EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DEEMS TWO ANH PETITIONS ‘ADMISSiBLE’
ANH petitions questioning risk assessment methods used for food supplements and wireless technologies move forward
23rd April 2009
For immediate release
DORKING, UK. In September 2008, the Alliance for Natural Health submitted two petitions on contrasting areas of public health. One of the petitions questioned the scientific methods being used by European authorities to determine the maximum levels for vitamins and minerals that will be mandated as part of proposed EU legislation. The second petition requested a fundamental review of the additive and cumulative risks associated with wireless communications devices, including mobile and cordless phones, wireless systems and telecommunication masts.
The Chairman of the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions, Mr Marcin Libicki, has now confirmed that both petitions are admissible “in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament”. Mr Libicki has also confirmed that, in each case, the Committee has “decided to ask the European Commission to conduct a preliminary investigation of the various aspects of the problem.” He indicated that the Committee would continue its investigation of the two ANH petitions as soon as it is in receipt of further information from the Commission.
Executive and scientific director of the ANH, Robert Verkerk, said: “We welcome, on behalf of members of the public throughout Europe, the Committee’s decision to admit our petitions. As a society, European citizens are increasingly reliant on the methods used by governments to determine the safety of our food and the technologies around us. When mobile and cordless phones as well as wireless systems appear to be deemed as safe, while vitamins are regarded as if they were toxic substances, it suggests that there is no level playing field when it comes to risk assessment. The European Food Safety Authority’s continued support for genetically modified crops is another blatant example of this”.
Dr Verkerk added; “One has to ask the question as to whether the methods being used by European regulators are more about appeasing big business interests than they are about consumer protection.”