HEALTH: Access to Medical Treatment Act of 2001 (HR 1964)

[Guest guest]

I read this bill (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query) and it does sound

good. Check it out....

 

Femme

**************

 

 

Center for Natural Healing

Monday, November 12, 2001 6:13 PM

Update on Health Rights

 

You may want to be informed about this and take action.

 

Protect Your Right to Use Alternative Medicine

 

American patriotism is running high these days. Flags wave from houses

and cars, and patriotic songs like " America the Beautiful " are being

sung with renewed fervor. Yet while Americans enjoy many freedoms, there

is one sense in which the United States is not the " sweet land of

liberty " - access to medical treatment.

 

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has a stranglehold on medical

treatment in this country. Promising therapies that have not gone

through the cumbersome and expensive FDA approval process are

effectively barred from the marketplace, and physicians who offer these

therapies are routinely persecuted. Worse still, patients are kept in

the dark about potentially lifesaving treatments that, in many cases,

have been used successfully in other countries for decades. What this

means is that right now we have a two-tiered society in which wealthy

individuals have access to promising medical treatments offered in

Canada, Mexico, Germany, and other countries, while the rest of us must

make do with a far more limited range of FDA-approved treatments that

are available in the U.S. Is this just? No. Is it legal? According to

our skewed system of government, it is. Support the Access to Medical

Treatment Act.

 

But there is a bill before Congress that would prevent things like this

from happening. Called the Access to Medical Treatment Act (AMTA), it

would give you the right to use safe and effective therapies of your

choice, whether they have the blessing of the FDA or not, provided that

you are informed of their side effects and the fact that they are not

FDA approved. It would free doctors to practice medicine as they see

fit, without worry of office raids and medical license threats, while

including safeguards that would protect patients from dangerous medical

therapies. This is the way medicine should be practiced. The impetus for

this bill was spearhead by former congressman Berkley Bedell, whose

personal experience illustrates the importance of freedom of access to

medical treatment. When Bedell contracted Lyme disease, his health

deteriorated and he was forced to resign from Congress. He first tried

conventional therapies for Lyme disease with no success, then turned to

alternative treatment. As he testified before the Government Reform and

Oversight Committee in 1998 in support of the Access to Medical

Treatment Act, his Lyme disease was cured by a whey extract from cow's

milk that was developed in Canada. Yet, in his words, " while anyone can

obtain rat poison off the shelf that might kill them, persons suffering

from Lyme disease in this country are prohibited from obtaining the whey

from cow's milk that might cure them. "

 

The Access to Medical Treatment Act would change all that. This bill is

now being considered in both the Senate (S 1378) and House of

Representatives (HR 1964). There will surely be a fight between

politicians who believe that patients have the right to make an informed

decision about their own medical treatment and those who believe that

our government should make the choice for them. You can make a

difference in this battle by writing to your representative and senator

and urging them to sign on as cosponsors of this bill.

 

For a sample letter that you can mail or e-mail to your senator and

representative,

 

You can find your representative's name, address, and e-mail address by

visiting http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.htm. Contact

information for senators is available at

http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index_by_state.cfm.

 

To read the text of the bill, visit http://thomas.loc.gov and enter the

bill number (HR 1964 or S 1378).

(http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query)

Nov 10, 2001