Do you still have Faith in the FDA after Reading This???

UsedToBeHusky

I am standing up to this and I, along with a doctor of mine are forming a group to start lobbying for the stoppage of this nonsense.

Good luck with that. Kellogg's is owned by Haliburton (Richard Cheney's company). Haliburton and Big Pharma have a whole lot more money than you. And money is what matters when it comes to lobbying.

I feel like the FDA fulfills a certain need and is necessary. However, I do agree that politics and money can easily corrupt the purpose of the FDA. At the same time, however, we need the FDA to put a stop to companies that market harmful substances in the US as well, such as the HCG crap! You have to consider all sides to a story. If you really want to make a difference with the FDA, then you need to motivate a politician to make FDA reform a pet project. Then, find voting citizens to rally behind that idea and that politician. Then, you MIGHT be able to make a difference.

skir927

You aren't allowed to make certain medical claims without FDA approval. I don't see a problem with that.

Stating Health benefits of a food is not the same as making medical claims.

Actually, it is. If a company is telling the public that a product lowers cholesterol, what does it matter if that product is Lipitor or breakfast cereal? Both products are regulated by the FDA and both need to bring evidence to support their claims. I have worked for several medical device companies, getting products approved/cleared by FDA and other regulatory bodies around the world, specifically focusing on advertising claims for part of that time. It is a complicated and sometimes frustrating process, but the people in these agencies are not unreasonable idiots who serve a mindless bureaucracy - they are scientists, engineers, and doctors who really do have the public health in mind.

kingkong123

...some government entity that wants to put every single person in this country on some type of prescription medication, make people sicker, fatter and more dependent on drugs.

hahahahahahahahaha

ARDuBaie

You are correct in stating that the members of the FDA previously held positions elsewhere, usually with food, agricultural, or pharmaceutical industries. They are basically wringers for these industries who have never lost their allegiance to the companies where they were employed.

Monsanto has been the main developer of genetically modified food, henceforth called GMOs. GMOs have been touted as being equal to their non-GMO cousins. Research is now showing that they are not equal. GMO foods often are less nutritious and lack the same taste as their non-GMO cousins. That means that the body is not being satisfied nutritionally or regarding taste, possibly leading people to overeat.

Research is also showing that GMO foods may actually increase the risk for certain types of cancer. British research has revealed that infants raised on soy-based formula have a higher risk for peanut allergies than those not raised on soy-based formulas or breast-fed. This is because the gene used to develop GMO soy came from peanuts.

Ninety percent of soy is now GMO. GMO soy is less nutritional than non-GMO soy. Vegetarians often use soy for their protein, but the protein content of GMO soy is less than non-GMO soy and it also may not be digested by the human body.

GMO corn also was made using peanut genes. Monsanto made GMO corn to be drought resistant and amenable to their Round-up herbicide. The drought resistant corn has been proven to be a dud and the use of Round-up herbicide has caused the introduction of a new fungus into the food chain.

In spite of all the problems with GMOs, the FDA has not pulled them from the shelves. Despite consumers demanding that GMOs be labeled, the FDA has sided with the agricultural industry's desires not to be forced to label GMO containing products. What are they afraid of?

Europe will not allow GMO food. What do they know that we don't know?

The FDA has been on the side of pharmaceuticals for a long time now. There is so much that I know that it makes me want to barf.

Over 100 girls have died from the Gardisil vaccination. Over 1,000 girls have suffered some sort of nerve damage from the Gardisil vaccination. Yet the FDA has not removed it from the market. The CDC, another corrupt agency, has even extended the use of the Gardisil vaccination to boys. This is a vaccination that was never really tested on humans. It was fast-tracked through the FDA approval process in order to get it on the market. Will these children be sterile when they get older? We don't know and only time will tell.

Cervical cancer is the most curable cancer. It is caught when women get a PAP smear. The Gardisil vaccination only protects against some of the forms of genital warts which may cause cervical cancer. There are others that can cause cervical cancer for which the person is not protected. So why the fast track? Money.

Hepatitis B vaccinations are given to infants as soon as they are born to protect them from medical staff who may be carrying it around on their hands. The thought is that since the staff will not get the vaccination, let's protect the child. The vaccination is very hard on the liver. Infants do not have a very developed liver, so they have trouble clearing the toxins in the vaccination. Yet the FDA allows Hepatitis B vaccinations to be given to infants.

For the life of me, we, the consumer, must be vigilant. We must educate ourselves about what we are putting into our bodies. We must voice our concerns and demand our rights in regards to labeling. In some places, organic food can be GMO food. Organic only applies to the way they are produced, not what they are produced from.

It does not surprise me at all that the FDA is threatening diamond walnuts about the omega vitamins. Look at Quaker and their oatmeal claims. If a food is helpful in preventing disease, and it is well substantiated, then the company should be able to use such in advertising.

Some books to read are Food Politics by Marion Nestle, anything by Michael Pollard. Educate yourselves and really understand what is going on.

Beezil

I am standing up to this and I, along with a doctor of mine are forming a group to start lobbying for the stoppage of this nonsense.

Good luck with that. Kellogg's is owned by Haliburton (Richard Cheney's company). Haliburton and Big Pharma have a whole lot more money than you. And money is what matters when it comes to lobbying.

I feel like the FDA fulfills a certain need and is necessary. However, I do agree that politics and money can easily corrupt the purpose of the FDA. At the same time, however, we need the FDA to put a stop to companies that market harmful substances in the US as well, such as the HCG crap! You have to consider all sides to a story. If you really want to make a difference with the FDA, then you need to motivate a politician to make FDA reform a pet project. Then, find voting citizens to rally behind that idea and that politician. Then, you MIGHT be able to make a difference.

I_get_fit

I have no faith in the FDA... whatsoever!

RobynC79

I want them to go after General Mills and Kelloggs and all these other companies making the same claims of lowering cholesterol and such.

There is a difference - you can say 'ingredient x has been shown to lower cholesterol'. You cannot say 'cheerios treat high cholesterol!'. The first is stating a known health benefit of an ingredient - even if that ingredient appears in what is otherwise a very unhealthy food product, it is a legitimate claim. The second is claiming the product treats a specific disease. Unless this is proven in a clinical trial, the FDA prevents you from stating it. Because it's untrue. Statins - shown in clinical trials to treat high cholesterol. Walnuts - have not been shown to treat high cholesterol in clinical trials. Maybe one day they will be - but until that happens, you cannot claim walnuts act as a drug (i.e., a substance treating a defined disease)

Many natural foods, such as nuts, vegetables, fats (coconut oil), fruit truly have healing abilities - The FDA does not want people to know that. The writing is on the wall and it is very common sense.

There is a big difference between something being 'common sense' and something being tested and demonstrated to treat a defined disease. Natural foods do not, on their own, treat diseases. Deficiencies, in some cases, yes. Diseases, no.

Sorry.

And I will believe the claims of many natural food companies over some government entity that wants to put every single person in this country on some type of prescription medication, make people sicker, fatter and more dependent on drugs. ]

I think you may be slightly paranoid. There are drugs that have been tested and approved by the FDA for that.

ResilientWoman

Suziq2you

Now I want Cheerios. And walnuts.

HerbieSue

Now I want Cheerios. And walnuts.

Me too!!

auntiebabs

bump

That_Girl

I've never trusted the FDA. They just take payouts to push the agenda of companies that are corrupt, through and through.

It's a scam.

You know they are sitting on cures for major diseases, but they won't post them because then the system will lose money for the treatments they sell.

melsinct

I have never had faith in the FDA or any federal agency overseeing the nation's food supply, for that matter.

BarbWhite09

I don't think I know anyone who actually trusts them...

Thomasm198

MaximalLife

Most of what the federal government does flops with the exception of waging war and collecting taxes.
These they do VERY well.

cessnaholly

bump

Shweedog

"...the company stated that the omega-3 fatty acids found in walnuts have been shown to have certain health benefits, including reduced risk of heart disease and some types of cancer."

That's a medical claim.

It's a fact about Omega-3. Not a claim about walnuts.

YassSpartan

Here's another example of how amazing FDA is...... AmasingLY AWFUL

The Failure of the FDA: Why We're Still Using Antibiotics on Livestock
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/01/the-failure-of-the-fda-why-were-still-using-antibiotics-on-livestock/251442/

efwolfcub

You aren't allowed to make certain medical claims without FDA approval. I don't see a problem with that.

THIS - in short, walnuts are NOT drugs, but if you're going to say 'clinically proven to lower cholesterol' or 'clinically proven to help erectile dysfunction / hair growth / fingernail fungus / obesity / high blood pressure / etc' then the fda has a right and a RESPONSIBILITY to say "hey, wait a minute - that's not proven. Show us your evidence or take your super walnut juice off the market"

would you prefer the alternative? People selling castor oil as "Tea party miracle tonic - guaranteed to cure absolutely anything you can thing of"

Is the FDA perfect? absolutely not. but on this - they're doing the right thing, without a doubt.