[metaw3]

It's not bill C-51 nor C-6. It's a bill from 2004 saying all NHPs must be licensed to be sold in pharmacies. I think it's the pharmaceutical lobbyists who are pushing this just to spite because all their work on bill C-6 is lost due to the prorogation.



http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2535804

The controversy revolves around Health Canada's natural-health products regime, launched in 2004 to vet treatments that had been virtually unregulated before, in a new system some critics said was still too lax.
As it ploughed through tens of thousands of applications for licences, the department said manufacturers could continue selling their products, so long as they had at least applied for approval.


The department has issued about 18,000 natural-health licences, while
at least 10,000 products are still waiting for certification, industry representatives said. The whole process was supposed to be done by this January.


The natural-food association argues that it makes no sense for the pharmacy regulators to try to block sales of products awaiting licences, when Health Canada itself has said they can be sold pending an approval decision.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodn...p-avis-eng.php

Some products which had been labelled with Drug Identification Numbers (DINs) will now require Natural Health Product Numbers (NPN #) as of January 1, 2010. In most circumstances, manufacturers will still be able to sell NHPs with non-compliant labelling (still bearing the "DIN") for a period of 6 to 12 months. Provided that no significant risks have been identified, enforcement discretion will be applied so as not to cause a disruption to the market by allowing depletion of product still bearing a DIN.


For the most up to date information on authorized NHPs, Health Canada maintains a publicly-accessible database of all licensed NHPs which is updated daily on its website at : www.healthcanada.gc.ca/lnhpd.