Bill 420 Lives
CategoriesBill C-420 is to prevent
Use (Abuse) of Regulations to Protect Pharma Monopoly
For previous history see:
Bill C-420 Must Be Passed As Written - Join FOF
Why Bill C-420 Saves Our Supplements & More!
Bill C-420 - 2nd Vote a Success
Health Freedom Bill C-420 Is Back In The Canadian Parliament
First Crack In Big Pharma's Wall (Bill 420)
Chris Gupta
-----------------------------By Peter Helgason
VP Regulatory Affairs
Alliance of Natural Health Suppliers
Thursday October 20 2005
Breaking News Breaking News
Facing extinction in Health Committee in Ottawa today Private members Bill C-420 survived a Liberal motion to quash by Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health Robert Thibault.
In a surprise development the Bill was supported by Liberal Health Committee members Brenda Chamberlain and Dr. Ruby Dallah and tabled until Health Canada releases its long promised Legislative Renewal recommendations in November. Conservatives Stephen Fletcher (Health critic), Rob Merrifield, Dr.James Lunney and the Bill's sponsor, Dr.Colin Carrie all voted to save the Bill. Voting against the widely supported private members bill were Liberals Thibault and Michael Savage, as well as Bloc Quebecois Members Real Menard and Bernard Bigras."This will really keep both Health Canada's and the Liberal minority government's feet to fire on the long promised removal of Schedule A and Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of the Food and Drug Act," a Health Committee source said in a telephone interview shortly after the historic vote.
Bill C-420 has a very interesting history. Originally introduced in the 37th Parliament by Dr. James Lunney (CPC Nanaimo/Alberni) the Bill passed second reading 124-85, with all-party support in the Chretien government. It died in Committee with the June 2004 general election. The Bill was re-introduced in the 38th parliament by Dr. Colin Carrie (CPC Oshawa) and went back to Health Committee by unanimous consent of the House at second reading.
The Health Committee heard nearly a hundred witnesses speak to the Bill in May before the summer recess, with near unanimous agreement from industry, practitioners, experts and academics that Schedule A (a list of 40 some diseases) and two clauses of the Food and Drug Act (Sec 3.1 and 3.2) which make it a crime to either advertise, or to sell to the general public any substance used to treat prevent or mitigate any of the diseases listed in Schedule A. Six years ago Health Canada's own hand picked expert advisory committee (known as the Transition Team) made the same recommendations saying Scedule and secs. 3.1 and 3.2 did not reflect modern science or thought and that there were many safe and effective non-drug treatments for many of the diseases on Schedule A.
posted by Chris Gupta on Monday October 24 2005
updated on Friday November 25 2005URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2005/10/24/bill_420_lives.htm
Related ArticlesLiver Cleanse And Gallstone Removal
Updated repost. CG Hi Theresa, Here it is (the original email). You have to do it several times to completely remove the stones. Just be warned that removing your gallbladder will leave you susceptible to Diabetes, Heart diseases etc. My motto don't do anything that you can't reverse! See also: What conventional medicine won't dare tell you about gall bladder removal surgery Please let me know your experience if do... [read more]
June 03, 2005 - Chris GuptaMelanoma Melodrama
I wrote about the "sunlight scare" in the last Daily Dose (7/8/3). But there's a lot more you need to know. Every summer, the news media performs the annual rite of the Aztec Chicken Littles: The sky isn't falling, but the sun is - right on your cancer-prone skin. The headline on healthday.com: More than One Million New Cases in U.S. This Year. OooohWEE! If that's true, people must be... [read more]
July 13, 2003 - Chris GuptaHealth warning: screening can seriously damage patients
See my earlier article The Depths of Deceit Mammography for some salient background. Particularly the effects of X-Rays Chris Gupta A story about cancer screening - they seem to finally recognize that something's not right about their approach. The numbers tell. Josef Health warning: screening can seriously damage patients Breast cancer checks at centre of fresh controversy as concerns grow that hi-tech clinics may harm those seeking to pre-empt illness... [read more]
July 12, 2003 - Chris Gupta
