FDA alert - fact and fiction

[Guest guest]

If the current alarmist and misrerpresented about the FDA alert were true, i.e., we stand to lose all alternative treatments and access to all supplements in less than three weeks were true, one would think that such leading alternative voices as Ralph Moss, Jon Barron, Annie Appleseed, Dr. Mercola, The International Wellness Directory, Dr. Rath, etc. would be up in arms. Their silence is deafening.Yes, Jon Barron did have something to say. But what he said in his blog today was:"I never said it was a law or a regulation. I referred to it only as a "Guidance," an internal FDA document that clarifies how they intend to interpret DSHEA."That said, there are three important points worth considering:1. In its specificity, the document tightens the restrictions on alternative health labeling found in DSHEA.2. Its very specificity makes manifest fundamental inconsistencies and absurdities in the DSHEA law. If you substitute "water" for "cranberry tablets" and "severe dehydration" for "urinary tract infection," as found on Page 12, then you've turned water into a drug according to these guidelines. Obviously, the FDA would never turn water into a drug, but the guidelines allow them the option to do so. That "flexibility" alone makes the guidelines dangerous. In reality, what the guidelines do is extend the FDAs authority to arbitrarily decide when to enforce their will.3. And the FDA absolutely does ask for public comment, allowing people a chance to address points one and two above.Obviously no responsible person wants total license for any and every marketer to claim that herb X cures cancer, but to not be able to mention the possible cancer fighting benefits of herbs like graviola or pomegranate, protocols such as detoxing or energy work, or supplements such as curcumin and green tea is equally wrong. It denies people the chance to make informed decisions.And as for waiting for the "so called" experts, these people can't even decide whether or not vitamin E provides any benefits or in fact puts you at risk. (And notice when it comes to these experts how non-specific the FDA is in their guidelines as to who they actually are; and how conveniently that allows them to reject any opinion they don't like.)Is this all a big deal? Probably not. Far more dangerous is the work of the FDA in killing herbs and supplements sub rosa (http://www.jonbarron.org/newsletters/03/7-21-2003.php). Kava kava is a great example.* Trashed by the FDA based on erroneous reports that it might cause liver damage after hundreds of studies prove that it doesn't. (http://www.jonbarron.org/newsletters/03/5-5-2003.php)* Denied coverage by most of the major insurers because of their fear of lawsuits that might be triggered by the FDA's statements of possible liver damage.* And right on cue, the class action lawsuit that was settled last year based on the liver damage kava kava does not cause. (http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/settlements/05514/kava_kava_settlement.html)Ultimately, the danger is not in big legislation, but in the slow and steady erosion of our rights to choose our own health care options that goes on under the table, out of sight and out of mind.And once again, it's worth restating, the FDA did ask for comments. If no one says anything, then we can't complain tomorrow if we wake up in the morning with that much less access to alternative therapies.So, while there is indeed reason to be concerned, my point is that it serves no purpose, indeed it detracts, to portray the FDA alert as something it is not and in the alarmist manner that some are doing!Tony