General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Supplement law to get another look

Started by markd · · Last activity · 5 posts · 616 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
12 June 2004
Last activity
19 June 2004
Original author
markd
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
616
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Senators call dietary supplement law, enforcement inadequate
    By IRA DREYFUSS, Associated Press (Published June 8' 2004)
    WASHINGTON (AP) - A decade-old federal law on dietary
    supplement safety and the FDA's enforcement are not up to
    the job of protecting Americans' health, two senators told
    an FDA official Tuesday.

    Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, ranking Democrat on the
    Governmental Affairs Committee's subcommittee on
    oversight, criticized the law as a failure. Subcommittee
    Chairman Richard Voinovich of Ohio, singling out one
    aspect, said it was unacceptable that Food and Drug
    Administration has not set regulations for good
    manufacturing processes in the 10 years since the law
    was passed.

    The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act requires
    the FDA to prove that a dietary supplement is harmful,
    rather than having the manufacturer prove it is safe as
    is required with drugs. The law also does not require
    supplement manufacturers to report adverse reactions, as
    drug companies must.

    "If the object of this law is to protect American
    consumers, it fails," Durbin told the director of the
    FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
    Robert Brackett, who is responsible for enforcing the
    law. "How can you meet that responsibility when the law
    is so weak?"

    Durbin, who requested the subcommittee hearing, is
    sponsoring a bill that would make manufacturers report
    serious adverse reactions such as hospitalizations,
    permanent injuries or deaths involving users of
    supplements. The bill also would let the government
    require manufacturers to prove a product is safe if FDA
    had received information that suggested adverse reactions
    from a supplement.

    Before the agency would ask for any more power, it wants
    "to maximize our activities under the current (law),"
    Brackett responded. "The administration at this time has
    no plans to make any changes."

    He said the FDA is working with the National Institutes
    of Health and with academic researchers to identify
    ingredients and has set up a system to track adverse
    reactions reported by consumers, health workers or
    manufacturers.

    The law requires require the FDA to set standards for
    good manufacturing processes so products do not contain
    contaminants such as bacteria and lead but do contain
    labeled ingredients in the proper amounts. The agency
    published a proposed rule in March 2003 and is reviewing
    responses to it.

    That's not good enough, Voinovich told Brackett. "I just
    cannot believe that it has taken that long after this law
    is passed," the senator said. "It's unacceptable that it
    takes 10 years to get something done."

    The regulations will be "done as soon as possible, that
    is our goal," Brackett said.

    The law allows the FDA to ban ingredients that are proved
    unsafe, and the agency announced in April that its ban on
    the diet aid ephedra had taken effect. The substance had
    been linked to 155 deaths, including that of Baltimore
    Orioles pitcher Steve Bechler in 2003.

    "Consumers are endangered by the FDA's inability to act
    on particular supplements," and ephedra is a case in
    point, Durbin said. "It took years - literally years -
    for the FDA to ban this substance under this law, DSHEA."

  2. Quoted message said:

    Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, ranking Democrat on the
    Governmental Affairs Committee's subcommittee on
    oversight, criticized the law as a failure. Subcommittee
    Chairman Richard Voinovich of Ohio, singling out

    Quoted message said:

    "If the object of this law is to protect American
    consumers, it fails," Durbin told the director of the
    FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
    Robert Brackett, who is responsible for enforcing the
    law. "How can you meet that responsibility when the law
    is so weak?"

    Well, our weaknesses would seem to be our greatest assets,
    judging from the mounting corruption and deterioration of
    American politics...

    Quoted message said:

    Durbin, who requested the subcommittee hearing, is
    sponsoring a bill that would make manufacturers report
    serious adverse reactions such as hospitalizations,
    permanent injuries or deaths involving users of
    supplements. The bill also would let the government
    require manufacturers to prove a product is safe if FDA
    had received information that suggested adverse
    reactions from a supplement.

    "Suggested", huh? This is similar to "law" that make it
    possible to waive your civil rights and lose your
    citizenship over a "suggested" affiliation with
    "terrorists". I think "[censored]"(head) Durbin should eat

    --
    _o Kristofer Dale, _ \<,_ ragged individualist,
    _____( )/ ( )_____ statistic at large...

    p.s. Learn and live, vitaletherapeutics.orgvitaletherapeutics.org

  3. Quoted message said:

    No specifics in your posting. Just rhetoric and venom
    rather like [censored] Durbin. I wouldn't trust Durbin to craft a
    city dog control ordinance as he'd likely outlaw dogs,
    cats, and goldfish.

    "Durbin, who requested the subcommittee hearing, is
    sponsoring a bill that would make manufacturers report
    serious adverse reactions such as hospitalizations,
    permanent injuries or deaths involving users of supplements.
    The bill also would let the government require manufacturers
    to prove a product is safe if FDA had received information
    that suggested adverse reactions from a supplement."

    Amen brother, and again, amen. Of course the consumer is not
    ready for such information, no reason to replace all those
    infomercials on which they now depend, "this here mircle in
    this here bottle will do the trick, trust me on this".

  4. Quoted message said:

    "Durbin, who requested the subcommittee hearing, is
    sponsoring a bill that would make manufacturers report
    serious adverse reactions such as hospitalizations,
    permanent injuries or deaths involving users of
    supplements. The bill also would let the government
    require manufacturers to prove a product is safe if FDA
    had received information that suggested adverse reactions
    from a supplement."

    Why not take the route used for cigarettes? Put a warning
    label, however dire you want, e.g., "The FDA had
    determined that you will probably be dead in a week if
    you use this product". This should be sufficient to scare
    off those uninformed people who might be hurt by misusing
    a supplement, while allowing knowledgable people to
    continue buying the supplements they desire without
    enormous price increase.

    By the way, for those who believe that the FDA is capable of
    fairly evaluating supplements, please explain why they made
    L-tryptophane illegal for decades, even though it is an
    essential amino acid.

    Ed Friedman

  5. Ed Friedman <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "Durbin, who requested the subcommittee hearing, is
    sponsoring a bill that would make manufacturers report
    serious adverse reactions such as hospitalizations,
    permanent injuries or deaths involving users of
    supplements. The bill also would let the government
    require manufacturers to prove a product is safe if FDA
    had received information that suggested adverse
    reactions from a supplement."

    Why not take the route used for cigarettes? Put a warning
    label, however dire you want, e.g., "The FDA had
    determined that you will probably be dead in a week if you
    use this product". This should be sufficient to scare off
    those uninformed people who might be hurt by misusing a
    supplement, while allowing knowledgable people to continue
    buying the supplements they desire without enormous price
    increase.

    By the way, for those who believe that the FDA is capable
    of fairly evaluating supplements, please explain why they
    made L-tryptophane illegal for decades, even though it is
    an essential amino acid.

    Ed Friedman

    Some manufacturer from the far east (I believe) cut corners
    on the process and allowed a number of batches go out with
    dangerous levels of impurities that caused some sickness and
    other physical problems. The FDA responded by throwing out
    the baby with the bathwater and prohibiting the whole kit
    and kaboodle. It is banned, period.

    TC

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.