3,561,596 members
12,429,752 petition signatures
$19,571,785,510 diverted from Big Pharma
Court Rules in Favor of Free Speech for Natural Supplements
The FDA has been controlling the market of natural supplementation and vitamins, suppressing free speech by not allowing suppliers and manufacturers to state the potential health benefits of a product on its label. A federal case brought against the FDA by Alliance for Natural Health-USA (ANH-USA) and other plaintiffs have made some powerful headway against the agency on this gag order and the emerging science behind healthy foods and dietary supplements.
The case was centered on the mineral selenium, in 2009 the agency denied several claims about the effectiveness of selenium and vitamins C and E in reducing cancer risks. In September of 2009, the ANH-USA, dietary supplement formulators Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw and the Coalition to End FDA and FTC Censorship, represented by Jonathon Emord and the Emord law firm, filed three separate lawsuits against the FDA. The lawsuits sought to reverse the denial of qualified health claims for these supplements, and bring the FDA back into compliance with the law.
The case revolved around “qualified health claims”, where the producer of a food or supplement tries to share the science behind possible benefits of a product with the public. If the science is less than completely conclusive, usually the case with food or food related items, the claim is referred to as “qualified”.
Of course, the FDA doesn’t want to support these claims as it will create incentives for consumers to purchase vitamins or minerals instead of going to see a doctor and stepping into the pharmaceutical trap. The agency wants beneficial foods and supplements to be treated like drugs, forcing manufacturers of the product to submit to the full FDA approval process in order to make any health claims. The approval process is of course out of reach for these companies as food and supplements, being natural, cannot usually be patented; subsequently, no manufacturers can afford the billion dollar approval processes. This is the agencies ticket to suppressing the market of the alternative health world, guaranteeing a competition-less environment for the pharmaceutical companies that pay the FDA’s bills.
This past June, Judge Ellen Huvelle US District Court of the District of Columbia ruled in favor of ANH-USA in the case against the FDA and the judge rendered a summary judgment showing the case was clear from the start.
ANH-USA sums up the judgement-
“The FDA was indeed violating freedom of speech by saying that no cancer-related health claims about the selenium could be made unless the science was completely conclusive or unless ridiculous and misleading disclaimers were added to the message.”
“Under pressure of our court victory, the FDA is for the first time allowing reasonable “qualified health claims” for some supplements.”
-ANH-USA
The settlement agreement with the FDA concluded that selenium supplements can state on their packaging “selenium may reduce the risk” of prostate, colon, bladder, or thyroid cancer.”, it must also include the following “Scientific evidence concerning this claim is inconclusive. Based on its review, FDA does not agree that selenium may reduce the risk of these cancers”. These disclaimer statements are the shortest and clearest ever approved. The last sentence of this disclaimer holds the FDA to expressing only their opinion and is not scientific fact, “based on its ‘review’”, which reinforces to the public the agencies long-time stance against natural medicine.
This is the largest number of dietary supplement/cancer-risk-reduction claims ever approved by the FDA and though this case was focused on selenium, this settlement with the agency is a win at a time when they are poised to gain an exorbitant amount of unconstitutional control (http://healthfreedoms.org/2010/12/04/unconstitutional-s-510-food-bill-driven-by-big-food-lobby-dollars/).
What the judge has ruled in the case can and should be applied to any food or dietary supplement producers for they all have a right under the free speech doctrine to talk about the benefits of a product when they can accurately present the science of the claims. Now, without jumping through impossible approval processes, manufacturers and companies can use the boundless amounts of research done on natural foods and medicines to display their potential benefits.
What a great win by these agencies and Emord law for the citizens of the United States.
~Health Freedoms
Sources:
Illustration by Larry West
http://luvataciousskull.deviantart.com/art/GOVERNMENT-CENSORSHIP-137270461
Related posts:
- An Open Letter to Consumer Reports: 10 Misinformation Hazards in Your “10 Surprising Dangers of Vitamins and Supplements” Article By James J. Gormley It is personally disappointing for...
- Will Congress Let Monsanto Write Its Own Rules? The agricultural biotech industry — well, let’s call it...
- 23 Natural Alternatives For Depression Many people have struggled with feelings of depression, feelings...
- Monsanto Tries to Criminalize Saving Seeds, Drags Farmer into Court As if its costly genetic tampering with the whole...
- U.S. Supreme Court to Review Monsanto Seed Patents The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Friday to consider...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Incredible!
What incredible work you have done, and continue to do.
I have hope!
Thank you.
This is a great victory. I know the powver of good supplements and organic food.
GOOD JOB, Jonathon Emord,et al. And THANK YOU to Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw for going through with this important issue. It’s good to know that there are honest judges out there, who can actually make a judgement using their god-given conscience. Thank you Judge Ellen Huvelle for sticking by our Constitution.
Thanks for keeping us informed, we love you Dr Rima, Gen Bert, and Ralph Fuetola!
I am mightily impressed by the success reported above and realize that it will not have happened without a tremendous effort.
Thank you. Thank you for the good you are achieving for manking at a time when people’s right’s are being taking from them at an ever-accelerating speed.
This is good news and I thank you for reporting it. At the same time, I can’t help but be disappointed by the many grammatical, typo, and general writing errors in the article above (such as the repetition of paragraphs 5 and 6). As a holistic health consultant and former publisher/editor of a magazine on these topics, I know how all too well how important it is to be extremely professional (even online!) when presenting info like this, which is already a stretch for many people to believe at all! When there are so many issues with the article structure and quality, it renders your info (and your organization) far less credible. It would be well worth ithe investment to have everything proofread by a pro before publishing. I hope you’ll take this as a complement that I am taking the time to offer this feedback, because that is how it is intended. Good luck!
I agree completely.
There is hope after all, thank you so much for the work you are and continue to do.
With her experience, perhaps Lois could do some editing as a volunteer. I agree, sometimes without it there is a disconnect; but I’m a chef not an editor. Lill
This is great!! As a supplement user for over 30 years this is music to my ears!!Hopefully this will pass on to other supplements and open the doors to the real truth for natural cures
Thank you for your part in getting this issue to court and to the lawyer who handled the case and to the judge for her conscientious judgment.
I have been a supplement user and an independent nutritional researcher for over 40 years. During that time, I have found the work of supplement scientists to be outstanding in finding natural alternatives that are often of more benefit than drugs for preventing or healing illness.
I have also been very concerned about the power of our FDA and their allegiance to the pharmaceutical companies instead of to our population’s health. I hope this case will establish a precedent.
Thank you again!
This is terrific, but let’s not jump for too much joy yet. You have got to know they will appeal this or try find some other way around this ruling. Let’s not get complacent on this.
Wow! great work, its hard to realize that every day in so many ways truth would be taken away if there were not some guardians on the job. Thank you.
Dear Lois,
One should never stammer if another shuns his/her grammar.
Let’s take a look at your reply:
This is good news and I thank you for reporting it. At the same time, I can’t help but be disappointed by the many grammatical, typo, and general writing errors in the article above (such as the repetition of paragraphs 5 and 6). As a holistic health consultant and former publisher/editor of a magazine on these topics, I know how all too well (how) important it is to be extremely professional (even online!) (w)hen presenting info like this, which is already a stretch for many people to believe at all! When there are so many issues with the article structure and quality, it renders your info (and your organization) far less credible. It would be well worth (ithe) investment to have everything proofread by a (pro)(suggestion professional) before publishing. I hope you’ll take this as a complement that I am taking the time to offer this feedback, because that is how it is intended. Good luck!
I don’t think it is much of a compliment to criticize an articles grammar with poor grammar of your own. (I am not a professional proofreader.)
Wow! You have a horrible attitude! I was sincerely trying to help. And your sarcasm is totally unwarranted. Furthermore, I was not creating a website, but feedback for you. There is a big difference in how much “proofreading” the two efforts warrant. You really do need luck! Take me off your email list. I don’t want anything to do with such nastiness.