WHAT DOCTORS DON’T TELL YOU - E-NEWS BROADCAST No. 180 - 11 August 2005

[Guest guest]

" WDDTY e-News " <e-news

WDDTY e-News Broadcast - 11 August 2005

Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:38:42 +0100

 

 

 

 

WHAT DOCTORS DON'T TELL YOU - E-NEWS BROADCAST No. 180 - 11 August 2005

Please feel free to email this broadcast to any friends you feel would

appreciate receiving it.

 

 

 

NEWS CONTENTS

 

CONTROLLING SUPPLEMENTS: You ain't seen nothin' yet

BOYO: Too many Welsh are getting sick

SCREENING: No, it doesn't save lives

HYPERTENSION: It's the new prostate

 

 

 

CONTROLLING SUPPLEMENTS: You ain't seen nothin' yet

 

Everyone has been paying such close attention to the EU's Food

Supplements Directive (FSD), which came into force 10 days ago, that

few are looking beyond that to the tsunami of legislation from

Brussels that is following in its wake.

Each new law represents a threat to alternative and nutritional

medicine that is as great as that posed by the FSD, if not more so.

First up is the Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products Directive, which

will put herbal remedies into the same regulatory framework as

pharmaceutical drugs, is likely to be adopted by the British

parliament in October. Only 'finished products' - and not the

individual herbs that are the ingredients - that have been in use for

30 years, including 15 years in an EU country, will be exempt from the

more onerous limitations of the new legislation. Any product that

fails the test will effectively be withdrawn because few, if any,

herbal manufacturers could afford the massive costs of licensing.

It's feared that the directive will send many small manufacturers to

the wall, and dramatically reduce consumer choice.

The Products (Pharmaceutical) Directive is even more damaging. This

is mirror legislation to the Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products

Directive, and does for many popular products, defined as food

supplements, as is being proposed for herbal remedies. So, like

herbal supplements, food supplements will be subject to the same

controls and regulations as pharmaceuticals. It is perhaps the most

sinister assault on alternative medicine, partly because the

legislation is incoherent and ill-defined. As it stands in its

current draft, any 'product' that may make you feel 'good' or

'better', and so have some health benefit, could be subject to

rigorous licensing. Its detractors point out that a cup of tea can

have these qualities, and so, as the legislation stands, would be

banned until it was proved to be safe.

Then there is the Addition of Nutrients to Foods Directive, which will

determine the safe upper limits of nutritionals that have survived the

FSD. Currently the UK and the Netherlands enjoy very high limits,

whereas in France and Germany those limits are set at around the

Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA), an arbitrary level that is supposed

to sustain minimal health. As the EU seems unable to agree on a

suitable measure, it's likely it will instead adopt those determined

by Codex, an 'independent' body that is overseen by the World Health

Organization. Its self-appointed duties include offering advice and

guidance to the 100 or so countries that make up its membership (see

E-news bulletin 170). Key members include Germany, France and

delegates from America's drug regulator, the Food and Drug

Administration (FDA), one of whom was recently quoted as saying that

nutritional supplements merely 'enrich the urine'. You can probably

guess that the safe upper limit will be set at around the RDA, thus

forcing off the market the supplements that offer therapeutic benefits.

The Sports Nutrition Directive will be announced late this year. This

legislation seeks to control any supplements and foods that is

intended to help anyone involved in 'intense muscular effort', and is

likely to be as swingeing as anything seen so far.

Finally, the EU Nutrition & Health Claims Regulations will control all

claims made about a health product. This will control not just the

labeling on the product, and its package inserts, but also any

announcements, press releases, marketing and advertising - indeed,

it's legislation that goes much further than that which currently

controls announcements about pharmaceuticals.

These directives want to treat harmless and safe nutritional

supplements as drugs, which kill hundreds of thousands of people each

year. They also fail to understand the infrastructure that supports

the pharmaceutical industry, which makes it the most profitable in the

world.

As a result, an industry that has harmed few, if any, consumers, and

made modest profits, faces extinction. Meanwhile, the various

pressure groups representing different factions of alternative

medicine will doubtlessly continue sniping at each other.

 

 

 

BOYO: Too many Welsh are getting sick

 

So what's it about the Welsh? According to new statistics, one-third

of all adults living in Wales has a long-term illness. Eighteen per

cent are being treated for high blood pressure, 14% for arthritis, 13%

for respiratory disease, 12% for back pain, and 10% for a heart

condition. No wonder Tom Jones and Charlotte Church moved out.

(Source: Welsh Health Survey, www.wales.gov.uk)

 

 

 

SCREENING: No, it doesn't save lives

 

Medicine has persisted with the idea that screening for breast cancer

saves lives. Why? Because trial after trial has said so (with

qualification). But a new study has come up with evidence that

contradicts all the previous trials, and has concluded that breast

cancer screening does nothing at all to save lives.

So what's happened? The researchers say their new study is the first

to use data from the 'real world' of clinical practice as opposed to

the tightly-controlled tests that have been used in previous studies.

The study team, from the University of Washington School of Medicine,

looked at the records of 1351 women who had died from breast cancer

between 1983 and 1998, and compared them against a group of 2501

women, who were matched for age and risk of developing breast cancer,

but who were free of cancer.

If screening works, the study team surmised, there should be more

women in the cancer-free group who had been screened. To their

surprise, this was not the case. Of the cancer group, 66 per cent of

the women had been screened against 64 per cent of the women in the

cancer-free group.

In other words, just as many women who had died from breast cancer had

been screened as those who didn't have the disease, which suggests

that screening either didn't detect the tumour in time, or didn't

detect it at all.

(Source: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2005; 97: 1035-43).

* So if screening isn't going to help, what will? The answers can be

found in the WDDTY Guide to Women's Health. It tells you how to

maintain good health, and avoid treatments and practices in medicine

that are ineffective or harmful. It suggests the best way to prepare

for the menopause, and how to avoid breast and other cancers, as well

as many other ailments that can afflict women. To order your copy,

http://www.wddty.co.uk/shop/details.asp?product=107

 

 

 

HYPERTENSION: It's the new prostate

 

They say that most men, if they live long enough, will die with

prostate cancer if not from it. It's an inevitable process of ageing,

it seems.

Now doctors reckon that hypertension could be a similar problem. A

new study has found that hypertension is 'unavoidable' in people who

are older than 80 years. Records of 5,296 participants who have

signed up for the long-term Framingham study found that fewer than one

in 10 who are 80-plus had normal blood pressure. Three-quarters of

them were already hypertensive, and the rest were getting there.

This is music to the ears of the pharmaceuticals, of course. This

could mean that everyone aged over 80 will get an automatic

prescription for a hypertensive drug, which should speed their entry

into the next world.

(Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, 2005; 294: 466-72).