|
Archives | (June 2003)
Printer Friendly
A Different Kind Of Threat From Abroad (cont.)
------------------------------------------------------------------ Page 5 of 5 And who are the “little guys?” According to a survey by the Dietary Supplement Education Alliance, the supplement industry’s trade organization, the overwhelming majority of supplement sales – over 60 % – are made through small and medium-sized businesses. Roughly a third of sales are through independent natural health food stores, and another fifth through multi-level marketing. Only about a third of sales are accounted for by mass merchandise retailers. Moreover, some 68% of supplement sales are comprised of vitamins, minerals and herbal products – exactly the items the new rules would affect. The roughly $11.4 billion in annual sales these items represented in the U.S. in 2000 is a pittance compared to the $100 plus billion in annual sales of the pharmaceutical industry. For small businesses to medium-sized businesses, though, they are critical. Sales of vitamins, minerals and other supplements account for up to 80% of the sales for health food stores and anywhere from 40% to 60% of sales for network marketers. Further, for many of these retailers, the sales of dietary supplements represent the bulk of the repeat trade that allows them to keep their doors open! Of course, the supporters of the EU and WTO claim there is nothing to worry about. They point to the fact that the EU directive calls the new rules “guidelines” rather than “standards.” This distinction, they say means that there is no basis for a WTO Dispute Resolution Panel to extend them to the United States. Their claim, however, is patently false. The WTO does not distinguish between different terms in its decision making process. It doesn’t matter whether the EU calls its new rules “standards” or “guidelines.” If the rules are enforced, in one country, then as far as the WTO is concerned, they are enforceable in all member countries. The advocates also note that there is an exemption under the treaty that covers foodstuffs, the so-called WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures or SPS for short, that allows nations to go by their own domestic rules in regulating foodstuffs. What they do not say, however, is that the exemption only applies if the rules are STRICTER than those contained in the international agreement. So the exemption would not apply in this case. Of course, both of these arguments are just smokescreens to keep supplement advocates from attempting to block the move. Fortunately the word is beginning to get out. But the danger has not passed. In 1997 the move to ban dietary supplements was blocked, but not without quick action by average citizens who didn’t want to give up their right to use safe, natural products. The same sort of action is needed today. If the millions of Americans who use vitamins, minerals and herbs do not speak out, the faceless bureaucrats of the WTO may yet succeed. |
|
