Codex
CODEX
Codex, formally referred to as Codex Alimentarius, is a rapidly moving legal and political movement that consists of a collection of international food standards, food practices, food guidelines and other food recommendations. The Codex Commission was formally established in 1963, and began years of ‘informal’ research. Although the ‘modern’ roots of Codex go back to the Food Agriculture Organization (FAO) formed in 1945 through the United Nations and its FAO committee. Few people are aware of Codex and it impact, as it has been a stealth-like and low-key campaign since it was created.
The Goal of CODEX
The overall goal of Codex is to develop a comprehensive policy that controls all food so that trade associations, governments, and companies can harmonize their various food standards to facilitate food safety and conformity. Supporters want Codex to work just like a universal norm of laws. The code is supposed to protect the health of consumers and make free trade practices easier and markets fairer because everyone will be on the same page.
Is it Law?
No. However, this does not keep it from getting implemented. On a basic level it is just a code of international regulations and guidelines. However, it gets teeth because the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted it as an official global standard – a big thing. The 182 country members of these organizations join because of the availability of international markets and the trade advantages provided by the WTO and the WHO. Once in these clubs, these members are expected to contribute and to support the international standards or else they will loose their privileges.
Problems of “One Size Fits All”
The creation of a global standard means that only the largest and loudest voices are heard. When Codex was created, the largest and loudest were not organic proponents or the organic farmers. This means that now the overarching rules of Codex tend to favor larger un-organic companies. The goal of this “one-size-fits-all” policy is to sell more products in order to make more money. This makes sense for big profits and a profit-driven company, because the market can get streamlined and everyone is on the same page. However, this eliminates the little guy – and makes it difficult for start-up small companies. It especially makes it difficult for value-driven companies—those interested in responsibility and the values of the consumer—because of the differences in company goals.
This “one-size-fits-all” does not make sense regarding organics. For example, the only California Almonds you can buy in commercial stores are pasteurized. Organic, raw almonds do not exist. This is due to overarching Codex rules that state pasteurization is good in EVERY CASE. There is a way that small farmers can get around this rule: they can go directly to the farmers market and sell direct because a grower is allowed 100 pounds of un-pasteurized almonds per day to sell to consumers. However, 100 pounds sold locally are not very many almonds. You can see how this example of Codex regulation limits the growth and competition of the market by preventing small, value-based, organic companies to compete on a large scale. We want to avoid this in other areas!
Control
We believe that those who control our food, control us. This may be obvious to some, but what we put into our mouths affects our health, our addictions, and what diseases we catch. Those large companies who provide food know the truth of how food with chemicals, irradiation, and pasteurization is ‘watered down’ in its potency and they know how this lesser-food affects human bodies. Perhaps now you’re wondering why companies do this, or if they even do it at all! The easiest examples of companies that act this way are the cigarette companies. They know that cigarettes are bad for your health but they continue to sell them for money. This is the goal and actions of a profit-driven company. When this attitude is dominant in policymaking – guess what – the slant is towards big interests and big profits. The code clearly has developed the food monopoly game-board with over 4,000 committees and 182 countries on the side of “one-size-fits-all” profits.
Balance
We have to make sure to find a middle ground. There is a common sense balance between freedom and control. We are not supporting the side of “No Regulation”, nor are we supporting the side of “One-Size-Fits-All Regulation”. In the areas of food safety, for example, too much freedom allows a farmer in a less developed rural area to use seriously contaminated water on crops, to mix too much manure in the soil, or to have workers at a production facility that do not wash their hands when handling fresh produce.
However, on the other side of the spectrum, one size does not fit all. We are obviously very advanced with technology, and we have the capacity to “tailor” policy to consider organics and the “little guy” farmers. We also have to ability to train and educate the entire “farm-to-fork” process. We have the capacity to not favor saving a buck for a corporation or large farm at the expense of our health and choice to eat organic.
European CODEX
Europe is much more invested in Codex regulations than the United States. The code was actually formed through the United Nations and its FAO, which means that Europe has had the code in place for much longer than the U.S. This is very good for Americans because we can keep an eye on the situation over the ocean to find out the future of Codex and where the regulations will take our markets. For example, you cannot ship vitamins—such as zinc—to France without them being confiscated by authorities. Penalties are not as strong as being caught with cocaine or recreational drugs, but the stage is set for fines and regulations. Also, a doctor’s prescription is currently needed for certain high dosages of vitamins so as to “prevent toxicity”. The POP Campaign wants to prevent these types of unnecessary regulations. We can use Europe’s relationship with Codex as a preventative map to where the U.S. is headed if we fail to take action.
Strange Connections
There is very interesting wording within CODEX policies that “strongly suggest” that a country member cannot allow national markets to place an unfair advantage on imports from member countries. This implies that, for example, almonds provided for us internally must be irradiated to level the playing field of consumer market preferences so that irradiated imported almonds from another country can have an equal opportunity. This is really tricky as it implies that the quality of organics within the US may need to be compromised so that imported organics have an equal market share. Bizarre – but the stage is set.
For more information:
Visit the Codex Alimentarius Wikipedia webpage Here
Or
Click Here for a link to the Codex website
