Fw: Pharma Takeover Pattern of Natural Products Industry to Be Revealed On the Air Tonight

[Guest guest]

i THINK THIS IS RELEVANT TO ALL WHO WISH TO CHOOSE HOW TO CARE FOR THEIR OWN

HEALTH! ANNE

Subject: Pharma Takeover Pattern of Natural Products Industry to Be Revealed

On the Air Tonight

> IAHF Webmaster: Breaking News, Whats New, Codex, EU FSD, All Countries,

What to Do

>

> IAHF List: Lou Gentile will be interviewing Hammell of IAHF on the

air tonight from 9-10 PM West Coast US time. The show can be heard world

wide at http://www.lougentile.com and will be archived.

>

> In case you miss the show- Here is an outline of what I will be

discussing:

>

> PATTERN REVEALED OF HOW THE PHARMA CARTEL PLUS CORRUPT VITAMIN COMPANIES

ARE TAKING OVER THE DIETARY SUPPLEMENT INDUSTRY

>

> On January 30th in London, I witnessed the following revealing spectacle:

>

> After the Judge had given both NAHS/HFMA and ANH/Nutri-Link the referral

necessary to take both cases on to the EU Court of Justice, where BOTH

groups (presumably) genuinely hope to overturn the EU Food Supplements

Directive, Ralph Pike, Director of NAHS, was clearly feeling very DEPRESSED,

and ANGRY.

>

> In other words, he was not happy, or brimming over with joy as you might

EXPECT a man to be in those circumstances......

>

> WHY was Ralph depressed?

>

> WHY has NAHS/HFMA been sending out press releases claiming credit for this

court victory, (when it clearly was not theirs), and why have they been

giving NO MENTION of ANH in their press releases about the court victory?

>

> Since the court victory on January 30th, why has NAHS/HFMA been pulling

out all the stops to try to maginalize ANH, to get them BANNED from both

upcoming vitamin trade shows in the UK, and why are they trying to have ANH

blacklisted by the vitamin industry trade press so that no mention of the

victory that was rightfully theirs will reach the public?

>

> Could it be that NAHS/ANH are actually a controlled opposition group that

doesn't WANT ANH to win in court?

> Could it be that NAHS/ANH are only going through the MOTIONS of defending

this industry?

>

> Look at the following email sent by Tips, JD, Legal Director of the

US based National Health Federation to Aldis, chair of HFMA, and ceo

of Holland and Barrett (largest chain of health food stores in the UK which

is owned by Nature's Bounty, the largest vitamin company in the world):

>

> From: SCT

> hfma@...

> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 5:26 PM

> Subject: Lawsuit in UK Against FSD

>

> Dear Mr. Aldis:

>

> I recently read on your website that your organization is taking

credit for the recent January 30th legal victory in London against the Food

Supplements Directive. Sadly, no mention is made anywhere in your article

of the vital leadership and participation of the Alliance for Natural Health

and the fact that its solicitors were responsible for that victory.

>

> As legal counsel for an American-based international health-freedom

organization, The National Health Federation, and as the legal columnist for

Whole Foods Magazine since 1984, I would appreciate an explanation.

>

> In my view, stealing credit for an achievement is on par with stealing

money. I would like to think that your organization is not a thief of

achievement and would give proper credit for this victory to the ANH, where

it properly belongs and would do it promptly. My column and the

organization for which I work will not fail to take note of your actions in

this regard.

>

> Thank you for your immediate attention to my query and request.

>

> Sincerely yours,

>

> C. Tips

> General Counsel

> National Health Federation

>

> (Aldis sent a pile of GARBAGE in response to this which will be easily

refuted the moment we have access to the transcript of the case which shows

exactly what happened in the courtroom. The transcript will prove that ANH

won the day, that the Judge and UK attorney were only able to attack

NAHS/HFMA's case.)

>

> Given that Nature's Bounty (member of HFMA and NAHS) is the wealthiest

vitamin company in the world, (annual revenues in excess of one billion

dollars), why, if they REALLY want to overturn the EU FSD, would they hire

only a top second tier law firm with no experience in overturning EU

Directives?

>

> Why would their lawfirm use the same argument in the FSD case that caused

them to LOSE the Kava Case? (Proportionality)

>

> Why would they not want to use the #1 lawfirm in Europe (Brick Court

Chambers) given their track record of overturning EU Directives, including

the Tobacco Directive, where they established the case law that must be

followed in a similar attempt vis a vis the Food Supplement Directive?

>

> (ANH hired Brick Court Chambers, while NAHS/HFMA not only did NOT hire

them, but show every sign of trying to SABOTAGE ANH's efforts to go on to

the EU Court of Justice....

>

> Clearly, vitamin consumers world wide are up against a group of large

vitamin companies in this industry that don't WANT the EU Food Supplement

Directive overturned.

>

> These large companies only care about PROFITS, not about consumers. They

view the EU FSD as a way of expanding their markets throughout most of

Europe, and it doesn't matter to them that they'd have to reformulate

product in England, Ireland, Sweden, and Holland, the PROFITS that they'd

make in the REST of Europe would more than make up for losses in those four

countries, even though those four countries currently are the most lucrative

countries for the sale of their products.

>

> Similarly, they don't CARE if that EU FSD adversely hammers the rest of

the world due to its impact at CODEX, because these big companies feel that

they're big enough to weather ANY STORM, and they welcome regulatory hurdle

raising that would drive smaller competitors out of the market...

>

> IADSA has announced a special meeting to be held in May in Prague, Czech

Republic titled " The Future of Food Supplements in Europe "

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:sCdkS5lvNKUJ:www.ahpa.org/Prague2004Conf

erence.pdf+IADSA,Prague & hl=en & ie=UTF-8

>

> To this meeting they have invited such perpeTRAITORS as Hathcock of

pharma dominated CRN (formerly of FDA) who will be discussing so called

" scientific risk asessment " as a means of imposing so called " safe Upper

Levels " to cap allowable vitamin potencies.

>

> The scientific fraudulence of what Hathcock, CRN, IADSA, HFMA, and all

other pharma dominated vitamin trade associations are trying to do via the

EU FSD and Codex is exposed via Alan Gaby, MD's article titled " Safe Upper

Levels " for Nutritional Supplements- One Giant Step BACKWARD

http://www.iahf.com/20040127.html

>

> HFMA is a member of IADSA.

>

> HFMA's Chair is Aldis, who is ceo of Nature's Bounty Company Holland

and Barrett.

>

> Nature's Bounty obviously doesn't care about consumers.

>

> If they did, they wouldn't be backing a second tier lawfirm which is

attempting to employ a losing argument ostensibly to " try to overturn " the

EU Food Supplement Directive.

>

> If they did care, they would be backing ANH's GENUINE legal effort to

overturn the FSD, the THMPD, and the PD.

>

> WHAT YOU CAN DO

>

> Get this to every vitamin company you buy product from and DEMAND to know

what they are doing to support the ANH lawsuit?

>

> Donations can be made via http://www.alliance-natural-health.org ANH

needs around $350,000 US to go on to the EU Court of Justice, and your

donations are badly needed, especially if ANH is unable to get past the

effort to shut them out of the upcoming vitamin trade shows in the UK and to

marginalize them in the trade press.

> For Health Freedom,

> C. Hammell, President

> International Advocates for Health Freedom

> 556 Boundary Bay Road

> Point , WA 98281-8702 USA

> http://www.iahf.com

> jham@...

> 800-333-2553 N.America

> 360-945-0352 World