• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

FDA Tyranny


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#1 Johann

  • Guest
  • 372 posts
  • -3

Posted 29 December 2009 - 03:46 PM


<h1 class="Headline">F</h1>Posted Image<h1 class="Headline">DA dupes Interpol to achieve illegal kidnapping and deportation of herbal formulator Greg Caton</h1>(NaturalNews) The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today stands accused of taking part in the kidnapping and illegal extradition of a permanent resident of Ecuador, in violation of both international law and Ecuadorian law.

Greg Caton, owner and operator of Alpha Omega Labs (www.AltCancer.com), an herbal products company that sells anti-cancer herbal remedies made with Ecuadorian medicinal herbs, was arrested at gunpoint at a road checkpoint in Ecuador, then transported to an Ecuadorian holding facility to await a hearing on December 14, 2009. Caton was expected to be set free by the Ecuadorian judge at that hearing based on the facts of the case which indicated Caton's permanent residency in Ecuador is legal and valid.

Three days before the hearing could take place, Caton was taken from his holding facility and, with the help of U.S. State Department employees, involuntarily placed on an American Airlines plane headed for Miami. An Ecuadorian judge rushed to the airport in Guayaquil and demanded that Caton be released from the plane, stating that the attempted deportation was illegal, but American Airlines employees reportedly refused to allow Caton to leave the plane, stating that the plane was "U.S. territory" and that Ecuadorian law did not apply there (even though the plane was still on the tarmac in Guayaquil and under the direction of the air traffic control tower there).

The plane then departed Guayaquil and continued its flight to Miami where Greg Caton was held in a federal detention facility to await trial in the U.S.

His crimes? Selling herbal medicine and daring to tell the truth about those medicines on his website.

By the way, you can listen to my exclusive interview with Cathryn Caton, who details these events in a downloadable MP3 audio file. Find the file here: http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Po...


FDA vs. Greg Caton
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has, for many years, pursued Caton, accusing him of selling "unapproved drugs" -- herbal medicines that have never been, and will never be, approved by the FDA to treat anything. He was convicted of these crimes in 2003 and served 33 months in federal prison.

After serving his term, Caton was on probation for another three years. As Greg Caton's wife explained to me in an exclusive interview, eighteen months into that probation, Caton received word that a "rogue FDA agent" named John Armand was intimidating his ex-employees in an attempt to convince them to testify against Caton in order to have him convicted of further charges that would lead to more prison time.

After submitting a request to his presiding judge to ask that the remainder of his probation be excused, Caton moved to Ecuador and acquired permanent residency there, in part to escape persecution by what he saw as a rogue FDA agent violating the law in an effort to see Caton prosecuted yet again.

As you'll see below, this fear was not unfounded.


Selling anti-cancer herbs is no crime in Ecuador
In Ecuador, by the way, selling herbs and accurately describing their medicinal properties is not a crime. It's common sense.

Every pharmacy, health food store, shaman and medicine man openly talks about the anti-cancer properties of various herbs. No one goes to prison for selling medicinal herbs in Ecuador -- the very idea seems silly. Why would any nation want to lock up its healers?

So the "crimes" for which Caton was convicted in the USA aren't even considered crimes in more medicinally enlightened countries such as Ecuador. There, people like Caton are considered valuable members of society.

Back in the U.S., the only real crime Caton was now guilty of was failing to serve his last 18 months of probation. But even that probation sentence was based on the false crime of Caton selling medicinal herbs while accurately describing their health-related properties. In other words, if not for the FDA's persecution of all herbalists who sell anti-cancer herbs, Caton would never have had jail time nor probation to begin with.


The FDA invokes Interpol
When the FDA realized Caton had moved to Ecuador, they went to work to try to have Caton arrested internationally. In order to accomplish this, they needed to have Caton listed as a wanted fugitive with Interpol, the international police database headquartered in Lyon, France.

Interpol is normally reserved for listing serious criminals: Murderers, rapists, terrorists, international money launderers, war criminals and the like. NaturalNews contacted Interpol to inquire as to how Gregory Caton, an herbal formulator violating nothing more than probation, could have been listed with Interpol as a wanted international fugitive with a so-called "Red Notice" -- Interpol's highest alert level. This is the kind of alert level someone like Osama Bin Laden might normally merit with Interpol.

We were told by the U.S. Interpol office (under the DOJ), "those individuals placed on a Most Wanted List are the ones who have allegedly committed the most heinous of crimes for a very long period of time."

In other words, the Interpol "Red Notice" designation -- which was applied to Greg Caton's listing -- is never applied to people who merely skip probation. The Greg Caton listing with Interpol, NaturalNews learned, was off protocol. Someone, it seemed, had managed to exploit the DOJ / Interpol system to get Caton listed as an international fugitive when he was merely guilty of skipping out on the last 18 months of his probation.


Exaggerating the information with Interpol
To make the Interpol listing sound more serious, paperwork was submitted to Interpol decision makers that listed Caton's offenses as "drugs related crimes, fraud."

This implies that Caton was engaged in some sort of serious drug operation: Drug smuggling, perhaps, or drug dealing. In reality, his only crime was selling medicinal herbs that the FDA mislabels "drugs" in its own bizarre regulatory language -- the same language that calls cherries "drugs" if they are sold alongside any words describing their benefits for relieving arthritis pain and inflammation.

To the FDA, even a bottle of water can be considered a "drug" if it's sold with the claim that it prevents dehydration, a medical condition.

The obvious question in all this, then, is: Who could have managed to exploit the Interpol system and get Greg Caton listed as an international fugitive?


Clues lead back to the FDA's Office of Criminal Investigation
The clue comes right from the Interpol listing itself, where it describes the origin of the "arrest warrant" as Lafayette, Louisiana. You can see the Interpol listing here: http://www.interpol.int/public/data...

Lafayette, Louisiana is the former operating base of FDA criminal investigations officer John Armand, the agent who went after Caton in 1999 and who managed to get him convicted of a felony crime (selling medicinal herbs) in 2003.

NaturalNews attempted to contact John Armand to get his comments for this story. I called the FDA office in Lafayette, Louisiana, identified myself as a reporter for NaturalNews, and asked to speak with agent John Armand. I was told he had been relocated to Florida and could now be reached out of the Jacksonville office.

I called the FDA's Jacksonville office, identified myself and asked to speak with agent John Armand for his comments on this story. I was told that I must first speak to a "press officer" of the FDA, as only a press officer could offer public comment. The next day, I was able to reach FDA press officer Mike Kelly whose reply mirrors FDA official policy: "No comment."

The FDA, he explained, never comments on any "ongoing investigation." In all, I placed five phone calls to various offices of the FDA, each time asking to speak with John Armand to get his side of this story. In every case, I was stonewalled and either told to talk to someone else or given the "no comment" reply.


Recap
Just to make sure you're following the twisted details of this story, here's a quick recap:

Greg Caton, a U.S. citizen and legal Ecuadorian permanent resident operating a legal Ecuadorian business selling medicinal herbs to customers around the world, was arrested at a road checkpoint in Ecuador. A few days later, against the demands of an Ecuadorian judge, he was involuntarily placed onto an American Airlines commercial jet where he was flown to Miami and put in a federal holding facility.

As Cathryn Caton told me in a recent interview (http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Po...), "I blame American Airlines as much as I do the U.S. To me, they are part of this illegal kidnapping... to me it's a terrorist act. They helped and cooperated with illegally kidnapping my husband and flying him to the U.S. They were told repeatedly by this Ecuadorian federal judge that he is not to leave the country, and they cooperated with these U.S. officials to illegally remove Greg from the country, against Ecuadorian court order."

His arrest in Ecuador was made possible by the "Red Notice" listing with Interpol. That listing was submitted through the United States National Central Bureau (USNCB), under the DOJ (Department of Justice), and it was submitted to the USNCB by the FDA. Within the FDA, the source for the listing was the Lafayette office, where agent John Armand operated.

The "Red Notice" listing, however, was off-protocol because Greg Caton was only guilty of skipping out on probation, not engaging in the kind of "heinous crimes" normally required to achieve a Red Notice listing with Interpol, which is normally reserved for terrorists, mass murderers and war criminals.

The Interpol listing was the key to getting Greg Caton arrested and illegally deported from Ecuador, without the U.S. engaging in any sort of formal extradition process as required by international law. In essence, the United States of America kidnapped Greg Caton, denied him his civil liberties under Ecuadorian law (and even perhaps under U.S. law), and illegally transported him out of Ecuador against the demands of an Ecuadorian judge.

This entire charade was masterminded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which managed to trick Interpol into flagging Caton with a "Red Notice" status even though his only outstanding crime was skipping out on probation to go seek a life of peace in a nation that welcomed his medicines instead of criminalizing them.


Does Cansema work?
Greg Caton's top-selling anti-cancer formulation is called Cansema, and it is sold by Alpha Omega Labs as an effective herbal treatment for topical cancers. If you have skin cancer of any kind, I encourage you to learn about Cansema and how it has eliminated cancers in many people. Even though Greg is now imprisoned in the U.S., Alpha Omega Labs is still open for business, and you can purchase Cansema online right now at www.AltCancer.com (note: NaturalNews has no financial relationship whatsoever with Alpha Omega Labs or Greg Caton).

Behind all the accusations, prosecutions and legal entanglements, the real question in all this seems to have been entirely avoided by U.S. health authorities. That question is, of course, does Cansema work? Does it really eliminate topical cancers?

If it works, then why all the criminal accusations against Greg Caton in the first place? Why the absurd labeling of his herbal products as "unapproved drugs" when even Caton himself doesn't call them drugs? He simply (and accurately) describes them as medicinal herbs, which is what they are. I find it fascinating that if I place a bottle of Cansema in my pocket when I board a plane in Ecuador, it's just "herbs," but when I exit the plane in Miami, suddenly those herbs have been transformed into "unapproved drugs" by the regulatory language police who operate in the U.S. much like the Ministry of Truth from George Orwell's novel 1984.

Regardless of what the product is called, the FDA isn't at all interested in whether Cansema actually works. The mere fact that the herbs were sold as a natural cancer treatment without FDA approval is enough to have Caton condemned as an international criminal. But in taking this stance, the FDA misses out on the thousands of satisfied customers who have successfully used Cansema to cure their own cancers.

Case in point: Dr. Brian O'Leary, a former NASA astronaut who has published over 100 scientific papers in peer-reviewed science literature (http://www.brianoleary.info/about.html). Dr. O'Leary is a customer of Greg Caton's. When he heard about Caton's illegal arrest and deportation from Ecuador, he issued this passionate statement:


Statement from Dr. Brian O'Leary
Greg Caton is a friend of mine and an extraordinary healer. I was shocked to hear about his kidnapping and illegal deportation to the U.S., regardless of perceptions of his legal status within the U.S., something I understand to be a mild violation at most. He is a legal resident of Ecuador and conducts a legal alternative health product [company] here. I thoroughly support his work in healing untold thousands of people of cancer and other serious diseases.

My own healing happened when Greg arrived at our home two years ago with his product Cansema. I had just been diagnosed with basal cell skin cancer after a biopsy had been taken from a very large and deep lesion on my back. I was scheduled for surgery the following week. I cancelled the surgery and applied the Cansema (a black salve consisting of a mixture of herbs and a bit of zinc chloride), and, in 3-4 weeks, a black scab formed that subsequently fell off. After three applications of the salve over 2-3 months, the cancer disappeared, leaving only a slight discoloration where the cancer had been.

An examination by a dermatologist at the St. Agustin clinic in Loja, Ecuador, showed that the cancer was completely gone. No new lesions have formed anywhere on my body, and diagnostic blood tests for any systemic cancers recently showed negatives, i.e., no cancer in my body.

On the larger issue of the suppression of alternative possibilities in the health, environmental and technology fields, we see a pattern emerging that the true geniuses of innovation are all too often violently suppressed by authorities who illegally, unethically and immorally punish these true pioneers of our time -- solely because of powerful vested interests that are far less effective in solving the problems presented.

This is an outrage, and I ask that, if justice has any meaning left, that Greg be released immediately from his current detention and flown back to his residence in Ecuador. This plea represents one of many coming from those of us who strongly feel that justice can only be served by supporting rather than condemning those of us willing and able to move humanity into a new paradigm of healing and sustainability.

If Mr. Caton is not immediately returned, and those who illegally bribed, kidnapped, deported and detained him are not held accountable, then many of us will need to take this issue to its next level for public airing.

- Brian O'Leary, Ph.D., former U.S. astronaut


Why healing is a crime in America
As these events clearly demonstrate, selling products that actually help people heal is a crime in America. There's a wonderful book on the topic, in fact, by author Kenny Ausubel, entitled, When Healing Becomes A Crime (http://www.amazon.com/When-Healing-...)

If you take a chance to read this book, you will discover that the kind of lawless tyranny, oppression and intimidation that has just been demonstrated against Greg Caton is nothing new for U.S. health authorities. Similarly unscrupulous activities were being undertaken by the AMA in the first half of the 20th century in a desperate attempt to destroy the credibility (and livelihood) of Harry Hoxsey, a man who also manufactured and sold topical anti-cancer salves.

To this day, intimidation campaigns continue against companies selling anti-cancer remedies. It happens so often that one day when I was walking along the sidewalk in Boca Raton, I met a couple who, when they realized who I was, told me they had been forced to flee the United States to pursue their anti-cancer stem cell work in another country.

Mexico, the Bahamas, Central and South America are all full of expat scientists, alternative medicine doctors, herbalists and naturopaths who have been forced to flee the USA or face imprisonment for their "crimes" of treating cancer with things other than FDA-sanctioned chemotherapy, radiation or surgery. This is why Americans have virtually no access to cancer clinics that offer real hope for healing. Instead, the American population is relegated to suffering the toxic side effects of chemotherapy and radiation under the "guidance" of nutritionally-ignorant oncologists who are poor doctors, but excellent followers of the FDA regime.

What Greg Caton's illegal arrest and deportation really represent is the ongoing war of tyranny against healers that's still pursued by the FDA and its "secret police" Office of Criminal Investigations (OCI).

This OCI, it turns out, operates with no oversight and no respect for the law of any land. Its employees and contractors openly engage in the intimidation of individuals engaged in the selling of natural products, routinely threatening them with imprisonment, armed raids, the seizure of their products and criminal prosecutions. Even Dr. Andrew Weil was recently threatened in this manner by the FDA. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027303_t...)

But NaturalNews asks the question: Who does the OCI answer to?

The answer is no one. There is no Congressional oversight, no judicial oversight and no civil rights protections for individuals targeted by the FDA's OCI. The U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights -- which are supposed to guarantee freedom of speech for herbalists as well as everyone else -- are thrown out the window by the OCI. Once you are targeted by the OCI, you have no rights to free speech. You are considered an enemy of the state and can find yourself listed on Interpol alongside terrorists and war criminals even though your only crime might be selling herbal creams to natural health consumers.

The FDA claims its OCI office helps protect the American people from unscrupulous quacks and charlatans. Certainly, there is a role for that function in any society, as many companies will inevitably try to cheat the public by selling health-related products that don't work (Tamiflu comes to mind, incidentally). But do we really need to be protected from an herbal product that works? How is Greg Caton's selling of herbal medicine harming anyone at all? His product really works, and if the FDA was interested in what works, you would think they might be interested in embracing herbalists instead of criminalizing them.


Anti-cancer herbs are common knowledge in Ecuador
That all this is going on in the USA is considered quite bizarre to locals in Ecuador, by the way. They are astonished at the idea that the United States of America would take a tax-paying, economy-boosting business person selling medicinal herbs and throw them in prison as criminals where the state must now foot the bill with taxpayer dollars. It

Keep in mind that Greg Caton was operating a perfectly legal business in Ecuador, with all necessary licensing, taxes and regulatory requirements. He was purchasing herbs from farmers, Shamans and land owners, then reformulating those herbs into long-proven anti-cancer remedies that were then sold to customers all over the world. He was breaking no laws in Ecuador, and in fact, he was contributing to the Ecuadorian economy by boosting exports and buying bulk herbs from all over Ecuador. Caton was a huge economic asset to the nation of Ecuador.

But he was a huge liability to the U.S. cancer industry which continues to base its business model on the intimidation and criminalization of anyone who offers cancer solutions outside the realm of pharmaceuticals, radiation and surgery. The cancer industry's enforcement arm is the Food and Drug Administration, a dubious agency that follows no law (literally, there are no laws limiting the actions of the FDA) and operates with virtually no oversight whatsoever. Essentially, the FDA operates like the mob, respecting no law while using tactics of intimidation to assert its power and authority over others.


The failure of Interpol
Interpol, for its part, is already shrouded in corruption controversy. It's top chief now stands accused of maintaining links to organized crime, accepting bribes, and maintaining a relationship with a convicted smuggler of real drugs (not herbal medicines) -- a man named Glen Agliotti. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8...)

NaturalNews has learned that Interpol is routinely abused by profit-seekers in India, who use India's arcane "dowry laws" to label innocent spouses as international fugitives in order to blackmail them for payoff money. Interpol has openly participated in this blackmail scam for many years, allowing its website to be used as a point of leverage for "dowry scammers" (http://www.merinews.com/article/abu...)

We also found complaints about the abuse of Interpol by corporations in Dubai that are using the flimsy judicial system there to blame foreigners for corporate embezzlement when, in reality, people in Dubai are walking away with the cash. (http://detainedindubai.org/Detained...)

In fact, if you begin to dig into this story, you'll find that Interpol is frequently used by scammers to red-flag innocent victims, so it's not much of a surprise to learn that the FDA rigged Interpol to list Greg Caton as a criminal mastermind in order to have him arrested, kidnapped and illegally deported to the United States.

Certainly, Interpol has some useful function in the world, as the sharing of police intelligence about truly dangerous, violent criminals seems a worthy goal. But when the system is used to destroy the lives of innocent victims who are guilty of no such heinous crimes, it becomes a tool of the destruction of human rights. Rather than protecting the innocent, in this case Interpol was used by the FDA to persecute the innocent. And that speaks strongly about the lack of credibility at Interpol. Its "Red Notice" listings apparently carry no more credibility than a plastic police badge found in a box of Cracker Jack.


About the term "kidnapping"
Some may question my use of the term "kidnapping" to describe the illegal arrest and deportation of Greg Caton from Ecuador. But if you carefully examine the definition of the word, you'll find it applies quite precisely to this situation:

Kidnapping: To abduct by force or fraud.
(Random House Dictionary)

As in, to involuntarily remove someone from their own home or property, with the threat of force (firearms), without the due process of law.

The United States of America, under this definition, is guilty of kidnapping an Ecuadorian resident. In no way did the USA engage in any legal extradition processes, nor did the USA even acknowledge any Ecuadorian law. Greg Caton was simply hauled away without a fair hearing and without any opportunity to defend himself against the charges being leveled against him.

This is not merely a violation of Greg Caton's civil rights, it is a violation of international law.


Action items: What you can do right now
You have the power to help rights these wrong and bring the FDA's actions in this matter to light.

As the editor of NaturalNews, I urge you to forward this story to your Senators and Congressional representatives. Someone please also make sure this story gets into the hands of Sen. Charles Grassley.

Protest this action with your elected representatives. In your own words, tell them why you think this kidnapping of Greg Caton is a great injustice that needs to be corrected. Ask them to investigate the FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations and determine how it is that FDA agents are able to exploit Interpol listings to achieve the illegal kidnapping and deportation of U.S. citizens living abroad.

Call, fax or write your representatives today:

Contact information for the U.S. Senate:
http://www.senate.gov/general/conta...

Contact information for the U.S. House of Representatives:
Call (202)225-3121 for the switchboard operator, or visit:
http://writerep.house.gov/writerep/...

Contact information for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration:
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/ReportaPr...

Contact information to file a complaint with the U.S. Dept. of Justice:
http://www.justice.gov/crt/split/co...
(Choose the option to file a complaint about a law enforcement agency, then file your complaint about the FDA OCI.)

Report fraud or abuse of Interpol's name (which is essentially what the FDA has done in this case):
http://www.interpol.int/public/mail...


Why this truth must be told
People will ask me, upon this publication of this story, why I'm willing to speak out against the FDA, the DOJ and Interpol.

Actually, I have nothing against any of these organizations as long as they serve the People rather than the interests of domineering corporations. The FDA, DOJ and Interpol all have an important place in a just society -- but only if they stick to their original charter and use their resources to serve the greater good.

What this story on NaturalNews reveals is that each of these organizations has, in one way or another, been hijacked by corporate interests in order to suppress the actions of one individual whose products threaten the profits of the pharmaceutical industry. In essence, Interpol has now been used to enforce the profit aims of Big Pharma, and that's not what Interpol is supposed to be used for. It's supposed to be about protecting the innocent, not allowing itself to be subjugated by Big Business (because, of course, the pharmaceutical industry virtually runs the FDA these days).

When Big Business runs the regulatory offices, the criminal investigation offices and the police organizations, the world is no longer safe for anyone who threatens the status quo. When the police intelligence community is used as law enforcement puppets by the corporate puppet masters, anyone who acts in competition with the established profit centers of corporate America (and cancer is a huge profit center) is immediately targeted for criminalization, prosecution and incarceration.

These are not the traits of a free society. They are not the actions of a justice system. They aren't even what you would expect to find in a western nation that claims to operate under a free market enterprise system. And yet this is exactly what we are seeing in the United States of America today, where this nation of regulatory tyrants is now openly engaged in the international kidnapping of innocents who have, for understandable reasons, chosen to reside in countries that do not consider herbalists to be criminals.

Free Greg Caton.

P.S. Listen to the audio interview with Cathryn Caton. It's a free MP3 download that's commercial free and DRM-free: http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Po...Share533<script src="http://static.ak.fbc...hp/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"><script type="text/javascript">yahooBuzzArticleHeadline = "FDA dupes Interpol to achieve illegal kidnapping and deportation of herbal formulator Greg Caton";yahooBuzzArticleCategory = "health";yahooBuzzArticleType = "text";yahooBuzzArticleId = window.location.href;<script type="text/javascript" src="http://d.yimg.com/ds/badge2.js" badgetype="large-votes">Buzz up!65 votes<script type="text/javascript">digg_topic = 'HEALTH';<script src="http://digg.com/tool...ls/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript">

About the author: Mike Adams is a consumer health advocate with a mission to teach personal and planetary health to the public He is a prolific writer and has published thousands of articles, interviews, reports and consumer guides, impacting the lives of millions of readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits from reading his articles. Adams is an honest, independent journalist and accepts no money or commissions on the third-party products he writes about or the companies he promotes. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a maker of energy efficient LED lights that greatly reduce CO2 emissions. He's also the CEO of a highly successful email newsletter software company that develops software used to send permission email campaigns to subscribers. Adams is currently the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a 501©3 non-profit, and practices nature photography, Capoeira, Pilates and organic gardening. Known on the 'net as 'the Health Ranger,' Adams shares his ethics, mission statements and personal health statistics at www.HealthRanger.org


#2 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 29 December 2009 - 03:57 PM

Stop the presses! Naturalnews is again spreading propaganda. Mike Adams, aka "Ranger", is a monster, basically an accomplice to mass murder. I have no regrets for calling out those monsters who prey on the weak and dying, i.e. cancer patients. People who go on to sell them useless herbs meant to replace standard therapy.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 Johann

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 372 posts
  • -3

Posted 29 December 2009 - 04:04 PM

The FDA, which approved Vioxx, that killed some 35,000*, according to the FDA ITSELF, must then be a MASS MURDERER.


*This is the FDA's estimate as to how many were killed by Vioxx. Other sources say it could be as many as 60,000.

Edited by Johann, 29 December 2009 - 04:05 PM.


#4 OneScrewLoose

  • Guest
  • 2,378 posts
  • 51
  • Location:California
  • NO

Posted 30 December 2009 - 06:29 AM

The FDA, which approved Vioxx, that killed some 35,000*, according to the FDA ITSELF, must then be a MASS MURDERER.


*This is the FDA's estimate as to how many were killed by Vioxx. Other sources say it could be as many as 60,000.


Imagine if cancer patients took fake remodies on the same scale that Vioxx was taken...

#5 eason

  • Guest
  • 126 posts
  • 0

Posted 30 December 2009 - 07:06 AM

Fake remedies?

#6 Cappa

  • Guest
  • 66 posts
  • 0

Posted 30 December 2009 - 01:06 PM

My uncle was put into the hospital with severe cardiac irregularities after taking Vioxx.

It should be the responsibility of the individual to scrutinize all claims, whether from the conventional medical establishment or from alt-health sources, and to take ownership of his own health. I agree that Mike Adams takes things too far, but unfortunately, I see the exact same thing on the other side of the aisle (conventional medicine/regulatory authorities), where anything that doesn't involve drugs or surgery is automatically considered quackery. The FDA and other such regulatory bodies are both dinosauric and corrupt. They serve no useful purpose except to line their own pockets, and that of their cohorts, through the suffering of the people who they are supposed to represent. In other words, they are arrogantly ignorant and willfully so - that is, both by choice and by design - and we would be better served if we did away with them entirely.

Edited by Cappa, 30 December 2009 - 01:36 PM.


#7 OneScrewLoose

  • Guest
  • 2,378 posts
  • 51
  • Location:California
  • NO

Posted 30 December 2009 - 02:22 PM

My uncle was put into the hospital with severe cardiac irregularities after taking Vioxx.

It should be the responsibility of the individual to scrutinize all claims, whether from the conventional medical establishment or from alt-health sources, and to take ownership of his own health. I agree that Mike Adams takes things too far, but unfortunately, I see the exact same thing on the other side of the aisle (conventional medicine/regulatory authorities), where anything that doesn't involve drugs or surgery is automatically considered quackery. The FDA and other such regulatory bodies are both dinosauric and corrupt. They serve no useful purpose except to line their own pockets, and that of their cohorts, through the suffering of the people who they are supposed to represent. In other words, they are arrogantly ignorant and willfully so - that is, both by choice and by design - and we would be better served if we did away with them entirely.


Yeah let's let pharma companies sell any compound they want!

#8 Ami

  • Guest
  • 16 posts
  • 0

Posted 30 December 2009 - 07:52 PM

My uncle was put into the hospital with severe cardiac irregularities after taking Vioxx.

It should be the responsibility of the individual to scrutinize all claims, whether from the conventional medical establishment or from alt-health sources, and to take ownership of his own health. I agree that Mike Adams takes things too far, but unfortunately, I see the exact same thing on the other side of the aisle (conventional medicine/regulatory authorities), where anything that doesn't involve drugs or surgery is automatically considered quackery. The FDA and other such regulatory bodies are both dinosauric and corrupt. They serve no useful purpose except to line their own pockets, and that of their cohorts, through the suffering of the people who they are supposed to represent. In other words, they are arrogantly ignorant and willfully so - that is, both by choice and by design - and we would be better served if we did away with them entirely.


Yeah let's let pharma companies sell any compound they want!


I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

#9 OneScrewLoose

  • Guest
  • 2,378 posts
  • 51
  • Location:California
  • NO

Posted 30 December 2009 - 07:56 PM

Drug companies scrutinize their own product? :)

I think might die of laughter. :)

Edited by OneScrewLoose, 30 December 2009 - 07:57 PM.


#10 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 30 December 2009 - 08:45 PM

The FDA, which approved Vioxx, that killed some 35,000*, according to the FDA ITSELF, must then be a MASS MURDERER.


*This is the FDA's estimate as to how many were killed by Vioxx. Other sources say it could be as many as 60,000.

Yeah, just that the FDA did not know beforehand that the drug was harming people. In contrast to cancer scammers. They are regularly told that their pseudo-treatments, deterring people from or replacing real treatments, kill. They know the consequences beforehand, but they choose to willingly poison and/or exploit dying people. Murderers. Worse than that.

It is the responsibility of the FDA to take drugs off the market which are dangerous. They save lives, that's not the same as killing and exploiting people. And, usually, approved drugs save many more lives than they harm.

It should be the responsibility of the individual to scrutinize all claims, whether from the conventional medical establishment or from alt-health sources, and to take ownership of his own health. I agree that Mike Adams takes things too far, but unfortunately, I see the exact same thing on the other side of the aisle (conventional medicine/regulatory authorities), where anything that doesn't involve drugs or surgery is automatically considered quackery. The FDA and other such regulatory bodies are both dinosauric and corrupt. They serve no useful purpose except to line their own pockets, and that of their cohorts, through the suffering of the people who they are supposed to represent. In other words, they are arrogantly ignorant and willfully so - that is, both by choice and by design - and we would be better served if we did away with them entirely.

...which obviously couldn't be farther from the truth. US health care bodies have been investing hundreds of millions of tax payer money to test the efficacy of non-drug treatments. (so much about considering all non drug treatments quackery)

Edited by kismet, 30 December 2009 - 08:53 PM.


#11 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 31 December 2009 - 04:52 AM

I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

Yeah, because the average man on the street has such a great understanding of the scientific literature and the nature of evidence, not to mention biology, chemistry, and pharmaceutics. This would be a great form of directed evolution. Eventually the population would be enriched in biomedical PhDs, and depleted of morons. Let's get this rolling. I wonder how long it will take to see an improvement in the quality of ImmInst posts?

#12 eason

  • Guest
  • 126 posts
  • 0

Posted 31 December 2009 - 05:42 AM

Most people seek alternative treatments because they wish to avoid the negative consequences that inevitably come with chemotherapy.

In contrast to cancer scammers. They are regularly told that their pseudo-treatments, deterring people from or replacing real treatments, kill. They know the consequences beforehand, but they choose to willingly poison and/or exploit dying people. Murderers. Worse than that.


Maybe you should learn to shut your mouth until you know better? Without solid proof, you really have no room to call people cancer scammers. As a matter of fact, some of these so-called "cancer scammers" that were persecuted by the FDA for DECADES are just barely being recognized for their treatments. DECADES. That's how messed up of a system we have.

#13 Cappa

  • Guest
  • 66 posts
  • 0

Posted 31 December 2009 - 07:17 AM

It is the responsibility of the FDA to take drugs off the market which are dangerous. They save lives, that's not the same as killing and exploiting people. And, usually, approved drugs save many more lives than they harm.

Most approved drugs "work" as indicated. That is to say, they work at controlling symptoms without addressing the underlying etiology. Sometimes this approach is necessary. If I may be cynical, keeping people unwell and on drugs is also the most profitable approach, and the people who tend to fund the research and who influence most of what is researched and how the research is conducted are either the ones who are making the money or they are politically and/or financially influenced by them. Money talks, of course, and as a matter of politics, the regulatory authorities (FDA) are overly chummy to their Pharma cohorts, they tend to downplay the unintended consequences of using Pharma drugs and they display deficient objectivity towards alternative therapies. Again, as a matter of politics, palliative medical practices have a way of overly dominantly permeating into both the medical educational institutions as well as the medical culture itself and end up creating borg, one-dimensional, idiot doctors. So these are my main problems with how things are right now. Conventional medicine obviously has a place. In its current state it's just out of place.

...which obviously couldn't be farther from the truth. US health care bodies have been investing hundreds of millions of tax payer money to test the efficacy of non-drug treatments. (so much about considering all non drug treatments quackery)

I said regulatory authorities (administrations), not research offices. I have reservations about NCCAM myself, as their history has been questionable (as has the dogmatic response to their very existence by the self-proclaimed guardians of medical truth), but it seems as though they are starting to clean things up. Although, I am sympathetic over the limitations of the double-blind, placebo controlled study.

Edited by Cappa, 31 December 2009 - 07:32 AM.


#14 KimberCT

  • Guest
  • 472 posts
  • 43
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 31 December 2009 - 02:16 PM

I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

Yeah, because the average man on the street has such a great understanding of the scientific literature and the nature of evidence, not to mention biology, chemistry, and pharmaceutics. This would be a great form of directed evolution. Eventually the population would be enriched in biomedical PhDs, and depleted of morons. Let's get this rolling. I wonder how long it will take to see an improvement in the quality of ImmInst posts?





So, you're conclusion is that our current system of "zero scrutinization" is better than one where people must research their prescriptions themselves or turn to a trusted source to do the scrutinizing for them?


Do you actually consider the FDA a trusted source?  :)

#15 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 31 December 2009 - 02:39 PM

Maybe you should learn to shut your mouth until you know better? Without solid proof, you really have no room to call people cancer scammers. As a matter of fact, some of these so-called "cancer scammers" that were persecuted by the FDA for DECADES are just barely being recognized for their treatments. DECADES. That's how messed up of a system we have.

No, the burden of proof lies on those who make extraordinary claims. Most people like Ranger are not just scammers, they're much, much worse than that.

It's up to you to provide (unbiased...) sources for your claims and anecdotes, anyway. Who? Why? When?

Most approved drugs "work" as indicated. That is to say, they work at controlling symptoms without addressing the underlying etiology.
[citation needed]
Let's play a game, you name one symptomatic treatment, I name a disease modifying agent: Oseltamivir.  :)
Sometimes this approach is necessary. If I may be cynical, keeping people unwell and on drugs is also the most profitable approach, and the people who tend to fund the research and who influence most of what is researched and how the research is conducted are either the ones who are making the money or they are politically and/or financially influenced by them.
Have you ever heard about modern day capitalism? Companies that sell superior treatments will crush those that provide symptomatic treatments.
Money talks, of course, and as a matter of politics, the regulatory authorities (FDA) are overly chummy to their Pharma cohorts, they tend to downplay the unintended consequences of using Pharma drugs and they display deficient objectivity towards alternative therapies.
I love how people butchter the FDA for both being too strict or for being too lenient. Only a select few, however, consider looking at it on a case by case basis. That's a sad state of affairs.
Again, as a matter of politics, palliative medical practices have a way of overly dominantly permeating into both the medical educational institutions as well as the medical culture itself and end up creating borg, one-dimensional, idiot doctors.
[citation needed]
Strange thing is we have been pouring billions of dollars into the development of actual cures for different cancers, but we're just not there yet. Ever considered that it may be simply damn difficult to treat certain diseases?


...which obviously couldn't be farther from the truth. US health care bodies have been investing hundreds of millions of tax payer money to test the efficacy of non-drug treatments. (so much about considering all non drug treatments quackery)



I said regulatory authorities (administrations), not research offices. I have reservations about NCCAM myself, as their history has been questionable (as has the dogmatic response to their very existence by the self-proclaimed guardians of medical truth), but it seems as though they are starting to clean things up. Although, I am sympathetic over the limitations of the double-blind, placebo controlled study.

I don't see how this makes your statement less wrong? You were implying that alternative approaches are being somehow suppressed. The FDA has no power to judge any substances (be it drug or supplement) inferior and not even worth research. They have to play by their own rulebook, if there's no evidence, a treatment (again be it drug or supplement) cannot be marketed as a cure. Sure, the rules should be extended to allow easier access to experimental therapies, better use of evidence-based supplements and more, but the statement is still outright wrong as I just refuted its very core: "I see the exact same thing on the other side of the aisle (conventional medicine/regulatory authorities), where anything that doesn't involve drugs or surgery is automatically considered quackery."
Conventional medicine has been looking into unconventional treatments for decades! You see, it's true what doctors tell us, 'if it works it's medicine, if it doesn't it's quackery.'

Do you actually consider the FDA a trusted source?  :)

Yes, absolutely. Your point is moot as the patient already has the responsibility to look after hir health as well as possible, but Joe Average simply lacks the knowledge and/or time to double check everything. Emancipated patients already do the best they can; but they're not doctors and never will be. Hence they will always rely on health professionals to some degree.

Edited by kismet, 31 December 2009 - 02:44 PM.


#16 KimberCT

  • Guest
  • 472 posts
  • 43
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 31 December 2009 - 03:19 PM

 

Do you actually consider the FDA a trusted source?  :)

Yes, absolutely. Your point is moot as the patient already has the responsibility to look after hir health as well as possible, but Joe Average simply lacks the knowledge and/or time to double check everything. Emancipated patients already do the best they can; but they're not doctors and never will be. Hence they will always rely on health professionals to some degree.


Hence they would turn to a trusted source for information, such as the health professional you mentioned, rather than blind faith in a governmental agency who's #1 goal is not public health.


Joe Average doesn't determine the value of a used car on his own. He turns to Edmunds or Kelley Blue Book.
Joe Average doesn't determine the value of college degree on his own.  He turns to salary.com to evaluate career worth.
Joe Average doesn't take up home brewing on his own.  He turns to manuals, websites, and other brewers for expert advise.


Prescription drugs would be no different.  Joe Average could study them himself or turn to an expert for advise.

#17 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 31 December 2009 - 03:39 PM

Most approved drugs "work" as indicated. That is to say, they work at controlling symptoms without addressing the underlying etiology.
[citation needed]
Let's play a game, you name one symptomatic treatment, I name a disease modifying agent: Oseltamivir. :)
Sometimes this approach is necessary. If I may be cynical, keeping people unwell and on drugs is also the most profitable approach, and the people who tend to fund the research and who influence most of what is researched and how the research is conducted are either the ones who are making the money or they are politically and/or financially influenced by them.
Have you ever heard about modern day capitalism? Companies that sell superior treatments will crush those that provide symptomatic treatments.
Money talks, of course, and as a matter of politics, the regulatory authorities (FDA) are overly chummy to their Pharma cohorts, they tend to downplay the unintended consequences of using Pharma drugs and they display deficient objectivity towards alternative therapies.
I love how people butchter the FDA for both being too strict or for being too lenient. Only a select few, however, consider looking at it on a case by case basis. That's a sad state of affairs.
Again, as a matter of politics, palliative medical practices have a way of overly dominantly permeating into both the medical educational institutions as well as the medical culture itself and end up creating borg, one-dimensional, idiot doctors.
[citation needed]
Strange thing is we have been pouring billions of dollars into the development of actual cures for different cancers, but we're just not there yet. Ever considered that it may be simply damn difficult to treat certain diseases?


Yes, Certain classes of drugs are good. Antibiotics, antivirals, metformin, etc.
Certain classes are more suspect: Biphosphonates, Statins, etc.

The problem is that sometimes the superior solution can't make money.
For instance, if something can be cured by diet, there's no profit to be made there by anyone.
(It's seriously therapeutic for Diabetes, Cancer and CVD!!)

Yes, the FDA is too lenient, because you can't really rely on them to make sure that xyz is safe. You need to look at it yourself too. It's too strict when people get denied access to some substances because someone made a "drug" from it.
Ex: Pyridoxamine, Piracetam.

Edited by rwac, 31 December 2009 - 03:40 PM.


#18 shawn

  • Guest
  • 61 posts
  • -4

Posted 31 December 2009 - 04:12 PM

The biggest problem I see with this situation is you have companies looking after peoples health who are driven by profit first, so their motivations and methodologies will always be in question.
Are they merely trying to mask the symptoms thereby keeping a grip on their golden goose or are they genuinely trying to eliminate the cause thereby killing their golden goose?
And why would they do the latter?
Because they are truly good people?
In some cases this is true, but sadly, for the most part it is not as people get into medicine to make a killing (financially) but to do so they have to literally do a lot of very slow and devious killing by keeping people sick and chained to their program.
These companies are legally bound to make a profit and we all know that healthy people don't need medicine so where is the profit in making people really healthy?
So the whole basis for this system is absurd.
Why?
Because of the money.
What is the diagnosis?
The whole system is riddled with harmful parasitic pathogens.
What can we do?
Take the profit out of the medicine racket so that it becomes a public service is the only cure for this patient.
Then we can see that it is in their best interests to actually cure people (by any means and modality that actually works) and get them back into the game.
I am all for Socialized medicine.
Capitalism and medicine is like matches and gasoline....very dangerous as we can all see, and very harmful in so very many cases

Edited by shawn, 31 December 2009 - 04:13 PM.


#19 OneScrewLoose

  • Guest
  • 2,378 posts
  • 51
  • Location:California
  • NO

Posted 31 December 2009 - 04:22 PM

It is the responsibility of the FDA to take drugs off the market which are dangerous. They save lives, that's not the same as killing and exploiting people. And, usually, approved drugs save many more lives than they harm.


Conventional medicine obviously has a place. In its current state it's just out of place.


It's place? No system of medicine has extended lifespan and treated disease quite like conventional medicine. Please tell me what type of medicine you think should be the default, beyond the vague term "alternative medicine."

...which obviously couldn't be farther from the truth. US health care bodies have been investing hundreds of millions of tax payer money to test the efficacy of non-drug treatments. (so much about considering all non drug treatments quackery)

I said regulatory authorities (administrations), not research offices. I have reservations about NCCAM myself, as their history has been questionable (as has the dogmatic response to their very existence by the self-proclaimed guardians of medical truth), but it seems as though they are starting to clean things up. Although, I am sympathetic over the limitations of the double-blind, placebo controlled study.


What are these limitations you speak of? What would you have take its place?

Maybe you should learn to shut your mouth until you know better? Without solid proof, you really have no room to call people cancer scammers. As a matter of fact, some of these so-called "cancer scammers" that were persecuted by the FDA for DECADES are just barely being recognized for their treatments. DECADES. That's how messed up of a system we have.


That's just stupid. The people making the claims for the treatment of cancer have the burden of proof. I could go grind up some pine leaves, put it in a pill, say it treats cancer and then rebut any claims to the contrary by saying "Well you don't have any proof that it doesn't work."

#20 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 31 December 2009 - 04:52 PM

 

Do you actually consider the FDA a trusted source?  :|?

Yes, absolutely. Your point is moot as the patient already has the responsibility to look after hir health as well as possible, but Joe Average simply lacks the knowledge and/or time to double check everything. Emancipated patients already do the best they can; but they're not doctors and never will be. Hence they will always rely on health professionals to some degree.


Hence they would turn to a trusted source for information, such as the health professional you mentioned, rather than blind faith in a governmental agency who's #1 goal is not public health.

The FDA employs heap loads of doctors and health experts. Didn't you know that? And, additionally, reliable citations are needed for your claim that the #1 FDA goal is not public health. Are you implying that somehow there is a conspiracy going on behind closed doors and every single employee keeps hir mouth shut instead of making a killing, winning the Pulitzer prize and making history as the person to discover this conspiracy?

The biggest problem I see with this situation is you have companies looking after peoples health who are driven by profit first, so their motivations and methodologies will always be in question.
Are they merely trying to mask the symptoms thereby keeping a grip on their golden goose or are they genuinely trying to eliminate the cause thereby killing their golden goose?
And why would they do the latter?

That's a central misunderstanding that is incredibly wide-spread: cures do not mean less profit. Antibiotics can cure infections, they still sell, but why? Diseases usually can be re-acquired. Most cures still require continous treatments to work. Treatment failures will always exist. Cures can be sold at a higher price than inferior treatments. The *socio-economical* benefits of curing diseases are worth a lot to the government, so you could expect incredible, never-ending, gold-mine-worthy funding from the government and welfare organisations.
If you could 'cure' all cancers, people would still get cancer, even several times during their life! (now they just die a miserbale, painful death and you can't make a lot of money from dead people) You would make a killing selling any such treatments.

While making money often gets in the way of curing people (and that's why we have the FDA & co), it's definitely not as bad as many think (most importantly it does not prevent "big Phrma" from releasing or developing "teh Curez").

Edited by kismet, 31 December 2009 - 04:55 PM.


#21 Ami

  • Guest
  • 16 posts
  • 0

Posted 01 January 2010 - 12:40 AM

I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

Yeah, because the average man on the street has such a great understanding of the scientific literature and the nature of evidence, not to mention biology, chemistry, and pharmaceutics. This would be a great form of directed evolution. Eventually the population would be enriched in biomedical PhDs, and depleted of morons. Let's get this rolling. I wonder how long it will take to see an improvement in the quality of ImmInst posts?

In a free market and absence of the FDA private companies would fill the void.
Through competition they would undoubtedly do a better job than the FDA could ever hope for.
Of course such talk is unfathomable to those who's first instinct is to look to government to solve their problems.

Edited by Ami, 01 January 2010 - 12:43 AM.


#22 EmbraceUnity

  • Guest
  • 1,018 posts
  • 99
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 January 2010 - 04:23 AM

I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

Yeah, because the average man on the street has such a great understanding of the scientific literature and the nature of evidence, not to mention biology, chemistry, and pharmaceutics. This would be a great form of directed evolution. Eventually the population would be enriched in biomedical PhDs, and depleted of morons. Let's get this rolling. I wonder how long it will take to see an improvement in the quality of ImmInst posts?

In a free market and absence of the FDA private companies would fill the void.
Through competition they would undoubtedly do a better job than the FDA could ever hope for.
Of course such talk is unfathomable to those who's first instinct is to look to government to solve their problems.


Nobody has outlawed private certification companies, and indeed many do exist, though they are often as corrupt or more corrupt than the FDA. I don't think anyone is that impressed when they see that little Real™ logo on their cheese, or a Quality Assurance International logo.

Snake oil salesmen when left to their own devices will prey upon the weak and credulous, and most people have neither the time nor the inclination to figure out what to believe. That is why experts exist. It is true that the more we rely on experts the more we need to rely on them, because we become complacent, and that is more of a human weakness and a flaw of our educational system. Nevertheless, even the most scrupulous public would fall victim to all sorts of bullshit.

Think about all the people whose investments were directly or indirectly tied to all these derivatives and mortgage backed securities.... none of it was regulated... and guess what... a bunch of people were pushing this crap on unsuspecting people, and it even found its way into pension funds. Are you saying the millions of people who were devastated by being indirectly tied up in this casino capitalism deserved what happened to them? Or how about all those old people that Mr Keating swindled in the 80s during the Savings and Loan Crisis? Sure maybe the con artists will get exposed in the long run in a "free market".... you know... long after peoples' lives have been ruined and a new crop of con artists hatch some other scheme.

One of the reasons the FDA hasn't been doing such a great job lately is that we have had repeated efforts from both the presidency and the congress to neuter the FDA and staff it with incompetent fools. The other reason is that the concentration of wealth and power has been allowed to go unchecked, and this has given corporations enormous power to lobby and bribe their way into favorable regulations. Regulatory capture would be less likely to occur if we weren't constantly giving handouts to the rich.

Edited by progressive, 01 January 2010 - 04:31 AM.


#23 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 01 January 2010 - 05:42 AM

I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

Yeah, because the average man on the street has such a great understanding of the scientific literature and the nature of evidence, not to mention biology, chemistry, and pharmaceutics. This would be a great form of directed evolution. Eventually the population would be enriched in biomedical PhDs, and depleted of morons. Let's get this rolling. I wonder how long it will take to see an improvement in the quality of ImmInst posts?

In a free market and absence of the FDA private companies would fill the void.
Through competition they would undoubtedly do a better job than the FDA could ever hope for.
Of course such talk is unfathomable to those who's first instinct is to look to government to solve their problems.

Yes, there is not even a shred of doubt. Alan Greenspan didn't have any doubt that unregulated companies would do what was best, because their own money and reputation was on the line. After it all blew sky high, he decided that he'd been wrong about that. But ya know what? I'm willing to give your plan a go. After the bodies start piling up, and a bunch of kids are born with flippers where hands are supposed to be, maybe the free marketeers will have a rethink. Maybe it would quiet down the conspiracy theorists for a generation or so, until people forget again. Part of the reason that the FDA is the way it is is because the public at large is so freaking risk-averse. The FDA will not approve a drug now unless it is squeaky clean, because that's what the people and their representatives seem to want. When they let a Vioxx slip through, they catch hell. When they don't approve a cure for the common cold because of minor safety issues, they catch hell. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

#24 Ami

  • Guest
  • 16 posts
  • 0

Posted 01 January 2010 - 06:52 AM

I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

Yeah, because the average man on the street has such a great understanding of the scientific literature and the nature of evidence, not to mention biology, chemistry, and pharmaceutics. This would be a great form of directed evolution. Eventually the population would be enriched in biomedical PhDs, and depleted of morons. Let's get this rolling. I wonder how long it will take to see an improvement in the quality of ImmInst posts?

In a free market and absence of the FDA private companies would fill the void.
Through competition they would undoubtedly do a better job than the FDA could ever hope for.
Of course such talk is unfathomable to those who's first instinct is to look to government to solve their problems.


Nobody has outlawed private certification companies, and indeed many do exist, though they are often as corrupt or more corrupt than the FDA.

I should have been more clear my comment above was actually pertaining to the FDA's monopoly on drug approval and denying individuals the choice of alternative treatment.

I don't think anyone is that impressed when they see that little Real™ logo on their cheese, or a Quality Assurance International logo.

And I certainly am not impressed by any assurance from the FDA.

Snake oil salesmen when left to their own devices will prey upon the weak and credulous, and most people have neither the time nor the inclination to figure out what to believe. That is why experts exist. It is true that the more we rely on experts the more we need to rely on them, because we become complacent, and that is more of a human weakness and a flaw of our educational system. Nevertheless, even the most scrupulous public would fall victim to all sorts of bullshit.

No amount of regulation will ever prevent snake oil salesmen from preying upon the weak. I agree, our educational system is flawed, after all it is government run.

Think about all the people whose investments were directly or indirectly tied to all these derivatives and mortgage backed securities.... none of it was regulated... and guess what... a bunch of people were pushing this crap on unsuspecting people, and it even found its way into pension funds. Are you saying the millions of people who were devastated by being indirectly tied up in this casino capitalism deserved what happened to them? Or how about all those old people that Mr Keating swindled in the 80s during the Savings and Loan Crisis? Sure maybe the con artists will get exposed in the long run in a "free market".... you know... long after peoples' lives have been ruined and a new crop of con artists hatch some other scheme.

One of the reasons the FDA hasn't been doing such a great job lately is that we have had repeated efforts from both the presidency and the congress to neuter the FDA and staff it with incompetent fools. The other reason is that the concentration of wealth and power has been allowed to go unchecked, and this has given corporations enormous power to lobby and bribe their way into favorable regulations. Regulatory capture would be less likely to occur if we weren't constantly giving handouts to the rich.

Yes, I do believe people should be responsible for their own money. If they choose to gamble in an unregulated market then they should be prepared to pay the consequences, also last time I checked the SEC hasn't been doing such a great job at preventing people from getting scammed.
The fact is that the stock market is full of professional crooks all operating under the "regulation" of the SEC. That's not to say you can't profit from the markets, but you better know what your doing.
Those that look to government to protect them will eventually be disappointed.


#25 KimberCT

  • Guest
  • 472 posts
  • 43
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 01 January 2010 - 01:00 PM

I'd bet less people would die if they had to scrutinize drugs themselves rather than the false sense of security they have with the FDA.

Yeah, because the average man on the street has such a great understanding of the scientific literature and the nature of evidence, not to mention biology, chemistry, and pharmaceutics. This would be a great form of directed evolution. Eventually the population would be enriched in biomedical PhDs, and depleted of morons. Let's get this rolling. I wonder how long it will take to see an improvement in the quality of ImmInst posts?

In a free market and absence of the FDA private companies would fill the void.
Through competition they would undoubtedly do a better job than the FDA could ever hope for.
Of course such talk is unfathomable to those who's first instinct is to look to government to solve their problems.

Yes, there is not even a shred of doubt. Alan Greenspan didn't have any doubt that unregulated companies would do what was best, because their own money and reputation was on the line. After it all blew sky high, he decided that he'd been wrong about that. But ya know what? I'm willing to give your plan a go. After the bodies start piling up, and a bunch of kids are born with flippers where hands are supposed to be, maybe the free marketeers will have a rethink. Maybe it would quiet down the conspiracy theorists for a generation or so, until people forget again. Part of the reason that the FDA is the way it is is because the public at large is so freaking risk-averse. The FDA will not approve a drug now unless it is squeaky clean, because that's what the people and their representatives seem to want. When they let a Vioxx slip through, they catch hell. When they don't approve a cure for the common cold because of minor safety issues, they catch hell. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

You believe Alan Greenspan is a free marketer?!  You're deregulated companies were still subject to 999,998 regulations rather than original 999,999.  That's like blaming the current economic crisis on capitalism despite massive government bailouts and a century their interference in the market.  Economic fascism does nothing but enrich those already in power.  Big business and government win.  The rest of us, the consumers, lose.


As for the FDA, guess what? The bodies are already piling up.  You yourself have just stated part of the problem above.  Why do you continue to defend them like they're the best solution we could possibly hope for?

#26 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 01 January 2010 - 02:30 PM

Great, another thread taken over by dogmatic hard-core libertarians. Sigh.

You believe Alan Greenspan is a free marketer?! You're deregulated companies were still subject to 999,998 regulations rather than original 999,999. That's like blaming the current economic crisis on capitalism despite massive government bailouts and a century their interference in the market. Economic fascism does nothing but enrich those already in power. Big business and government win. The rest of us, the consumers, lose.


[citation needed]

Edited by kismet, 01 January 2010 - 02:32 PM.


#27 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 01 January 2010 - 04:36 PM

You believe Alan Greenspan is a free marketer?!

Alan Greenspan, devotee of Ayn Rand? They used to hang out together. She even had a pet name for him; she called him "The Undertaker". Sorry, but he's one of your guys, and he is one of the top-tier perps in the near-destruction of the world economy.

#28 OneScrewLoose

  • Guest
  • 2,378 posts
  • 51
  • Location:California
  • NO

Posted 01 January 2010 - 05:15 PM

Libertarians don't seem to understand the need of skill specialization in the context of society. One person has only so much time, and can only learn so much. This person contributes to himself and to society through what he has learned and his expertise, focusing on that (say, medicine), while another person focuses on something else (i.e. stocks). By combining these sets of expertise we build a society, where one's person's expertise can support another person in some way. In a libertarian society, everyone would have to be completely responsible unto themselves, and would have to learn more than one person realistically can. Libertarianism ignores the fact that we are where we are as a society from both individual and combined efforts, not just one (libertarianism), or the other (communism). There is a reason why people have evolved to go completely crazy (literally) by being isolated from social contact for a significant amount of time.

That being said, the FDA combines people's expertise so that it can do the work for other people whose expertise may differ. It may not be all sunshine and roses, but it's a necesssary body.

Edited by OneScrewLoose, 01 January 2010 - 05:17 PM.


#29 shawn

  • Guest
  • 61 posts
  • -4

Posted 01 January 2010 - 06:28 PM

The case of aspartame shows just how such an organization can be co-opted and used in a corrupt fashion.
Persoanlly I agree with much of what onescrewloose has said as Gov't agencies are necessary, but they are a 2 edged sword in that they can be abused and be a source of great evil, just as much as they have the potential for great good.
A short review of recent history proves this absolutely.
I an not anti-gov't, just anti-corruption.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#30 eason

  • Guest
  • 126 posts
  • 0

Posted 01 January 2010 - 06:53 PM

Antineoplastons

The FDA persecuted the doctor behind them to no end. He was, and still is (though changing), viewed by his peers for the past 30-40 years as a "quack" and a "scammer." Yet, it turns out, antineoplastons do work.

After numerous "failed" studies conducted by American researchers over the past decades, which Burzynski repeatedly and suspiciously claimed were rigged by authorities, published Japanese research proving their efficacy forced the FDA to finally take Burzynski's antineoplastons seriously.

You can find articles, many of them very recent, all over the Internet to show the extent to which this "unconventional" and controversial doctor was outcast from the medical community.

The FDA is filled with bureaucrats from large pharmaceutical corporations and other controversial food corporations such as Monsanto. Its history is riddled with scandal. The concept of the FDA would be great if it weren't so corrupted.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users