certain
dosages or combinations...So,
how can Codex affect us here in Australia exactly?
Australia it will be more of a back door mechanism, a Trojan
horse, rather than a full, front door, frontal attack as
is happening in the UK and soon possibly the USA. At this
can more directly affect Europe and the USA as
the Codex legislation pertains to food and can directly
affect their "food regulations" as supplements
are regulated as "Foods" in these countries. However, the mechanisms
with which these new regulations could be enforced globally
is relevant to Australia, the USA is a good example. The
USA had passed a bill called the Dietary Health Education
Act (DHEA) in 1994 which protects
supplements as being regulated as drugs and extends
greater consumer choice. Via the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), Free Trade Area of the Americas
(FTAA) and the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA)
this European Codex regulation could eventually be foisted upon the USA regardless of the
domestic DHSEA Bill. If the USA and Europe adopt these new regulator standards, especially the
new Maximum Permitted Limits (MPL's) & Safe Upper
Limits (SUL's) http://www.ahf-au.org/suls.alan.r.gaby.htm
then Australia, still
operating under Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA's) can be
challenged in the WTO international courts for creating
trade barriers against international manufacturers wishing to
import into Australia or when our manufacturers export
into other countries, then these Australian exporters may
be accused of creating trade barriers...as the world is
operating under one standard and Australia is operating
under another standard.
without the threat of trade barrier legal proceedings, our
manufacturers, instead of running two separate production
lines, one for export and one for domestic product, would eventually switch to a one size fits all approach and
harmonise voluntarily....these are the back door mechanisms
that CAN affect Australia.
even before any of the above scenarios transpire,
Australia could still feel the effects of Codex. If Europe and the USA adopt Codex like standards
(still being vigorously fought in legal challenges by the
UK based ANH), then
supplements will be subject to multi-million dollar drug
like trials....this will decimate the smaller
manufacturers and add more costs to production. Research
will slow as only the large corporations will be able to
spend that sort of money. Australia does very little
research in the way of dietary supplements, instead
Australia relies on research from overseas...
Dr Caroline Dean's summery (short version) http://www.ahf-au.org/dr.dean.mp3
Even though Dr Dean talks
with relevance to the USA, she explains how years earlier Codex was not a threat, then all of a sudden they find
it is a threat via free trade agreements....
simple outline of the implications of MPL's & SUL's: http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHWebsiteDoc_145.doc
For a complete and thorough understanding on the gross lack of science in the WHO's so called "Nutrient Risk Assessment" process, read ANH's submission to them at:
do the replies I receive from the politicians say all this
seems to be generated from websites overseas in the USA? Because
the politicians have done no research at all, they have
been given a standard template to reply to their electors
with. If they had of done any research they would have
found there are at least three sites (below) in Australia
and New Zealand who are generating this information. If
the politicians can not get this right then what hope do
we have of their assurances of "everything will be
ok"? Bugger all hope really....they are just regurgitating
party policy and TGA dis-information.
this just happening in the USA and Europe? Australia does
not have to conform to Codex or the WTO?
part this is true. Technically it is not happening in the
USA, at this point in time, however the health advocates and consumers,
unlike Australians, can see into the future. Technically Australia or any other
nation does not have to conform (at the moment) to Codex. The
difference between now and the future is the cost of
penalties arising from trade disputes. At this point in
time there are no real international standards with
regards to health supplements therefore no concern about
trade disputes...In the future, even if our supplements are regulated as
"Therapeutic Goods" in Australia, it will not
stop a trade dispute levelled at us from another
participating member country. The WTO's plans for the
future are "approved once, accepted
everywhere". 'Suzanne Harris writes with regards
to the USA experience (link below). The USA supplement industry is
regulated as "Foods" and this makes the USA more
immediately vulnerable however talk about trade disputes
and trade barriers is universally applicable. http://www.thelawloft.com/Freedom/050125_us_law.htm
I was struck recently by an article appearing in the NNFA Today magazine, Volume 18, No.11 entitled "International Products Regulation Q&A: What Affect do They Really Have on the U.S.?" While some parts of the article were good, a number of the questions and answers struck a discordant note including the following:
||"However, according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture official, the United States has never changed its laws or regulations to conform to any standards or guidelines adopted at Codex. He noted further that the United States does not, as a matter of practice, officially accept, accept in part, accept free distribution, or accept standards or guidelines adopted by the Codex Commission. Therefore, it doesn't appear that any changes to U.S. law or regulations would likely occur as a result of any adoption by the Commission of the vitamin and food supplement guidelines." [emphasis added]
It was the therefore that really bothered me. If NNFA asked that unnamed bureaucrat about acceptance of guidelines, then it really asked the wrong question. The U.S. generally doesn't accept Codex guidelines nor do other countries. The Codex Secretariat hasn't received a notice of acceptance in the last 10 years. The better question is whether Codex standards and guidelines act as a template or containment within which countries must then write their laws and regulations or face enormous political and legal pressure. To this latter question the answer is clearly yes — write laws within the acceptable field set forth by the applicable Codex standard or guideline or be prepared to accept the consequences, including the risk of cross-sector trade sanctions if you don't.
this point in time there is a US congress bill H J Res 27
being tabled which withdraws the US from participation of
the WTO. This is something Australians should look to implement.
below synopsis is by author Gary North. North sums up the international
trading climate very succinctly.
The illusion of voluntarism has been maintained for a decade. This was easy to do. Until the creation of the WTO, the Codex was voluntary. The United Nations rarely exercises its sovereignty except in cases of war. But the kid gloves can now come off at any time. To understand this, consider the careful commentary of Paul Anthony Taylor. (The documentation is on the site.)
Whilst it may be technically true for the WTO to say that "there is no legal obligation on Members to apply Codex standards, guidelines and recommendations," the reality is that Codex texts are used by the WTO as a means of resolving international trade disputes, and WTO Members are legally obliged to abide by WTO rulings. Once the Codex Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements are completed therefore, all it would take to begin enacting them globally would be for one of the participating countries to launch, and win, an international trade dispute. The global adjudicators in such an instance would be the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, some of the hearings for which take the form of closed meetings held in private. Appeals to Dispute Settlement Body rulings are possible, but they have to be based on points of law such as legal interpretation – they cannot re-examine existing evidence or examine new issues.
Theoretically, there are three levels of acceptance for Codex texts, namely; `full acceptance'; `acceptance with specified deviations'; and `free distribution' (which means that the country concerned undertakes that products conforming with a Codex Standard may be distributed freely within its territorial jurisdiction, while domestically produced products sold within its own borders remain unaffected). The `free distribution' option has led many people to mistakenly believe that Codex does not have the authority to impose anything on a country in terms of domestically produced products sold into its own internal market. However, because Codex standards are used by the WTO to resolve international trade disputes, WTO members can literally have Codex Guidelines and Standards forced upon them, irrespective of acceptance.
are we sending Australian delegates to the Codex forums?
good question. If
Australia doesn't have anything to worry about because our
supplements are regulated as drugs (Therapeutic Goods),
therefore being immune from accepting any international
legislation, pertaining to the new Codex Maximum Permitted
Limits (MPL's) and Safe Upper Limits (SUL's) http://www.ahf-au.org/suls.alan.r.gaby.htm
, then why is Australia sending delegates to the international Codex meetings such as the meeting in Bonn, Germany on 3-7 November 2003 where an Australian delegation headed by Ms. Janine Lewis of FSANZ proposed an application of risk analysis to
vitamins and minerals including determining their upper “allowable” limits. Why
is Australia proposing guidelines for other countries if
we are not going to harmonise to these same proposed
Ms Janine Lewis
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
P.O. Box 7186
Canberra BC ACT 26110
Tel.: +61 (2) 62 71 22 45
Fax: +61 (2) 62 71 22 78
Ms Jane Allen
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
PO Box 7186
Canberra BC ACT 2610
Tel.: +61 (2) 6271 2678
FAX: + 61 (2) 6271 2278
do the pharmaceutical companies have to gain from this
restrictive legislation? Don't they also sell supplements?
they do sell supplements. In Australia most natural health
brands are all owned by
pharmaceutical companies. Centrum is owned by Wyeth… Mayne
owns Cenovis, Natures Own, BioOrganics, Golden Glow and
Hilton products….Natures Way is Australian owned having been bought from Roche.
Pharmaceutical companies have
been slowly buying health supplement companies over the
last decade or more. This then buys the pharmaceutical
companies a place at the bargaining table with regards to
the industry organisations such as ASMI and also TGA
committees. This way the pharmaceutical industry have been
able to slowly manipulate the health supplement industry
in Australia. So why would they create legislation that
would make it harder for consumers to purchase their
products?....Their business is disease! They make billions
from patented drugs and only millions from health
supplements.....If they play their cards right they will
be able to hedge their bets. By increasing the entry
compliance costs into the health industry they lock out
any small newcomers into the natural health arena. Any
smaller companies now operating will fold because the
expense of compliance has become exorbitant or they will
be bought out by the drug companies....People will still
be able to get their supplements however at vastly reduced
dosages and at higher prices.....as by then we will have
conformed to the new international guide lines (MPL's
therefore the drug companies will still make money from the ineffectual
supplements, the people will be hypnotised thinking they
still have access to the supplements, and the people will
still get sick and eventually use drugs as the real
dosages of vitamins and minerals needed for good health
are impossible to sustain or obtain....Even if the
supplement brand names the pharma companies own do not
make a profit, it doesn't matter as the drug business will
be making many more billions rather than just millions!
They take a loss to make a gain! That's clever business
would never try to ban supplements or remove our access to
supplements in Australia, Isn't this just conspiracy
the Liberal Government in 1981 have already tried to
remove supplements from the shelves and make them
prescription only http://www.ahf-au.org/vitamin.scare.htm
So, yes they would if they
could, just to please their corporate drug company mates.
surely the TGA and the Australia Government will resist
pressure to conform to these international standards? Ahhh...the
TGA? There is a special place in my heart reserved for the
TGA...The TGA's director recently confirmed in an interview that the TGA receives 100% of its funding from the pharmaceutical industries. When asked if this could cause conflicts of interest he said he could not comment on government policy!
again, the TGA's track record of protecting the pharmaceutical interests is an open book. VIOXX,
139,000 deaths and still counting......but no inquiry.....VIOXX
is still available for sale!!! http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2005/s1340327.htm
Need I say more?...How
about ZYban....76 deaths, 8737 adverse reactions.....and
how about the class 1 recall of all health supplements
that PAN produced when dimenhydrinate (Travelcalm), a pharmaceutical drug
manufactured by PAN, only caused dizziness and nausea...How
about the enquiry into the natural health industry that
followed, recommending sweeping changes and vastly
increased compliance costs with criminal penalties and
goal terms for offenders! All because of a pharmaceutical
drug manufactured by PAN that caused dizziness and nausea
but no deaths like VIOXX or Zyban which is still for sale.....Are
you starting to join the dots yet? http://www.ahf-au.bigpondhosting.com/eve.hillary.who.privatised.tga.htm#zyban
heavy fines are levied against Australia because of "trade barriers" the government will say they
have no choice but to conform as the fines and penalties
from the WTO are too great!
The governments track record tells a different story. If
we look at how the government has sold us out to the US
corporations with regards to the Australian PBS, making it easier for the drug companies to make
greater profits buy vetoing the cheaper alternative drugs
that the PBS committee recommends....
future in this regards is quite transparent! Of course
they will sell us out!
Australian experts from industry bodies like CHC or
practitioner bodies like ATMS have done their research?
Below is an excerpt from an interview of Robert Verkerk of the Alliance for Natural Health in the
The ANH have just been to court in the EU to try to over turn a directive that will make over 300 natural elements illegal and remove from sale over 5000 products....read what the
expert body said about proposed EU legislation (this is about how Robert first started getting involved):
"Then a large vitamin company, asked for my views on the EU Food Supplements Directive because they had been informed by the UK Health Food Manufacturers Association that it would not be a major problem. This was around January 2002, just as the Directive was coming into its second reading at the European Parliament. This company had looked at the Directive and seen the so-called Positive List of allowed vitamins and minerals on it. The list contained vitamins and minerals that would be allowed to be sold in Europe after 1st August 2005. A huge range of natural food supplements and organic forms of vitamins and minerals had been omitted from the list which contained mainly inorganic forms."
Notice that the "UK Health Food Manufacturers Association" said
"that it would not be a major problem". The TGA and ASMI are just another carbon copy of the
UK Health Food Manufacturers Association....In the UK, over the next 2 years
there were MAJOR problems! The CHC and ATMS are just mindlessly echoing what the TGA and ASMI
churn out....and then this
"supplements are Therapeutic Goods and not foods" mantra goes around in a self perpetuating cycle!
Yes supplements are regulated as Therapeutic Goods here in
Australia but this does not protect us from WTO
it seems that the ATMS and the CHC have little idea as to the issues
of the future but choose to naively rely on information pushed by the TGA and
ASMI....sloppy research really...actually, no research at all!.
It seems that the ATMS and the CHC never saw the implications of our latest
free trade debacle which will add 5-10% onto the cost of vitamins and minerals, as supplement manufacturers now have to subject their products to drug style patent
searches.....In fact no one in the industry saw it until it was too late! And this will be just the tip of the ice berg...
Unfortunately very few industry players in Australia have any understanding of
free trade agreements and the mechanisms which can be used to implement Codex style regulation in Australia in the coming years....And the ATMS knows almost nothing about
free trade agreements!
can the Trans Tasman Agency/Treaty change how Australia
regulates health supplements?
the surface it doesn't look like it will make much impact
to Australia, what is sure is that it will decimate the
New Zealand health industry in the short term. With
regards to Australia and New Zealand in the longer terms, keep in mind the following paragraphs
and sections of the Tran Tasman Treaty as the spirit of
the document certainly seems to be setting us up to
harmonise with world standards and the WTO: http://www.jtaproject.com/Downloads/Key%20Documents/TreatyText.pdf
ACKNOWLEDGING their commitment to securing trade liberalisation and an outward-looking approach to trade;
CONSCIOUS of their obligations under the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization done at Marrakesh on 15 April 1994;
Pg 5, paragraph (c)
To avoid barriers to trade except where such barriers are necessary to safeguard public health or safety, or to fulfil other legitimate objectives consistent with the Parties’ international obligations.
(11) How will the Trans Tasman Treaty affect NZ's health industry?
the moment it seems that it will benefit some of the
larger health companies in New Zealand and Australia. The
new compliance costs that the TGA will enforce upon NZ
health companies will essentially send the smaller players
broke as they will not be able to afford to stay in
business....The larger companies, especially the ones
already owned by pharmaceutical interests will prosper as
will other larger non-pharma health companies. New Zealand
already regulates their health products as food. This
regulation has worked well for many years, it doesn't
really need fixing, maybe some small regulatory changes.
If New Zealand falls to the TGA Trans Tasman Treaty we may
then find we no longer
have access to health products, we in Australia once
purchased from New Zealand because they were illegal in
Australia...now they will also be illegal in New Zealand
if the TGA takes control.
(12) Is NZ's health industry in its present form (food) more vulnerable to Codex harmonisation than Australia?
Yes, as the Codex legislation
pertains to foods. This would make a good TGA argument for New
Zealand to harm-onise to the Australian "Therapeutic
Goods" regulations to give NZ more protection ....however, in the longer term there
will be no difference as products produced and sold under
the "Therapeutic Goods" banner could still be subject
to international trade disputes hence having to conform to
international regulatory practices such as MPL's & SUL's instead
of RDA's...in the long run there is no difference.
(13) Why doesn't my multi
level network marketing company get involved,
they say there is nothing to worry about? Like the
retailers, manufacturer's and wholesalers, the MLM's are
concerned about inviting the wrath of the TGA to their
door steps. If you put the TGA off side then you could pay
dearly, PAN for instance. Multi
level marketing companies, like the rest of the industry know little or
nothing about free trade agreements. Secondly, many MLM
companies especially do not like to stick their heads out if they can
avoid it as the press traditionally have been unkind to
MLM's, probably because the retail sector see them as a
threat, therefore the two
groups are not always on the same team! Add
to this the MLM's greater need to maintain credibility,
membership and sales, the last thing they want to do is
rock the boat, lead the charge and initiate action and or
public debate....they would sooner just get on quietly
with business as usual until the threat becomes so obvious
that the whole industry is up in arms....this way they are
not an isolated voice which would endanger their
reputation and credibility...They will wait for a common consensus....They
are not unlike the rest of the industry, retail or
manufacturing....no one will go out on a limb...especially
while the Government and TGA are saying the opposite....
As in business, the demise of your competition is also to
your benefit, so if one MLM becomes vocal and is ostracised,
even shut down as in the case of PAN by Government and TGA,
then it will be to the benefit of the other MLM's...greater market share for them...It is interesting
to note that many Neways (MLM) distributors purchase Neways
products from New Zealand because the TGA will not allow
these products to be sold in Australia....If the Trans
Tasman Treaty goes through I would expect the products
that are illegal in Australia now will then be illegal in
New Zealand in the future so the Neways people can
probably say good by to such incredible products as D-Toxerate, Maximol & Life Enhancer in their present
Why does my practitioner association who represents health
practitioners in Australia say the same thing as the TGA,
supplements are regulated as Therapeutic Goods and not foods therefore health supplements in Australia can't be
affected". The right response from these
associations would be to say that: at this point in
time there is no threat as health supplements are
regulated as Therapeutic Goods here in Australia however
in the medium to longer term we may be subject to
complexities of international law via free trade
agreements hence there could be a threat down the track!
unfortunately they like to pretend that they are the all
seeing all knowing oracles of the industry. They believe
it is their job to keep everyone calm, to allay fears that
may be detrimental to the industry. This is akin to the
band playing on the Titanic....everyone being as calm and
happy as Hindu cows while the ship slides beneath the ice
cold waters....These associations do everyone a disservice.
Like the rest of the industry the
associations know little or nothing about free trade
Agreements. As well, the practitioner associations are
subject to similar business survival needs as that of the
health retailers, manufacturers, wholesalers and MLM's. The associations
are essentially businesses, they have market share and benefit
from the another associations demise. Once again they don't
want to be the first ones to stick their heads out
are waiting for a collective consensus...Some employees
who work for our associations are also members of TGA
committees....this could be a conflict of interest or it could simply
be that they believe they are representing the associations and
members the best way they can....it
is hard to tell at this moment. Either way they are doing
a disservice to their members in the longer run.
Why aren't some of the health industry companies
more vocal and why aren't they raising these issues with
the government? Same as the above reasons for MLM's
and associations. The larger retailers or manufacturers benefit
from the demise of their competitor....they are
positioning themselves in the market place. Many health
supplement companies, small and large, made many millions of dollars more after the PAN
collapse...Secondly, many companies are also fearful of the
TGA, they do not want to go up against the Government or TGA when the issues are not easy to
articulate here in Australia at present. They are waiting until the issues become more tangible,
however when issues become "more tangible" it
will be very much too late as the rest of the world would
have fallen into line via free trade agreements and
Australia & New Zealand will just be a formality!
Everyone is hedging their bets, waiting on the fence,
watching....until it is all too late! The fence will
collapse under the total weight of ignorance and naivety. Many
companies believe that if they tread softly, then the TGA
will leave them alone. This is akin to helping shovel the
bodies into the furnace hoping you will not be next!
Why do the industry bodies like (Australian Self
Medication Industry) ASMI and Complimentary Health Council
(CHC) repeat the same dis-information as the TGA, that
health supplements are regulated as Therapeutic Goods and not foods therefore health supplements in Australia can't be
again...The right response from these industry bodies would
be to say that: at this point in time there is no
threat as health supplements are regulated as Therapeutic
Goods here in Australia however in the medium to longer
term we may be subject to complexities of international
law via free trade agreements hence there could be threats
down the track!
I have said, they like to pretend that they are the all
seeing all knowing oracles of the industry. They believe
it is their job to keep everyone calm, to allay fears that
may be detrimental to the industry. This is akin to the
band playing on the Titanic....everyone being as calm and
happy as Hindu cows while the ship slides beneath the ice
cold waters....These industry bodies do everyone a disservice.
Technically the "Therapeutic Goods" mantra is correct, for this present point
in time, but not so for the future. This is what the TGA
wants everyone to believe. It is like an anaesthetic
putting everyone back to sleep again... ASMI is different
to the CHC for one reason. ASMI is mostly the conglomerate
of the pharmaceutical industry, the CHC is more aligned
with the natural health industry. ASMI seems to be working behind
the scenes to undermine the health industry while the CHC
seems to be just naive and has not done their research or
just do not want to stick their neck out.
The unfortunate result is the echoing of the TGA's
"Therapeutic Goods" Mantra. Some employees who
work for the CHC are also members of TGA
committees....this could be a conflict of interest, once again, it
is hard to tell at this time. Either way they are doing a
disservice to the industry in the longer run.
Why do the lecturers at my college or university say the same thing as the TGA, that health supplements are regulated as Therapeutic Goods and not foods therefore health supplements in Australia can't be
Once again these people teach natural therapies, they know
nothing of free trade agreements. Universities and colleges share the same vulnerabilities and business needs as retailers manufacturers and
MLM's. Universities and colleges rely on enrolment numbers, they are remise to talk about the future in bleak terms as this will affect there enrolments and budgets. While many academics have worked
very hard over the last many years to get university funding for natural therapies this could be put in jeopardy by talk of impending peril and doom ....What academics express to their students and publicly may be very different to what they think and say behind closed doors. It is a balancing act but either way they are also doing a
disservice to their students in the longer run. Short term
gain at the expense of long term demise!