![]() |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| LOOKING INTO AND BEYOND A POISONED WORLD: Who is the FDA Protecting? Opinion by Cori Brackett A few days ago, SweetRemedy.tv linked to an article detailing the FDA seizure of $71,000.00 in supplements from FulLife Natural Options Inc.. The FDA's justification for this muscle-flexing was that, "The agency takes seriously its responsibility to protect Americans from unapproved drugs." On the very same day, another article appeared recommending that women make their own informed decisions about whether or not to have a mammography. The main reason cited for this idea was that there are many "false positives" and over-diagnoses resulting in unnecessary tests, treatments and anxiety, when mammograms, by the article's own admission, only save (for every 1000 women screened) about one life in younger women and 3 in older women. Given that the odds of benefiting from mammography are much worse than the odds for a novice gambler of winning a free hotel night in Vegas, it would seem reasonable to allow women to make informed, intelligent decisions. I applaud the authors of this recommendation for respecting the consumer enough to consider her to be capable of making decisions when given the correct information. Yet, a mammography is an FDA-approved procedure. Therefore, according to The FDA, mammographies must be safe and effective. This discriminating outcome in the approval process for drugs or medical procedures favors the pharmaceutical companies with deep pocketbooks over the much cheaper herbal or natural treatments that would successfully compete with them. It seems to me that the FDA is more interested in protecting the pharmaceutical companies and their profits than protecting Americans. Just look at the recent settlement that the court ordered Wyeth to pay because three women said that the company's hormone therapy drugs caused their breast cancers. It was ruled that Wyeth should pay $134.5 million for their responsibility. Was this an FDA approved drug? Yes. It is not apparent to me where the FDA is "protecting Americans" in this situation. According to the article, "Wyeth lawyers said that the drugs were not dangerous and were still on the market. They had been through trials on breast cancer risk, carried detailed warning labels about the risks, and had been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)." Yet, they were still found to be responsible and instructed by the jury to pay. On the cheaper side of treatment, there was also study from August of this year published in the journal, Nutrition Reviews, by researchers at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego. Cedric F. Garland, Dr.P.H and colleagues found that sunshine cuts the risk of breast cancer. In Sweet Remedy, Dr. Joseph Mercola states that some 6000 people actually die each year because of lack of sunshine. When I did a search for sunshine and breast cancer on The FDA from August, the closest I found was the Patient Information for the drug, Evista, which recommended supplementing with Calcium and Vitamin D, "if you do not get enough calcium and vitamin D in your diet." There was no other acknowledgement that I could find mentioning the positive effects of vitamin D - let alone sunshine - on breast cancer. In other words, The FDA essentially ignored the beneficial effects of sunshine (natural vitamin D) on breast cancer risk. Is that because sunshine is "an FDA unapproved drug"? Perhaps the sun should pay for some extensive tests. References: "$71,000 Worth Of Dietary Supplements Seized For Allegedly Violating New Act, Says FDA", Medical News Today, http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/85412.php, Oct. 13, 2007 "Approximately $71,000 of Dietary Supplements Seized at FDA Request", US Food and Drug Administration, www.fda.gov, October 13, 2007 "Patient Information, Evista", posted on www.fda.gov, September 10, 2007 Sweet Remedy: The World Reacts to an Adulterated Food Supply (DVD), Tucson: Sound and Fury Productions, 2006. Sweet Remedy Website, www.sweetremedy.tv "Sunshine cuts risk of breast cancer", Scotsman, http://news.scotsman.com/health.cfm?id=1224282007, August 5, 2007 "Study Shines More Light on Benefit of Vitamin D in Fighting Cancer,", Science Daily, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070821163248.htm "Women Should Make Their Own Decision About Breast Screening", MedIndia, http://www.medindia.com/news/Women-Should-Make-Their-Own-Decision-About-Breast-Screening-27834-1.htm, |
||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||