No matter what country you live in, if you value access to vitamins & herbs it is very important that you carefully read this letter because international "harmonisation" will become clearer to you, and it will be easier to see how we must fight back now and rally support to nominate South African Health Freedom Fighters to join the CODEX delegation in Germany in September this year, to raise our voice of disapproval against the South African Authorities and the HPA who are selling us out in an elaborate international scheme to take away our birth right to God-given Natural Health Substances.

This might take you 10 minutes to read, but it will be 10 minutes well spent, I assure you. (Be sure to forward this widely so more people will understand what's going on and how we can lose if we do not beware of the MCC's Food Control Directorates (Theo Van der Venter) and HPA's secret moves while things are suspiciously quiet.

The following information is sourced from various government sources and through PHARMAPACT's international affiliates, such as The International Advocates For Health Freedom.

Many may not know that the threat to health freedom by means of the current illegal Listing System proposal is a booby-trap which is carefully planned by the New World Order, through the World Trade Organisation (WTO) , the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the European Union).

What we have outlined here are the SPECIFICS of Council Directive 65 / 65 from the European Commission wherein dietary supplements are "ENSLAVED" as "DRUGS" and we are currently seeing world wide efforts to force harmonisation to this "DIE-WRECKTIVE"

The MCC is currently trying to force harmonisation which is parallel to EEC 65/65 via their current Listing System Proposal. The MCC is collaborating with certain vested interest companies such as Pharma Natura, Bioforce, Natura, and others, which attack defendable structure function claims, and product names that imply a therapeutic use.

We're seeing additional efforts to force "harmonisation" in America, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, , S. America, and all over Europe.

EEC 65 / 65 is being shoved rapid fire down the throats of people in the EU via ESCOP, BIOMED, and EMEA (European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products.)

The most recent effort to force EU-wide "harmonisation" with EEC 65/65 came through the June 1997 Discussion Paper on Vitamin and Mineral Supplements (The so-called "Green Paper"). The EU Commission is currently analysing the responses of individual countries in an effort to decide if harmonising legislation may be achievable.)

The best way for us South Africans to monkey-wrench these proceedings is to be VERY vigilant : to educate our elected officials, to hold demonstrations, and to drive from office any who uphold the pharmaceutical agenda and those who are pushing the Listing System Proposal. We are now having to laying charges against the officials who are not upholding their mandate to serve the people of our beloved country.

(It also wouldn't be a bad idea to continue the protesting in Geneva which broke out recently against the various offices of the Globalists there in order to keep sending the message to these bastards that we're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it anymore.)

The situation in the UK at this present time is that in 1993, under the Maastricht Treaty, a single European Market was formed without internal trade barriers. Numerous directives have been or are in the process of being adopted for various industry sectors, and member states in the EU (UK is one) are required to (ahem)...."harmonise" (read "HARM-UH NIZE") with these,(ahem) "directives" (read "DIE-WRECKIVES")

Although under the UK Food Safety Law of 1990, the UK currently has the most liberal legislation (eg the product must "not be injurious to health"; responsibility for administration rests with their Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Foods (MAFF) which is run by a complete imbecile named Jeff Rooker (strongly recommended that they "ride him out on a rail" politically.

Jeff Rooker (UK Director of the Medicines Control Agency) has clearly been given his marching orders by his Globalist Puppet Masters, and it's evident to us that the fate of access to high potency supplements in England depends on whether or not they are able to derail Rooker's mindless effort to force the arbitrary restriction on vitamin B-6 to just 10 mg, because if he gets away with that, this would indicate to the Pharmaceutical Stooges in Brussels that England is no longer standing in the way of the forced harmonisation to EEC 65/65 under which dietary supplements are restricted to the "nth" degree.

The beast which will inevitably be implemented against South Africa is known as EEC 65 / 65 Relating to Medical Products. We have information that this directive is to be adopted by the World Health Organisation and will be imposed on all member countries, including South Africa as we have become WHO members, since the inception of our new government.

We can now see who is behind the Listings System. It is interesting to note that Pharma Natura have been the main instigators in pushing the Listing System, as they are exporting their products to European Countries where they have to have a similar system in place in South Africa as in Europe, otherwise their products will not be accepted.

Directive 65 / 65 provides two separate definitions of the term "medicinal product", one relating to presentation, the other to function. Let us look at the 65 / 65 model and relate it to the Listings Proposal. It is clear that the CMC have been trying to "harmonise" South Africa and are prepared to compromise our countries sovereignty for twenty pieces of silver, without any communication with the public about their intent.

 A product is medicinal if it is:

a) any substance or combination of substances "presented for" treating or preventing disease in human beings or animals, or

b) any substance or combination of substances which may be administered to human beings or animals "with a view towards" making a diagnosis or to restoring, correcting, or modifying physiological function

1) Product "presented for treating or preventing" disease not only when it is expressly "indicated" or "recommended" by means of labels, leaflets or oral representation but also whenever any averagely well informed consumer gains the impression that the product may meet the definition of a medicinal product.

2) Some factors: form of the product (e.g., is it a pill or tablet or other traditional pharmaceutical form?); form of the packaging; trade dress; express or implied representations; intent of person placing the product on the market; target customers (especially those at high risk); whether any similar products authorised as medicinal products.

3) Testimonials of physicians or reference in the labelling to pharmaceutical research or methods is also evidence product is presented as medicinal product.

4) European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision in Ter Voort (1991 Dutch proceedings relating to the sale of herbal teas) confirmed that a product is a medicinal product under the first definition of Directive 65/65 if it is recommended or described as having therapeutic properties, even if it is generally recognised as a foodstuff and has no therapeutic effect. The alleged therapeutic benefit need not be on the labelling of the product itself, but can be supplied by the manufacturer or its agent after the sale (such as by sending a brochure to consumers upon request.)

5) In South Africa, claims to manage "stress, anxiety, or nervous tension" are treated as medicinal claims. If product marketed to vulnerable section of the population it might be treated as medicinal if it claims to restore a specific bodily function or organ to a normal healthy state. In general, words like "restores, repairs, eliminates, controls, alleviates, heals, cures, treats, protects, or prevents" may all be viewed as implying a medicinal claim.

a) Other specific claims that are generally regarded in South Africa as indicating a medicinal claim, particularly if used in connection with a disease or specific adverse condition include:

· traditionally used for________________

· is said to benefit those who suffer from __________________

· can lower cholesterol

· strengthens the immune system

· fights gum disease

· burns fat

· stops craving for _____________

· stimulates immune system

· helps body adjust after crossing time zones.

b) Claims that are not likely to be considered medicinal, provided not used in connection with a specific disease or adverse condition, include:

· helps to maintain health or healthy lifestyle

· revitalising

· relaxing (except for products containing sedatives)

· refreshing

· invigorating

· uplifting

· soothing

1. Many herbs and other substances have well recognised pharmacological properties, and their presence in a product may trigger regulation as a medicinal product.

2. Function test is extremely broad and may sweep in:

a) Products endowed with medicinal properties or capable of having an effect on physiological function but not presented as such :

b) products such as contraceptives or hair loss remedies which alter physiological functions in the absence of disease

c). products which affect physiological functions but do not have the advertised effect (for consumer protection reasons)

d. BUT NOT certain substances with a de minimis effect on physiological functions (eg cosmetics).

3. In Van Bennekom (1983 Dutch criminal proceedings related to the supply of vitamins and multi-vitamin tablets, pills, and capsules), ECJ said vitamins sold for consumption in small quantities as an essential part of the daily diet indispensable for the proper functioning of the body were NOT medicinal products, whereas vitamins sold in LARGE DOSES FOR THERAPEUTIC PURPOSES in combating certain diseases other than for which the cause is vitamin deficiency WERE medicinal products.

The court also stated, however, that mere concentration level alone is not always sufficient to determine whether a vitamin is a medicinal product and that it is impossible to specify a concentration above which a vitamin would always be deemed a medicinal product.

1. Herbal medicinal products are covered by Directive 65/65

2. The European Scientific Co-operative on Phytotherapy (ESCOP) formed in 1989, has prepared monographs ("summaries of product characteristics") for several herbal remedies with the goal that compliance with the monographs will allow for registration and marketing as a medicinal product. As of 1995, 15 monographs issued.

3. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA) established in 1997 the Ad Hoc Working Group on Herbal Medicinal Products

1. The growing demand in the EU combined with wide variations in regulations of Member Countries (including South Africa when the WHO adopts the EC 65 / 65 resolutions) due to cultural differences has resulted in numerous trade complaints that Member states are using their local regulations to erect barriers to the free circulation of vitamins and minerals throughout the EU.

2. The lack of harmonisation means that Member Countries are free to regulate supplements as they wish - typically as foods or medicines.

Currently there is a wide range of national regulations, ranging from prior authorisation required for marketing to virtually no regulations provided the supplement must be "safe to consume".

Some Member Countries focus on first establishing a nutritional need for increased consumption of a particular vitamin or mineral beyond normal diet, while others focus only on safety (ie no marketing unless established need vs marketing unless established harm)

To get a clearer view of how the International Drug Trust is attempting to "boil the frog slowly" and to force their dictates on the people of the world, it is very important that you visit so called "PHYTONET" at www.exeter.ac.uk/phytonet/welcome.html and follow the links there to ESCOP, BIOMED, and EAPM. IF WE ALLOW THE MCC AND THE CMC TO CONTINUE WITH THE LISTING SYSTEM, ALL LISTED SUBSTANCES WILL INEVITABLY BECOME CLASIFIED AS DRUGS. THE THIRD CATGORY, NAMELY LISTABLE SUBSTANCES IS THE FIRST STEP INTO THE GRAVE FOR HEALTH FREEDOM.

It states in the ESCOP website that ESCOP's mission is to force the "harmonisation" of laws pertaining to the manufacture and sale of herbal products throughout the EU and throughout the world.

It is interesting to note that South Africa has been a member of ESCOP and the member from South Africa is Professor Peter Folb (MCC chairman / WHO : Director of Collaborating Centre For Drug Policy / Director of TRAMED).

They want to force us all to full pharmaceutical GMP's in order to drive all the small companies out of the market, upon getting control of the market, a lot of products will disappear and those that remain will cost 10 or more times what they do right now. It is interesting that in certain European countries where the listing system has been implemented, that the prices of supplements escalated in price by up to 1000% in the first three years of implementation.