WRITTEN QUESTION E-3077/00 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Sale over the Internet of substances for human consumption which are regarded as harmful in America.
Date: 2000-10-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United States, common commercial policy, electronic commerce, market approval, medicinal product

C 151 E/58

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.5.2001

However, the agri-environmental measures in Articles 22 to 24 of that Regulation do provide for support
to be granted to farmers who give agri-environmental commitments for at least five years concerning
methods of agricultural production which protect the environment and preserve the landscape. The aid
paid to the farmer in return for the agri-environmental service rendered is based on the income foregone
and the additional costs arising from the commitments.

Agri-environmental support is intended primarily to encourage the management of low-intensity pasture
land. To do this, some of the rural development programmes drawn up by the Member States and
approved by the Commission include agri-environmental premiums for the upkeep of alpine pasture. This
traditional method of stock breeding entails keeping the animals (cattle, sheep or horses) on mountain
pasture for a period which varies considerably (from 80 to 180 days) depending on the area where the
measure is being applied and local conditions. This highly extensive practice is considered by all concerned
as essential to maintain the environmental balance of mountain areas, which are very fragile ecosystems
from an environmental point of view. The maintenance of alpine pasture imposes additional costs on
farmers and so this technique attracts a premium, which again varies considerably depending on the area
where the measure is being applied and local conditions.

It should be noted that this support is in no way either production aid or direct aid to the beef/veal sector
such as that provided under the market organisation in question.

The Commission does not therefore consider that there is any need to amend the existing rules to take
account of the points raised in the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 151 E/071)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3077/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 October 2000)

Subject: Sale over the Internet of substances for human consumption which are regarded as harmful in

America

Is the Commission aware of a report published by Associated Press on 7 September and reproduced,

1.
inter alia, on the website (cid:145)Discovery Health: Health News(cid:146) on:

http://www.discoveryhealth.com/DH/ihtIH/EMDSC000/333/333/296934.html

under the title (cid:145)FDA Cracks Down on Laetrile Resurgence(cid:146), which refers to a product distributed in America
under the names (cid:145)Laetrile(cid:146),
(cid:145)Amygdalin(cid:146) and (cid:145)Vitamin B 17(cid:146) by organisations with such names as (cid:145)World
Without Cancer Inc.(cid:146), (cid:145)Health World International Inc.(cid:146) and (cid:145)Health Genesis Corp.(cid:146)?

Can the Commission confirm that the ingredients of Laetrile include apricot stones, which according
2.
to a long-standing popular belief can prevent cancer? Does the Commission have an opinion on the extent
to which apricot stones can prevent or cause cancer? To what extent are these characteristics of apricot
stones affected for better or for worse by other substances contained in Laetrile?

3.
Is the Commission aware of the efforts of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to
combat trade in Laetrile, on the assumption that this substance is carcinogenic and can also cause cyanide
poisoning? Does the Commission have an opinion concerning the arguments for and against this adverse
assessment and about the resultant ban on the substance(cid:146)s sale in the United States?

4.
The sale of Laetrile is now continuing over the Internet, so that it is increasingly becoming available
on the European market. Other substances for human consumption whose benefits or harmful effects have
not been ascertained are likewise being sold in this way. Does the Commission share the concern of the
FDA, and does it therefore consider such substances harmful to European consumers?

22.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 151 E/59

If the answer to Question 4 is affirmative, and bearing in mind the international nature of this
5.
problem, will the Commission promote coordinated action by the Member States and applicant countries
to inform European consumers about any adverse effects which have been shown to arise from substances
for human consumption available over the Internet?

Answer by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 2000)

The Commission is aware of the possible risk to the health of European citizens posed by the Internet sale
of medicinal products by companies established outside the Community.

For over twenty years now, products derived from laetrile have been put forward, especially in the United
States of America, as an alternative to conventional cancer treatment. The research carried out on these
products has established that laetrile has not been effective in the treatment of cancer and indeed could
prove to be toxic in some cases. Moreover, given the ineffectiveness of the claimed indications and the side
effects associated with the release of cyanide, these products are have not been authorised for marketing.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States is currently taking action to halt the
manufacture, packaging, promotion, distribution and marketing of products derived from laetrile or
apricot stones. Laetrile has been banned by the FDA and is not authorised for sale as a medicinal product
in the Community.

The authorisation, advertising and sale of pharmaceutical products within Europe is regulated by specific
Community directives which apply both to the sale of those products by electronic means and to their sale
by more conventional means. In addition, the recently adopted Directive 2000/31/EC of the Parliament
and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular
electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) (1) provides for transpar-
ency requirements, administrative cooperation among Member States and effective control in the Member
State where the on-line service is located.

Moreover, in the case of provision of pharmaceuticals by pharmacists, the latter are, of course, subject to
the rules of conduct of their own professional bodies.

However, as pointed out by the Honourable Member, the global nature of the Internet allows for the
advertising and sale of pharmaceuticals to European consumers by operators from third countries, thereby
bypassing the protection provided by Community legislation. The Commission has begun working with
the Member States to address this problem and the Commission is considering promoting the use of codes
of conduct, and possibly running consumer awareness campaigns.

(1) OJ L 178, 17.7.2000.

(2001/C 151 E/072)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3086/00

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(2 October 2000)

Subject: Article 192 of the EC Treaty

Under Article 192 of the Treaty of Maastricht, Parliament was given the right to request by an absolute
majority of its Members that the Commission (cid:145)submit any appropriate proposal on matters on which it
considers that a Community act is required for the purpose of implementing this Treaty(cid:146).

Can the Commission confirm that six such resolutions were adopted during the 1994-1999 legislative
period, namely on:

(cid:129) hotel fire safety (20 April 1994)

(cid:129) environmental damage (4 May 1994)