A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw

scurvy, that doesn’t mean that’s the only thing that vitamin C does. In fact, scurvy is a free-radical disease, and there are otherfree-radical diseases, such as cardiovascular disease and many types of the processes that causes the initiation and promotion of cancer. There are many other free-radical diseases that vitamin C can reduce your risk of, provided you take enough of it, and that takes more than sixty milligrams. You are notgoing to reduce your risk of heart attacks by taking only the RDA of vitamin C– sixty milligrams.

Sandy: The recent political battle is over the FDA’s control of the flow of truthful non-misleading information concerning dietary supplements. They set up asystem in which you can not communicate any information whatsoever on labels or in ads– no matter how much supporting evidence you have for it in the way of the scientific studies– unless the FDA first gives you permission to do so. Well, this is a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Durk: Now this just applies to people selling nutrient supplements, not to scientists or other third parties who don’t benefit from the sale of the nutrient supplements.

Sandy: The FDA’s restrictions on the communication of truthful information is a violation of the Constitutional rights of people who offer supplements, because if something is truthful, the First Amendment of the Constitution says that the government is not supposed to have the power to be able to stop you from saying it.

Durk: It’s also a violation of the Constitutional rights of people who want to hear these things, and would otherwise benefit from it.

Sandy: This battle’s been going on for quite some time. We recently sued the FDA for Constitutional violations of the First Amendment, because they have continued to claim that they have the right to decide what you can and can’t say– that you have to get their permission to say anything. This is a scientificorthodoxy. It’s like what happened in the Soviet Union when they had Lysenkoism, and Lysenko controlled what people could say about biology. The FDA has long controlled what information could be provided about dietary supplements, and the FDA is a slow rigid bureaucracy. They have fallen far behind the data.

Durk: And that’s why we’re suing them– because the FDA’s prohibition on truthful, non-misleading claims is costing literally at least a couple of hundred thousand lives per year. For example, most of the people who could benefit from low-dose aspirin do not know that taking a quarter to a half aspirin per day can very dramatically reduce your risk of a heart attack and death from a heart attack. We’re talking about roughly a forty percent reduction in risk for a manover fifty, and for post-menopausal women it’s about the same.

Durk: But most people do not know this, and the people who would love to tell you– like the Bayer aspirin company– are forbidden from doing so. They’re allowed to tell doctors about low dose aspirin reducing the risk of a second heart attack, but not about its protective effects against first heart attacks, even though the mechanisms of preventing that second heart attack are exactly the same as the mechanisms for preventing the first heart attack. Eventhough there is overwhelming evidence you can prevent many first heart attacks, you can’t say it. The patents on aspirin ran out almost a hundred years ago.

Sandy: Nobody is going to be able to get exclusive use of a claim after spending 200 to 250 million dollars in order to get the FDA to approve the claim. So no one’s going to do it.

Durk: In fact, the aspirin component in the 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Comments are closed.