Custom Search

TELL SENATORS TO OPPOSE THE FOOD SAFETY ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2010 !

o;adulterating” and “misbranding.” You could have gone to jail for ten years just for citing scientific research from leading universities about your food product.

The bill has been revised. It now says you don't go to jail for up to ten years unless you “consciously or recklessly disregard a risk of death or serious bodily injury.” That’s certainly better—it would be hard for the FDA to claim you consciously or recklessly disregarded a risk of death or seriously bodily injury by citing Harvard research! This change is thanks to all the people who have taken the time to write Congress. It is a victory for the people.

Recipients

Your Senators

Contact

*Required fields

* Title:

* First Name:

* Last Name:

* Your Email:

* Address 1:

Address 2:

* City:

* State / Province:

* ZIP / Postal Code:

Phone Number:

Yes, I would like to receive periodic updates and communications from Alliance for Natural Health USA.

Remember me. What's this?

Message

* Subject:

Dear [Decision Maker],

* Please personalize your message

I was shocked to read the original language of S. 3767, the new Food Safety Accountability Act of 2010. The original bill contained draconian penalties for adulterating or misbranding food-which was completely unacceptable because of the way the FDA interprets the words adulterating or misbranding food. You could have gone to jail for ten years just for citing scientific research from leading universities about your food product! I was pleased to learn that the bill has been amended. It now says you don't go to jail for up to ten years unless you "consciously or recklessly disregard a risk of death or serious bodily injury." This is a great improvement. It would be hard for the FDA to claim you "consciously or recklessly disregarded a risk of death or serious bodily injury" by citing Harvard research! Unfortunately, the bill needs further revision. For such harsh jail terms to apply, the bill should require both Leahy's new language ("conscious or reckless disregard of a risk of death or serious bodily injury") and the actual subsequent occurrence of death or serious bodily injury. The new Leahy language is too vague to stand alone and gives too much wiggle room to the FDA, an agency notorious for stretching the law in order to threaten and intimidate. As one of your constituents, I want you to know that I take dietary supplements regularly, and value their help in keeping my family healthy. This bill, even after improvement, is still a misguided attempt to protect our food supply or ensure the safety of supplements. There is still too much risk that natural product makers will be threatened, silenced, and penalized. Please, Senator-this is still a bad bill. Unless it is further revised, I strongly urge you to fight and defeat it.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

[Your Address]

[City, State ZIP]

Oct. 4, 2010

secure3.convio.net/aahf/site/Advocacy

Four Winds 10 - News