There is a food fight taking place. One of KUDO’s local talk show hosts has devoted some time to the fight, but unfortunately is offering information from a guest who is a partisan for one side in the food fight. I want to offer my readers a somewhat broader understanding than they can get from a participant in the fight.

     At one level, the food fight is over the Codex Alimentarius Commission, which is an international body created by the United Nations. The Commission adopts international regulations governing food, vitamins and nutritional supplements. Some people are concerned that these products need to be regulated for health and safety reasons. Other people are concerned that the Commission and its regulations will make some types of vitamins and nutritional supplements difficult or impossible to obtain in the future.

     But at a deeper level, this is a fight between two sets of economic interests. Both sides are despicable, each in their own way. It is time to introduce the fighters.

     In the red corner, we have the big pharmaceutical companies that develop and market prescription drugs. These include Merck, Pfizer and their ilk. There is a lot to dislike about the red corner. They are bigger and more powerful than their opponents. They have been granted (and vigorously protect) monopoly pricing power for their products. They are also greedy bastards who have cheerfully let millions of people die of easily and cheaply cured diseases because the people cannot pay the exorbitant monopoly prices that are demanded for prescription drugs.

     In the blue corner, we have the manufacturers of various types of vitamins, nutritional supplements, herbal remedies, nostrums, pills and “natural” cures. While not as powerful as the red corner, they still wield considerable clout, and have used it to demand and get an almost completely unregulated industry. Unlike the red corner, they do not need to prove that their products are safe or effective, or even that their products actually contain the ingredients that are listed on the packages.

     If you look at the regulations of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, you will find that they consist of things like labeling standards, purity standards, and public health safety standards. Of course, because both sides in the fight are intensively lobbying the Commission for economic advantage, it is possible for the regulations to be unreasonable on one side or the other, or to not properly protect the interests of the consumer.

     It is easy to understand why the blue corner objects to these regulations. They are accustomed to being unregulated. The regulations will cut into their profit margins by making the production of their products more expensive.

     It is also easy to understand why the red corner supports these regulations. The red corner is already highly regulated, and loses some of its market to the unregulated blue corner. The red corner hopes that the regulations will drive up the cost of the products of the blue corner (or even eliminate some products entirely), so that the red corner can sell more of its products.

     This is a food fight between powerful economic interests. So what is a concerned consumer to do? Here is my prescription.

     First, we all need to learn to do a better job of distinguishing between what is industry hype and what our own interests are. Far too many people just blindly accept the claims of powerful economic interests, and never realize that their own best interests are being ignored or trashed in the public debate. We need to do a better job of standing up for ourselves.

     Second, we need to support implementation of reasonable health and safety regulations for all products that we consume, including those from the blue corner. When we buy a product, we should be able to rely on the accuracy of the information on the label, and on the safety and purity of the product inside. Claims about the benefits of the products should be supported by solid evidence. It is disgraceful that a multi-billion dollar industry presently has no obligation to meet these basic requirements.

     Third, we need to push for a complete overhaul of the monopoly patent system that generates such huge profits for the big pharmaceutical companies. There are many alternatives to patents that would cost less, and make much more sense economically. Many of the best discoveries in new drugs come from publicly funded research. Then they are turned over to private companies who make huge monopoly profits from them for years and years. If research on new drugs were driven by public health needs, instead of by greed, we could save a lot of lives and money that are currently being wasted.

     Finally, we need to greatly reduce the ability of large corporations to manipulate public opinion in favor of their economic interests. If we roll back the doctrine of corporate personhood, and require that corporations can only exist if they serve the public interest, then we can kick the fighters out of the arena, and reclaim some control over our democracy.

---