Alternative Health vs mainstream medicine and Scn

[Terril park]

This would be one of the reasons the FDA classed them as drugs – “because they are not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced conditions”.

You are talking about food. Much theories as to hominids intelligence related to eating sea food. Primrose oil seems to have a lot going for it.

Specially for a Madhair.

You saying that food is not OK unless sanctioned by the FDA? Like
the crispy cool chips referred to by someone else?

Can you see how advocating a position, even if true, is sorely undermined when people jump on crap data as a support?

Good point.

However more important is the exposing of FDA using crap data. Or
data that is controversial. Or from false science from drug companies.
Badly going studies quickly terminated etc.

Note the open door with Monsanto. People resigned from momsanto, went to work for FDA to approve Monsanto products, and returned to work for monsanto. They possibly on retiring had cushy jobs with the FDA. The last is possibly supposition. Years ago I read about this.

Now I can’t get toasters and crystal meth out of my head….

ETA:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/docs/ir_gregory_smith_080807.pdf
This is simply the best example of regulatory corruption evar:

The RIK employee recalled that on one occasion in late 2004, Smith telephoned her repeatedly asking for drugs. She said she provided cocaine to him early that evening, but he continued to call her. Eventually, she said, Smith traveled to her house and wanted her to have sex with him. She said he also asked her if she had more cocaine, and she stated that she did not but that someone who was staying with her might. She said Smith obtained crystal methamphetamine from one of these individuals and she watched him snort it off the toaster oven in her kitchen. The RIK employee also said she and Smith engaged in oral sex that evening.​

You lost me on all the above.

Like sex but don't have a drug history.

 

[Zinjifar]

I just realized that my answer to you would have been black dianetics. So, pretty much woggy black art mind games.

but, more effective

Zinj

 

[themadhair]

You saying that food is not OK unless sanctioned by the FDA?

The FDA laid out their reasoning, and you haven’t touched a single point they raised.
I linked the original complaint, and you haven’t highlighted a single flaw in their reasoning.

So why are you ignoring said reasoning? Diamond Foods were making claims that were simply unsupported by scientific research. It doesn’t matter whether it was walnuts, camel piss or something cooked up in a lab. Making claims that your product can help all sorts of ailments, when those claims have a dearth of supporting evidence, qualifies them as drugs as per the law (which makes complete sense if you think about it without your anti-FDA goggles).

The complaint called bullshit and the FDA agreed. So since you haven’t touched any of this reasoning, why are you still persisting with this over-simplistic and completely wrong soundbite of “it’s food not drugs”? If Diamond Foods hadn’t made scientifically unsupported medical claims the FDA would never have gotten involved, highlighting the pointlessness of your little soundbite. Since Diamod Foods retracted their misleading claims they have resumed their selling of walnuts – which would seem to be at odds with how your interpret their role here.

However more important is the exposing of FDA using crap data. Or
data that is controversial. Or from false science from drug companies.

Based on this thread you strike me as someone who doesn’t really adhere to the data when expressing your concerns about the FDA. Just sayin’. There is no shortage of corruption, but you only undermine your case when you allow yourself to be sucked in by misleading stories like this one.

You lost me on all the above.

You haven’t heard of the Mineral Management Service and the toaster meth story? The overview is here, and would be funny if it wasn’t true:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrdFVi03mEA

 

[Type4_PTS]

The complaint was not filed by the FDA. I note that you didn’t respond to any of the scientific points made in the letter, deciding instead to rant about the FDA. I find that extraordinarily curious and bemusing that you did that.

In this message to Terril as well in numerous other comments made in this thread Madhair is attempting to portray this whole issue between the FDA and the food companies as a scientific issue. (Food companies such as Diamond Foods make claims that are unsupported by the science.)

This couldn't be further from the truth. The warning letters from the FDA to Diamond Foods and the cherry growers had little to do with science.

As Jonathan Emord, a constitutional attorney has put it:

"The FDA, with an absolute hammer, prior restraint, forbids any statement that a nutrient treats a disease. It is illegal in this country to say it, whether you have proof to support it or not. It is absolutely illegal.
So it is a prior restraint that is antithetical to the core values of the First Amendment."
(stated in Youtube recording below beginning at 1:38 of the recording)

"Prior Restraint" is the most severe type of censorship that exists and that is exactly what the FDA is doing to the detriment of the American people and in violation of the First Amendment. The only exceptions to the above are what the FDA authorizes....period.

And this is not being done to protect the American people but to protect who the FDA considers to be its real customer which is the pharmaceutical industry.

So if you are an apple farmer and it's found out that apples prevent cancer, and the science supporting that is overwhelming, you'll be committing a crime and are opening yourself to an FDA raid at gunpoint if you communicate that fact to your potential customers. (unless of course you want to spend a billion dollars on getting your apples through the drug approval process. Good luck with that



(quoted statement begins at 1:38 of this recording)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIoraJnZOcg&feature=related

 

[Terril park]

Roger B has posted some in depth articles aboout essential fatty acids
on the thread " Reverse the aging process".

Essential reading.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Nutrients can ameliorate or even sometimes cure physical illnesses. There's plenty of evidence out there.

 

[themadhair]

This couldn't be further from the truth. The warning letters from the FDA to Diamond Foods and the cherry growers had little to do with science.

I note with interest how you, like you seem to do habitually on this forum, are trying to ignore the science and the important details (while hypocritically appealing to the FDA banning claims based on ‘overwhelming science’). I’ve already linked the original complaint which laid out the scientific basis underpinning the accusation that Diamond Foods engaged in misleading labelling, and the FDA ruling is simply a reiteration of this as current law applies.

It really is quite simple. There is no scientific evidence that walnuts are effective (or even safe) for treating the myriad of conditions Diamond Foods included in its labelling. The FDA called Diamond Foods out for this. No amount of off-topic bullshit from type4 addresses this point, which is the central crux of why the FDA ruled the way they did.

"Prior Restraint" is the most severe type of censorship that exists and that is exactly what the FDA is doing to the detriment of the American people and in violation of the First Amendment. The only exceptions to the above are what the FDA authorizes....period.

Diamond Foods got to do their labelling, and only after a complaint was upheld were they forced to retract – so how is this a prior restraint case???? Do you know what the term actually means type4?

So if you are an apple farmer and it's found out that apples prevent cancer, and the science supporting that is overwhelming, you'll be committing a crime and are opening yourself to an FDA raid at gunpoint if you communicate that fact to your potential customers.

A straight up lie. Interesting that you have repeated, in almost every post you have made, the idea of ‘overwhelming science’, but the instant someone starts calling you on it you decry them for turning this into a scientific issue. Fucking hypocrite.

 

[Zinjifar]

Nutrients can ameliorate or even sometimes cure physical illnesses. There's plenty of evidence out there.

But, if you start using such claims in your advertising, you will be damned to the same 'put up the evidence' mill that any *other* 'drug' would face.

The answer is simple; don't make the claims and just sell your 'nutrients'.

Zinj

 

[Terril park]

PTS 4

[So if you are an apple farmer and it's found out that apples prevent cancer, and the science supporting that is overwhelming, you'll be committing a crime and are opening yourself to an FDA raid at gunpoint if you communicate that fact to your potential customers. ]

MADHAIR

[A straight up lie. Interesting that you have repeated, in almost every post you have made, the idea of ‘overwhelming science’, but the instant someone starts calling you on it you decry them for turning this into a scientific issue. Fucking hypocrite.]

My friend was selling on the internet nutritional products and substances to
handle male baldness.

He was raided by the UK equivalent of the FDA. I suspect looser and stupider. He was absent and they didn't use guns, this is the UK guys,
but were heavy handed with my friends dog who of course resisted the
incursion. They took all his materials.

The accompanying police officers thought these " pharmaceutical police" people were nuts.

Legal aid was VERY interested in taking the case on for free.

However when it came to trial their lawyers having been called in to the judge were told my friend on being convicted would have jail time not a fine!

Completely unexpected! he had minors and a dog to consider, and no
wife.

Where did this judge come from?

So Madhair, you like science and law.

Try and look further.

 

[shadow]

As Jonathan Emord, a constitutional attorney has put it:

"Prior Restraint" is the most severe type of censorship that exists and that is exactly what the FDA is doing to the detriment of the American people and in violation of the First Amendment. The only exceptions to the above are what the FDA authorizes....period.

Commercial speech is not fully protected by the constitution. The supreme court ruling in Central Hudson Gas & Electric v Public Service Commission set a test for evaluating commercial speech regulations that would be used in many subsequent cases. The Central Hudson test recognizes the constitutionality of regulations restricting advertising that concerns an illegal product or service, or which is deceptive. For all other restrictions on commercial speech, however, the Court's test requires that the government show that the regulation directly advances an important interest and is no more restrictive of speech than necessary.

So if you are an apple farmer and it's found out that apples prevent cancer, and the science supporting that is overwhelming, you'll be committing a crime and are opening yourself to an FDA raid at gunpoint if you communicate that fact to your potential customers. (unless of course you want to spend a billion dollars on getting your apples through the drug approval process. Good luck with that

If the apple farmer has overwhelming science supporting that his apples prevent cancer, then he files the claims and support with the FDA just like anyone else that want to make claims that they have a product that prevents disease. There is a panel that reviews food nutritional claims and the supporting science and overwhelming support should pass through the panel with ease. Or is the issue what is overwhelming for some is merely of interest to others?

 

[Voltaire's Child]

But, if you start using such claims in your advertising, you will be damned to the same 'put up the evidence' mill that any *other* 'drug' would face.

The answer is simple; don't make the claims and just sell your 'nutrients'.

Zinj

BUt what if there was a situation where nutrients could help with something physical and others would want to know?

It's not far fetched. Just look at the books written by doctors naming which foods are contraindicated when the patient has this or that condition or disease or is taking certain meds. And why is that? Because nutrients contain substances that sometimes are found in medicines, that do react with medicines, and so on.

What about saying that a food rich in Vitamin C or Vitamin C itself prevents scurvy?? That's a good example.

 

[programmer_guy]

This is one source of FDA info on some items

11. Appendix C: Health Claims
October 2009
Guidance for Industry: A Food Labeling Guide
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceCom...lingNutrition/FoodLabelingGuide/ucm064919.htm

The approved claims are in the left column.

 

[programmer_guy]

From the FDA website:

http://www.fda.gov/Food/DietarySupplements/ConsumerInformation/ucm110417.htm#getinfo

Is it legal to market a dietary supplement product as a treatment or cure for a specific disease or condition?

No, a product sold as a dietary supplement and promoted on its label or in labeling* as a treatment, prevention or cure for a specific disease or condition would be considered an unapproved--and thus illegal--drug. To maintain the product's status as a dietary supplement, the label and labeling must be consistent with the provisions in the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994.

*Labeling refers to the label as well as accompanying material that is used by a manufacturer to promote and market a specific product.

In general, this answers this question from the FDA.

However, the FDA has allowed claims for specific items.
http://www.fda.gov/food/labelingnutrition/labelclaims/ucm111447.htm

 

[programmer_guy]

What about saying that a food rich in Vitamin C or Vitamin C itself prevents scurvy?? That's a good example.

From the FDA website: (bold emphasis mine)
http://www.fda.gov/food/labelingnutrition/labelclaims/ucm111447.htm

Structure/function claims have historically appeared on the labels of conventional foods and dietary supplements as well as drugs. However, the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) established some special regulatory procedures for such claims for dietary supplement labels. Structure/function claims describe the role of a nutrient or dietary ingredient intended to affect normal structure or function in humans, for example, "calcium builds strong bones." In addition, they may characterize the means by which a nutrient or dietary ingredient acts to maintain such structure or function, for example, "fiber maintains bowel regularity," or "antioxidants maintain cell integrity," or they may describe general well-being from consumption of a nutrient or dietary ingredient. Structure/function claims may also describe a benefit related to a nutrient deficiency disease (like vitamin C and scurvy), as long as the statement also tells how widespread such a disease is in the United States.

So, there it is. (However, I don't see that scurvy is widespread in the U.S. Nevertheless... that is what they have said.)

 

[Zinjifar]

BUt what if there was a situation where nutrients could help with something physical and others would want to know?

Then, the people searching for valuable nutrients would have to look elsewhere than commercially promotional advertising and claims.

There's nothing wrong with saying 'This sweetened bubbly beverage contains quinine' but saying 'Zilch Brand Tonic Water is proven to help in the treatment of malaria' just begs for a 'put up or shut up'.

and, I *love* quinine water. haven't had any malaria recurrences in ages.

Zinj

 

[themadhair]

So Madhair, you like science and law.

Try and look further.

Can I take you complete lack of comment regarding the Diamond Food situation an admission that you accept the FDA got that one right? So far the only case that has had the relevant dox posted is the Diamond Foods case. Why are people abandoning that example to throw out other claims? If you got the Diamond Foods case so wrong what confidence should other people have that any other example you refer to is accurate (particularly in the absence of dox)?

The sad thing is that there are multiple legitimate complaints that can be made about the FDA – but people are seemingly so eager to use rhetoric and exaggeration that they floor their own argument before they even get started.

Structure/function claims have historically appeared on the labels of conventional foods and dietary supplements as well as drugs. However, the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) established some special regulatory procedures for such claims for dietary supplement labels. Structure/function claims describe the role of a nutrient or dietary ingredient intended to affect normal structure or function in humans, for example, "calcium builds strong bones." In addition, they may characterize the means by which a nutrient or dietary ingredient acts to maintain such structure or function, for example, "fiber maintains bowel regularity," or "antioxidants maintain cell integrity," or they may describe general well-being from consumption of a nutrient or dietary ingredient. Structure/function claims may also describe a benefit related to a nutrient deficiency disease (like vitamin C and scurvy), as long as the statement also tells how widespread such a disease is in the United States.

Damn you. I was hoping to wait until type4 put his foot into his mouth regarding the apples before smacking him with this.

What some posters on this forum seem to missing is that in a lot of cases, and Diamond Foods is a great example of this, the food claims being made really don’t have scientific support and/or were gross exaggerations. This important little detail is missed when they launch their tirades against the FDA. And it is sad to see them doing that given that there really is much to criticise about the FDA.

 

[uniquemand]

I really enjoy the positioning of alternative health as being opposed to both scientology and mainstream medicine. False dichotomy, discussion over.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Like I said, nutrients do handle some things. Vitamin C cures and prevents scurvy. There are other things.

 

[uniquemand]

Yes, and "mainstream medicine" recognizes this.

 

[themadhair]

Like I said, nutrients do handle some things. Vitamin C cures and prevents scurvy. There are other things.

When did the FDA claim otherwise? Why are people using examples like Diamond Foods to insinuate that the FDA would ban such claims??????