Bill C-420 yesterday - there is something wrong 
          with the way Health Canada manages natural health products.
          <<< Back to Bill C-420
          James Lunney - Member of Parliament
		  
Bill C-420, Natural Health Products: Debate
		  2003/20/10
		  
Mr. James Lunney: Mr. Speaker, I thank all my colleagues who spoke this
		  morning to Bill C-420, and especially for granting me the extra couple of
		  minutes.
		  
I appreciate the remarks made by the hon. member for
		  Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot, who was the first to speak from the
		  government side to the issue, and for the support from my colleagues from
		  Edmonton North and from Macleod. I know my colleague from Nanaimo-Cowichan
		  would have been happy to speak as well.
		  
Referring to my colleague's remarks about a third category between food and
		  drugs, in fact, after all the debate that went through the House in 1997 and
		  1998 with the health committee, the health committee and the transition team
		  made that recommendation. Canadians were led to believe they would be
		  getting a third category, not food, not drugs, but it would be in the
		  middle; physiologically active nutrients that have a health benefit, whether
		  it is identified by tradition, hundreds of years of use with no apparent
		  harm, whether it is identified by scientific investigation or whether it is
		  absolutely proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, as are many health products.
		  The unfortunate thing is that Health Canada reneged on the legislative
		  renewal that would have created the third category. It simply said that it
		  would have a new health products directorate. The Office of Natural Health
		  Products was set up and NHPs were placed squarely as a subclass of drugs.
		  Unfortunately, the legislative renewal that was promised to accompany the
		  regulations, which will come into effect in January 2004, has been scrubbed.
		  I see, and I believe many Canadians see, that as a betrayal of the
		  confidence and trust that Canadians put into the process. The legislative
		  renewal would have required addressing the antiquated subsections 3(1) and
		  3(2) that say one shall not label and advertise that a vitamin, mineral,
		  herbal or natural health product will influence a whole schedule of
		  diseases; schedule A that has been discussed this morning.
		  
If it were only the labelling and advertising issue, I do not think it would
		  be as serious. It is the consequence of that section that is so serious. The
		  consequence is that Health Canada says that as soon as a health claim is
		  made the product is then taken off the market unless it goes through a
		  multi-million dollar drug approval process, which simply is inappropriate
		  for a natural health product that is not patentable.
		  
The point that I have been trying to get across is that natural health
		  products are not patentable. Drug companies make huge investments into
		  products for which they hope to receive profits. The health committee is now
		  looking at this. The industry committee was looking at the patent extensions
		  of 20 years and now, with ever-greening multiple years beyond that, for
		  profits on a patented drug. However natural health products have no such
		  patents. Therefore, the pharma world is not interested, it seems, in
		  promoting that kind of research. It seems to me it is fundamentally wrong
		  for Health Canada to force a natural product through that kind of approval
		  regime.
		  
 There has been some confusion about what Bill C-420 would actually do. Bill
		  C-420 would not gut the whole Office of Natural Health Products directorate.
		  It would simply move it from under a drug style directorate to under a food
		  style directorate. We could still have the good manufacturing practices and
		  the inspections. We could still make sure that what is on the bottle is in
		  the bottle. We could still provide assurance of health claims. We could
		  review them to determine whether a health claim is traditional without
		  evidence of harm. We could provide Canadians with assurances that the health
		  claim has some scientific validity.
		  
The question of safety is not really an issue. Where there is an issue of
		  safety we would all be in agreement. Evidence should be brought forth and if
		  it were dangerous then we would address it in a public manner.
		  What is outrageous is that Health Canada would take products that might
		  improve the health of Canadians off the market. Frankly, I think Canadians
		  would find that unacceptable. A simple mineral supplement like chromium
		  picolinate is absolutely essential for blood sugar metabolism. That is true
		  for all members of the House. We cannot metabolize sugar without chromium.
		  We excrete it when we metabolize sugar. The fact that Health Canada would
		  take that most physiologically effective form off the market seems to be
		  fundamentally perverse and contrary to the public interest.
		  A mineral supplement, which was developed in Alberta, called E.M.Power+, has
		  been helping Canadians with a mental illness known as bipolar disease or
		  manic depression. There is a tremendous cost to the individuals and there is
		  a high risk of suicide.
		  
We actually have people in the House today who are here because they are
		  concerned. They are watching the debate and many are watching across the
		  country because they are concerned. They feel their lives are being
		  threatened because Health Canada is taking the products off the market
		  simply because people begin to tell others that this could help them with
		  their mental illness. There are over 3,000 Canadians receiving help from
		  this product and yet Health Canada would move to take it off the market.
		  They want to know, why would Health Canada do this when there is evidence of
		  benefit?
		  
I would like to give an example. There was a lady from Ontario who had been
		  on psychiatric drugs for 18 years. Her husband had been on suicide watch for
		  many years. She has been taking this vitamin and mineral product for about
		  two and a half years and she is off her psychiatric drugs. She is not trying
		  to kill herself or her husband any more. She is holding down a job, paying
		  taxes and she is volunteering. She wants to know, why would Health Canada
		  take this away from her? Frankly, so do I.
		  
Folic acid is well known as the best defence against heart attack and
		  stroke. Health Canada knows that and it is reported in the Canadian Journal
		  of Cardiology. If a simple vitamin, folic acid, is a better defence than
		  anything else we know of, would Canadians not want to know about it?
		  Like the statement from Shakespeare, I feel that there is something rotten
		  in the state of Denmark, with no reference to any member on the other side.
		  But there is something wrong with the way Health Canada manages natural
		  health products. The new Natural Health Products Directorate is maintaining
		  antiquated subsections 3(1) and 3(2), and will continue to take products
		  with a health claim off the market. Health Canada sent the police to raid
		  the computers of a little company in Raymond, Alberta, and has obstructed
		  delivery of the product.
		  
In times when health costs are spiralling, Canadians would expect Health
		  Canada to have an interest in a product that might lower the cost, lower the
		  morbidity of a serious disease, and improve clinical outcomes. That was the
		  approach of the Province of Alberta when it heard about the effect that
		  E.M.Power+ was having on Albertans, it asked to look into this. There are
		  huge costs associated with it. A $544,000 study was set up at the University
		  of Calgary under the leadership of Dr. Bonnie Kaplan. Canadians feel
		  betrayed and certainly the people taking the product who have their lives
		  back feel betrayed when Health Canada hears about this and moves in to shut
		  down the study.
		  
Is there no room for science to progress the treatment of disease? There in
		  an excellent article in the September issue of Saturday Night called "A
		  Prescription for Profit" which talked about the attitude of the drug
		  companies looking at sickness as a marketing opportunity.
		  Frankly, it is known that mental illness is expected to increase in Canada
		  by about 25% over the next 10 years. It seems that the drug companies are
		  positioning themselves to capture the market. Many of the drug companies
		  mistakenly take a patent on a product that is being used to treat an illness
		  and consider it a patent on the illness itself. There is something
		  fundamentally wrong with that.
		  
That is made even worse if Health Canada is complicit in maintaining that
		  which is contrary to the public interest. It seems to me that Health Canada
		  ought to be on the forefront of advancing opportunities to advance health
		  care in Canada. If a natural health product can do that, Canadians have a
		  right to know and have a right to access low risk products.
		  I encourage members to think about this issue seriously. I would be quite in
		  favour of a third category. It would mean opening the act. The reason I put
		  it as a subclass of food is because of the response of Health Canada. Under
		  the food directorate we can still have the good manufacturing practices,
		  inspections, and the safety that people require without having the
		  bureaucratic and heavy-handed response of a drug style directorate.