Why Codex Should Matter to You
<<< Back to Codex
<<< Back to main page
by John Hathcock, Ph.D.
If you've been standing on the sidelines, the Codex Alimentarius may seem
to be nothing more than a group of food regulators slowly chewing on
regulations a few times a year in exotic locations. But those of us who
have been in the ballgame for a long time are well aware of the
far-reaching influence that Codex Alimentarius and its decision-making
body, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, have on our industry.
Literally translated as "food code" in English, the Codex Alimentarius is
the most authoritative international set of food standards. Set up as a
joint program of the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1960, Codex may move
slowly, but make no mistake-it eventually has a huge impact on the issues
it addresses. And those issues can have a huge impact on a company's
business.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) recognizes Codex as one of three
international standard-setting bodies for food safety, thereby providing
Codex documents the presumption of being the controlling standard in trade
disputes, imposing obligations on importing and exporting countries.
At the end of June, the Commission met in Rome, and several U.S. interests
fared poorly. Specifically, a European was elected as the next chairman of
the Commission, while the United States had supported a candidate from
Chile. The American candidate running for one of three new vice chairman
positions was defeated, losing out to candidates from Canada, Japan and
Tanzania.
There was also a failure to require greater clarity about the membership
and participation of "regional economic integration organizations" in
Codex. As written, this change to the Procedural Manual would permit a
collective vote by the European Union but would virtually preclude similar
participation by any other organization that might be created.
Industry claimed a small victory by getting the health claims document
pushed a couple of steps back in the approval process. This will require
further discussion of the document, which CRN basically supports except
for its recently expanded scope that includes advertising.
Codex standards and guidelines are adopted by a tedious eight-step
consensus procedure that often takes many years. Consequently, there is
ongoing opportunity to affect the process, if one is familiar with it and
stays in tune along the way. CRN maintains the importance of industry
participation and a vigilant involvement in the process.
How Codex Works
The Codex Alimentarius Commission's handbook explicitly states that Codex
standards and guidelines have two "aims": protecting consumer health
(through a better supply of safer and more nutritious food) and ensuring
fair practices in food trade. Participation in Codex meetings is limited
to the delegations of member nations, recognized intergovernmental
organizations (IGOs) and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Only
national delegations may vote. CRN and the International Alliance of
Dietary/Food Supplement Associations (IADSA) are the only supplement
organizations that have gained official NGO status at Codex.
The Commission has set up a large number of committees to do the basic
work, but no committee documents or recommendations have any official
status until the Commission adopts them. In the four decades since the
inception of Codex, the Commission has adopted a large number of
"standards" (numerical values for some aspect of specific foods relating
to safety and nutritional values) and "guidelines" for procedures and
methods.
Each Codex committee is hosted by a specific country, which provides a
secretariat and chairman for that committee. Over a series of meetings,
these roles often allow that country to have major impacts on the
committees' decisions, but the Commission has sometimes reversed those
decisions. Codex prefers to work through consensus, but a member country
can call for a vote on specific issues.
Impact on the Dietary Supplement Industry
For the supplement industry, three Codex committees are critically
important:
- The Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses
has been working for many years on proposed draft guidelines for vitamin
and mineral supplements. The large stumbling block in the way of consensus
is the choice of whether upper limits should be RDA-based or based on
safety as evaluated by risk assessment.
- The Codex Committee on Food Labeling has made much progress on a
proposal for health claims on the labeling of any foods, including dietary
supplements.
- The Codex Committee on General Principles considers a wide range of
structural and procedural issues, the most important for the supplement
industry being the "proposed draft guidelines on risk analysis." European
countries, individually and collectively through the European Commission's
(EC) role as an IGO, have made a sustained effort to gain recognition of
their "precautionary principle," which would diminish the role of science
and increase the political impact on food safety decisions.
The precautionary principle is just one example of how industry can make
an impact on Codex issues. With industry NGOs, including CRN and IADSA,
urging cooperative national delegations, the General Principles committee
again refused to incorporate the precautionary principle in its risk
analysis draft document during its April 2003 meeting. When the nutrition
and foods committee meets in November to again consider its proposed draft
guidelines on vitamin and mineral supplements, industry NGOs will be there
to urge the national delegations to carry forward our viewpoints. CRN will
continue to promote the adoption of maximums based on genuine safety
considerations identified by nutrient-appropriate risk assessment.
The recognition by WTO guarantees the importance of Codex standards and
guidelines. This recognition and worldwide scope of application trumps
regional authorities, such as the EC, and would serve as the arbitrating
standard in bilateral trade disputes. Codex is simply too large and
powerful to be ignored. There is no doubt that the outcomes are more
likely to be acceptable if our industry stays involved.
John Hathcock, Ph.D., is vice president of scientific and international
affairs for the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) in Washington,
D.C. He analyzes and develops CRN policy positions and makes presentations
on international regulations and issues, including those on Codex
Alimentarius and the European Commission.
Back to top of Document
