VeggieBoards banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,792 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
If you are in the U.S., and you are concerned with the possibility of the FDA having even more authority over the sale and use of dietary supplements, then go here:

http://capwiz.com/nnfa/issues/alert/...103491&type=CO

You can contact your local senators and let your voice be heard. Personally, I'm not at all excited about the FDA possibly banning safe and helpful herbs or supplements that have been in use for (in many cases) hundreds of years because they have a complaint, or if a consumer misuses them. I would rather the FDA put the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 to better use, by making consumers aware of the benefits and risks of certain supplements in order for us to make up our own minds.

I usually shy away from potentially debatable topics on the boards because I don't think I'm very good at getting my point across sometimes
but I happen to feel quite strongly about this topic. If you want to keep your freedom to choose what supplements are right for your health, then I urge you to contact your senators today!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
I don´t agree. St. John´s Word may have toxic effects on the liver. Kawakawa preparations have been taken off the market because of severe side effect.

I heard about traditional Chinese medicine being counterfeated with the use of lead, Ayurvedic preparations containing steroids. You must have an instrument to get to know the black sheep.

I´m not sure about the risk that helpful herbs or supplements (or even harmless) get banned. What would be the corrective?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,792 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Both St. John's Wort and kava kava have had links to potential liver damage if taken in excess, over a long term, and in people with a history of liver problems. So have many FDA approved medications, such as Lamisil (nail fungus med), Serzone (antidepressant) and Rezulin (diabetes med). Since the liver acts as a filter for many herbs, supplements, and medications we may take, this can be a potential problem for countless other meds.

Many herbs have side effects. But, many herbs have helped thousands of people who couldn't or wouldn't take medication.

Of course dietary supplements should be montiored for our safety. The FDA already has that right, given to them in an act passed in 1994:

http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/supplmnt.html

I would like to keep my right to educate myself on my personal health, and if I choose to treat myself with traditional preparations or vitamins, I would like to be able to continue to do so.

Of course, if you strongly disagree, you can always contact your local senator and tell him/her that you agree with the proposed dietary supplement safety act. That's the beauty of freedom, eh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
Of course, approved medications have side effects! If you take St. John´s Wort as an efective antidepressant, which it is, then you also encounter side effects as approved medications.

The problem aren´t the herbs you collect but if you take herbs and produce a commercially avaible dietary supplement, you shuld also have some kind of obligation. Sometimes the borders aren´t set clearly as glucosamine for instance is sold as a dietary supplements in some countries but as a presciption medication in others. And don´t count on everybody educating themselves as you are doing.

The question is: Are the rights of the FDA sufficient to monitor dietary supplements or not?

My disgreement is not as hard as you might think. It´s more same rights and obligations. If your link convinces me (I haven´t read it yet, I´ll tell you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
I´ve looked at S. 722 and at http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/supplmnt.html.

S. 722 deals with Serious Adverse Dietary Supplement Experiences like SAEs (Serious Adverse Events) are with medications. So, to me it looks more like an instrument for risk and quality mangement. Reducing risks would be wonderful, wouldn´t it? Or do I miss something? Is it used as a pretext to do something, which has no direct connection to the topic?

Let´s play with a new vitamin supplement called Bio-Multi-XXX2, which I just invented and bears so resemblance to anything on the market, and which is labeled as vegan and suitable to meet the needs of pregnant women. After a while obstreticians see more and more women with a strange dry skin and a high rate of spontenous abortions or babies with birth defects. What went wrong? Instead of 8000 IU vitamin A the pill contained 80000 IU. Without some kind of quality management this might go on undetected. Question: is the 1994 Act sufficient?

I like Chinese Tradional Medicine, I even studied Chinese (1 ½ years in Taiwan) to know more about it. Once I´ve been with a delegation travelling through mainland China. All of a sudden more 90% of this group of scientists and journalists caught a flu. As we didn´t carry appropriate medication on us, I went to a local Chinese drug store, and bought Chinese tradional product, which worked really good. That´s only to tell you that I´m not biased against Chinese medicine. To my dismay fraudulent Chinese preparations had been found, containing lead or other toxic substances. Question: How would you find out, if it´s sold without restrictions?

So, I´m still not convinced that something is wrong with S.722.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top