|
<Back
| Home | Basics |
Departments | Get
Involved | Site Map | What's
New

The Rome 2005 Codex Supplement
Guidelines Aftermath: Risk and Opportunity
July 27, 2005
The international CODEX delegates adopted global guidelines for
vitamin and mineral food supplements as one of its first decisions.
The guidelines recommend labeling that contains information on maximum
consumption levels of vitamin and mineral food supplements, assisting
countries to increase consumer information, which will theoretically
help consumers use them in a safe and effective way, according to the
World
Health Organization (WHO).
"According to WHO, the guidelines ensure that consumers receive
beneficial health effects from vitamins and minerals.
"The guidelines say that people should be encouraged to select
a
balanced diet to get the sufficient amount of vitamins and minerals.
Only in cases where food does not provide sufficient vitamins and minerals
should supplements be used."
The vitamin and mineral guidelines, while not overriding national
legislation, provide national governments with a blueprint for domestic
vitamin and mineral regulation, which is much more restrictive than
American dietary supplement law. The restrictions in the guidelines
create a risk for supplement consumers worldwide. As nations begin adopting
laws consistent with the guidelines to avoid losing international trade
disputes, there is a risk that the world market in supplements will
sink
to a lowest common denominator of a relatively few low potency
products. As the market contracts around such limitations, pressure
will mount on the U.S. to adjust its law to the international standard.
The American supplement industry advocates of the international Codex
guidelines say they will resist such pressures but, critics fear, they
have little commercial incentive to do so.
The industry Codex advocates assert that consumers and manufacturers
worldwide will benefit from adoption of the guidelines, because they
require acceptance of science as a rational approach to setting upper
intake limits, create freedom of trade for the industry, and increase
freedom of choice for the public. This might turn out to be true for
countries such as Greece, Norway, Spain, or France, which currently
significantly restrict dietary supplement products. However, countries
just
beginning to establish dietary supplement regulations will be inclined
to adopt the Codex standard rather than laws similar to the much less
restrictive U.S. Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA).
In response to this concern, industry guidelines advocates argue that
it could have been much worse. They site maximum levels of nutrients
set on the basis of safety evaluation through risk assessment as far
superior to maximum levels set the basis of Recommended Dietary Allowances
(RDA), as called for in the original proposed Codex guidelines. The
population reference intakes (PRI) and RDA, they point out, are based
on nutritional need, and are not scientifically valid for assessing
safety and setting maximum levels of intake. The current guidelines
also
treat supplements as food and minimize the impact of the precautionary
principle, which blocks products from marketing until proven safe even
if there is no suggestion of harm. These are significant accomplishments.
However, the cost for these successes is enormous.
Under the Codex guidelines, vitamins and minerals will be evaluated
for safety as if they were toxic chemicals. Nothing prevents the unbridled
use of this approach from discovering very low safe upper limits (it
is technically possible, though unlikely, that they could even, in some
instances, be lower than the RDA). Fifty years of U.S. legislative and
judicial determinations, culminating in the passage of DSHEA, oppose
this concept. The opposition often had to overcome the repeated and
shrill
objections of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It appears to critics
of the Codex guidelines that, having failed domestically, the U.S. FDA
now hopes to get the international community to treat nutrients as poisons.
The critics point out that a senior FDA official supportive of treating
nutrients as toxins has taken FDA leave in order to run the Codex-supported
toxicological review of vitamins and minerals. The critics find this
fact troubling. Industry supporters of the guidelines say they will
stand firm against unfair treatment of nutrients as toxins. A battle
looms.
In addition to the battle over safety standards, supplement guidelines
critics support the FAO/WHO observation that Codex must do more to include
nutrition standards in its commercial trade guidelines. In this context,
supplement advocates, while opposing the use of improper standards for
the safety evaluation of supplements, support the role of dietary supplements
in the campaign to end world hunger and promote world health. They point
out that researchers have shown that $1 of vitamin A
supplementation equals $30 of development aid. They argue that similar
results are likely for all essential vitamin and mineral supplements
but that the Codex guideline could make it more difficult to achieve
these benefits. This position is one they believe is not antithetical
to supplement industry interests. The dietary supplement community of
consumers, producers, researchers, sellers and others could play a leading
role in the FAO/WHO contribution to the global effort to end world hunger.
This appears to be a position that the manufacturers who support the
current guidelines could embrace.
During the first day of the Codex meeting's five minute supplement
guidelines discussion, China, while not objecting, gave a glimpse of
the unfolding discourse. It stated that every government, in making
decisions about vitamins and minerals, should be allowed to take into
account the dietary limitations of their own countries, that governments
be allowed to select vitamins and minerals according to the customs
and habits of their country, and that definitions of the sources of
vitamins be
permitted and publicized. This is not the way the Codex guidelines envision
the international supplement trade unfolding. International trade rules
permit a country to diverge from an international standard if it has
a sound scientific basis to do so. It is possible that some countries-possibly
China?-might diverge from the guidelines in way more supportive of dietary
supplements than is Codex.
The road out of Rome runs between the Palatine, the hill from which
Romulus and Remus launched the Roman adventure, and Claudius' palace,
overlooking the Circus Maximus. Authorities removed the final remains
of 2005's Live8 Roma from Circus Maximus on Wednesday. FAO world headquarters
sits at the bottom of the hill, cattycorner from Claudius' palace and
the Roman Forum. This was the center of the Roman Republic. A
banner on the side of the FAO headquarters invites each individual to
become a partner with FAO in ending world hunger.
by Jim Turner, general counsel to the Weston A. Price Foundation and
attendee at the Rome CODEX meeting.
<Back
| Home | Tour
| Calendar | Contact
Us | Funding | Join
Now
|