CBC Attacks Herbal Medicines

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
1)Like I said, some people expect it to be a radical, overnight change...not the gradual campaign it is. I guess you are one of the former.

I don't expect that at all. I can only go by what is currently in the Codex, and what changes are being suggested. Why don't you cite the portions that do what you are proposing?

2)Have you ever been to a farmer's market? Or bought anything straight from a farm? If not, it wont affect you at all. For those of us who prefer pure food, it'll affect us plenty.

I buy almost all of my vegetables at the Trolley Stop "Saturday Farmer's Market" and the local farmer's market on other days. There is nothing in the codex that would change how they do business, as they clearly label their products, both on the sign and on the bags they put the veggies in once you buy them. The farmers are responsible and test every harvest for common pathogens.

Again...why are any of these things bad? Why won't you just answer my questions?

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
1)Like I said, some people expect it to be a radical, overnight change...not the gradual campaign it is. I guess you are one of the former.

I don't expect that at all. I can only go by what is currently in the Codex, and what changes are being suggested. Why don't you cite the portions that do what you are proposing?

2)Have you ever been to a farmer's market? Or bought anything straight from a farm? If not, it wont affect you at all. For those of us who prefer pure food, it'll affect us plenty.

I buy almost all of my vegetables at the Trolley Stop "Saturday Farmer's Market" and the local farmer's market on other days. There is nothing in the codex that would change how they do business, as they clearly label their products, both on the sign and on the bags they put the veggies in once you buy them. The farmers are responsible and test every harvest for common pathogens.

Again...why are any of these things bad? Why won't you just answer my questions?

1)Ive been answering your question with examples of exactly why it is bad. You dont seem to want to hear it. And thats your right. The fact is, this will put many farmers out of business, and will limit the availability of supplements. It limits dosage levels. It will make many simple things, such as high dosage vitamin c, a prescription only item. It labels supplements as drugs, not food, which most are. And yet it does not require labeling of gmo's.

2)Your farmers market labels vegetables? Sorry, I dont buy it. Unless your farmer's markets vary greatly from the ones I go to, where one can purchase an individual, unwrapped, unlabeled tomato. With codex, that goes away.

3)Ever heard of Monsanto? The stoppage of trade with those who dont adopt codex tends to coincide greatly with those who wont grow monsanto gmo's.

4)You, in Europe, are not part of Codex, yet. On Dec. 31st, 2009, the European Food Supplements Directive went online. Codex hasnt gone fully online yet.
Some reading material for you:
www.natural-health-information-centre.com...

www.healthfreedomusa.org...
translate.google.com...://codexalimentarius.come2me.nl/791700/Monsanto&ei=uA0cT c7GHo-q8Abj8uzxDQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CC8Q7gEwAjgo&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcodex%2Bmonsanto%26start%3D40%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox -a%26hs%3Dh8%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-USfficial%26prmd%3Divns
open.salon.com... to_codex_death_breaking_the_uns_code_x
www.anh-europe.org...

I'm still waiting for you to quote the portion of the Codex that does any of the things you've suggested.

Wh ycan't you do this?

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

 

I think each herb and supplement needs to be looked at individually. There certainly are herbs that are recognized by medical doctors and societies to be quite beneficial. On the other hand, there is no doubt that some of the herbal medicines being pushed by unscrupulous companies are NOT beneficial, and in fact, potentially harmful, or even deadly.

You are missing the point. Look at what we know already about paracematol and other over the counter pain killers. No herbal medicine has been shown to cause as much damage as these, but they will not be touched by regulators. And the fact is I can go out and buy fast food, alcohol, ciggarrettes

all known killers

and no government agency is going to eliminate my access to these organic substances. Hell, tobacco is an herb and other herbs are smoked for medicinal reasons.

The testing protocols are extremely expensive, which will centralize the power in the alternative health field, allow the pharmaceuticals to move in even more and adulterate alternative combinations.

This is not about protecting the consumer, though no doubt well meaning people are being used by Pharma in the process.

Originally posted by jjjtir
The study CBC cited is this

Adverse events associated with the use of complementary and alternative medicine in children

adc.bmj.com/content/early/2010/11/24/adc.2010.183152.abstract

public fulltext pdf of the report here

press.psprings.co.uk/adc/december/adc183152.pdf

Of course there are problems, but they are nothing compared to, for example, the problems and deaths associated with over the counter pain medications. But I hear no outcry for these to be restricted.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Just curious...have any of you actually READ the Codex Alimentarius?

Yes, I have. And you are right about some of the other posters. However you are wrong about the scope of the codex. It will force companies to run combinations of herbs through very expensive testing. Prohibitively expensive testing. It will reduce the amount of products, and not by eliminating dangerous ones, but by eliminating smaller companies.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
I'm still waiting for you to quote the portion of the Codex that does any of the things you've suggested.

Wh ycan't you do this?

Because you're asking for something that isnt there, at least in the form that you want it.

For the third time: there are people who expect this to be a drastic, written out, overnight change. Then there are thse who understand how thing actually work.

Did you bother to read any of the material I posted? Or do you just expect me to post where the FDA admits this is sinister?

reply to post by captaintyinknots


So, you're admitting, then, that there is no document related to the Codex, no portion of the Codex, and no proposed addition to the Codex that would remove herbs, vitamins, or supplements from stores, or prevent you from growing your own?

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

So, you're admitting, then, that there is no document related to the Codex, no portion of the Codex, and no proposed addition to the Codex that would remove herbs, vitamins, or supplements from stores, or prevent you from growing your own?

I admit that it doesnt say it in the straight forward, exact wording that you wish to read, yes.

I don't admit, however, that these guidelines wont do exactly that, as far as supplements are conerned. And I never claimed it would prevent you fro growing your own, *IF* you can get access to organic seeds which is exactly what I said before.

'Course, you havent bothered to read any of the material I posted, and you certainly dont understand codex alimentarius, as you are under the illusion that it is active where you live right now.

Again, these things are not designed to be an overnight change.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

I admit that it doesnt say it in the straight forward, exact wording that you wish to read, yes.

Then your argument has nothing to stand on, other than paranoid, fear-fueled rantings.

I don't admit, however, that these guidelines wont do exactly that, as far as supplements are conerned.

What makes you think this? Is there any statement by a lawmaker or any document published by a government pertaining to the Codex that suggest this would happen? I've asked you this a number of times, and you just can't find anything reasonable to support it.

Course, you havent bothered to read any of the material I posted

Why would I? It has nothing to do with the actual Codex. The things you've posted are all "what if" scenarios with no basis in reality.

and you certainly dont understand codex alimentarius

Really? Because I've read it, which is why I knew you wouldn't be able to cite the portion that does what you claim.

as you are under the illusion that it is active where you live right now.

Please quote where I said this. I would hate for you to be caught in a lie.

And how do you even know where I live right now?

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa


1)Yes, you're absolutely correct. Unless it specifically says within the lines of codex that it will do these things, theres no way it could happen, and the tens of thousands of people who are against it are nothing but paranoid fear-mongers who have taken no time to research their stance.

2)Yes, you're absolutely correct. Unless the government (who made it, by the way) says its bad, it can't be. And the hundreds of petitions against it mean nothing.

3)Yes, you're absolutely correct. Sources, even ones from multiple countries, should be written off without reading them. How do you know what they are about again, if you didnt bother to take the time?

4)You're absolutely correct. Reading Codex Alimentarius, and refusing to research it any further makes you an expert on it.

5)While I do apologize that i claimed you said you lived in these nations, as you did not, your claim Codex has been implemented in most EU nations is still false.

And which "codex guidelines" are those? The codex has been implemented in most EU nations, and there is no lack of access to any herb, vitamin, or supplement you want, provided it is labeled properly.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

 

1)Yes, you're absolutely correct. Unless it specifically says within the lines of codex that it will do these things, theres no way it could happen, and the tens of thousands of people who are against it are nothing but paranoid fear-mongers who have taken no time to research their stance.

If they've "researched" in the same manner you have, then yes, these "thousands" (which are probably more like hundreds or dozens) are, indeed, paranoid fear-mongers.

3)Yes, you're absolutely correct. Sources, even ones from multiple countries, should be written off without reading them. How do you know what they are about again, if you didnt bother to take the time?

Web sites without references, and without merit, aren't "sources". I could publish a website today that claims Obama is secretly a Buddhist woman. Does that make it so?

5)While I do apologize that i claimed you said you lived in these nations, as you did not, your claim Codex has been implemented in most EU nations is still false.

That's funny, because 27 EU nations are members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, and the EU as a whole, since 2003, became a full, signatory member of the Commission. They help write and enforce the Codex, along with the EU and the WTO. It's all spelled out pretty clearly on over a dozen EU, WTO, and UN sites. Here's one:

EU Codex

But, you're right. There's no way the EU themselves should be trusted to know if the EU is a member of the CAC.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

 

1)Yes, you're absolutely correct. Unless it specifically says within the lines of codex that it will do these things, theres no way it could happen, and the tens of thousands of people who are against it are nothing but paranoid fear-mongers who have taken no time to research their stance.

If they've "researched" in the same manner you have, then yes, these "thousands" (which are probably more like hundreds or dozens) are, indeed, paranoid fear-mongers.

3)Yes, you're absolutely correct. Sources, even ones from multiple countries, should be written off without reading them. How do you know what they are about again, if you didnt bother to take the time?

Web sites without references, and without merit, aren't "sources". I could publish a website today that claims Obama is secretly a Buddhist woman. Does that make it so?

5)While I do apologize that i claimed you said you lived in these nations, as you did not, your claim Codex has been implemented in most EU nations is still false.

That's funny, because 27 EU nations are members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, and the EU as a whole, since 2003, became a full, signatory member of the Commission. They help write and enforce the Codex, along with the EU and the WTO. It's all spelled out pretty clearly on over a dozen EU, WTO, and UN sites. Here's one:

EU Codex

But, you're right. There's no way the EU themselves should be trusted to know if the EU is a member of the CAC.

1)There's a difference between being part of the commission, and being fully under the hood of codex. It's a gradual implementation. But you know that already, being the expert that you are.

2)You didnt read the sources, so you have no scope to say whether they are unfounded. Had you bothered to, you would have seen that these were not just blogs or editorials that I posted.

3)In the end, I should have taken a look at your profile sooner, rather than carry out this argument with someone who has refused to research, who hasnt posted one single fact, and who **SHOCK AND HORROR** works in medicine(and not the herbal kind). Not really a surprise that someone who stands to benefit from it is all for it.

Bit shilly in here.