-
-
Tell the FDA you don't want irrdiated food
The FDA has approved irradiating spinach and lettuce. Tell the FDA this is not acceptable for the following reasons:
Irradiating food makes food more dangerous, not safer. Some major concerns with food irradiation include:
-The formation of free radicals, which can set off chain reactions in the body that destroy antioxidants, tear apart cell membranes, and make the body more susceptible to cancer, diabetes, heart disease, liver damage, muscular breakdown and other serious problems.
-Serious health problems in laboratory testing, including, including premature death, fatal internal bleeding, cancer, stillbirths and other reproductive problems, mutations and other genetic damage, organ malfunctions, stunted growth and vitamin deficiencies.
-The creating mutant forms of dangerous bacteria, like E. coli and Salmonella
-Nutrient loss in foods, including the destruction of vitamins and essential fatty acids.
Tell the FDA here: http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?ma...
-The formation of carcinogenic chemicals, like benzene and toluene.
-While irradiated lettuce and spinach must be labeled in supermarkets, there are currently no labeling requirements for restaurants serving irradiated produce or other items. Patrons and clients may consume irradiated lettuce and spinach in the future without their knowledge, nor consent. The FDA has approved irradiating spinach and lettuce. Tell the FDA this is not acceptable for the following reasons: ... more -
FDA Finds Lead in Vitamins
See Which Vitamins for Women and Children Have the Most and Least Lead:
The Food and Drug Administration has wrapped up testing of vitamins for women and babies, and found that almost all contain trace amounts of lead.
Lead is of particular concern to pregnant women, fetuses and young children — particularly those under the age of six. Lead, a naturally occurring metal, is know to cause permanent brain damage, limiting IQ, causing behavioral and learning problems and affecting other aspects of development. Some studies have linked exposure to violent spates across the country, and the government has worked to limit exposure by banning or limiting the lead content in paints, gasoline and, most recently, lead in many toys and children's products.
The FDA vitamin research covered 324 multivitamin-mineral products available over the Internet. The FDA failed to detect lead in only four.
However, the FDA does not consider any of these vitamins unsafe, based on lead content.
Remembering that the FDA has not labeled any of these products as unsafe, here is a summary of the 10 vitamins tested by the FDA that would result in the greatest and least exposure to lead, by age group. (complete list.)
Greatest Exposure, Ages 0-6
1. Nature's Plus Animal Parade Shake (Powder)
2. Superior Multi Age (Powder)
3. Nutraceutical Pedia Power (Tablet/Capsule)
4. Physio Kids Multilogics Chewable (Tablet/Capsule)
5. Ola Loa Kids (Powder)
6. Nature's Plus Animal Parade (Tablet/Capsule)
7. Vita-Big-Kids (Tablet/Capsule)
8. Wonder Laboratories Formula Nineteen (Tablet/Capsule)
9. Clinicians Choice Chewable Daily Multivitamins (Tablet/Capsule)
10. Dynamic Health Multi for Children (Liquid)
Least Exposure, Ages 0-6
1. Twinlab Infant Care (Liquid) *
2. Natrol Liquid Kids Companion (Liquid)*
3. NF Formulas Liquid Pediatric (Liquid)*
4. Windmill Bite-A-Mins (Tablet/Capsule)
5. Kids Liquid Dolphin Pals (Liquid)
6. My First Flintstones (Tablet/Capsule)
7. Natural Wealth Children's Chewable Multivitamins Plus Extra C (Tablet/Capsule)
8. Uno Diario Ninos (Tablet/Capsule)
9. Flintstones Plus Immunity Support (Tablet/Capsule)
10. Natural Wealth Children's Chewable Multivitamins (Tablet/Capsule)
* denotes vitamins that contained no lead, in FDA testing.
Greatest Exposure, Ages 7+
1. Kal Enhanced Energy Teen Complete (Tablet/Capsule)
2. Clinical Nutrients for Female Teens (Tablet/Capsule)
3. Clinical Nutrients For Male Teens (Tablet/Capsule)
4. Doctor's Choice For Male Teens (Tablet/Capsule)
5. Maxi Teen Supreme (Tablet/Capsule)
6. Rainbow Light Active Health TEEN (Tablet/Capsule)
7. Nature's Plus Source of Life Power Teen (Tablet/Capsule)
8. FoodScience Teen's Superior (Tablet/Capsule)
9. Esteem Total Teen (Tablet/Capsule)
10. Vitanica Women's Symetry (Tablet/Capsule)
Least Exposure, Ages 7+
1. Lil Critters Drop Zone for Teens (Candy-like)
2. Nutrition Now Zow for Teens (Candy-like)
3. Michael's For Pre-Teen Boys (Tablet/Capsule)
4. Michael's For Teen Boys (Tablet/Capsule)
5. Puritan's Pride Mega Vita Min For Teens (Tablet/Capsule)
6. Michael's Pre-Teen Girls (Tablet/Capsule)
7. Michael's Teen Girls (Tablet/Capsule)
8. Good 'N Natural Ultra Teen (Tablet/Capsule)
9. Futurebiotics Derma Teen (Tablet/Capsule)
10. GNC Mega Teen (Tablet/Capsule)
(For the complete list check out the link) See Which Vitamins for Women and Children Have the Most and Least Lead: ... more -
Voice your opinion on FDA plan to irradiate vegetables
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has okayed the irradiation of lettuce and spinach. Food irradiation is the process of exposing food to ionizing radiation in order to destroy disease causing pathogens, like bacteria and viruses.
However, you can make your voice heard by taking part following this link to the FDA's 30-day comment period. OCA has created some talking points you might include and elaborate upon.
Irradiating food makes food more dangerous, not safer. Some major concerns with food irradiation include:
-The formation of free radicals, which can set off chain reactions in the body that destroy antioxidants, tear apart cell membranes, and make the body more susceptible to cancer, diabetes, heart disease, liver damage, muscular breakdown and other serious problems.
-Serious health problems in laboratory testing, including, including premature death, fatal internal bleeding, cancer, stillbirths and other reproductive problems, mutations and other genetic damage, organ malfunctions, stunted growth and vitamin deficiencies.
-The creating mutant forms of dangerous bacteria, like E. coli and Salmonella
-Nutrient loss in foods, including the destruction of vitamins and essential fatty acids.
-The formation of carcinogenic chemicals, like benzene and toluene.
-While irradiated lettuce and spinach must be labeled in supermarkets, there are currently no labeling requirements for restaurants serving irradiated produce or other items. Patrons and clients may consume irradiated lettuce and spinach in the future without their knowledge, nor consent.
-There are many alternatives to irradiation. Visit OCA's Irradiation Alternatives page for more information
Make your voice heard! Click here to send the FDA a message during the 30-Day Comment Period.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Voice your concerns and or objections to the FDA plan to irradiate lettuce and spinach at the link above. Once again, the FDA is taking it upon itself to effect the food we eat without our consent and without alerting consumers to potential health threats from irradiation. This is a chance for citizens to exercise their right to be heard to protect their own health and the health of their children.
Thank you. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has okayed the irradiation of lettuce and spinach. Food irradiation is the process of exposing ... more -
FDA plots to mislead consumers over irradiated foods: Natural News
"Consumer awareness is considered undesirable by the FDA; an agency that also works hard to censor truthful statements about nutritional supplements and functional foods. Accordingly, the FDA pursues a policy of enforced ignorance of consumers regarding irradiated foods, nutritional supplements, medicinal herbs and all sorts of natural substances. It is currently illegal in the United States to state that cherries help ease arthritis inflammation if you are selling cherries. http://www.naturalnews.com/019366.html)
On the food irradiation issue, the FDA is now proposing two things that are nothing short of astonishing in their degree of deceit:
FDA proposal #1: Irradiated foods shouldn't be labeled as irradiated unless consumers can visibly tell they're irradiated.
This ridiculous proposal by the FDA suggests that foods shouldn't be labeled as irradiated unless there is some obvious material damage to the foods (like their leaves are wilting). Thus, foods that don't appear to be irradiated should not have to be labeled as irradiated.
Imagine if this same ridiculous logic were used to regulate heavy metals content in foods: If consumers can't SEE the heavy metals, then they should be declared free of heavy metals!
FDA proposal #2: Irradiated foods should be labeled as "pasteurized," not "irradiated."
This FDA proposal is so bizarre that it makes you wonder whether the people working at the FDA are smoking crystal meth. They literally want irradiated foods to be labeled as "pasteurized."
And why? Because the word "pasteurized" sounds a lot more palatable to consumers, of course. Never mind the fact that it's a lie. Irradiated foods are not pasteurized, and pasteurized foods are not irradiated. These two words mean two different things, which is precisely why they each have their own entries in the dictionary. When you look up "irradiated," it does not say, "See pasteurized."
But the FDA is now playing the game of thought police by manipulating the public with screwy word replacement games that bear a strange resemblance to the kind of language used in the novel 1984 by George Orwell. And it is, indeed, an Orwellian kind of mind game that the FDA wants to play with the food supply: After unleashing Weapons of Mass Destruction (radiation) onto the foods, the FDA wants to label them all as simply being "pasteurized," keeping consumers ignorant and uninformed.
How do I know the FDA wants to do this? The agency said so itself in an April 4, 2007 document filed in the Federal Register (Volume 72, Number 64). As published in the document (2):
FDA is also proposing to allow a firm to petition FDA for use of an alternate term to "irradiation'' (other than "pasteurized''). In addition, FDA is proposing to permit a firm to use the term "pasteurized'' in lieu of "irradiated,'' provided it notifies the agency that the irradiation process being used meets the criteria specified for use of the term "pasteurized'' in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) and the agency does not object to the notification."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This deception is simply so immoral and so absolutely out of the realm of all humanity that I find it hard to wrap my head around it. The FDA, an organization of the US federal government that is supposedly here for our safety, only sees us as guinea pigs. They did it with GM foods, Rbgh, and the countless drugs on the market killing people, and they now do it with radioactive food without our consent. I don't even know what to say anymore. And this is so important because people otherwise will not know of this unless it gets out to the masses, and yet the media will not tell people about this. How many will have to get sick or die before it is considered news? "Consumer awareness is considered undesirable by the FDA; an agency that also works hard to censor truthful statements about nutr... more -
New FDA labeling rule is a double edged sword
"Government regulators have issued new rules designed to keep drug warning labels clear and concise, though some say the new guidelines would also shield drugmakers from lawsuits.
The regulations from the Food and Drug Administration, which were released Thursday and take effect next month, explain when drug and medical device companies are responsible for rushing out safety updates on their products.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America welcomed the announcement, saying it provides much-needed clarity. But trial lawyers who represent consumers said it will provide legal protection to companies that withhold information on their products' risks.
In recent years, drugmakers have added warning information to their labeling more quickly, even when the scope of the risks was unclear. This strategy helped protect companies from allegations that they didn't act quickly enough to inform patients, according to Dan Kracov, an attorney with Arnold and Porter.
"The thinking was 'We need to get this information on the warning label now otherwise we're going to get hit over the head with product liability suits,'" said Kracov, who represents pharmaceutical companies.
The new FDA rule should protect companies from such lawsuits. It states that companies are only obligated to rush out warnings when they have clear evidence of a serious risk that hasn't been reviewed by FDA. In all other cases, the rules state that FDA will review the information and consider a new label at its own pace.
FDA officials said the changes would help ensure that companies are not haphazardly adding warning information to their products.
"The key point is this rule offers doctors and patients clarity and confidence that labels mean something and can be relied on," said Randall Lutter, FDA deputy commissioner for policy.
However, trial court attorneys said the rule lets companies off the hook on alerting consumers to the risks of their products.
The American Association of Justice, a professional group for attorneys, argues the new rule requires an excessive standard of scientific evidence before companies are required to update their labels. The group's lawyers say the new rule will make it easier for companies to claim they were not obligated to alert consumers.
"When consumers are harmed they will have no way to get recourse from manufacturers," said Gerie Voss, a director with the American Association of Justice. "This rule is going to be a total shield against all 'failure to warn' claims."
Voss said many of the recent lawsuits against drugmakers, such as the Vioxx case involving Merck & Co. Inc., would not be possible under the new rules. The company has agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle with patients who suffered heart attack or stroke and alleged the company failed to warn them about those risks.
Voss said the new FDA rule is part of a larger effort across the Bush administration to shield companies from lawsuit.
Since 2005, the administration has proposed dozens of regulations that limit lawsuits against pharmaceutical makers, automakers and other companies by ruling that federal regulations trump state laws.
Product liability lawsuits are usually filed in state courts, where juries often are more receptive to claims against corporations.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to wade into the issue later this year." "Government regulators have issued new rules designed to keep drug warning labels clear and concise, though some say the new guid... more -
FDA approves radiation for vegetables!
"Federal regulators are expected today to let processors for the first time use radiation to kill bacteria in spinach and iceberg lettuce.
The step will protect consumers and growers, who have been battered by E. coli outbreaks in recent years.
But are shoppers ready for irradiated vegetables?
Experts point out that meat and some other foods have been treated with radiation for years, with little or no resistance from shoppers. But that may be simply because few are aware of the practice.
Anuradha Prakash, an assistant professor at Chapman University and an expert on food irradiation, said consumers are ready to make their food safer given the outbreaks that have occurred in the past few years related to fresh produce.
"But there will have to be lots of consumer education before they will accept it," Prakash said.
Christine Bruhn, a University of California food science marketing specialist and director of the UC Davis Center for Consumer Research, agreed. She said that while some consumers are ready, most are unaware of the practice.
"Maybe the science community has not spoken enough about this," Bruhn said. "But they will be doing it more and more now."
The Food and Drug Administration is set to formally give the green light today to a practice officials have concluded is safe. The long-awaited decision comes in the wake of high-profile bacterial outbreaks involving tainted California greens.
"I hope we will see a reduction in the number of food-borne illnesses," Dr. Robert Brackett, chief scientist with the Grocery Manufacturers Association, said Thursday. "It gives the industry another tool to increase food safety."
Irradiation of beef has been allowed since 2000. Yet only about 15 million pounds of the roughly 8 billion pounds of beef processed annually is irradiated, Dennis Olson, an Iowa State University meat scientist and irradiation expert, told the Chicago Tribune.
The beef industry liked the concept, but didn't want to promote irradiation because of consumer concerns, he said."
Wow - so not only are they doing this on veggies, they've been doing it on beef for years but didn't want to tell us because they knew we'd find it strange. WTF?!? "Federal regulators are expected today to let processors for the first time use radiation to kill bacteria in spinach and iceberg... more -
FDA: Irradiating spinach, lettuce OK to kill germs
The Food and Drug Administration on Friday will issue a regulation allowing spinach and lettuce sellers to take that extra step, a long-awaited move amid increasing outbreaks from raw produce.....(seriously?) The Food and Drug Administration on Friday will issue a regulation allowing spinach and lettuce sellers to take that extra step, a lon... more
-
FDA to allow radiation of spinach and lettuce
Health regulators have approved the use of ionizing radiation for fresh spinach and lettuce, saying the technique already approved for other foods can help control harmful bacteria and other pathogens.
The Food and Drug Administration said on Thursday the radiation treatment also would make the leafy greens last longer and give them greater "shelf-life" for retailers and consumers.
The approval comes two years after E. coli outbreaks linked to spinach and lettuce sold in grocery stores and served at various restaurants. Outbreaks of the dangerous bacteria sickened dozens of consumers and led some to be hospitalized.
Foods already approved for radiation treatment include meat, poultry, spices and molluscan shellfish such as oysters, mussels and clams. Health regulators have approved the use of ionizing radiation for fresh spinach and lettuce, saying the technique already approved for... more -
zapping (via radiation) food for saftey?
How do you feel about this? Zapping food via radiation?
-
FDA uses consumer fears to start irradiating food
All they needed was a big enough crisis to get this passed, I guess. The wording of the opening paragraph says it all:
"Consumers worried about salad safety may soon be able to buy fresh spinach and iceberg lettuce zapped with just enough radiation to kill E. coli and a few other germs.The FDA said irradiation doesn't compromise the safety or nutrient value of raw spinach and lettuce.
The Food and Drug Administration on Friday will issue a new regulation allowing spinach and lettuce sellers to take that extra step, a long-awaited move amid increasing outbreaks from raw produce." All they needed was a big enough crisis to get this passed, I guess. The wording of the opening paragraph says it all: ... more -
6 people on diabetes drug fall ill; 2 die
The Food and Drug Administration yesterday reported that six people with type 2 diabetes, who were taking Amylin Pharmaceuticals' drug Byetta to control their blood sugar, developed a severe inflammation of the pancreas.
Two of the six people died.
Although the regulatory agency did not make a link between the drug and pancreatitis, investors sent shares of San Diego-based Amylin down more than 13 percent, or $4.45, to close at $29.76.
Analysts speculated that sales of Byetta, the company's lead product, could drop and Amylin could have a tougher time getting a once-weekly version of the drug approved for market.
Amylin, which markets Byetta in partnership with Eli Lilly & Co., pointed out that people with type 2 diabetes are at higher risk for pancreatitis than the general population.
“The proportion of cases reporting complications or fatal outcome is similar to that observed in the general population with pancreatitis,” Amylin said in a statement.
Nonetheless, the company said it would work with the FDA to “ensure that our Byetta product label continues to provide physicians and patients with information about the risk of pancreatitis.”
“In accordance with our strict internal processes, we continuously monitor and notify regulatory authorities of adverse events reported during the use of any of our drugs,” the company's statement said.
The FDA's note is the second in 10 months about people taking Byetta developing pancreatitis. In October 2007, the FDA said 30 patients who had been prescribed Byetta had reported less severe cases.
Byetta, on the market since 2005, is the top seller of Amylin's two diabetes drugs. Its sales rose 17 percent in the second quarter over the same quarter last year. Although analysts were initially skeptical about Byetta's appeal in the marketplace because it requires twice-a-day injections, the company has said more than 1 million people have been prescribed the drug.
And a once-a-week version of the drug is in development.
Since this long-acting version of the drug stays in the body longer after one dose and can't be “turned off” if pancreatitis develops, the FDA may have concerns about the condition when it considers the drug for approval, Tim Anderson, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. in New York, said in a note to investors.
But he said he still expects its approval in 2010 and U.S. sales of $1.5 billion by 2015.
A local diabetes expert said yesterday he is not convinced that Byetta played a role in the people developing pancreatitis.
“People who are type 2 diabetics have a high triglyceride level, a leading cause of pancreatitis,” said Steven Edelman, a doctor and professor of endocrinology, diabetes and metabolism internal medicine at the University of California San Diego Medical School.
Edelman said he has prescribed Byetta to hundreds of patients. Its advantage over other drugs is that it helps patients lose weight, he said. Other type 2 diabetes medications make patients gain weight, a problem in a disease linked to obesity.
Edelman further suggested that data from Byetta's clinical trial may even support the theory that it might prevent pancreatitis: of thousands of people who took Byetta in the clinical trial, three developed pancreatitis while six people taking a placebo developed pancreatitis.
“However, I think it is super important that the company and FDA monitor this thing closely to be sure,” Edelman said. The Food and Drug Administration yesterday reported that six people with type 2 diabetes, who were taking Amylin Pharmaceuticals'... more -
FDA’s off-label policing criticized
When federal regulators catch a drug company peddling prescription drugs for an unapproved use, it takes them an average of seven months to issue a warning, according to a draft report by congressional investigators. It typically takes four more months for the company to fix the problem. During that time, a lot prescriptions can be written.
The report from the Government Accountability Office delves into a gray area of medical practice and federal oversight: the use of medications to treat conditions other than the ones the drugs were approved for, a practice known as “off-label” prescribing.
Although widely accepted, off-label prescribing can amount to an uncontrolled experiment. While some patients benefit, others get drugs that do not do them much good and end up wasting money. Some people have been harmed by unexpected side effects.
What makes the practice so difficult to get a handle on is a web of seemingly contradictory laws and regulations.
Drug companies are forbidden to promote medications for uses that have not been validated by the Food and Drug Administration on evidence from clinical trials.
Doctors, however, can use their own judgment in prescribing medicines. Also, under guidance proposed by the FDA this year, drug companies could distribute to doctors scientific articles that suggest new and unapproved uses for medications.
The situation has raised concerns for Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), who fears that federal programs such as Medicare and Medicaid are paying billions for medications used for questionable purposes while bulking up the bottom line for pharmaceutical companies. Indeed, a 2006 study suggested that more than 20% of prescriptions written in the United States are for off-label use.
The review Grassley requested found that the FDA is ill-equipped to catch even blatant marketing abuses by drug companies. The agency does not have any staff exclusively assigned to monitor whether companies are following the rule against marketing drugs for unapproved uses.
The FDA “isn’t keeping track of how drugs are marketed for off-label use, even though marketing for off-label use is illegal and it’s the FDA’s job to enforce that law,” Grassley said in a statement. “As a result, drug makers aren’t being held accountable for promoting unapproved use of medicine, and patient safety is diminished.”
More at link. When federal regulators catch a drug company peddling prescription drugs for an unapproved use, it takes them an average of seven mont... more -
Medical marijuana: Can't smoke it, but FDA approved scientifically regulated ...
Medical marijuana already exists. It's called Marinol.
The FDA has not approved smoking marijuana for medicinal purposes, but has approved the active ingredient-THC-in the form of scientifically regulated Marinol.
A pharmaceutical product, Marinol, is widely available through prescription. It comes in the form of a pill and is also being studied by researchers for suitability via other delivery methods, such as an inhaler or patch. The active ingredient of Marinol is synthetic THC, which has been found to relieve the nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy for cancer patients and to assist with loss of appetite with AIDS patients.
Unlike smoked marijuana--which contains more than 400 different chemicals, including most of the hazardous chemicals found in tobacco smoke-Marinol has been studied and approved by the medical community and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the nation's watchdog over unsafe and harmful food and drug products. Since the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, any drug that is marketed in the United States must undergo rigorous scientific testing. The approval process mandated by this act ensures that claims of safety and therapeutic value are supported by clinical evidence and keeps unsafe, ineffective and dangerous drugs off the market.
There are no FDA-approved medications that are smoked. For one thing, smoking is generally a poor way to deliver medicine. It is difficult to administer safe, regulated dosages of medicines in smoked form. Secondly, the harmful chemicals and carcinogens that are byproducts of smoking create entirely new health problems. There are four times the level of tar in a marijuana cigarette, for example, than in a tobacco cigarette
The DEA recognizes the importance of listening to science. That's why the DEA has registered seven research initiatives to continue researching the effects of smoked marijuana as medicine. For example, under one program established by the State of California, researchers are studying the potential use of marijuana and its ingredients on conditions such as multiple sclerosis and pain. At this time, however, neither the medical community nor the scientific community has found sufficient data to conclude that smoked marijuana is the best approach to dealing with these important medical issues.
The most comprehensive, scientifically rigorous review of studies of smoked marijuana was conducted by the Institute of Medicine, an organization chartered by the National Academy of Sciences. In a report released in 1999, the Institute did not recommend the use of smoked marijuana, but did conclude that active ingredients in marijuana could be isolated and developed into a variety of pharmaceuticals, such as Marinol.
In the meantime, the DEA is working with pain management groups, such as Last Acts, to make sure that those who need access to safe, effective pain medication can get the best medication available. Medical marijuana already exists. It's called Marinol. ... more -
Customers say company's vitamins made them sick
At least 197 people in a dozen states — 53 of them in Georgia — were sickened earlier this year after taking the liquid supplement Total Body Formula. Their hair fell out in clumps, their fingernails fell off. They suffered nausea, vomiting and fatigue. Some had disabling joint pain, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and state health officials.
Doctors treating 21-year-old Felicia Blasingame of Acworth this spring first thought she had the flu, then tested her for everything from parasites to lupus to rheumatoid arthritis, trying to figure out what was causing her nausea, seizures, knee pain and hair loss, she said
Edgar Gurley, 78, of Marietta said he went from being active and healthy to suddenly in January battling a cascading array of symptoms, including diarrhea, fatigue and confusion. Gurley said doctors struggled to explain why his blood chemistry and thyroid levels were out of whack, his kidneys were failing and his hair was falling out.
As their symptoms worsened, Blasingame and Gurley said they continued to take their daily 1-ounce dose of Total Body Formula, thinking it was critical to their health.
Yet several batches of Total Body Formula and Total Body Mega Formula contained hazardous amounts of the mineral selenium — up to 40,800 micrograms per serving, 200 times the amount listed on the product’s label, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The FDA is still investigating how this happened, and state health officials are still tallying the human toll.
Because of several pending lawsuits, lawyers for three companies involved in the manufacture and sale of Total Body products declined to discuss what happened.
Problems with Total Body Formula products began in January as the first victims fell ill, but health officials were unaware for two more months. Alarm bells went off in early March after a Florida chiropractor notified state health officials about a cluster of patients with unusual hair loss, muscle cramps, nausea and diarrhea. All, it turned out, had used Total Body supplements.
“If he hadn’t said anything to anybody, we might not have known about it,” said Roberta Hammond, the Florida Department of Health’s food and waterborne disease coordinator.
On March 27, the FDA issued the first of three warnings, advising consumers not to use Total Body Formula in tropical orange and peach nectar flavors and Total Body Mega Formula in orange/tangerine flavor.
Tests by the FDA found the supplement contained high amounts of selenium as well as levels of chromium that were 17 times higher than recommended. Total Body recalled 1,484 bottles of the product from the market. The symptoms users experienced are signs of selenium toxicity, the FDA said.
“Some people have been pretty debilitated by this,” said Paul Melstrom, a CDC Epidemic Intelligence Service officer assigned to the Georgia Division of Public Health. At least 197 people in a dozen states — 53 of them in Georgia — were sickened earlier this year after taking the liquid supplement Tot... more -
FDA approves 1st drug for Huntington's disease
"Federal drug regulators Friday approved a medication to treat a major symptom of Huntington's disease, marking the first time since the disorder was first described in a Long Island family 136 years ago that any kind of treatment has been available in the United States.
In Huntington's, a rare, devastating condition, brain cells degenerate because of a genetic miscue easily passed from one generation to the next. The disorder results in jerky, involuntary movements known as chorea.
The drug tetrabenazine controls the chorea, which affects about 90 percent of people with the disease. It was approved under the Food and Drug Administration's orphan products program, which is aimed at developing treatments for conditions affecting fewer than 200,000 people. Huntington's disease affects 30,000 people nationwide.
"I think this is a big deal both in terms of having something to offer patients with Huntington's disease and ... because people have been trying to find something for Huntington's patients for decades," said Dr. Andrew Feigin, a Huntington's researcher at the Feinstein Institute of Medical Research in Manhasset, part of the North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System.
Feigin, who studied the drug in the clinical trial, added that tetrabenazine "has been around for many years and in other countries, and we knew that it improved chorea."
"It was a matter of a company being interested in it" and ultimately taking steps to get it to market, Feigin said.
Tetrabenazine is produced by Prestwick Pharmaceuticals in Washington, D.C.
Doctors have been aware of tetrabenazine since the late 1950s and have used it to treat other movement disorders. Regulators in Europe and Canada approved tetrabenazine in the 1990s for Huntington's chorea.
In the U.S., advocates for patients say, major pharmaceutical companies show little interest in developing treatments for orphan diseases because they do not have millions of patients who can drive profits.
"It's just wonderful to have a drug approved by the FDA," said Dr. Fred Marshall of the University of Rochester, who led the clinical trials. "It's also important symbolically for the patients and their families. They've suffered for so long. The big victory here is putting the drug on the map."
He emphasized that tetrabenazine is not perfect, and too high a dose can lead to depression and suicidal thoughts and exacerbate chorea.
Huntington's disease was first described in 1872 by Dr. George Huntington, of Columbia University, who studied an East Hampton family affected by the disease over several generations." "Federal drug regulators Friday approved a medication to treat a major symptom of Huntington's disease, marking the first ti... more -
Controversial chemical declared "safe" by FDA - do you trust them?
"A controversial chemical commonly found in baby bottles, can linings and other household products does not pose a health hazard when used in food containers, according to a draft assessment released by the Food and Drug Administration Friday.
The report stands in contrast more than 100 studies performed by government scientists and university laboratories that have found health concerns associated with BPA. Some have linked the chemical to prostate and breast cancers, diabetes, behavioral disorders such as hyperactivity and reproductive problems in lab animals.
Exposure to the small amounts of bisphenol A (BPA) that migrate from the containers into the food they hold are not dangerous to infants or adults, the draft said.
"FDA has concluded that an adequate margin of safety exists for BPA at current levels of exposure from food contact uses," regulators wrote in the draft report, which will be reviewed Sept. 16 at a meeting of members of an FDA advisory committee studying the safety of the chemical.
The chemical industry and the agencies that regulate the use of BPA, the FDA and the Environmental Protection Agency, have deemed the chemical safe, largely on the strength of two industry-funded studies that found no problems. The American Chemistry Council welcomed the findings of the new report.
But FDA critic Diana Zuckerman, president of the National Research Center for Women and Families, said the agency lacks sufficient
BPA, in commercial use since the 1950s, is found in many everyday items, including compact discs and automobiles. One federal study estimated the chemical is present in the urine of 93 percent of the population.
Canada has decided to ban the compound in baby products. Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer, and Toys R Us, the largest toy seller, have said by January their shelves will be free of children's products containing BPA."
What do you think? "A controversial chemical commonly found in baby bottles, can linings and other household products does not pose a health hazard ... more -
FDA pleases its true audience once again
So, according to the venerable FDA, bisphenol A is now safe for humans and not a health concern. This quote from the article sums it up nicely:
"The FDA's draft report was greeted with enthusiasm by the American Chemistry Council, which has defended the chemical's safety.
"FDA is the government agency we rely upon to assess food-contact products. They've assessed this issue in great detail and their conclusion is very reassuring," said Steve Henges, an executive director with the council." So, according to the venerable FDA, bisphenol A is now safe for humans and not a health concern. This quote from the article sums it u... more -
GM sugarbeets not a sweet proposition, and citizens are fighting back
Never underestimate the power of a few committed people to change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
-- Anthropologist Margaret Mead
Even if you've heard the above quote many times before, the sentiment expressed is so powerful that I think it's worth repeating. All around the world, small groups of people are organizing public support for improved food safety and successfully challenging large corporations to change their behavior.
That's exactly what Flint Michigan residents Kathleen Kirby and Mark Fisher are banking on: their power to influence change. They're participating in a nationwide consumer boycott of Kellogg's Co. instigated by the Organic Consumers Association. By boycotting the world's largest cereal company, they hope to pressure Kellogg's into rejecting the use of sugar from genetically engineered (GE) sugar beets and to spark widespread market rejection in products ranging from cereal to baby food to candy.
As you may know, Roundup Ready sugar beets are genetically altered to resist Monsanto's toxic weed killer, Roundup, and its active ingredient, glyphosate. But here's the scary truth about these beets:
When the USDA first approved GE sugar beets for commercial planting in 1998, the EPA also increased the maximum allowable residues of glyphosate on sugar beet roots from just 0.2 parts per million to 10ppm. That's a staggering 5,000 percent increase of allowable toxins on beet roots. And, it's little surprise that EPA made this policy change at the request of Monsanto.
Sugar beet roots contain sucrose that's extracted, refined, and processed into the sugar used in the foods we eat. What this means is that the more GE ingredients that find their way into our food, the greater the likelihood that we are ingesting more toxic chemicals.
Thankfully, GE sugar beets have never been grown in the U.S. for sale to food manufacturers -- that is, until this year, when Western farmers planted their first crop of Monsanto's Roundup Ready sugar beets. Right now, over half of the sugar used in U.S. processed foods comes from sugar beets, with beet and cane sugars combined in those products. What's most disturbing is that once GE sugar beets hit the market, which could be as early as next year, there will be no way to know if we're eating GE sugar because GE ingredients are not labeled.
Currently, only four major GE crops are sold commercially -- corn, cotton, soy, and canola. Most of these are engineered to withstand repeated, large doses of herbicides. For the most part, these crops and their byproducts are largely fed to animals with the exception of some minor food ingredients and oils. GE beet sugar breaks with this tradition in that it could become the first major GE ingredient added to almost all processed foods on our grocery store shelves.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Our food supply is systematically being taken over and poisoned by Monsanto.There is no other way to state it now. If sugarbeets are allowed to continue to become a part of our food supply, then you can expect that EVERYTHING you touch will be genetically modified, and it has NOT been proven to be safe for human consumption or our environment. Please, I have been writing on this for months along with others who have been trying to make people understand how URGENT it is that you get involved in pushing state legislatures to require proper labelling of GM sources in foods. Read up on this at the Monsanto tag and take action.
Citizen activism is the only way to make companies like Monsanto back down. Consumers did it regarding POSILAC, and we can do it with this. Current TV is the only place I have been able to get exposure to this so far aside from my own blog, and it is also because of people here voting the information up so more can see it. So thank you to those who fight the good fight here everyday over those who would do anything in their power to keep this down. Never underestimate the power of a few committed people to change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." ... more -
say no to the Mothers act!!!!!!
This act is supported by Obama
-
After Stroke: New Treatment for Vision Loss
NovaVision is VRT, the Vision Restoration Therapy. VRT is an FDA-cleared, patented, non-invasive rehabilitation that may restore visual field defects after brain or optic nerve damage due to stroke, head injury or a brain tumour.
These impairments of the visual system have traditionally been considered untreatable, but in the last years scientific research provided evidence that even the visual brain’s restitution potential can be reactivated. By systematic stimulation some of the lost visual functions can be restored and the intact visual field can be noticeably enlarged.
NovaVision VRT consists of a neuropsychologically based examination of the visual field defect and – if conditions are considered as positive - a computer-based home therapy for six months. The daily therapy sessions themselves are going to be performed by the patient on his own PC at home in two twenty minute parts. Monthly, the patients send their data to NovaVision for supervision and adjustment to the reached progress of their visual field.
Patients who undergo VRT have a clinically proven 70 percent success rate without surgery or medication.
Since 2008 British patients have an easier way to access treatment with VRT. Janice Juul in Bristol, an optometrist with a lot of neurological experience, started partnership with NovaVision. Patients can visit her to have their visual field loss precisely diagnosed. NovaVision is VRT, the Vision Restoration Therapy. VRT is an FDA-cleared, patented, non-invasive rehabilitation that may restore visua... more
-
