Have your say on the development of a Natural Health Products Bill

By Grant Jacobs 13/05/2010

Submissions close in just a few days, on May 17th. PDF and Word copies of the consultation paper are available on-line.

The Ministry of Health list the key elements of the consulting paper as:

  • product approval, based on notification of products on a database
  • recognition of the decisions of trusted overseas regulators, where appropriate
  • a list of prohibited ingredients
  • a list of permitted ingredients and a process for adding new ingredients
  • a list of permitted low-level natural health products claims
  • labelling requirements
  • advertising rules
  • export certification, where it would assist companies to access overseas markets
  • a tailor-made manufacturing code of practice

Instructions for submissions and related information are available on the MOH website. (You can email your submission to email to nhpproposal@moh.govt.nz, which is probably the likely approach for most of us.)

I’m a little too busy (an huge understatement) to scour the internet widely for other views on this, but as a quick starter list,

I have to admit I’m a bit frustrated that I didn’t hear of this sooner, but I hope even at this late stage some may find time to contribute.

Share your thoughts in the comments.

Other articles on Code for life:

Pharmacists to say that homeopathy does not work?

An horrific case of natural health treatment of cancer

Homeopathy check-up: Not in the health system, disclaimers on labels

Time for disclaimers on remedies?, ’alternative’ or not

Homeopathic remedies in NZ pharmacies

Medical remedies-burden of proof lies with seller

Elsewhere on sciblogs:

why ‘natural supplements’ need regulation

0 Responses to “Have your say on the development of a Natural Health Products Bill”

  • One can only hope that something half-way decent comes of this move (the gummint’s, I mean!). It’s what I was thinking of when I wrote about Medsafe’s recall of those various ‘male health’ products; should have done a bit more searching around first, eh, & then I could have referenced this as well 🙁

  • I didn’t notice it until I skimmed yesterday’s paper so don’t feel bad about it!

    Given how much I’ve written on this general topic over the past few months, I’m a little embarrassed at not seeing this until so late. Hopefully I’ll find some time in the weekend to look closer at this.

    Glancing at the labelling portion hurriedly, one thing I will almost certainly recommend is that the labelling for ingredients be in “standard” (i.e. IUPAC) units. The homeopathic “ingredient lists” for example don’t actually give amounts in the product, but the preparation, which has them listing the starting ingredients despite them not being present in the final product.

  • If anyone has individual points that they’d like aired, let me know and I’ll consider them. My own submission is likely to be very brief and only cover the one or two sections where I think I can contribute in a meaningful way. (These committees must get reams of stuff that waffles on unhelpfully… I’d rather not add to that!)

  • […] Relevant to readers here, too, he notes “Another emotive example – one that I suspect I will soon have to engage with – is that of health claims associated with alternative medicines and herbal-type products.” We cover our fair share of this on this at sciblogs and I have to admit I am left wondering precisely what he is anticipating having to deal with. Possibly this relates to the Natural Health Products Bill? […]