Huge victory for freedom of speech in America

May 5, 2011

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has suffered a stinging defeat in a lawsuit in Washington DC, where their tyrannical censorship of serious health claims have been found unconstitutional.

In the beginning was the word
“First Amendment to the United States Constitution” refers to freedom of expression as fundamental to the nation and is also the foundation of any civilized legal community today.

Without freedom of expression – no freedom
However, in civil services in many countries a tendency has crept in to promote their own political objectives by intimidation and over-management rather than under-management.

This is well known in Europe’s vast civil service, where no case is too small to rule from Brussels. And here in Denmark we know it as a tendency of the civil sevice to administer dietary supplements regulations in a far more restrictive way than it has ever been thought or spoken in the EU Food Supplements Directive, although this is much more restrictive than the equivalent in the U.S.
In other European countries like the Netherlands and England the same EU
rules are administered far more in consistent with people’s interests than is the case here in Denmark.

In the U.S. in 1996 the civil rights group “Citizens for Health” succeeded in implementing that a dietary supplement can only be banned if it is harmful.
Here in Denmark it will be prohibited if it is beneficial!

Lawsuit against FDA
It was the straw that broke the camel’s back to the “Alliance for Natural Health (ANH), and the organization sued the FDA in this matter in the District Court for the District of Columbia,” which recently ruled in the case.

The Court ruled that the FDA’s censorship of documented claims are contrary to the U.S. Constitution very first words about freedom of speech. The Court even allowed explicitly the following claims, which however was not about dietary supplements, but vitamins: “Vitamin C may reduce the risk of gastric cancer” and “Vitamin E may reduce the risk of bladder cancer”.

Denmark
Unfortunately we can´t expect Danish politicians in a foreseeable future to be awakened by a population who is surprised that there are health-promoting information, it may not get, even if it so desires.

One day, people will make politicians aware that this is contrary to the Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights in which one may not prevent people from information that they wish to receive.

This means that the authorities are on thin ice when they prohibit Internet sites that contain documented product information about diet or dietary supplements. The citizen performs however a independent active action when he or she click their way to a website; – thus accessing information on their own hand. But this is not allowed. It is not good for him to see how he can improve his health.

It must strike one with wonder, who might have an interest in restricting the population from such information.

A cry for freedom
Allow us here at Denmark’s Independence Day, May 5th to make below pious desire to promote general health in a free Denmark:
The Danish Vital Council believes that people should have free access to information about dietary supplements and free access to buy safe dietary supplement. This is the best guarantee to prevent accidents and to ensure that the consumer gets the best possible product to suit his needs.
This implies that:

1) The consumer must have free access to information
The Vitality Council believes that misinformation must be penalized.
Today we penalize information in Denmark. Not even pharmacies and doctors must be informed about the available scientific evidence concerning dietary supplements.
This should be changed so that consumers can get free access to accurate information.
2) The consumer must have free access to dietary supplements
The Vitality Council does not believe that it is in the public interest to have curtailed ones right to buy the dietary supplements, one may wish, when these are otherwise safe to consume.
The Vitality Council must therefore urge that no authority administratively hinder people’s access to dietary supplements whose safety can not be doubted.

By: Vitality Council

www.anh-usa.org/free-speech

ECJ Advocate General Says: The Food Supplement Directive Invalid under EU Law

April 5, 2005

The many millons of European food supplement users have a good reason to be happy today. After the health freedom alliance, The Alliance for Natural Health’s landmark challenge of the very contentious Food Supplement Directive (FSD) by the European Courts of Justice (ECJ), the ECJ Advocate General Geelhoed today has stated that the directive is invalid according to EU law.

This increases the chance for the many supplement users to maintain the possibility of taking supplements to take care of their health..

The resistance against the planned EU-directive has been growing for the last five years and the supplement users now see a possibility to win the case, which can be likened to the fight between David and Goliath.

The Advocate General in a statement released in Luxembourg today at 9:30 Continental time, concluded that:

-The Food Supplements Directive infringes the principle of proportionality – because
– basic principles of Community law, such as the requirements of legal protection, of legal certainty and of sound administration have not properly been taken into account.
– The Directive is therefore invalid under EU law.

The Advocate General’s pronouncement is not a ruling. That will come from the ECJ judges, later – in June. But typically, in the vast majority of cases, the Court Judgment follows the recommendations of the Advocate General with 80%.

If the Advocate General’s recommendations are adopted, in effect, the ban on (ca 270) vitamin and mineral forms not included on the EU’s ‘Positive list,’ due to come into effect on 1 August 2005, will be declared illegal to sell and impossible to buy. The opposition to the positive list concept of allowable nutrient forms finds it too narrow, too restrictive, and based on flawed science.

An example could also be that synthetically produced selenium could be allowed on the positive list, while the natural source found in e.g. Brazil nuts would not; synthetic forms of Vitamin E (often used in ‘adverse’ vitamin studies reported in the media) would be allowed, but the natural, most beneficial food forms would not.

Alternative practitioner Inge Lundberg-Hansen is happily welcoming the Advocate General statement, and says: “There is so much sickness around. We know that food supplements prevent and that they can save us many of the wide spread diseases such as asthma and allergies, and that people by the help of supplements can obtain more energy, a better health and mood, a better relationship to their family, work, and financial situation. We are many, who will be happy, if the ban of the Food Supplement Directive does not come into effect.”

Alternative practitioner and health shop assistant, Agathe Langhof, is of the opinion that the ban of the Food Supplement Directive will make people very angry, so she is also very happy to hear about today’s positive news. She says: “Much more people than the authorities are aware of are depending on their vitamins and minerals. Supplement users are no longer a minority, but rather amount to half of the population. And the Food Supplement Directive case has made the contrast between pharmaceutical medicine and food supplements more distinct, and they want to decide over their own health. But maybe we are not supposed to too healthy and old?”

The M.D. Claus Hancke, who is the chairman of the Vitality Council says: “The Advocate General’s recommendation is the first sign we see of a sound judgement in connection with the EU Supplement Directive and it is my heartfelt hope that the ECJ will follow the Advocate General’s recommendation.”

BY: Vitality Council / SOURCE: ANH PRESS RELEASE / 05-04-05

________________________________

For more information:
Alliance for Natural Health (ANH)

 

American Authorities Wish for Better Information and Reporting about Dietary Supplements

April 12, 2004

Since 1994 liberal legislation in the United States has secured the American population full access to safe dietary supplements. 2½ year ago FDA asked the Institute of Medicine (IoM) to investigate the extent of harmful effects of supplements. The FDA received this report from IoM last week.

The conclusion is, among other things, that there are very few safety data for the 29,000 different dietary supplements sold in the United States, and the concern seems to be that this market grows by 25% a year, and today amounts to about 18 billion. dollars annually.

…………………………….

By: Vitality Council

Reference:
Special report: A health fad that’s hard to swallow, New Scientist Special Report, 12. April 2004.