Press Releases
15.12.2009
HEALTH STORES DISMAYED AT NUMBER 10’S RECYCLED E-PETITION RESPONSE
The lead organization for Britain’s health store retailers says it is dismayed by the recycled reply it has received in response to its Number 10 e-petition.
Earlier this year the National Association of Health Stores (NAHS) created an online petition on 10 Downing Street’s website, joining hundreds of other organisations and citizens campaigning on issues ranging from transport to saving the British pub.
The NAHS petition called on the Prime Minister to intervene personally to ensure consumers in Britain continue to have access to safe, higher potency vitamin and mineral supplements. Thousands of these products could be forced off shelves over the next few years as a result of restrictive and scientifically arbitrary EU legislation.
But instead of receiving a reply to its own petition from the Government, the NAHS received a word-for-word copy of a reply to a completely separate petition on Codex Alimentarius, the global foods standards body.
The NAHS’s administration manager, Avril McCracken, comments: “We were completely dumbfounded that the Government had apparently recycled a reply to an unrelated petition and thought it would do as a formal response to our petition — which has been signed by over 1300 people. Number 10 has since said that the recycled reply was caused by an “administrative error” but our members have been left with the strong suspicion that they are being fobbed off with a one-reply-fits-all response.”
NAHS chair, Wendy Atkinson, added: “Are the Number 10 e-petitions just there to make people feel better and think they are being listened too? Our experience is that nobody is listening at all, and that’s incredibly disappointing at such a crucial time for our members’ businesses.
“The harsh reality is that many health stores up and down Britain could face closure if they lose their bread and butter products. Ministers have frequently promised that they will fight our corner in Europe, but what we now need is decisive action and not just warm words. The health food trade has repeatedly warned the Government of the growing anger in Britain — from both consumers and industry — about this damaging legislation from Brussels. The Conservative Party has said it will ensure health choice is an election issue next year, and so we hope the Prime Minister will take serious notice of our concerns and consider that our petition is worthy of a proper reply.”
For more information and high resolution images please call:
Avril McCracken on 01875-341 408 or
Wendy Atkinson on 01274 889047
Notes for editors:
 |
The National Association of Health Stores was started in 1931 to represent the growing number of independent health food stores in the UK. It is the only organisation in the UK which can claim to speak for such businesses and is run entirely by independent retailers.
The NAHS seeks to promote to the public the benefits of shopping in locally owned, independent health food stores and to ensure that there is a good standard of customer advice available in all its member stores.
The NAHS also works with other organisation like Consumers for Health Choice (CHC) and the Health Food Manufacturers Association (HFMA) to ensure the maximum possible availability of health food and nutritional products. To this end in recent years the NAHS started two Judicial Reviews against the government. One on its ban of the popular and safe herbal remedy, Kava Kava, and the second against the European Food Supplements Directive. |
The NAHS is completely committed to driving forward the UK health food trade in spite of increasing competition from supermarkets and the internet. We firmly believe that the best place to buy health foods is from your local health food store, from people who live and breathe health foods, and are well trained. It is to this end that NAHS has recently teamed up with the Health Food Institute to implement free diploma training for all member staff.
• For more information on the NAHS and to find your local health store please visit www.nahs.co.uk
ENDS
Folic Acid Fortification: New Threat To Health Stores and Consumers
The recent decision by the Board of the Food Standards Agency (FSA) to push ahead with compulsory fortification with folic acid of white and brown bread flour could have major implications for the independent health trade with levels of the supplement being halved. It is estimated by the National Association of Health Stores (NAHS) that the average health store carries around 30-50 product lines which would be affected, including virtually all multivitamins, B complexes, and meal replacement products.
The decision was taken to reduce the number of neural tube defects (NTDs) which cause Spina Bifida births as well as a considerable number of terminated pregnancies. Folic acid deficiency has been long accepted as the reason. NAHS and Consumers for Health Choice (CHC) both opposed the concept of fortification in this manner. If these women, mainly in low socio-economic groups are not consuming adequate folic acid then it is likely they are not consuming adequate levels of a host of other beneficial nutrients. The use of fortification is a sticking plaster for the abject failure of the FSA’s own ‘Five A Day’ message to reach these women. Unfortunately the FSA Board decided that their decision to fortify should not be revisited for at least five years.
The FSA are aware that recent research appears to link increased colorectal cancer risk with high folic acid consumption may complicate their decision to introduce large amounts of folic acid into some people's diets via fortification.
As a result the FSA has insisted that no one person should consume folic acid above the Upper Level (UL) of 1000mcg from all sources. However, the modeling exercise carried out by the FSA appears to show that 130,000 people in the UK could be at risk of consuming above the UL. The FSA are seeking to bring this number down to zero and are proposing a cap on folic acid supplements at 200mcg for all supplements, except those aimed at women aged between 14 and 49 who will be allowed to purchase up to 400mcg.
An NAHS Director, was present at a recent stakeholder meeting with the FSA to discuss the fallout of the fortification decision. 'The trade meeting at the FSA had been preceded by a meeting with the food fortifiers such as Kellogg's and Unilever. At that meeting they voluntarily agreed to reduce the amount of folic acid per serving from 50mcg to 30mcg. The FSA clearly expected the health food trade to be similarly flexible.
'The modeling system is absurdly simplistic. The FSA have decided that there is a group of people which they call ’healthseekers’. They believe that this group both consume supplements and go out of their way to purchase fortified foods in equal measure and are, therefore, at particular risk of exceeding the UL. This does not match the profile of the average health store customer who, although they may be taking a supplement containing 400mcg of folic acid will generally only get extra folic acid from dietary folate in leafy greens and pulses.
'Another way of looking at this argument is just because everyone else in your street gets oodles of folic acid from eating Kellogg's Cornflakes and spreading folic acid-containing Flora on their fortified white bread toast, you will be told that you can't take the same strength of food supplements you have been taking safely for years, along with your natural diet. ‘The FSA need to understand that not all ‘healthseekers’ are the same. Our brand of ‘healthseeker’ eats a broad, healthy diet, takes supplements, and goes out of their way to avoid the types of processed food which are currently fortified. Not many health store customers will be consuming large amounts of white and brown bread flour products, either now or in the future. ‘The current model does not reflect this and we are in real danger of being forced to cut back the amount of folic acid in multivitamins which are being perfectly safely consumed at the moment.
The most recently published study of folic acid consumption and bowel disease shows that, once again, it is single supplements that could be at fault, not the synergistic complexes which the majority of health stores customers buy them in. ‘The FSA are also potentially making their own negotiations on Maximum Permitted Levels with the EU more difficult by this decision. This will the biggest exercise in modeling nutrient consumption from all sources prior to the EU establishing its own models. It is not unreasonable to worry that the overburdened European Food Safety Authority, will draw heavily on this most recent model.
But this particular example totally eliminates freedom of choice and does not allow for those people, our customers, who do not conform to population norms. In December both the Health Food Manufacturers Association (HFMA) and the NAHS sent surveys to their members to calculate more accurately how many products could be affected. This was done at the request of the FSA. Early responses received by the NAHS show that a significant number of key lines in all health stores, such as multivitamins and B complexes will be hit. The full results will be sent to the FSA by the end of the December 2007.
It is expected that a follow up meeting will be held with the FSA early in the New Year ‘The problems associated with this model are quite simple. This is a flagrant and undemocratic misuse of the science of statistics. I urge that retailers, manufacturers, and consumers each contact their local MPs to make them aware of the issue and to ask them to write to Deidre Hutton, the Chair of the FSA to urge a flexible approach. Quite simply, we need to ensure that the implementation of the decision to fortify does not adversely affect those people who are not average!’
ENDS
Half of British Health Food Stores To Face Closure:
Half of British Health Food Stores To Face Closure:
Half of British Health Food Stores To Face Closure:
Half of British Health Food Stores To Face Closure:
The humble vitamin pill takes centre stage again as a new survey conducted by the National Association of Health Stores (NAHS) predicts the industry has reached extermination level with around 2,000 job losses and 700 shops set to close. European legislation in the form of the Food Supplements Directive (FSD) is the primary malefactor on this occasion as EU regulators start to set maximum dose levels for vitamins and minerals across Europe.
The Commission has the powers under the provisions of Article 5 of the Food Supplements Directive, 2002/46/EC to dictate what doses of vitamins and minerals consumers will be allowed to take. A major problem however, is that key groups and industry across the Union are divided on the issue. In Britain the new survey confirms that the UK market would be decimated, millions of consumers would be denied products of their choice and the health of many put at risk as many higher dose specialist supplements are removed from sale.
On the other hand, many bureaucrats believe this would be a price worth paying for removing barriers to trade in lower dose potencies across Europe – and a liberalisation of the market in some countries that have restrictive regimes. The Chairman of NAHS said: “The British negotiating team, led by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) have done their best to secure an outcome that allows maximum consumer choice by lobbying for a two tier system which has been questioned by the European Commission, so it is hardly surprising that they have failed to make progress. The main problem is that most other Member States seem quite happy to accept the ‘one-size fits all’ approach of very low dose levels being proposed.
The Chair continued; “Our survey was conducted in direct response to the FSA Regulatory Impact Assessment on the setting daily dose levels of vitamins and minerals in food supplements, and we found the results quite shocking. It is clear that half of all independent health food shops face extinction by 2009 and it is quite likely that the bigger chains could reduce their numbers. It would be impossible for many to stay in business as consumers switch their allegiance to unregulated overseas Internet sources to obtain the supplements they need. It must also be remembered that this is just one part of one piece of legislation – there are rafts of equally damaging proposals in the pipeline, each one with the potential to severely restrict consumer choice and bring the industry to its knees.”
The NAHS has organised a petition that is available in independent health food shops, and also an on-line petition directed at the Commissioner, Markos Kyprianou. This can be found at http://www.consumersforhealthchoice.com/phpPETITION/
The message is clear – consumers want to keep their higher dose safe, specialist nutrients and retailers need to sell them to stay in business. The message to Europe is that Maximum Levels should be set on the basis of sound science only and not restricted to the low levels favoured by France and Germany to protect their own existing markets; if a product is safe, properly manufactured and legally labelled – everyone should be allowed to use it.
Full Responses Are Available By Clicking On Links Below:
NAHS Response To UK FSA on Upper Levels
NAHS Response to FSA North Ireland on Upper Levels
NAHS Response to FSA Wales on Upper Levels
SHFRA Response to FSA Scotland on Upper Levels
National Association of Health Stores www.healthstores.org.uk
ENDS
29th MAY 2007
Notes for Editors:
The National Association of Health Stores (NAHS) is the national body representing the interests of 1200 independent health stores in the UK. It has long had concerns about the Food Supplements Directive (FSD) which it believes could have major impact on the businesses of our members. The NAHS believes that the FSD should take account of principles of proportionality, subsidiarity, and respect for consumer choice in order to square the circle to meet the need of maintaining high levels of consumer safety and allowing for a single market, whilst not disproportionately affecting the businesses of our members.
The Food Supplements Directive 2002/46/EC was finalised and Published in the Official Journal in May 2002. At present it deals with vitamin and mineral supplements (with provision for extension to other categories in the future).
The two key areas are:
a. It establishes lists of permitted nutrients and nutrient sources.
b. It provides for the setting of maximum permitted levels at which such nutrients may be present.
Despite welcome interventions by Ministers, the outcome will be the removal from the UK market of thousands of safe and popular products and the likely ruination of the health food industry unless there are further substantial positive developments. Article 5 of the Directive provides that maximum permitted levels (MPLs) for nutrients will be set taking into account several factors. That process first required EFSA (The European Food Safety Authority) to produce a report on the maximum safe level of intake for each nutrient. EFSA’s work is now complete. The EFSA figures have been passed to the Commission, and they are currently using them as the starting point for producing a list of figures for consideration by Standing Committee as the proposed maximum permitted levels for nutrients in supplements. These figures are expected later in 2007.
The Commission will start with the Upper Safe Level and “risk manage” that figure downwards to take into account nutrients present in other food sources, including fortified food. It will also “take into account” the “population reference intake” (the daily amount necessary for avoiding disease of nutritional deficiency, nothing to do with safety or optimum nutrition).
The Directive does not define what “take into account” actually means, giving the Commission considerable flexibility. It could propose figures at or close to the UK level. Equally, it could take the view that as France, Germany and most other Member States want lower levels to be set, it will propose more restrictive figures accordingly. The job of the Commission is to get the legislation passed, not to take on France and Germany on this issue. The process is already well underway and needs to be influenced now.
The Commission is expected to produce another ‘orientation paper’ just prior to the summer break and that paper will set out the parameters governing the process through which it will propose actual figures for limits. Copies of the NAHS survey and their response to the FSA consultation are available on request. "
ENDS
