The FAO/WHO/Codex Ailementarius Commission has launched the first Joint FAO/WHO Project to construct an umbrella framework for establishing the safe upper levels for nutrient supplements globally.

The purported task of this scientific international collaboration is to assess the 'risk' of nutrients and related products as a measure to protect human health. Currently there are no established techniques to measure the 'risks'.

While this project is of great importance to the future of our supplement choices and therapies in North America, a ten-year-old hurdle remains unresolved. It's the Codex proposed guidelines on the potency limitations of vitamins, minerals and other supplements.

At a Codex Committee meeting in Rome this coming July, we can expect to see the adoption of the Codex new guidelines for our vitamin supplements and other natural health products and therapies.

Consequently, health conscious North Americans may see our worst fears come to pass, high levels of nutrients lowered because the Codex brainchild believes we can derive our daily nutrients from ordinary food, which is why they are currently encouraging the consumer to refrain from buying supplements!

In reality, what that means is that the upper RDI limits will be pushed to very low levels in an effort to 'protect the consumer ". How low? Possibly as low as the RDI set out for soldiers during World War II. Codex claims their fear is 'over-supplementation'.

So what is Canada's position in the International debate?

As a country member, Canada is not bound by the dictates of the Codex unless we formally accept their standards or guidelines. Most countries ignore the Codex procedures (because they have never worked) and notification from them has no bearing on enforcement.

An agreement of sorts has been reached on the wording of the proposed guideline and the last words they have agreed to use are the following; "When the maximum levels are set, due account may be taken of the reference intake values of vitamins and minerals for the population. This provision should not lead to setting of maximum levels that are solely based on recommended nutrient intakes. e.g., Population Reference Intake or Recommended Daily Allowance values".

The good news is that we have won this round, but the battle for global nutritional regulation is still up for grabs and we are losing because the European Union (EU) does not believe in supplementing the diet with vitamins and minerals. In fact, their attitude appears to be adverse to vitamins and minerals and they think differently as to who should regulate nutritional therapies.

Dr. Rolf Grossklaus chairman of the CCNFSDU was quoted as saying, "It is not to prevent disease or to heal but rather the scope is to optimize nutrition. Consumers should know that a balanced diet is best."

So now we are engaged in an international debate where Europe believes in strict enforceable regulations and products prescribed only by a medical doctor, while North America believes in freedom to make our own health choices.

Canadian consumers and other stakeholders in the natural health industry will no doubt be watching closely for news to come out of the Codex Committee meeting in Rome this summer.

Copyright © 2005 Linda K. Beach C.H.

About Linda: Linda K. Beach C.H. is the chief consultant and owner of Medical Botany Research (http://www.medicalbotanyresearch.com). Medical Botany Research provides Canadian Natural Health Product registration in Canada.