McCain's Freedom Destroying Bill

SoWal Insider

Mar 1, '10 · 11:35 AM3,594

:angry: Big oil wanting to drill in our waters, government trying to take away supplements for big pharma. What is this Country coming to? :bang:

"McCain?s bill is called The Dietary Supplement Safety Act (DSSA). It would repeal key sections of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA). DSHEA protects supplements if 1) they are food products that have been in the food supply and not chemically altered or 2) if they were sold as supplements prior to 1994, the year that DSHEA was passed. If a supplement fits one of these two descriptions, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cannot arbitrarily ban it or reclassify it as a drug.

McCain?s bill would wipe out even the minimal protections contained in DSHEA. It would give the FDA full discretion and power to compile a discreet list of supplements allowed to remain on the market while banning all others. Everyone knows that the FDA is friendly to drug companies (which pay its bills and provide good revolving door jobs) and hostile to supplement companies. Under this bill, this same Agency could quite arbitrarily ban any supplement it wished or turn it over to drug companies to be developed as a drug and sold for multiples of its price as a supplement.

There are a lot of vested interests which are threatened by supplements. Drug companies do not like them because they represent a low cost, safer, and often more effective alternative to drugs. The FDA does not like them because supplements do not come through the FDA approval process and therefore do not support the FDA budget.

Why not simply require that supplements be brought through the FDA?s drug approval process? Wouldn?t that create a level playing field? That is probably the argument that Senator McCain has been sold. But it is a completely false argument. The FDA drug approval process costs as much as a billion dollars. It is not economically feasible to spend such vast sums on substances that are not protected by patent, and natural substances cannot legally be patented. This is the great ?Catch 22? of American medicine. The FDA, which is supposed to guard and promote our health, is hostile to the kind of natural medicine?based on diet, supplements, and exercise?that represents the real future of healthcare. The Agency has either been captured by drug interests or is trapped in a catastrophically expensive, toxic, and ineffective patented-drug model."

FULL ARTICLE HERE
THE BILL HERE

Replies

SoWal Insider

Mar 1, '10 · 12:36 PM#2

I feel a little sorry for the folks at the FDA. On the one hand, people want their bleeding edge treatments and supplements before they are approved or without any kind of approval. On the flip side, if a few people get sick or die from the use of these drugs, the FDA is thrown upon the cross. I wouldn't want their job.

SoWal InsiderAuthor

Mar 1, '10 · 1:16 PM#3

I feel a little sorry for the folks at the FDA. On the one hand, people want their bleeding edge treatments and supplements before they are approved or without any kind of approval. On the flip side, if a few people get sick or die from the use of these drugs, the FDA is thrown upon the cross. I wouldn't want their job.

The FDA is a corrupt, dysfunctional agency.

Since the start of the new year, evidence of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) inability to fulfill its mission of protecting public health has escalated, placing pressure on the Congress and the Obama administration to take immediate steps toward substantial reform of the Agency and the appointment of new leadership.
In early January, nine scientists at the FDA wrote to then President-elect Barack Obama and his transition team making a bold appeal for immediate intervention at the Agency to correct what they alleged to be widespread managerial misconduct, intimidation and corruption.

LINK

So, is this agency you want telling you you can't take your fish oil now and need a prescription for it?

Beach Fanatic

Mar 1, '10 · 2:21 PM#4

My favorite website is Independent news on natural health, nutrition and more. Here is a link showing more articles of FDA corruption. I am not in favor of the FDA regulating my supplements!! I do my own research on what I take or don't take.

FDA corruption news and articles

SoWal Insider

Mar 1, '10 · 2:28 PM#5

The FDA is a corrupt, dysfunctional agency.

The whole federal government is a corrupt, dysfunctional system. Tell me something I don't already know.

LINK

So, is this agency you want telling you you can't take your fish oil now and need a prescription for it?

No I don't actually, I lean toward less regulation, and would expect people to do their own due diligence. But alas I think a lot of folks aren't willing to take on that kind of responsibility.

Edited Mar 1, '10 · 2:30 PM

SoWal Expert

Mar 1, '10 · 2:30 PM#6

I think the FDA should regulate supplements - especially considering the claims many make and how many people take them.

Am all for increased efficiency and competence in any organization.

SoWal Insider

Mar 1, '10 · 2:58 PM#7

My dr. and I discuss supplements in almost every physical appointment. He wants me taking a really good calcium supplement with vitamin D. That is understandable.

Other than that, I believe we should get our nutrients from our diets, which for many means making adjustments. I am not for this bill and would take it one step further to examine what if any earmarks are buried in it.

Beach Fanatic

Mar 1, '10 · 3:23 PM#8

We tried not regulating the dietary supplement industry. People died because of it. There were something like 150+ deaths reportedly linked to the dietary supplement ephedra, including pro baseball player Steve Belcher, before the FDA moved to ban the substance, and even after that, the supplement makers fought the ban every step of the way.

There have also been many issues of quality control including cross contamination of supplements (which has actually caused problems for athletes subject to drug testing) and supplements containing far more or far less of a substance than it's marked on the label.

Beach Fanatic

Mar 1, '10 · 3:40 PM#9

I'll take my chances with unregulated supplements any day compared to the risk of drugs made by big pharma and "regulated" by FDA. There have been scads of problems with regulated drugs as well, including serious disease and death, and I have little or no faith in the ability of the FDA to do what it is supposed to do. Having FDA regulate supplements will just mean there's a bunch of them we won't be able to get at all, and the rest will cost twice as much as they do now or more.

Such regulation would cause all kinds of trouble for our dear mom and pop health food stores too.

Some people cannot get all the nutrients they need from diet, even all-organic, for all kinds of reasons, and need supplements to maintain or restore balance and wellness. Sometimes for life, sometimes just during a rebalancing of some illness or imbalance.

Beach Fanatic

Mar 1, '10 · 3:55 PM#10

Yet another example of how corporations run this country, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. It's all about the money. Guess I'll be buying black market vitamins. And no, you cannot get all the vitamins and minerals you need from a "good" diet, due to poor soils and many other factors. And that's for people with no known health problems. Many health issues can be effctively mediated or even cured through proper supplementation.

Far more people die or are harmed by prescription drugs taken as intended and prescribed in this country than by supplements. If you need proof, I can find numbers online. This is not a bill to "protect" the American public; it's a bill to give even more power to the pharmaceutical companies. This is the same government that allows patenting of human body parts, stifling research by limiting it only to the company with the patent. I grow more disgusted by my government - on every level - every day.

SoWal InsiderAuthor

Mar 1, '10 · 3:57 PM#11

We tried not regulating the dietary supplement industry. People died because of it. There were something like 150+ deaths reportedly linked to the dietary supplement ephedra, including pro baseball player Steve Belcher, before the FDA moved to ban the substance, and even after that, the supplement makers fought the ban every step of the way.

There have also been many issues of quality control including cross contamination of supplements (which has actually caused problems for athletes subject to drug testing) and supplements containing far more or far less of a substance than it's marked on the label.

Supplements, just like over the counter medications can be abused just like anything and result in death.

I have no issue with monitoring the packaging of supplements to make sure they contain what they say they do, that it' not loaded with fillers and, if it's an herb, that it be monitored for cross contamination. Also, if an herbal supplement, that the extraction process be verified. Australia has an Agency called The Department of Health and Aging Therapeutic Goods Administration. They specifically monitor this. It's a separate agency from a drug monitoring Agency. Their standards are even higher than our FDA. However, they are not restricting and dictating what supplements people can freely take. There is difference.
From their web site: "The regulatory framework is based on a risk management approach designed to ensure public health and safety, while at the same time freeing industry from any unnecessary regulatory burden."

Banned

Mar 1, '10 · 3:58 PM#12

We tried not regulating the dietary supplement industry. People died because of it. There were something like 150+ deaths reportedly linked to the dietary supplement ephedra, including pro baseball player Steve Belcher, before the FDA moved to ban the substance, and even after that, the supplement makers fought the ban every step of the way.

There have also been many issues of quality control including cross contamination of supplements (which has actually caused problems for athletes subject to drug testing) and supplements containing far more or far less of a substance than it's marked on the label.

That's a good example. I remember once at the gym I got me one of those energy powder things, Agent Orange or something like that. Thought it might be nice to have a few extra carbs for an intense workout. So I take more than a couple of scoops and in a few minutes I'm feeling pretty good. A few minutes later I'm feeling kind of wound up so I read the label. Sure enough there are a few warnings on it due to the fact that it contains ephedra derived from the wonderful natural organic herbal ma huang tree. What to do except throw the stuff out and in the meantime enjoy the really nice buzz. I mentioned to the guy the next day that there ought to be more than fine print warnings on this stuff. He said oh no, they wouldn't be allowed to sell it if it wasn't safe.:roll: About a month later they stopped carrying it. A couple of years later it was banned.

SoWal Insider

Mar 1, '10 · 4:16 PM#13

Supplements, just like over the counter medications can be abused just like anything and result in death.

I have no issue with monitoring the packaging of supplements to make sure they contain what they say they do, that it' not loaded with fillers and, if it's an herb, that it be monitored for cross contamination. Also, if an herbal supplement, that the extraction process be verified. Australia has an Agency called The Department of Health and Aging Therapeutic Goods Administration. They specifically monitor this. It's a separate agency from a drug monitoring Agency. Their standards are even higher than our FDA. However, they are not restricting and dictating what supplements people can freely take. There is difference.
From their web site: "The regulatory framework is based on a risk management approach designed to ensure public health and safety, while at the same time freeing industry from any unnecessary regulatory burden."

Yes, one can OD on vitamin A. And, there are other vitamins and minerals you can ingest too much of. But, having the FDA involved? Nah.

We have too much junk on the shelves. I look at the way my family was reared and how they ate and it confirms in me that despite we live in busy cities and/or have busy lifestyles, if we made a concerted effort to adjust our diets, we would get most of the nutrients needed naturally.

SoWal Expert

Mar 1, '10 · 4:21 PM#14

I don't trust those supplements. What is so wrong with regulating them? :idontno:

Banned

Mar 1, '10 · 4:26 PM#15

The FDA is a corrupt, dysfunctional agency.

LINK

So, is this agency you want telling you you can't take your fish oil now and need a prescription for it?

It's the snake oil I'm most concerned about.

Beach Fanatic

Mar 1, '10 · 4:32 PM#16

I don't trust those supplements. What is so wrong with regulating them?

Over 38,000 hits for "FDA revolving door Big Pharma" is what's wrong. The cozy relationship between Big Pharma and the FDA is well-documented and not just by the wacko health nuts. Executives leave private companies for the FDA, make rules regarding (favoring) their former employers, then return to private sector at heftier salaries as thanks. Not a bad gig.

SoWal Expert

Mar 1, '10 · 4:41 PM#17

Well, then stop that. Don't just create a huge area of totally unregulated items that will harm people.

Banned

Mar 1, '10 · 4:44 PM#18

Well, then stop that. Don't just create a huge area of totally unregulated items that will harm people.

Or just as bad won't help them at all, create a sense of false hope, and keep them from pursuing treatments that might actually be effective.

Beach Fanatic

Mar 1, '10 · 4:53 PM#19

Or just as bad won't help them at all, create a sense of false hope, and keep them from pursuing treatments that might actually be effective.

Lots of FDA approved treatments do just that -- give false hope and keep folks from pursuing effective treatments, not to mention causing harm.

Banned

Mar 1, '10 · 5:15 PM#20

Lots of FDA approved treatments do just that -- give false hope and keep folks from pursuing effective treatments, not to mention causing harm.

Most drug ads for FDA approved drugs are quite honest about the risks. It seems like 60% of the ads are devoted to warnings. You won't see that with an enzyte commercial. I'll go with evil corporate, capitalistic science over folklore and mythology if I had to choose between two evils.

Beach Lover

Mar 1, '10 · 5:30 PM#21

Our government's number one mission is to protect the profits of big business. With all that has gone on the past few years I'd be shocked if this initiative doesn't gain instant bipartisan support.

SoWal Insider

Mar 1, '10 · 5:32 PM#22

Most drug ads for FDA approved drugs are quite honest about the risks. It seems like 60% of the ads are devoted to warnings. You won't see that with an enzyte commercial. I'll go with evil corporate, capitalistic science over folklore and mythology if I had to choose between two evils.

Enzyte! False Advertising??

Beach Fanatic

Mar 1, '10 · 5:44 PM#23

Enzyte! False Advertising??

Isn't Enzyte just a smile enhancer? Certainly seems to make everyone on the ad smile! lol

SoWal Insider

Mar 1, '10 · 5:50 PM#24

Most drug ads for FDA approved drugs are quite honest about the risks. It seems like 60% of the ads are devoted to warnings. You won't see that with an enzyte commercial. I'll go with evil corporate, capitalistic science over folklore and mythology if I had to choose between two evils.

Plus all the science taking place in our universities and the non-profits, the results of which funnel into cures and treatments drug companies produce. I definitely agree, I'll take what they prescribe over some untested supplement miracle cure I heard about on late night tv.

Banned

Mar 1, '10 · 9:04 PM#25

Plus all the science taking place in our universities and the non-profits, the results of which funnel into cures and treatments drug companies produce. I definitely agree, I'll take what they prescribe over some untested supplement miracle cure I heard about on late night tv.

There is fierce competition among the various companies, and that has to have kind of a watchdog effect on the safety of various treatments as well as an incentive to make a better drug. The penis pill is a perfect example. It's the pharmaceutical mousetrap so to speak. You can bet that right now somebody is working on making four hour erections a safe effective benefit rather than a dangerous side effect.;-)