URGENT: FDA Threat, April 30th, This Year. READ!

Greetings all health oriented Bluelighters. I write to you to alert you of an insidious FDA proposal which would reclassify natural supplements, etc., as "medicine". By doing so, they would be making them illegal for any non-physician (most likely a physician who doesn't conform to their "conventional"/allopathic standards) to use, since almost any "regular" physician doesn't deal with them anyway. This is an assault on those who choose to be healthy, the companies which provide options, and the freedom of choice of a great many people.

It is legalized criminality, all in the name of control and profit. Without getting into the politics of it, I urge you all, to please, visit the link below, read it, and submit the petitioning letter against it, the FDA is accepting submissions from individuals, industry, etc., until the 30th of April, 2007. Please help to stop them. Thank you!

The link: http://tinyurl.com/2u7ghc

I actually would like to see something along these lines put into effect. There would be a lot less BS magical herbs on the market. And the things that do work would have to be regulated. There are no production standards on any of this stuff right now.

One more step towards a Draconian society. Stupid fucking humans....

You're being manipulated. The current bills being proposed do virtually nothing. They increase the FDA's budget for researching the safety and efficacy of supplements, as well as creating a system for tracking/reporting adverse health effects caused by supplements.

Not exactly something to be afraid of...unless you're selling dangerous supplements and are afraid the government will discover the dangers they pose.

Look, as far as I'm concerned, there should be a lot less "BS magical" drugs on the market, which have a far worse safety to efficacy ratio than these "BS magical herbs" you speak of, yet are approved, by the FDA. No, I do not sell dangerous supplements. No, I don't sell any supplements at all. And yes, there are companies with production standards. I'm sure that you can pull out links here and there, showing some herb or another supplement causing an adverse reaction. Relatively speaking, big deal. Even with that, the safety record of natural therapies is considerably better than your good old synthetic conventional treatments.

I am simply speaking out against this because it is in violation of what should be our right to choose therapies with which we feel comfortable and safe. How many people are killed each year by approved drugs? Is this the sort of governing regulatory body that we want telling us what's safe?

I am surprised that anyone thinks that the FDA has the best interests and health of the consumer in mind. These are the same people who allow for neurotoxic sweeteners to remain on the market. That's one stinking little example. It's all profit, control, and access restriction, and has little to nothing to do proving efficacy, better standards, etc.

the fda knows nothing, being controlled by that ignorance scares me to death. How can we fight this thing?

Either they know nothing, or they know exactly what they're doing, and they're doing it because they are in bed with large those who have large, corporate, vested interests in keeping people sick, and reliant on products which mask symptoms, but often do little to treat the underlying causes of disease. Alternatives are often less expensive, require shorter term use, and are essentially empowering, giving the individual the liberty to explore for themselves, the best avenues possible to be healthy.

There was a customer at work today who started to tell me about her frustration with General (Allopathic) Practitioners. Her complaints echoed the many which I've heard over the years - she used to have severe allergies and sensitivities to many things - and all that her G.P. ever did was try to prescribe her heartburn medicine and antidepressants, telling her it was in her head, and blew up on her whenever she questioned what was being said, or suggested anything natural. Tired of it, she went the natural route, and found the relief which she had sought through convention, but convention - denied her the options go beyond the big, but oh so small world, of prescription medications.

Look - to any readers - this is not intended to come across as an affront to General Allopathic Practitioners, or to people who feel safe and comfortable using "regular" medicine - even if it is estimated that it kills hundreds of thousands of North Americans annually - No, this has to do, with getting certain bodies the hell off of our backs, away from the industry which they fear a profit loss to because they can't seem to join 'em so they try and beat 'em, and getting them away from what they have no business trifling in to the extent to which they desire for their means of exceedingly high control and profit.

I would strongly suggest that anyone who gives a damn (and this even goes for you people who don't use natural therapies, because it goes deep and wide) to read about: Codex Alimentarius. This distinguished sounding organization has shit all to do with protecting consumer's health and the sanctity of our food supply.

So, would you like your food to be irradiated with the equivalent of over
330, 000, 000 chest X-rays? Would you like your food to be in the hands of those who so desire to genetically modify and engineer it? Would you like to be able to only purchase extraordinarily expensive synthetic supplements at inflated prices with a prescription? Would you like the nutrient content of food to drop even lower than it already is?

Nickels is right - this is Draconian. It has all to do with trade and money and power. They don't care about our right to be healthy.

Now, what can be done? Well. There is always growing dissent towards the bodies behind this insanity. There are a few places which I urge you to visit. In addition to the link which I posted above ( http://tinyurl.com/2u7ghc ), you should see "The Big Picture" for an outline of the connections, at:

http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/thebigpicture.php

Also, check out: http://freedomincanadianhealthcare.com/

And: http://www.nocodexgenocide.com

And: http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/

And to get an idea on some of the whole trade issue: http://www.stopthenau.org/
And: http://stopspp.com/

There's a good start. Read everything. You're pissed off about it? You should be. It is a violation. Then, harness your abilities and share the information with everyone that you know who cares. And for God's sake, protest. You want to take it face down and ass up? You're not helping. Don't be apathetic and allow yourselves to be fu**ed. There's growing resistance. There should be. Take care, and take action!

R.ticle One said:

Even with that, the safety record of natural therapies is considerably better than your good old synthetic conventional treatments.

Click to expand...

So, uh, how many people died of tuberculosis this year? How many people died of tuberculosis 200 years ago? How many people survived cancer this year? How many people survived cancer 200 years ago?

come on dude....

kittyinthedark said:

So, uh, how many people died of tuberculosis this year? How many people died of tuberculosis 200 years ago? How many people survived cancer this year? How many people survived cancer 200 years ago?

come on dude....

Click to expand...

Fair play. I don't have the answers to "how many?" Of course there are survivors. I must ask, however, why it is estimated by cancer societies that these days, 1 in 3 people will get cancer. Someone will want to insult me for saying this, but sickness, especially chronic disease like cancer, is a business. I do again refer you to the figures of over 700, 000 deaths attributed to conventional treatment, however. Is this truly acceptable?

Why does the majority of mainstream "doctor's" protocol for treatment involve a masking of the symptoms with drugs instead of addressing the cause of the symptoms?

Look, I am in favor of choosing natural therapies, or in cases of disease such as cancer, patients being able to combine the two - conventional and natural - in a complementary manner, if they wish - and I must again state that it is a rights violation to attempt total control over natural products, which have been used since far beyond the times of synthetic creations and modified, isolated ingredients, with relatively ill effect. People must retain the liberty to choose how to be well, how to heal themselves, and to maintain purity of food.

If you want to rely on drugs, eat GMO crops, ingest pesticides, get vaccinated with who-knows-what-plus-the-mercury-preservative-they-said-they-took-out-
but-still-shows-up, let the heirloom varieties of vegetables bred for flavor and nutritional value get killed off, have your food irradiated, have your vegetables missing nutrients, minerals and enzymes because we've mistreated the soil, have your beef come from cows who have to be injected with antibiotics and hormones because they would often die from being cramped together in a feed lot, eating corn and grain and protein muck which can severely damage their ruminant stomach and kill them without the injections, and have your world compartmentalized, tracked, controlled and made sicker - you go right ahead. It will be (already is) to the detriment of all of us. But the decisions of anyone silly enough to swallow that pill should not infringe on the rights of those who choose to do things in a less destructive or even sustainable and regenerative manner. And that - is what this - is all about.

We must reclaim and preserve our right to have access to what is healthy. The scenario above is the antithesis of what is healthy. The "big boys" don't give a shit about healthy. They try to push things like this because they fear a loss of control. When people know how to empower themselves, they become less reliant on a system which thrives on just that - their reliance on one "choice".

I don't necessarily think that regular GPs are bad folks. Just misinformed, because they are heavily raised by pharma companies. Well intentioned and sometimes helpful, but not really doing well for others. Again, if you choose that route, you choose it. Those that choose others, must not be restricted from doing so.

Think about all that. Did you even read any of those links I provided?
-----------------

R.ticle One

Someone with some digg clout should "digg this" -- digg.com

It will definitely raise public interest in it.

If you, someone decides to please give me a link to "digg it" or "del.icio.us" it.

Good looking out R.ticle One...

another good article http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_4803.cfm

kharma_bum said:

Someone with some digg clout should "digg this" -- digg.com

It will definitely raise public interest in it.

If you, someone decides to please give me a link to "digg it" or "del.icio.us" it.

Good looking out R.ticle One...

another good article http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_4803.cfm

Click to expand...

Cheers man, someone who "gets it", you are! Any digg people, please digg it. The article you linked to sums up very succinctly what I've been saying - "they" are poopy-ass shit scared because they don't want people to be empowered and free from a cyclically destructive system, and this is a desperate attempt to curtail people's freedom. Is anyone listening and doing something yet?
------------------------------------
R.ticle One

I think this is very fucked up... to the point that it almost sounds like a paranoid conspiracy theory because it's so utterly ridiculous.

From the article kharma_bum posted, apparently taken from one of the FDA's documents:

"...if a person decides to produce and sell raw vegetable juice for use in juice therapy to promote optimal health... [and] if the juice therapy is intended for use as part of a disease treatment regimen instead of for the general wellness, the vegetable juice would also be subject to regulation as a drug under the Act."

I mean... seriously. Vegetable juice???

I'm really into complementary therapy and alternative medicine, and I'm glad to see that here in the UK, people are becoming more aware of the benefits of complementary medicine. I've had many minor health conditions where 'normal' medicine has been far less efficient (and much more expensive) than alternative medicine, which is enough to convince me that although allopathic medicine has many positive aspects, it still leaves a lot to be desired.

I am simply speaking out against this because it is in violation of what should be our right to choose therapies with which we feel comfortable and safe...

I am surprised that anyone thinks that the FDA has the best interests and health of the consumer in mind. These are the same people who allow for neurotoxic sweeteners to remain on the market. That's one stinking little example. It's all profit, control, and access restriction, and has little to nothing to do proving efficacy, better standards, etc.

Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly!!!

They've been threatening to do this for what, 13 years now; or longer? Every year I hear about this. How close are they to actually passing a bill that puts all this into effect? Just the same, I filled out my name and e-mail address on the link you gave. I hope this is not some scam to get peoples' names on another "watched list". Like anyone who wants to keep their rights will be spyed on or some shit.

The supplement industry (billion$/year) always manages to fight off FDA re-classification. There is so much quack science (just read through this thread), fraud, and even danger involved with some of these supplements that's it is surprising that this fails. More consumer protection and enforcement would be nice but prohibition would be too much, imo.

It really surprises me that so many BLers are actually FOR this bullshit. You do realize that this law would make even vitamins drugs? VITAMINS! There are a lot of herbs sold that aren't well studied, granted. But this proposal has nothing at all to do with protecting anyone, make no mistake. This is ALL about money, period.

dbailey11 said:

They've been threatening to do this for what, 13 years now; or longer? Every year I hear about this. How close are they to actually passing a bill that puts all this into effect? .

Click to expand...

Very VERY close. In 2009, somethin called Codex Alimentarius goes into affect. read it and weep. we in for some deep deep shit if that goes thru. Its a document of health and food restrictions and regulations that is supposed to be pretty much worldwide, and includes fun stuff like all vitamins being considered drugs and made illegal, and a rule that ALL foods must be irradiated.....check it out....http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php

kittyinthedark said:

So, uh, how many people died of tuberculosis this year? How many people died of tuberculosis 200 years ago? How many people survived cancer this year? How many people survived cancer 200 years ago?

come on dude....

Click to expand...

Cancer was pretty rare 200 years ago, actually.What are you saying? That you trust the government and FDA to tell you what you can eat? If you wanna talk about history, how bout the many different chemicals and additives used in food and household products back in the 50s that ended up causing diseases, birth defects, deaths, and shitty health for the people who were exposed to them, back when it was "totally safe"? ANd everyone said "come on, its just fine!" And look what happened. dont be too quick to trust others to make your decisions for you on this shit. ,the rates of cancer go up higher and higher each year. coincidentally, the food we eat is processed and preserved and altered so much you can barely call it "food" and more like "product" these days and the toxins in the environment and foods we eat are also rising with the cancer rate. hmm.
Anways,
R.ticle one, listen, i know you are gettin alot of shit for this posts, but i agree with you and understand where you are comin from. dont let the people get you down who dont want to believe the terryfying reality of whats realy goin on with our food sources.

I can't believe that shit. Again, this has Nothing to do with protecting people. It's about how much money the drug companies are going to make once this takes effect. Bastards!!

Banquo said:

...There is so much quack science (just read through this thread), fraud, and even danger involved with some of these supplements that's it is surprising that this fails. More consumer protection and enforcement would be nice but prohibition would be too much, imo.

Click to expand...

Thank you for having the common sense to agree/admit that prohibition would be too much. As for quack science, I'm quite sure that one could find a great deal of "quackery" within the world of approved conventional, pharmaceutically based medical treatment, too. I believe that the term should be expanded from it's Stephen Barrett-ish definition, to include continued government approval despite known risks. I know it's a bit trite to reference the Vioxx scandal, but need we/they so harshly criticize a supplement which may be gently effective and very safe, or perhaps take more time to work if used in conjunction with a treatment plan that involves the patient as an individual person, when they knowingly approve a dangerous drug, allowing at least 27,785 heart attacks and deaths (perhaps more, this is a 2004 figure I believe)?

If that isn't quackery, I don't know what is. (Before anyone pulls out a report of some herb not doing what was claimed it would, you know what I mean. I'm simply attempting to expand people's idea of what junk science truly is - when it involves putting people's lives at risk, knowingly, for profit).

Need I also remind you that certain studies on, vitamins for example, were subtly tampered with, using synthetic substitutes, which in some cases can cause disorder and disease in the body. It's kind of like that old "all saturated fat is bad for you" "study" from maybe some 50 or 60 years ago if I recall - basically, the vegetable oil industry, wanted more of the pie of cash, published a study stating that coconut oil was linked to heart disease, etc. - the things which too many people have blindly attributed to healthy fat. Of course what they didn't disclose at that time was that the "evil coconut oil" they studied had been hydrogenated - and we all (I hope) know that chemically altering dietary fats is a great way to promote disease.

glitterbizkit, I know it all sounds utterly ridiculous! That's because "they" ARE utterly ridiculous. They are profit-minded bigboy bullies who are scared because "nerdy little alternative health" is suddenly outwitting them, and so they try to tagteam him, away from the prying eyes of...the guidance councilor, the teachers, the principle, parents, and other kids (congress, the natural health industry, practitioners, patients, etc., to fill out this fun little analogy). Woe befall those who wallow in the apathy brought on by the fact that it sounds crazy enough to be a conspiracy theory.

dbailey11, thanks very much for signing. Yours is one more voice demanding the liberty to live healthily which we deserve to have intact, not trampled by the nonsensical actions of a greedy corporate entity. You see correctly.

lacey k, thank you for posting that link and your support, you're on the money. Everyone should visit it, and the others I posted to get a grasp of the lunacy that this and Codex Alimentarius disgustingly embraces. I've had skepticism in my life before. And don't get me wrong. People are taking action against it all the time...this is kind of like some David and Goliath shit, no?
----------------------

R.ticle One

Oh, just so that people know what types of people sit behind the chairs of these grand, fraudulent committees, the German head of Codex, a Mr. Rolf Grossklaus stated that "nutrition is not relevant to health". (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) Are there enough exclamation marks in the world to put after such a quotation to highlight the sheer insanity of such a statement?
-------------------
R.ticle One