Do you trust the FDA?
From the article: "Perhaps no single statement about the Food and Drug Administration is more revealing than the eye opening one attributed to former FDA Commissioner Dr Herbert Ley: "The thing that bugs me is that people think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the FDA is doing and what the public thinks it's doing are as different as night and day." Dr. Ley has been noted as the last FDA Commissioner who made an attempt to stand up to the pressure and influence of the big drug companies.
Most people labor under the misconception that the sole purpose of the FDA is to serve as a watchdog for the public and protect them against bad drugs. Two recent polls indicated that while 82% of the public surveyed said that they trust the FDA to keep our drugs safe, 2/3 of the FDA's own scientists said that they didn't."
Great video about how the FDA has failed us, the consumer.
I would also like to add another question. With the ongoing pressures and the constant failing of the Western medical system, do you trust your physician to heal?
Please answer that question after you read the entire article I have linked above. The video is for your viewing pleasure. Also, feel free to pose your own lines of questions for debate.
As a side note, I would love to hear reactions before and after watching it but feel free to express yourself to the fullest. Here are some sample questions: Do you think it's legit? Does it concern you? Will you remain "business as usual" or make a change in your life? What alternative do we have? What regulations could be put into place that get rid of the pressure on FDA scientists? etc. etc.
|
After I saw that video a couple days ago I agree with you. I do not trust the FDA at all. I would not be 100% trustworthy of them 4 months ago as well. The FDA is need of some new and improved drug that will turn them around as a company. The FDA sent a report to cogress and the president boasting drug-approval time has been cut almost in half since the advent of PDUFA.All of which would be fine if it meant that the drug testing did not suffer as well. 10 million people took Vioxx, Vioxx was definately not tested enough the company Elucida Research said that the FDA took all of the normal precautions but how could they say that when Vioxx caused more than 27,000 people to experiance heart attack or death? Even more had strokes! There are also many other drugs that the FDA has F'ed up on I chose Vioxx to break them down. I do not trust the FDA as far as I can throw them and that is nowhere. Side: No
2
points
check this out: "Chrysalis Nutritionist Stephen Heuer Arrested by Federal Marshalls in FDA Raid" http://www.naturalnews.com/025347.html This is the only thing the FDA cares about. Shutting down those that are not in line with their pharma friends. Side: No
0
points
2
points
There are way too many to list but since you insisted. (I don't know why you didn't just do a little research yourself after reading the article) Let me also add that this topic was brought up because a very dear and experienced friend, a Dr. in the medical field for over 40 years, brought me up to date on the so called FDA and physicians today. In the years to come you will see the escalating battle for power between the Western philosophy of medicine and the Eastern. The only difference is that you have more consumers backing more the preventative (eastern) vs reactive (western). Main source is from David Bonello's article "Healthcare for Dummies"
Dr Carolyn Dean MD, ND, author of "Death By Modern Medicine", after analyzing government databases and peer review journals concluded thus: "I found that 784,000 people are dying annually, prematurely, due to modern medicine, intervention." She adds, that this too is a low estimate due to the medical monopoly under-reporting, or as the adage goes: A doctor buries his mistakes. The government’s job is to protect the people, not profits. Yet the FDA has already outlawed a food, Red Yeast Rice and is currently (2006) being asked by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals to restrict the sale of bioidentical hormones (plant estrogens and natural progesteron). Why? Women aren't buying into the HRT protocols anymore because the risks are ridiculous. Women are dying from HRT and the FDA, the government, wants to protect Wythe Pharmaceutical's profits, and not women. o [fbu1] Antineoplastons: FDA Declares War. . 1996 January. The case of Dr. Burzynski. o [fbu2] Antineoplastons: How the FDA Stops Medical Progress. . o [fbu3] FDA and Courts Block Dr. Burzynski's Patient's Treatments. . By the Life Extension Foundation. 1996 February. Includes list of legislators to contact with demands for Congressional action against FDA abuses. o [fco] Congress Holds Hearings on FDA Abuses of Authority. . Summary of hearing on 1995.jul.25. Opening comments by Congressman Richard Burr. o [fqu] FDA Backgrounder - Top Health Frauds. . 1996 November. The FDA considers herbs "quackery". Read their official website for this and other humourous but disturbing commentary. o [fre1] DeMeo, James; Anti-Constitutional Activities and Abuse of Police Power by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other Federal Agencies. . Reprinted from On Wilhelm Reich and Orgonomy, Pulse of the Planet #4, 1993. o [frh1] Power-Hungry FDA Is Hazardous to Our Health. . By Robert Higgs, Ph.D. 1995.aug.10. o [frh2] Public Health vs. Bureaucratic Self-Interest: Don't Trust the FDA to Reform Itself. . 1995.may.18. o [fsb] Strong-arming American Business. . SBSC Reg Watch: Second in a Three-Part Series on the FDA. 1995 July. Professional and industry groups that promote herbalists' rights o [gahg] American Herbalists' Guild. . For their position paper on the proposed regulations related to the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act: . o [gapm] American Preventative Medical Association. . o [gahp] American Herbal Products Association. . o [gcfh] Citizens for Health. . Also: up-to-date synopses on current legislation affecting health care and availability of natural and alternative health products. o [ghan] Health Action Network Society (Canada). . Codex: international trade agreement proposal that would restrict herbal product and nutritional supplement availability in all countries who become signatories to this treaty. o [ica]Lesso, John; Codex Update and the Significance of the German Proposal to Australia. . o [ich] Letters to Senator Orrin Hatch by Milton Bass regarding UN/WHO Codex Alimentarius. . o [icl] Life Extension Foundation: Fighting for Health Freedom. . Articles by Saul Kent and William Faloon on the FDA and Codex. o [icn] Hammell, John; American health freedom threatened by international commission. . Published by the Tribune. o [icr] Codex committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses. . Bonn, Germany. Report prepared by James T. Heimbach, Ph.D., 1996.oct.15 Excessive corporate influence in government o [kpm] Ralph Nader and the Real Presidential Race: Corporate Oligarchy vs. Resurgent Democracy. . By Patrick Mazza, posted to Cascadia Planet, 1996.sep.19. o [kra] Ending Corporate Governance; We The People: Revoking Our Plutocracy. . Articles and resources for people wishing to restrain the influence of large corporations in government. o [krn] Ralph Nader on Corporatism and Plutocracy. . Excerpts from a speech given at Harvard University. Footnotes [age] Gerson, Max; A Cancer Therapy: Results of 50 Cases; Gerson Institute, Bonita, Calif., c1990. [aho] Ausubel, Ken; Hoxsey: How Healing Becomes a Crime; Mystic Fire Video, Malibu, California, c1987. [ajw] FDA Versus The People of the United States; Jonathan Wright Legal Defense Fund, Citizens For Health, PO Box 368, Tacoma, WA 98401; 206/922-2457, fax:206/922-7583. [are] Greenfield, Jerome; "Wilhelm Reich Versus the USA", W.W. Norton, NY, c1979; Wyvell, Lois; "The Jailing of a Great Scientist in the USA", Pulse of the Planet, 1993 #4; DeMeo, James; "Author's Preface", The Orgone Accumulator Handbook; Natural Energy Works, El Cerrito, Calif., c1989. [ari] Lynes, Barry L.; "The End of the Line: Royal Raymond Rife - Corrections and Perspective"; c1996(?). . Lynes, Barry L.; "The Cancer Bureaucracy: How The Real Cures Are Suppressed"; Health Action Network Society, . [arm] Culbert, Michael L.; Medical Armageddon, vol. 1-2 and vol. 3-4; C and C Communications, San Diego, Calif., c1994. These volumes contain detailed descriptions of numerous FDA abuses, describing a systematic campaign of suppression of alternative health modalities from its beginnings in the early part of this century. The FDA began as an agency devoted to protecting the allopathic patent medicine manufacturers who sold their medicines without identifying the ingredients, unlike the herbalists and homeopathic manufacturers of that era. [asu] A list of FDA raids; from Life Extension Magazine, republished by Sumeria. . [awr] With Guns Drawn FDA Makes Vitamin Bust; Health Action Network Society. . [dir] Walker, Martin J.; Dirty Medicine; Slingshot Publications, c1993. Chapters 1 and 2 describe the historical beginnings of the FDA in 1938 as part of a New Deal trend toward government regulatory agencies assuming responsibility for the scientific improvement of industry and society. Unfortunately, the largest corporations created a revolving door policy toward government regulatory officials: on leaving government, these officials frequently were offered lucrative jobs in the very same private industries they had regulated, in some cases receiving money and bribes while still in office. [guy] Guyton, Arthur; "The Chemical Senses, Taste, and Smell"; in: Textbook of Medical Physiology; W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, c1971; p.645. Human olfaction is capable of detecting 4x10-14 g/ml of the compound methyl mercaptan. [mil] Milgram, S. (1963); Behavioral studies of obedience; Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378. [mir] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. (United States Reports) 436. [kel] Kelman, H. (1973); Violence without moral restraint. Journal of Social Issues, 29, 25-61. [or1] Pathogen Reduction; Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) Systems; Proposed Rule. . From the Federal Register, 1995.feb.03, p.6773, Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, 9 CFR Part 308, et al. Describes how meat inspectors rely on organoleptic methods (smell and appearance) for effective detection of spoiled or contaminated meat and poultry. [or2] Testimony of Dr. Michael Friedman before the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry; Committee on Agriculture, U.S. House of Representatives; 1996.may.22. . Mentions the effective use of organoleptic criteria in the detection of seafood spoilage by trained testers. [poi] Egginton, Joyce; The Poisoning of Michigan; W.W. Norton and Co., c1980. [rei] Reich, Wilhelm; The Mass Psychology of Fascism; St. Albion Press; c1970. [tcm] Wicke, Roger; What is traditional Chinese herbology? (How to choose herbs using methods of Chinese herbology) . [za1] U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 8. "The Congress shall have Power... to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;..." [zbu] U.S. v. William M. Butler, 297 U.S. 1. "The question is not what power the federal government ought to have, but what powers, in fact, have been given by the people...The federal union is a government of delegated powers. It has only such as are expressly conferred upon it, and such as are reasonably to be implied from those granted. In this respect, we differ radically from nations where all legislative power, without restriction or limitation, is vested in a parliament or other legislative body subject to no restriction except the discretion of its members." [zda] Davis v. Massachusetts, 167 U. S. 43; Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140, 145. "Moreover, a distinction must be observed between the regulation of an activity which may be engaged in as a matter of right and one carried on by government sufferance or permission. In the latter case the power to exclude altogether generally includes the lesser power to condition and may justify a degree of regulation not admissible in the former." [zha] Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 74-75. "...we are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights. "Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the State. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the State and the limitations of its charter. Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is a reserved right in the legislature to investigate its contracts and find out whether it has exceeded its powers. It would be a strange anomaly to hold that a State, having chartered a corporation to make use of certain franchises, could not in the exercise of its sovereignty inquire how those franchises had been employed, and whether they had been abused, and demand the production of the corporate books and papers for that purpose. " [zma] Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (Cranch) 137, 174,176, (1803). "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." [zmi] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491. "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." See also: Boyd v. U.S. 116 U.S. 616. [zpe] Perry v. U.S., 294 U.S. 330, 353 (1935). "...the Congress cannot revoke the Sovereign power of the people to override their will as thus declared." [zpo] Case citations regarding exercise of the police powers. Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45; Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356; Butcher's Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746; Lawton v. Steele, 152 U.S. 133; Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S 623. [zte] Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 39 (1967). "There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today. Yet if the individual is no longer to be sovereign, if the police can pick him up whenever they do not like the cut of his jib, if they can "seize" and "search" him in their discretion, we enter a new regime. The decision to enter it should be made only after a full debate by the people of this country." [zv1] 42 U.S.C. 1963. "Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any state or territory, subjects or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, equity, or other proper proceeding for redress." [zv2] Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 485 (1928). "Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means.... would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face. " [zv3] Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623, 662. "It is a fundamental principle in our institutions, indispensable to the preservation of public liberty, that one of the separate departments of government shall not usurp powers committed by the Constitution to another department." [zv4] From George Washington's Farewell Address. "It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those intrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres; avoiding in the exercise of the powers on one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism." * [zyi] Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall 419, 471; McCullock v. Maryland, 4 Wheat 316, 404, 405; Yick Yo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370. In the United States, Sovereignty resides in the people, who act through the organs established by the Constitution." Side: No
http://www.cummings.com/articles/ http://healthfully.org/medicalcrap/ http://www.skeptically.org/quackery/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/01/ There is a pretty big dam list those are just some that I know of. The FDA used to be the strictest in the business but not anymore. I trust the FDA about as much as I would trust a starving cannibal to stand watch while I take a nap. Side: No
1
point
There is a lot of history behind the inefficiencies of the FDA. Here are some very current articles: This is in the New England Journal of Medicine 2008 "Drug Development for Neglected Diseases — The Trouble with FDA Review Vouchers" Aaron S. Kesselheim, M.D., J.D., M.P.H. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/ From Clinical Cancer Research "Drug Safety and Drug Efficacy:Two Sides of the Same Coin" http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/ If the FDA is so efficient then why are we still having problems? And why are these being proposed now? Again follow the trail and you'll see. But you just want me to do all the work and research all of this for you, don't you. Philipson, Tomas J. and Sun, Eric,Is the Food and Drug Administration Safe and Effective?(October 2007). NBER Working Paper No. W13561. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1024975 You should be able to access this: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ Those are 33 wonderful sources to look at on the article above. Let me add that you cannot access it just create an account for free and you should be able to. Side: No
2
points
1
point
Absolutely but it still seems that the mass of the United States still trust and rely on the FDA and their decisions! I feel the need to add debates like this, in the hope, that you will all share it with others who are guinea pigs and have no clue. let me add that the USDA is just as bad and with that said we should all start doing something about it! Side: They are corrupt
1
point
Wolf and beinglo both provided a plethra of samples of why the FDA is not to be trusted. I think it's important to point out the root of the problem. You can't fix the FDA simply by firing the old guard, or creating oversite for the oversite. The shameful failures of the FDA is a direct result of two things. 1. A crappy exec branch appointing crappy people. 2. Special interests. The first one is something fluid, that really cannot be solved permanately. Every now and then we elect asses who appoint assess to high positions, and that will continue forever. But the second one is inexcusable. Government was set up in such a way that, the people that represent the people are equally influenced by every individual within the U.S. It's not perfect, but works very well. Introduce special interests, like pharmeceuticals, suddenly you have small groups with literally the power of millions of votes in their wallet. Until special interest groups are reigned in, government oversite will continue to be a joke. Side: No
|
