Guest guest Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 I can answer my own question. Ma Huang was banned in 2004 from being used in diet supplements. That was Dick Durbins deal. The State of New York (2007) wants to ban ephedra in supplements and encourage the FDA to force manufacturers to prove effectiveness and adverse reactions of proudcts containing it. I haven't found the " smoking " Hillary connection, but who cares? New studies have found no connection between ephedra use and cardiac difficulties. The FDA has the power here, not the New York Senate. And so far the FDA is on our side! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 Here is a bit more information as I currently understand it: Clinton and Schumer were 2 of the 4 co-sponsors of Senator Durbin’s 2003 (pre-ban) S. 722, which would have, among other details, established a premarket approval rule for stimulants (assumed to be intended to include any herb containing caffeine, ephedrine, synephrine, etc.). McCain was one of the other 2! But, the actual ban on ma huang (in fact on ephedrine alkaloids) from dietary supplements was completed by FDA under its authority derived from DSHEA, and not by new legislation. You can read all about it at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.722: (if that link does not work, go to http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d108query.html and search for “Bill No.” and “S. 722.” Marnae Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 but ma huang is still available for purchase at Chinese pharmacies in New York, at least in New York City. --RoseAnne On Apr 15, 2008, at 6:33 PM, marnae ergil wrote: > Here is a bit more information as I currently > understand it: > > Clinton and Schumer were 2 of the 4 co-sponsors of > Senator Durbin’s 2003 (pre-ban) S. 722, which would > have, among other details, established a premarket > approval rule for stimulants (assumed to be intended > to include any herb containing caffeine, ephedrine, > synephrine, etc.). McCain was one of the other 2! > > But, the actual ban on ma huang (in fact on ephedrine > alkaloids) from dietary supplements was completed by > FDA under its authority derived from DSHEA, and not by > new legislation. > > > You can read all about it at: > http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.722: (if > that link does not work, go to > http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d108query.html and search > for “Bill No.” and “S. 722.” > > Marnae > > --- > > Subscribe to the free online journal for TCM at > Times http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com > > Help build the world's largest online encyclopedia for Chinese > medicine and acupuncture, click, http:// > www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/wiki/CMTpedia > > http:// > and adjust > accordingly. > > Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside > the group requires prior permission from the author. > > Please consider the environment and only print this message if > absolutely necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2008 Report Share Posted April 26, 2008 my understanding is that the ephedra ban was not intended for acupuncturists (due to lobbying by the then AAOM). meaning we can still prescribe it. the problem is the herbal companies are not allowed to import it. according to laura thorne of golden needle, the fda came up with a waiver that the chinese herbal companies could apply for in order to import ma huang. they all have, but the fda is not processing the applications. kath b On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 6:44 PM, RoseAnne Spradlin <ra6151 wrote: > but ma huang is still available for purchase at Chinese pharmacies in > New York, at least in New York City. > > --RoseAnne > > > > On Apr 15, 2008, at 6:33 PM, marnae ergil wrote: > > > Here is a bit more information as I currently > > understand it: > > > > Clinton and Schumer were 2 of the 4 co-sponsors of > > Senator Durbin's 2003 (pre-ban) S. 722, which would > > have, among other details, established a premarket > > approval rule for stimulants (assumed to be intended > > to include any herb containing caffeine, ephedrine, > > synephrine, etc.). McCain was one of the other 2! > > > > But, the actual ban on ma huang (in fact on ephedrine > > alkaloids) from dietary supplements was completed by > > FDA under its authority derived from DSHEA, and not by > > new legislation. > > > > > > You can read all about it at: > > http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.722: (if > > that link does not work, go to > > http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d108query.html and search > > for " Bill No. " and " S. 722. " > > > > Marnae > > > > --- > > > > Subscribe to the free online journal for TCM at > > Times http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com > > > > Help build the world's largest online encyclopedia for Chinese > > medicine and acupuncture, click, http:// > > www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/wiki/CMTpedia > > > > http:// > > and adjust > > accordingly. > > > > Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside > > the group requires prior permission from the author. > > > > Please consider the environment and only print this message if > > absolutely necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 28, 2008 Report Share Posted April 28, 2008 Kath, The root of the problem here (in my view, anyway) is that FDA lacks much of the legal authority and regulatory mechanisms needed to implement a partial ban as they have attempted to do with ma huang. The tools available to them are crude and ill-suited to regulating our materia medica. If something is deemed too dangerous, they have few options available outside of an absolute ban. Yes, FDA has said, that the ban " does not affect the use of Ephedra preparations in traditional Asian medicine..., " but their authority to (and certainly their ability to) implement this partial ban is questionable. So we find ourselves with very inconsistent applications of the final rule. The complexity is compounded by inconsistencies and poor communication across government agencies. For the most part, I understand that botanicals containing ephedrine alkaloids are simply being held by US Customs at the port of entry. Customs generally has no way to know who will be using these products or how, so they tend to block entry as a default. I think we clearly need a more nuanced regulatory model along the lines of what has been developed by the Traditional Medicines Congress. But this proposal has met with a wall of opposition from the health freedom movement who generally hold that access to herbs should be unfettered by regulation. While I would agree with them to the extent that I believe we each have a fundamental right to decide what we do/don't ingest, I think that some herbal products--when commodified (and especially when highly processed)--pose a significant enough danger that there needs to be some measure of accountability by those who dispense them. --Bill. -- Bill Mosca, LAc San Francisco CA mosca On Apr 25, 2008, at 7:01 PM, wrote: > my understanding is that the ephedra ban was not intended for > acupuncturists > (due to lobbying by the then AAOM). meaning we can still prescribe > it. the > problem is the herbal companies are not allowed to import it. > according to > laura thorne of golden needle, the fda came up with a waiver that the > chinese herbal companies could apply for in order to import ma > huang. they > all have, but the fda is not processing the applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2008 Report Share Posted May 1, 2008 bill: i agree with all of your points here, esp. that medicinal herbs should be dispensed my qualified (nccaom cert. for chinese herbs) health prof for public safety. as far as the fda partial ban: yes one of the fda biggest problems is that under funded/staffed to complete its mission of protecting public health/safety in the us. right now, customs is blocking the shipments and because the fda has not processed the chinese herb co's waivers, the herb co's can't get the herbs through. kath On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Bill Mosca <mosca wrote: > Kath, > > The root of the problem here (in my view, anyway) is that FDA lacks > much of the legal authority and regulatory mechanisms needed to > implement a partial ban as they have attempted to do with ma huang. > The tools available to them are crude and ill-suited to regulating > our materia medica. If something is deemed too dangerous, they have > few options available outside of an absolute ban. Yes, FDA has said, > that the ban " does not affect the use of Ephedra preparations in > traditional Asian medicine..., " but their authority to (and certainly > their ability to) implement this partial ban is questionable. So we > find ourselves with very inconsistent applications of the final rule. > > The complexity is compounded by inconsistencies and poor > communication across government agencies. For the most part, I > understand that botanicals containing ephedrine alkaloids are simply > being held by US Customs at the port of entry. Customs generally has > no way to know who will be using these products or how, so they tend > to block entry as a default. > > I think we clearly need a more nuanced regulatory model along the > lines of what has been developed by the Traditional Medicines > Congress. But this proposal has met with a wall of opposition from > the health freedom movement who generally hold that access to herbs > should be unfettered by regulation. While I would agree with them to > the extent that I believe we each have a fundamental right to decide > what we do/don't ingest, I think that some herbal products--when > commodified (and especially when highly processed)--pose a > significant enough danger that there needs to be some measure of > accountability by those who dispense them. > > --Bill. > > -- > Bill Mosca, LAc > San Francisco CA > mosca <mosca%40wetmoon.com> > > On Apr 25, 2008, at 7:01 PM, wrote: > > > my understanding is that the ephedra ban was not intended for > > acupuncturists > > (due to lobbying by the then AAOM). meaning we can still prescribe > > it. the > > problem is the herbal companies are not allowed to import it. > > according to > > laura thorne of golden needle, the fda came up with a waiver that the > > chinese herbal companies could apply for in order to import ma > > huang. they > > all have, but the fda is not processing the applications. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.