Natural Solutions Foundation (NSF) prøver å true seg inn i NHFs (National Health Federation) årlige delegasjon til Codex Alimentarius’ møter. Som leseren sikkert vet, er Codex Alimentarius et FN-organ som setter globale matstandarder og retningslinjer, også for kosttilskudd. Fritt Helsevalg mener at Codex’ retningslinjer vil føre til globale og unødige restriksjoner på din tilgang til gode kosttilskudd og naturmidler.

Fritt Helsevalg er medlem av NHF, som er basert i USA og er verdens eldste helsefrihetsorganisasjon. NHF har status som non-governmental organisation (NGO) i Codex, og er eneste stemmen helsefrihetsbevisste forbrukerne har der.

Vi har over lengre tid, sammen med våre samarbeidspartnere i USA og Europa, lagt merke til at Natural Solutions Foundation er en “helsefrihetsorganisasjon” som kommer med en god del unøyaktigheter og feilinformasjon rundt helsefrihetssaken. Dr. Rima Laibow har blant annet et foredrag på Youtube om Codex Alimentarius, og det er til tider ganske villedende.

Natural Solutions Foundation liker å gi inntrykk av at de er store og viktige, og ikke minst profesjonelle. Vårt inntrykk er faktisk det motsatte. Fritt Helsevalg opplever stadig at vi blir kontaktet på bakgrunn av krisemaksimert feilinformasjon folk har fått fra Natural Solutions Foundation.

Deres siste stunt ser ut til å være å prøve å true seg selv med på National Health Federations Codex-delegasjon siden de selv fikk avslått sin søknad om giodkjennelse som NGO i Codex.

En kan spørre seg hvorfor en FN-organisasjon som skal lage globale matstandarder ser ut til å ville unngå at helsefrihetsorganisasjoner får påvirkningsmuligheter innen deres organer. Matindustrien, også genmanipuleringsindustrien, er godt representert, men forbrukerne får ikke bli representert på samme måte som pengeinteressene innen dette FN-organet.

Gjør Natural Solutions Foundation mer skade enn nytte?

NSF har demonstrert at de mener de ”er best”, og man kan forestille seg  at om de (mot formodning) skulle komme med på NHF’s Codex-delegasjon, nok ville kreve både kommandoen og mikrofonen; noe NHF naturlig nok ikke kan gå med på. NHF har deltatt i Codex i årevis, mens NSF bare har ”deltatt” fra publikumsgalleriet. Om man bedømmer etter deres skriverier, så demonstrerer de klart at de ikke vet (godt nok) hva de snakker om, og følgelig kan de gjøre stor skade.

Når NSF ikke har oppnådd NGO-status, burde de heller demonstrere sine medlemmers styrke/effekt  (de hevder de har millioner av medlemmer) ved å utfordre Codex, i det offentlige rom, til å tillate bedre representasjon av forbruker-, helse- og frihets-NGO’er. DA kunne de gjøre nytte for seg!

Men saken er klar hvis vi skal avgjøre HVEM vi skal anse som pålitelige. Det er definitivt NHF og definitivt ikke Natural Solutions Foundation. Om man var i tvil tidligere, demonstrerer de selv helt klart med dette utpressingsforsøket (for det er det det er!) at de ikke er til å stole på.

Les vedlagte pressemelding fra NHF (på engelsk), hvor de viser og kommenterer utpressingsforsøket Natural Solutions Foundation nylig har kommet med. Pressemeldingen er et interessant stykke lesning, og substansierer klart hva FHV har prøvd å forfekte. NSF klarer ikke å fremstille Codex-virkeligheten korrekt og vil ikke ta korreks. Ei heller vil de samarbeide med andre helsefrihetsorganisasjoner. Gjør et besøk på deres nettsider og se om du finner linker til andre organisasjoner! Det gjør du ikke.  De hevder å ha millioner av medlemmer; hvor dokumenteres de? Og hvem er de? På nettsidene står oppført:

Board of Trustee Members:
General Albert Stubblebine (U.S. Army Retired), President
Rima E. Laibow, MD, Medical Director
Ralph Fucetola, JD, VP-Legal (han skrev utpressingsbrevet)

I tillegg er oppgitt seks rådgivere (advisers), hvorav two også tilhører Citizens for Health og en tidligere tilhørte CFH. Du kan lese mer om dem på NSF’s nettsider. Intet mere er sagt på deres nettsider om organisasjon og medarbeidere.

Og nå driver de altså med direkte utpressing. Natural Solutions Foundation demonstrerer igjen at de er en organisasjon man med fordel kan holde seg unna. Fritt Helsevalg gjør i hvert fall dét inntil de demonstrerer at de kan fremstille Codex-problematikken korrekt, samarbeide med andre og oppnå noenting faktisk og praktisk.

Først kommer en editert og kommentert utgave, så kommer den originale pressemeldingen.

Scott Tips, president i National Health Federation svarer på spørsmålet hvorfor NSF ikke skal slippe til i Codex-delegasjonen:  

“Because it would absolutely */destroy/* the only health-freedom seat at Codex!

“How could the Federation work with NSF’s incredible incompetence and inability to tell the truth? Here are just a few of the many reasons why we say No”:

Krisemaksimering og feilinformasjon 1
+ In March 2005, NSF announced that Codex would take vitamins and minerals off health-food store shelves in the U.S. by July 31, 2005.  When we pointed out to them */in person/* that this absolutely would not happen and they would make the health-freedom movement look bad when the removal from store shelves did not occur, they flatly refused our request to stop making this announcement.  Of course, four years later vitamins and minerals are still freely found on health-food store shelves in the U.S.

Krisemaksimering og feilinformasjon 2
NSF is incorrectly claiming that "Codex will go into global effect on December 31,      2009."  When that date passes and NSF’s readers realize they were fooled once again, what date will NSF then select?  2011?  2012?  

NSF har ikke fått med seg de enkle fakta her: Datoen viser til EUs kosttilskuddsdirektiv, og ikke Codex. Fritt Helsevalg har skrevet mye om EUs kosttilskuddsdirektiv, og artiklene ligger på nettsiden vår.

Tar fokus bort fra viktige saker
When the Central American Free Trade Agreement –CAFTA – (which requires the application of Codex standards within the United States) was hanging by a thread and was even defeated on the House floor for a short while, NSF helped divert action against the anti-health-freedom bill by announcing that CAFTA was */not/* a threat to health freedom!  NSF did this while the handful of true and sincere health-freedom groups fought feverishly against CAFTA. The International Advocates for Health Freedom has dealt with this issue at length on its website.

Krisemaksimering og feilinformasjon 3
Considering that it paints a picture of itself as an “authority” on Codex issues, NSF still incorrectly claims that "The CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission meets every two years, always offshore (Rome, Bonn, Paris, etc.) and never in Smallville, U.S.A." In fact, the Commission meets every single year, alternating between the FAO headquarters in Rome, Italy and the WHO headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland.

“Mirakelet” som ikke skjedde
In a typical exaggeration and use of tabloid tactics, NSF claimed (and still claims) that the WHO had "severely chastized" Codex Alimentarius for not making a significant contribution to human health in its 42 years of existence.

A simple comment was blown out of proportion and effect.   NSF''s claim that a "Miracle" occurred at the meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in Rome in July 2005 is false.  /See, e.g.,/
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-miracle.htm.

”Seieren” som ikke fant sted
NSF''s falsely claimed again that A "Stunning Victory" for health freedom had occurred at the May 2006 meeting of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling in Ottawa, Canada.  There was no stunning victory, at least not to anyone truly familiar with Codex.  /See, e.g.,/
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-ottawa.htm.

NSF gir dårlige råd – negative konsekvenser for helsefriheten
Sør-Afrikas delegat i Codex har vært positiv til naturlig helse og helsefrihetsorganisasjonenes ønske om fri tilgang til effektive og sunne naturmidler. I så måte har Sør-Afrika vært en samarbeidspartner for NHF i Codex. Etter at Natural Solutions Foundation kom inn i bildet, har delegaten, Mrs. Booyzen, sluttet å samarbeide med NHF.

At the April-May 2008 meeting of the Codex Committee for Food Labelling in Ottawa, Canada, NSF was behind the ill-advised South African move to inject religion into a strongly-secular Codex at the wrong time.  The result was */major  blowback/* that resulted in the South African delegate, Mrs. Antoinette Booyzen, being called on the carpet by her own government, humiliated, and thereafter side-lined from future Codex meetings. The NHF lost a valuable Codex ally as a result of NSF’s clumsy, behind-the-scenes manipulations.

In fact, it can be argued that the NHF had lost Mrs. Booyzen as an ally even before because once NSF started appearing at Codex meetings, Mrs. Booyzen unaccountably stopped coordinating her Codex activities with NHF and began only associating with NSF. Whether this was intentional or not on the part of NSF is irrelevant because the result was the same: Mrs. Booyzen strangely stopped working with NHF.

Feilinformasjon 4
As a self-pronounced "source of expert information" (see http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2931), NSF''s  notion that "Codex Alimentarius sharply restricts or eliminates most medicinal herbs and limits the conditions that can be treated using medicinal herbs to a small number of trivial ones" is grossly inaccurate and patently false./3 Medicinal herbals are not subject to Codex jurisdiction.

Avisartikkelen som aldri kom
And another example of NSF’s flagrant grandstanding without substance: They boldly announced, "A major newspaper in this [African] country runs a full page story on the importance of our stand on Codex and health freedom! We will scan it and share it with you AFTER the Codex meeting. It urges the country to take care to protect its access to healthy and natural options!  In color, no less!" (/See/ http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=117)  

Of course, no scan of any such African newspaper story has ever either been published on the NSF''s website or, that we know of, sent out to its subscribers.  What happened to it?  

Ekstravagant ressursforbruker
NSF is a large resource sinkhole, draining valuable resources away from other health-freedom organizations.  For example, to attend last year’s Codex meeting in Cape Town, South Africa, NSF was demanding donations of $33,000. NHF sent its delegate to the exact same meeting for only $3,000!

Unngåes av de fleste andre helsefrihetsorganisasjoner
NSF is shunned by the vast majority of health-freedom organizations, including the American Association for Health Freedom, Alliance for Natural Health, Dr. Rath Health Foundation, International Advocates for Health Freedom, National Health Freedom Coalition, Fritt Helsevalg, MayDay, and the National Health Federation, all of whom work together amongst themselves cooperatively on a variety of different health-freedom issues, showing thereby that it’s not a “turf war” issue. These organizations will just simply have nothing to do with NSF.



Utnyttelse av dårlig informerte forbrukere?
NSF preys on the unsophisticated and/or naïve health-freedom activists who are interested enough in health freedom to get taken in by NSF’s slick jargon or else ask “why can’t we all just work together,” while those who know better have carefully avoided NSF and realize that you cannot work with everyone, especially those who continuously put out false or incorrect information.

Angriper helsefrihetsorganisasjonen National Health Federation
Hiding behind the false belief that by not mentioning the Federation by name it is somehow not attacking us directly, NSF grandiosely and incorrectly states in its recent press release that: "You deserve a voice that represents you at the Codex table.  The rules and regulations of Codex demand that and so do we." Perhaps thinking that Mr. Fucetola’s extortionist e-mail was not sufficient, NSF has gone public with its demand.

   *DON’T BE FOOLED BY NSF’S CUTE, FUZZY WORD GAMES – THEY
   BELIEVE IN EXTORTION AND AREN’T AFRAID TO USE IT!*

In other words, NSF is saying that if they cannot benefit from the National Health Federation’s hard work in having secured */and kept/* an official seat at the Codex table, then *NSF is going to do its best to take it away from them*.

So, you be the Judge – Does NSF deserve a seat at the Codex table?  A commercial operation that from the very beginning has never gotten its Codex facts straight, shunned by every real health-freedom organization that the Federation works with, and whose idea of advancing health freedom in the World is to threaten us – a genuine health-freedom organization – with the loss of our legitimately-gained Codex seat if the Federation does not cave in to NSF’s extortionist demand, *NSF doesn’t even deserve the time of day*.

Den originale pressemeldingen

PRESS RELEASE

NATIONAL HEALTH FEDERATION EXTORTED!!!
June 30, 2009

    
Recently, the National Health Federation – the World’s oldest health-freedom organization, the only health-freedom organization accredited by Codex to attend and speak out at its meetings and which has been diligently following and attending Codex meetings since the mid-1990s – received an extortionist e-mail from one of the newest organizations to arrive on the health-freedom scene.  In it, these upstarts clumsily *demand*  that the Federation put them on the Federation’s Codex delegation or else they will try to take away our accredited status!

In their own words, here’s the extortion they have threatened us with:

   “/Dear Scott,/

   /The Natural Solutions Foundation wants to congratulate you for your appearance/ /on the Gary Null Show concerning NHF''s role at Codex.  You styled National/ /Health Federation as the "Voice of Health Freedom".  We welcome many voices/ /In  health freedom and I''ve always supported the good work of NHF, since even/ /before the 1979 "Appreciation Award" I received from NHF, which proudly remains on the wall of my office./

   /I must, however, raise a matter of concern with you regarding NHF''s role in/ /Codex.  According to the 18th Codex Procedural Manual, Rome, 2008, under the //heading "PRINCIPLES CONCERNING THE PARTICIPATION OF INTERNATIONAL NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE WORK OF THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION", p. 23, Section 1,/

   /"1. Purpose/
   /The purpose of collaboration with International Non-Governmental Organizations/ /is to secure for the Codex Alimentarius Commission, expert information, advice/ /and assistance from  International Non-Governmental Organizations and to enable organizations which represent important sections of public opinion and are/ /authorities in their fields of professional and technical competence to/ /express the views of their members and to play an appropriate role in ensuring/ /the harmonizing of intersectoral interests among the various sectoral bodies concerned in a country, regional or global setting. Arrangements made with such organizations shall be designed to advance the purposes of the Codex/ /Alimentarius Commission by securing maximum cooperation from International //Non-Governmental
   Organizations in the execution of its programme."/

   http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/procedural_manual.jsp

   /Thus, in keeping with these principles, we find it disquieting that although/ /Natural Solutions Foundation attends Codex meetings (and will be at the/ /Commission meeting in Rome next month), is clearly a source of expert/ /information, represents important sections of public option (we are the/ /largest "net roots" health freedom organization in the world by a several times) and are authorities in our fields of professional and technical/ /competence, your organization has not yet seen fit to offer us a seat at the //table, quite literally, as co-observers./

   /We note that you often do so with other organizations  representing far smaller //numbers of constituents./

   /It would appear, then, that despite a clear mandate from Codex to make sure/ /that NGOs participate in order to provide accurate representation of public/ /and professional opinion and perspective, there is a choice to ignore that //responsibility given by Codex when your Observer Status was granted./

   /As we have pointed out on numerous occasions, Scott, the other side is/ /well-armed, equipped and fully arrayed. There are too few of us and we have a/ /huge battlefront to cover.  It makes far more sense to collaborate than to/ /compete and the health freedom presence at Codex could be strengthened //enormously by such collaboration./

   /Do we have to contest NHF''s observer status through the Codex mechanism, in/ /order to have a seat at the table? I hope not; avoiding that would be to/ /everyone''s benefit. I know we can find the way to be both respectful and/ /supportive collaborators, despite personal or professional differences among //some involved./

   /Please contact me to work out the details of NSF participating in the Health/ /Freedom Seat at Codex, as was directed by Chairman Claude Moshe and as has yet //to be implemented./

   /Our millions of readers will be happy to learn that you have chosen to open //the floor to THEIR voice as well./

   /Yours in health and freedom,/
   /Ralph Fucetola, JD/
   /Counsel and Trustee
   //Natural Solutions Foundation/”

   
   *HERE’S WHY THEY ARE WRONG – _ONCE AGAIN_*



Besides having insulted us by assuming that we do not already represent their “millions” (really, /millions/?) of readers as well at Codex meetings, Mr. Fucetola reveals his complete ignorance of Codex procedure and facts. This is one of the reasons why letting NSF join the Federation at the Codex table would be one of the */worst/* things to do for health freedom.

            *1.  The Cited Paragraph Does Not Support NSF’s Demand.*

First of all, as any literate person can plainly see, the Codex text quoted by Mr. Fucetola does not require the National Health Federation – an official accredited INGO at Codex meetings – to accept NSF on its Codex delegation.  The paragraph talks about how Codex wants to benefit from the expertise of INGOs.  It says nothing that would require an already-accredited organization to accept a non-accredited organization into its ranks.  Even a 6th-grade student on drugs could see that.

And even if it did, why pick on the Federation?  Why not pick on a commercial organization that sells coffee and other products, such as NSF does, instead?  There are several commercial organizations, accredited by Codex, that share the similarity of commercialism that is the hallmark of NSF.  Has NSF contacted them to extort a seat at the Codex table?  Who knows?

*2.  There Was No Public Demand by the Codex Commission Chairman.*

Besides getting the then-Codex Chairman’s name wrong – it is Mosha not Moshe – Mr. Fucetola then trots out the old line, repeated at http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2931 that basically claims "we were denied ‘Official Observer’ status a couple years ago on the theory that the ‘Official Observer’ is obligated under the Codex rules to make a place at the table for us."

Unfortunately for NSF, the National Health Federation''s then-Vice Chairman, Paul Anthony Taylor attended the very Codex meeting in question (a meeting that Mr. Fucetola missed).  Mr. Taylor’s report on the meeting can be found at
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-geneve.html.


As can be seen, Mr. Taylor’s report makes no mention whatsoever of these events. The reason for this is very simple: the version of events described by NSF is mostly */fictitious/*.    Yes, NSF''s application for membership was considered at this meeting. However, this was only done through its momentary consideration as a very minor agenda item. Indeed, as Mr. Taylor recalled, the Chairman was about to close the day''s proceedings when he realized that he hadn''t dealt with it.

As the Committee was about to begin packing up for the day, the Chairman merely cited the relevant agenda item, referred to the Codex Executive Committee''s recommendation of a few days earlier *(to reject NSF''s application)*, and asked if there were any objections to this recommendation.  Needless to say, no objections were expressed.  As a result, the entire matter was dealt with in the virtual blink of an eyelid; and, most importantly, in the few seconds that it took of the Executive Committee''s time, Mr. Taylor does not recall the words "Natural Solutions Foundation" having been mentioned even once.  Equally importantly, the official denial of observer status to NSF had nothing at all to do with "the theory that the “Official Observer” is obligated under the Codex rules to make a place at the table for us," as has been claimed by Mr. Fucetola and NSF in its recent press release./1

            *3.  No other Codex Provision Supports NSF’s Position

   Either.*

NSF’s recent press release attacking the National Health Federation also claims that Codex somehow requires NHF to include NSF on its delegation.  Its press release then refers to yet another paragraph in the Codex Procedural Manual as “support.”    Yet, any plain reading of this paragraph in the current edition of the Procedural Manual does not support NSF’s position either./2

What NSF conveniently forgets to tell its readers is that this paragraph comes in the section on "Information Required of International Non-Governmental Organizations */Requesting/* ‘Observer Status’” (at page 35 of the PDF).  (emphasis added)    This statement (weak though it is anyway) only applies when more than one organization is applying and requesting observer status at the same time.  As such, given that the Federation already has had official Observer status for many years now, this statement is essentially irrelevant and inapplicable.

NSF has been pretending during its few years of existence that it is some sort of “powerhouse” at these Codex meetings, but the reality is that they are completely excluded from the meeting room floor (except when they sneak in), must sit in a separate section reserved for public viewers, the same as anyone off the street would occupy, and most delegates are oblivious to their ghostly presence.

   *BUT, REGARDLESS OF THE RULES, YOU MIGHT ASK, WHY NOT LET NSF
   BENEFIT FROM THE FEDERATION’S SEAT AT THE CODEX TABLE?*

You mean, even if NSF doesn’t mind using extortion to get what it wants, the Federation should still give in to the extortion????

Why not?  Because it would absolutely */destroy/* the only health-freedom seat at Codex!

How could the Federation work with NSF’s incredible incompetence and inability to tell the truth?  Here are just a few of the many reasons why we say No:

+ In March 2005, NSF announced that Codex would take vitamins and minerals off health-food store shelves in the U.S. by July 31, 2005.  When we pointed out to them */in person/* that this absolutely would not happen and they would make the health-freedom movement look bad when the  removal from store shelves did not occur, they flatly refused our request to stop making this announcement.  Of course, four years later vitamins and minerals are still freely found on health-food store shelves in the U.S.

Now, NSF is incorrectly claiming that "Codex will go into global effect on December 31, 2009."  When that date passes and NSF’s readers realize they were fooled once again, what date will NSF then select?  2011?  2012?  NSF cannot even get their subjects straight since this quoted date applies to the EU Food Supplements Directive and not to Codex. (/See/
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-beware.htm.)


Considering that it paints a picture of itself as an “authority” on Codex issues, NSF still incorrectly claims that "The CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Commission meets every two years, always offshore (Rome, Bonn, Paris, etc.) and never in Smallville, U.S.A."  In fact, the Commission meets every single year, alternating between the FAO headquarters in Rome, Italy and the WHO headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland.

In a typical exaggeration and use of tabloid tactics, NSF claimed (and still claims) that the      World Health Organization (WHO) had "severely chastized" the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) for not making a significant contribution to human health in its 42 years of existence. In fact, a simple comment was blown out of proportion and effect.  Thus, NSF''s claim that a "Miracle" occurred at the meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in Rome in July 2005 is false.  /See, e.g.,/
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-miracle.htm.

When the Central American Free Trade Agreement –CAFTA – (which requires the application of Codex standards within the United States) was hanging by a thread and was even defeated on the House floor for a short while, NSF helped divert action against the anti-health-freedom bill by announcing that CAFTA was */not/* a threat to health freedom!  NSF did this while the handful of true and sincere health-freedom groups fought feverishly against CAFTA.  The InternationalAdvocates for Health Freedom has dealt with this issue at length on its website.

NSF''s falsely claimed again that A "Stunning Victory" for health freedom had occurred at the May 2006 meeting of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling (CCFL) in Ottawa, Canada.  There was no stunning victory, at least not to anyone truly familiar with Codex.  /See, e.g.,/
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-ottawa.htm.

At the April-May 2008 meeting of the Codex Committee for Food Labelling in Ottawa, Canada, NSF was behind the ill-advised South African move to inject religion into a strongly-secular Codex at the wrong time.  The result was */major  blowback/* that resulted in the South African delegate, Mrs. Antoinette Booyzen, being called on the carpet by her own government, humiliated, and thereafter side-lined from future Codex meetings.  The NHF lost a valuable Codex ally as a result of NSF’s clumsy, behind-the-scenes manipulations.

In fact, it can be argued that the NHF had lost Mrs. Booyzen as an ally even before because once NSF started appearing at Codex meetings, Mrs. Booyzen unaccountably stopped coordinating her Codex activities with NHF and began only associating with NSF. Whether this was intentional or not on the part of NSF is irrelevant because the result was the same: Mrs. Booyzen strangely stopped working with NHF.

As a self-pronounced "source of expert information" (see                   http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2931), NSF''s  notion that "Codex Alimentarius sharply restricts or eliminates most medicinal herbs and limits the conditions that can be treated using medicinal herbs to a small number of trivial ones" is grossly inaccurate and patently   false./3 Medicinal herbals are not subject to Codex jurisdiction.

And another example of NSF’s flagrant grandstanding without substance: They boldly announced, "A major newspaper in this [African] country runs a full page story on the importance of our stand on Codex and health freedom! We will scan it and share it with you AFTER the Codex meeting. It urges the country to take care to protect its access to healthy and natural options!  In color, no less!" (/See/ http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=117)  

Of course, no scan of any such African newspaper story has ever either been published on the
NSF''s website or, that we know of, sent out to its subscribers.  What happened to it?  Did their dog eat it?  Was it confiscated by U.S. Customs upon their return home?  Was their suitcase lost in transit?/4

NSF is a large resource sinkhole, draining valuable resources away from other health-freedom organizations.  For example, to attend last year’s Codex meeting in Cape Town, South Africa, NSF was demanding donations of $33,000.  NHF sent its delegate to the exact same meeting for only $3,000!

NSF is shunned by the vast majority of health-freedom organizations, including the
American Association for Health Freedom, Alliance for Natural Health, Dr. Rath Health Foundation, International Advocates for Health Freedom, National Health Freedom Coalition, Fritt Helsevalg, MayDay, and the National Health Federation, all of whom work together amongst themselves cooperatively on a variety of different health-freedom issues, showing thereby that it’s not a “turf war” issue.  These organizations will just simply have nothing to do with NSF.

NSF preys on the unsophisticated and/or naïve health-freedom activists who are interested enough in health freedom to get taken in by NSF’s slick jargon or else ask “why can’t we all just work together,” while those who know better have carefully avoided NSF and realize that you cannot work with everyone, especially those who continuously put out false or incorrect information.

   *NSF THEN ATTACKS THE FEDERATION IN ITS MOST RECENT PRESS RELEASE*

Hiding behind the false belief that by not mentioning the Federation by name it is somehow not attacking us directly, NSF grandiosely and incorrectly states in its recent press release that: "You deserve a voice that represents you at the Codex table.  The rules and regulations of Codex demand that and so do we."  Perhaps thinking that Mr. Fucetola’s extortionist e-mail was not sufficient, NSF has gone public with its demand.

For the reasons mentioned above, NSF does not have a leg to stand on and – as usual – misstates the law and exaggerates the facts in its “fast and loose” claims.

Just as one example, NSF outright */lies/* to its readers when it claims in its press release that it “initiated the process of a meeting”:

 "In fact, shortly after the Natural Solutions Foundation was created, General Bert and I initiated the process that led to a 2005 "Summit Meeting" of the Health Freedom groups on both sides of the Atlantic in Crystal City VA. Except for meeting our third Trustee, Ralph Fucetola, his wife Kathy and Attorney Jim Turner there, the results were pure T'' N E: Turf and Ego."

The truth is that the summit in question (which was attended by Scott Tips and Paul Taylor, amongst many others) was organized by the American Association for Health Freedom and the Dr. Rath Health Foundation.  The largest single funding for the summit was provided by the Dr. Rath Health Foundation.  Aside from their persistent demands to be allowed to attend, Laibow, Stubblebine, and NSF had no role whatsoever in the organizing of it.

How can these persons be trusted?  They cannot even tell the truth about the origins of a simple meeting, but must claim credit for it.  Is it any wonder that knowledgeable health-freedom activists and organizations will have absolutely nothing to do with them?  Again, there are simply some people and organizations that just cannot be worked with.

   *DON’T BE FOOLED BY NSF’S CUTE, FUZZY WORD GAMES – THEY
   BELIEVE IN EXTORTION AND AREN’T AFRAID TO USE IT!*

In other words, NSF is saying that if they cannot benefit from the National Health Federation’s hard work in having secured */and kept/* an official seat at the Codex table, then *NSF is going to do its best to take it away from them*.  Like a spoiled five year old in pre-school bawling about not having a toy, they are meanly going to try to destroy it rather than let anyone else have use of it!!!  At the most basic gut level that tells you volumes about how much NSF really cares about health freedom.

And as for Mr. Fucetola, he is a very different person than NHF president Scott Tips first met back in 1969, or even the NHF thought it knew thirty years ago in 1979.  It’s high time that he took that “Appreciation” plaque off his wall and mailed it backto the Federation.  After receiving his clumsy extortionist threats, the Federation demands its return.  Ungrateful extortionists such as Mr. Fucetola do not deserve to display awards of “appreciation” while biting the hands of those who gave it to them.

The National Health Federation had been in existence */for 50 Years/* before the NSF suddenly materialized on the health-freedom scene as “instant experts.”  In our opinion, they are a commercial business that spouts health-freedom slogans to entice donations and sales of products.  Earlier this year someone created a parody of NSF that made the rounds and can still be viewed at http://naturallysolvent.blackapplehost.com/, which hilariously spoofs NSF’s commercial materialism.  Perhaps this parody says it best of all.

So, you be the Judge – Does NSF deserve a seat at the Codex table?  A commercial operation that from the very beginning has never gotten its Codex facts straight, shunned by every real health-freedom organization that the Federation works with, and whose idea of advancing health freedom in the World is to threaten us – a genuine health-freedom organization – with the loss of our legitimately-gained Codex seat if the Federation does not cave in to NSF’s extortionist demand, *NSF doesn’t even deserve the time of day*.

The */real/* health-freedom organizations have worked with us for years on Codex issues without any problem, and they merit your support.  If any good is to come out of this exchange between the Federation and NSF, at least it will be your realization that NSF is not among those organizations that merit support.

   ---------

  1. The relevant report of the Codex Executive Committee, cited above, can be found at http://www.codexalimentarius.net/download/report/661/al2903Ae.pdf.
The paragraph dealing with NSF''s application and the reasons for its rejection can be found on page 15 of the PDF.

  2. At page 35 of the PDF, it states "If more than one organization with similar interests is */requesting/* observer status in any field of activity, such organizations will be encouraged to form themselves into a federation or association for the purpose of participation. If the formation of such a single organization is not feasible, the application should explain why this is so." (emphasis added)

  3. In addition to the specific links mentioned above, many of the points made in this press release are dealt with in great detail in Paul Anthony Taylor’s "Instant Experts" article. /See/http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-beware.htm  /See also/ Paul Taylor’s "A Modern Major General Exposed?" article, which also contains some well-researched material and can be found at
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-moderngeneral.html.

4. Some of NSF''s claims are beyond comment and nothing but pure sensationalism. For example, NSF says that “Dr. Grossklaus, Chairman of CAC and anti-nutrition Chairman of the pivotal "Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses" (CCNFSDU), had the delegate from India bodily removed during a November 2003 CCNFSDU meeting. The delegate''s crime? Insisting on discussing the inclusion of CCNFSDU-approved material in baby formula which could kill 10% of newborns in his country. After the delegate was forcibly removed, Dr. Grossklaus nonchalantly declared the issue approved by "consensus."  (/See/
 http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/aboutcodex/indepth/wto.shtml.)  Yet, NSF did not even attend this 2003 meeting, and, in any case, did not even bother to form their organization until late 2004 or 2005.  For accurate reports on what actually happened at the meeting by those in attendance, please see Paul Taylor’s report at
 http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/bonn2003codex.html
 and Scott Tips’ at http://www.thenhf.com/codex_09.htm.