The following pages are HTML Versions
of an OCR converted PDF file
Sent by email and fax
Mr. Peter Aldis
Chair
Health Food Manufacturers Association
63 Hampton Court Way
Thames Ditton
Surrey KT7 OLT
United Kingdom
24 February 2004
Dear Mr. Aldis
ANH Response to your letter to Scott Tips, General Counsel to the National Health Federation (USA), sent 6 February 2004
I have to say that the Directors of ANH were very surprised indeed and deeply saddened by your letter dated 6th February 2003 to Scott Tips (Appendix 1) as it contains numerous factual misrepresentations and is also highly pejorative of ANH and its Directors.
But rather than respond to this at the time it was written we had originally intended to rise above it and let the matter go as our main objective at ANH is to devote all our energies and resources to resisting and defeating the very serious EU legislative challenges to natural health supplements here in the EU on behalf of our members.
Alas, this course is no longer possible.
It now transpires that your letter (and / or its contents) has been published by the likes of Ralph Pike and Ron Law on a worldwide basis together with their additional extremely pejorative and inaccurate commentary, so that we are now forced to respond publicly to set the record straight and protect the reputation of ANH and its Directors.
Introduction
By way of introduction, we find it most unprofessional that you saw fit to allow your letter to Scott Tips to be very widely disseminated around the world and yet never actually had the courtesy to send a copy to ANH.
You say in conclusion to Mr. Tips that you hope that your letter is "helpful in explaining the truth of the matter".
In fact you achieve quite the opposite effect, as your letter is replete with material inaccuracies and inconsistencies, which make the document as a whole quite misleading and which carry a number of most negative implications. I deal with these as set out below.
Indeed these are so serious that we hereby request your confirmation in writing that your letter was sent out with the full knowledge and approval of the HFMA Council and Members. Was this in fact the case?
There are numerous factual inaccuracies, inconsistencies and negative implications in your letter.