FDA Ghost Regulations

Now moving on to the theme of regulated substances which are thought to be (or conveniently painted as being) unregulated. Nutritionist Niel Levin recently posted his letter to Reader's Digest in response to an article which slammed nutritional supplements. Are they unregulated and is there doubt about what is in the vitamin or mineral supplement that you purchase locally? Levin clearly describes the existing regulations on supplements, both recent and older. There is other information in this post about the drastic decrease in nutrients of common foods that we eat over the past 40 or 50 years. It is quite stunning to read.

So let's put this into a bit of perspective. Many experts (and even government agencies) will tell you that you do not need to take nutritional supplements and it is better to get these substances from food. But even if you have a reasonable diet, you could easily be deficient in many important minerals and vitamins due to the fact that our foods are themselves deficient. This will leave you more open to getting a disease. At the very least, more colds and flu. And when you do get sick, you are more likely to take a medicine which has Acetaminophen which can poison you even to the point of death. Ghost regulations. Unintended consequences of well-intentioned policies (which may be putting it mildly).

[/health/corruption]     0 comments     permalink

Conspiracy and Bias Against Supplements

Another article provided by nutritionist Neil Levin provides an overview of the typical problems one might encounter with headline grabbing studies. I know that Levin is involved in formulating certain supplement products. Is there bias in his views? Perhaps there is. Yet I think his list here is a good analysis of possible problems and worth keeping in mind when reading studies that make media headlines.

[/health/corruption]     2 comments     permalink

More Evidence of Big Pharma's Influence

Most physicians (94%) reported some type of relationship
with the pharmaceutical industry, and most of these
relationships involved receiving food in the workplace
(83%) or receiving drug samples (78%). More than one third
of the respondents (35%) received reimbursement for costs
associated with professional meetings or continuing medical
education, and more than one quarter (28%) received
payments for consulting, giving lectures, or enrolling
patients in trials. Cardiologists were more than twice as
likely as family practitioners to receive payments. Family
practitioners met more frequently with industry
representatives than did physicians in other specialties,
and physicians in solo, two-person, or group practices met
more frequently with industry representatives than did
physicians practicing in hospitals and clinics.

The supplement industry is frequently sited for it's influence but I suggest that there is nothing like the scale of influence which the Pharmaceutical Industry is able to leverage on doctors and physicians. Is it any wonder why your physician would hardly ever suggest taking a nutritional supplement when they are receiving such favors from a competitive industry? I don't mean to suggest that the supplement industry is without guilt in the area of manipulation and conflict of interest. See Bill Sardi's recent discussion of labeling for some of their problems.

Update

The whole question of bias goes deeper (I think) than just conflict of interest or manufacturer influence. I've been thinking about this in terms of my own profession and my own bias. I certainly have a point of view and am admittedly biased towards the use of Open Source software. I have discussed this a little bit with my boss. Of course, they had an Open Source network already in place when I was hired, so the company was committed to this direction and they needed someone with knowledge in this area. But I will unashamedly look to an Open Source solution to a problem first before I look elsewhere. In some sense this is dogmatic. I believe in this approach and I am committed to trying to make it work. Of course, there may come a point in time (if this technology fails or recedes dramatically) that I may have to change this commitment. There have been instances in my company where I have had to go with a proprietary solution. But my boss at least gave me the chance to look at the alternatives. So I try to have the philosophy that I will do what is best for business although I admit that I do have biases and I tend to favor an approach. Are medical professionals any different? Do they not have an ingrained approach to their practice, a seemingly dogmatic commitment to a particular way of doing things? This is worth thinking about and I will have more to observe on this in the future.

[/health/corruption]     2 comments     permalink

More on Nader's Group

Now the whole question of corruption in the drug and pharmaceutical business may be out of bounds for some of you. Many of us conservatives are fond of saying that we have the best health care system in the world. In many respects, I still believe this is true. But that doesn't mean that corruption is not possible. There are a couple things to consider here. First of all, the type of system doesn't necessarily prevent corruption. That is, a system can be corrupt if it's socialized or not socialized. Corruption occurs in government and the private sector. And corruption occurs regardless of the type of government. There is increasing evidence that the NIH (or perhaps individuals researchers within the NIH) are getting money from pharmaceutical companies. Now doesn't that seem odd that the agency responsible for making sure drugs are safe for the public is being paid by the very companies who stand to make large profits from putting those drugs on the market?

The connection to vitamins and other supplements is involved here as well. As I have mentioned before, there is no reason for a drug company to look into the benefits of (or conduct research into) vitamins since it is not possible to take out a patent on one. And there are many drugs which appear to imitate the action of vitamins and are also inhibited by vitamins. Statin drugs which are commonly prescribed for people with heart disease are an example. People taking these drugs are commonly told to stop taking vitamins. You can also see here that it would be to the advantage of a drug company to suppress the knowledge and use of vitamins if they indeed already do some of the things that the drugs they are developing attempt to do. I am not an expert in this field. I have only recently taken an interest in vitamins. But I am certainly not surprised to think that there could be corruption involved in this area. What do you think?

[/health/corruption]     0 comments     permalink

Contact Me:
bobber at kc0dxf dot net

Music Sites

Guitar Builders and Luthiers

Running

Frequented National Blogs

Internal

Columnists (political)

Columnists (technical)

Health and Nutrition

Big Shark Team Cyclists

Other Cyclists

Health Care Reform

Paleo (Hunter Gatherer) Diet (and related diets)

Christianity

Historic Christian Confessions

Classical Education

Routed Slot Car Tracks

Training With Power

Cycling

Ultrafit

Digital Cameras

Sporting Goods and Bike Shops

Technical

Transcendent Music

Utilities