FDA and the Truth with a "Sticky"

[Petrodus]

Looking forward to discussions on any topic that would promote our cause. However, this is probably going to end up being the shortest thread in the Campaigning discussions group.

I don't understand why the FDA (fill in the blank)? The truth is (fill in the blank). Is Big Pharma (fill in the blank)?

Untold thousands of hours have been devoted to discussions directly or indirectly regarding the FDA and the "Truth". Many of the same questions and frustrations surface over and over in countless discussions.

If it weren’t for the FDA...there wouldn't even be a Campaigning discussions group.

Consider the following to be a "Sticky thread"...required viewing.

Listen to this archived interview on YouTube...(the Entire 7-part interview). Listening to parts 8-11 (when the public calls in)...is recommended but optional.

The link below is unique because at the end of each part of the interview the next will automatically play. Each part is aprox. 10 min. in length.

Secrets of the FDA: Suppressed Information
Drug Industry, FDA and Health Issues
Jonathan W. Emord
Only attorney in history who has defeated the FDA 7 times
6 times on First Amendment grounds
Click Here
____________________

Jonathan W. Emord, Esq.
Emord & Associates
_________________________________________________

We are not the only group in America, with a just cause, being stressed
by government, the FDA and Big Pharma

 

[Vocalek]

I listened to the entire interview. Then I visited Emord's web site and ended up ordering both of his books. I am part way through Global Censorship of Health Information. http://www.emord.com/

This is hair-raising stuff. It isn't just e-cigarettes. And it isn't just the FDA. The sub title of the book is "The politics of controlling therapeutic information to protect state-sponsored drug monopolies."

I have been taking a supplement for years to control my cholesterol, as I had an adverse reaction to a statin drug. The supplement contains 500 mg. of Niacin (vitamin B3) and is formulated to release slowly to avoid "flushing." The brand name is Slo Niacin. Now mind you, it would be illegal for the manufacturer to print on the label that the product can control cholesterol levels. That would be a "medical claim".

But the FDA recently approved a new pharmaceutical product by Abbot Laboratories called Niaspan to control cholesterol. It contains 500 mg. of Niacin, formulated to release slowly. In other words, it's pretty much exactly the same thing as Slo-Niacin. You may have seen the ads for Niaspan on television. The makers of Niaspan went through the FDA drug approval process, so they ARE allowed to make medical claims about the product.

Now get this: I just paid $16 for 100 tablets of Slo Niacin. Out of curiosity, I asked the pharmacist how much it would cost for the same quantity of the 500 mg. tablets of Niaspan. $227.00

The interesting thing is that there will probably be patients who ask the doctor for the prescription version because their copay for prescriptions is lower than the cost of the OTC drug. And do you wonder why health costs keep going up?

 

[Petrodus]

I listened to the entire interview. Then I visited Emord's web site and ended up ordering both of his books. I am part way through Global Censorship of Health Information. Emord & Associates, P.C. | Constitutional & Administrative Lawyers
This is hair-raising stuff. It isn't just e-cigarettes. And it isn't just the FDA. The sub title of the book is "The politics of controlling therapeutic information to protect state-sponsored drug monopolies."

I read your reply with much interest and appreciate you sharing.

We are not the only group in America, with a just cause, being stressed by government, the FDA and Big Pharma.

I don't have any magic quick answers. Many know much more than I do. The purpose of this thread was to open discussions with those (like yourself) who took the time to hear the "Painful" truth.

Thank you so much for your reply.

 

[Petrodus]

A friend recently contacted me and said there may be those who might be reluctant discussing the FDA, for certain reasons.

The original post was not created to open a discussion on the content of the interview. Just to assume all posting had listened to the full interview.

 

[t9c]

This is terrifying info. Mr. Emord states the only way to solve the problems created by the governmental pharmaceutical industry complex is to completely eradicate the FDA.
If you haven't been convinced already that your government is against you, this interview will be the sledge hammer that will convince you otherwise.

btw, the proceeds from his books sales (2 books) go a fund to help fight the FDA in court cases for those who need representation but can't afford it on their own (as he states in the interview). In the text below the video there are links to sites selling his books.

In light of this interview, it's not hard to surmise that anyone who opposes the FDA may have good reason to fear for their lives.

 

[Petrodus]

This is terrifying info. Mr. Emord states the only way to solve the problems created by the governmental pharmaceutical industry complex is to completely eradicate the FDA.

In light of this interview, it's not hard to surmise that anyone who opposes the FDA may have good reason to fear for their lives.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

Thomas Jefferson

 

[Petrodus]

If the primary purpose for this thread was not intended to open a discussion on the interview...Why didn't I just post the interview on an existing thread?

The interview was mentioned on a number of other threads but those threads were on the New Members Forum resulting in 2 replies.

Members wishing to express reactions and comments to the interview are encouraged to click the Reply button. However, it is understood many found the interview more truth than they really wanted to hear. I remember not getting much sleep the night I first listened to the interview. Reality didn’t fully sink in until after I listened to it 3 more times the following day. Listening to those calling in and talking with Jonathan Emord was also very enlightening.

I found the interview a lot more than just enlightening! We didn’t vote the FDA officials into office and we can’t throw the bums out either! I’m sure they find the scenario a comfort as well as amusing!

This is the “Campaigning Discussions Forum”...Do I have any beneficial suggestions focused on campaigning? I can't think of any suggestions that haven't already been mentioned in countless threads.

Here I will hang my hat and post information, observations, and thoughts. Some may just be humorous posts related to topics of discussion.

 

[Vocalek]

See if we can get one of the newly elected U.S. Representatives to kick off a Congressional Investigation into the FDA. Specifically, put them on the hot seat for misleading press releases that mislead the public about the dangers of smoke-free alternatives. I would dearly love to see Josh Sharfstein called to testify and sworn to tell the truth and ask him "What was the quantity of Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines that your lab tests found in electronic cigarettes -- expressed as nanograms."

And of course there is always the "Why does FDA promulgate regulations that prohibit companies from making truthful statements about their products?"

 

[Petrodus]

The only constant in life is change

The first post on this discussion group was on April 1, 2009.
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then.

Today the E-cigarette movement has taken on a "Life of its own". "The Business" of E-cigarettes is now driving the market.

Discussion forms still play an important role. Primarily that of "Education and Support".

I suggest today the most productive thing we can to do to fight the opposition would be to unite behind an organized group like CASAA, ECA or the NVC.

We all know what the NRA stands for. The NRA is NOT powered by the "Truth". It’s powered by the large numbers of members united and supporting one organization.

The NRA members funnel information and concerns to the organization. The organization (not individuals) represents a barrier against all opposition.

If the NRA suggests the members do this or that...Wow!

If ones interest and focus is Education and Support then discussion forums would be most satisfying.

If ones focus is fighting the opposition...I suggest joining and really getting involved with an organized group like CASAA, ECA or the NVC.

Because we listened to the interview...We all know individuals waiving the "flag of truth", means absolutely nothing to the opposition. We know that Congress (for the most part) will not oppose positions put forth by the FDA. The same applies to most at State and local governments.

Food for thought

 

[Vocalek]

The ECA is defunct.

There's no reason why people can't join both the NVC and CASAA, if they wish.

 

[Petrodus]

A spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down

DISCLAIMER: For those who find swear words offensive
Click the back-arrow on your browser.

George Carlin was my favorite comedian. For those who
are not familiar with the name...See Biography below the video.

When I first listened to the Jonathan Emord's interview...
This George Carlin routine came to mind. I said to myself...
Wow, George Carlin was Not exaggerating!

Owners of America



George Carlin (May 12, 1937 – June 22, 2008) was an American stand-up comedian, social critic, actor, and author, who won five Grammy Awards for his comedy albums.

Carlin was noted for his black humor as well as his thoughts on politics, the English language, psychology, religion, and various taboo subjects. Carlin and his "Seven Dirty Words" comedy routine were central to the 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation, in which a narrow 5–4 decision by the justices affirmed the government's power to regulate indecent material on the public airwaves.

The first of his 14 stand-up comedy specials for HBO was filmed in 1977. In the 1990s and 2000s, Carlin's routines focused on the flaws in modern-day America. He often commented on contemporary political issues in the United States and satirized the excesses of American culture. His final HBO special, It's Bad for Ya, was filmed less than four months before his death.

Carlin placed second on the Comedy Central cable television network list of the 100 greatest stand-up comedians, ahead of Lenny Bruce and behind Richard Pryor. He was a frequent performer and guest host on The Tonight Show during the three-decade Johnny Carson era, and hosted the first episode of Saturday Night Live.

Source: Wikipedia

 

[Petrodus]

Light at the end of the tunnel

I'm really not a "gloom and doomer"...Just a "realist"
A couple favorite sayings
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
I don't make the news...I'm just reporting it.

The FDA will NOT Ban E-cigarettes Click Here
Very interesting discussion.

We need to keep the pressure up on those opposing the movement for many reasons and the number one reason is...we haven't won yet.

It's popular (and safe) to hammer smokers. Since the E-cigarette vapor looks like smoke then oppose the use. regardless of the FDA. Those idiots using this logic could go extinct tomorrow and no one would miss them. Nice way of saying wouldn't you like to kick their ... back to the Stone Age?!

It wasn't that long ago when E-cigarettes were something new and information was primarily being spread by word of mouth.

Today, the "E-cigarette Business" is driving the market. The nice thing is E-cigarette users are very well informed and truth now has started to spread like wild-fire. We don't hear much talk about "anti-freeze" any more.

Arthur Schopenhauer once said, “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

I think we are now approaching the third stage.

A "smoking hot" Christmas present this year
will be an E-cigarette. (Pun intended)

 

[Petrodus]

The Business side of Promoting and Campaigning

Old News

The FDA proclaims that it does not consider the Electronic cigarette to be a legitimate smoking cessation aid, and demanded all marketers immediately remove from their materials any suggestions stating Electronic cigarettes help people stop smoking cigarettes.

Follow the Money Trail

Today the "E-cigarette business" is driving the market. They are doing a fantastic job proclaiming E-cigarettes actually do help people stop smoking. They are doing a fantastic job of informing the public of the truth and denouncing lies and misinformation.

Why do you think it has become almost impossible to surf the subject without running into web pages without back-links to commercial websites selling E-cigarettes? I'm not just talking about large colorful adds...but very informative pages with text links IE every time "E-cigarette" appears in text it is a hyperlink to Blu or Green Smoke (just 2 examples).

The marketers of E-cigarettes can't make health claims on their commercial websites...However, some have purchased other domain names and created very informational pages promoting E-cigarettes and packed those pages with health benefits and testimonials. Naturally, those pages include back-links to their commercial websites.

Marketers can participate on many informative pages on the Net as well as point visitors to their commercial websites. Paid ads, forums, private websites, YouTube, blogs, and Tweets...just name a few.

If the FDA and others pull stunts that might negatively effect E-cigarette sales...Have no fear. Web pages will start popping up professing the truth including hundreds of (searchable) posts and replies on the ECF.

The overwhelming majority of pages on the Net today are commercial or informational pages with back-links to other websites. Great! When the un-informed clicks on Google, the odds are they will be quickly informed of the truth and get caught up with shopping.

The E-cigarette market is exploding and the "truth" travels with the increased popularity.

 

[Petrodus]

A Rose by any other name is still a Rose

E-cigarettes are less dangerous than cigarettes.

OH, how I hate that phrase! AND any other phrase we use implying PVs are dangerous but less dangerous than smoking tobacco.

We for ever more will have to live with the phrase "Electronic Cigarette" because that is the "common name" the public (and many of us) use when referring to PVs.

To the public, if it looks like a cigarette and produces clouds of "smoke" then it is a cigarette...Might be safer (tests not in yet, CRAP) but still a type of cigarette.

Question: Is that one of those Electronic Cigarettes your smoking?

Answer: I understand the question. Many refer to these as an Electronic Cigarette...However, the truth is they are Personal Vaporizers and what appears to be smoke is just harmless water vapor.

Question: I heard they have nicotine in them. Doesn't nicotine cause cancer?

Answer: Nicotine, similar to caffeine in coffee, is addictive. Nicotine is the reason why smokers have issues with quitting...So yes, there is some nicotine involved. However, nicotine and caffeine don’t cause cancer. I continue the habit but free of the thousands of chemicals and cancer causing carcinogens found in cigarettes. Again, its a Personal Vaporizer and I understand why so many refer to it incorrectly as an Electronic Cigarette.

I can not even begin to count the number of people, while smoking a cigarette, who have asked me...Has the FDA approved Electronic Cigarettes as safe?

When in discussions or debates and others use the phrase "Electronic Cigarettes"...We Must Stop And Say...I understand the term, but to be correct these are Personal Vaporizers and the only association with cigarettes is that some have a similar shape, they can contain nicotine, and what appears to be smoke is nothing but harmless vapor.

The whole world has been programmed to be Politically Correct. So to be Politically Correct...It is NOT an Electronic Cigarette...It is a Personal Vaporizer! If we unite behind the Political Correct name...we will find the battle a whole lot easier.

It doesn't matter if the conversation is just with someone who stopped us on the street or in a formal debate with a government official. The correct term is Personal Vaporizers. We insist on the term PV to set the stage in casual conversations as well as in formal arguments.

PS: If we stop buying PVs that look just like cigarettes...(tongue in cheek) Maybe just Mabe that would help our cause.

Those wishing to enter a debate comparing PVs
with cigarettes should first be required to watch this video



Several active ingredients and special methods of production are involved in making sure the nicotine in a cigarette is many times more potent than that of a tobacco plant.

The nicotine content in several major brands is reportedly on the rise. Harvard University and the Massachusetts Health Department revealed that between 1997 and 2005 the amount of nicotine in Camel, Newport, and Doral cigarettes may have increased by as much as 11 percent.

According to the March 1973 edition Medical World News, there’s an average of 5-20% sugar that’s added to cigarettes. Some studies indicate sugar in cigarettes is the main source of lung cancer. ALSO Many diabetics are unaware of this secret sugar intake.

 

[Vocalek]

The truth of the matter is that the Massachusetts Health Department's study has been criticized. They decided to use a different way of measuring nicotine in the latter years. So when looking at their results across years, you are comparing apples to oranges.

The tobacco control community likes to believe that more nicotine = more addictive, but is it really true? When the Surgeon General told smokers, if you can't quit, at least switch to one of the new low-tar, now-nicotine brands, I did that. For 20 years I had been a pack a day smoker. A year or so after switching to lights, I took stock and realized that I was smoking 2-1/2 packs a day! Years later, I learned that this was a common phenomenon. Switching to lights makes smokers smoke more of them, or inhale more deeply, or even unconsciouly cover up the air holes that were diluting the smoke (without even knowning they were there) in an effort to get the regular amount of nicotine. The fact is that smokers self-regulate their nicotine intake. They smoke more when under stress because nicotine helps to relieve stress by relaxing the skeletal muscles and normalizing some of the brain chemistry associated with depression and/or anxiety. They smoke less when they are content. Under every-day circumstances, they tend to take in the same amount of nicotine, day after day. Putting more nicotine in a cigarette would just result in fewer puffs or fewer cigarettes smoked.

Taking that knowledge to heart, I researched nicotine content to find the highest amount in any commercial brand. I then switched to that brand and reduced my daily intake by 10 cigarettes. I figured that the less smoke I inhaled, the better for my lungs.

Now, thanks to e-cigarettes, my daily intake of traditional tobacco cigarettes is zero.

 

[Petrodus]

Monsanto in the E-cigarette market

Eye catching title. Misleading title?

This is an Internet discussion...Not the CNN Newsroom

There is just way too much money involved for the FDA's friends not to have already jumped into the market. I suggest they are not waiting for the FDA to do this or that...they are already in the market right now.

The FDA hasn't banned E-cigarettes and hasn't yet "dropped the hammer" to slow down sales with heavy regulations. It is a well-known fact that the FDA is in the business of protectionism. They protect the drug industry.

I suggest there is a possibility there are E-cigarette companies and campaigns running right now where the (hidden) money trails leads back to the FDA's friends.

If the FDA's friends are in the market, that means they are (behind the scenes) actively funding and promoting their vested interests. If there is any truth to this speculation...The FDA would be kinda-sorta on our side (How sick is that?)

If you can't beat them...Join them!

Your thoughts?

 

[Petrodus]

Bottom feeder & Ambulance chasing Law Firm

We all know: The FDA proclaims that it does not consider the Electronic cigarette to be a legitimate smoking cessation aid, and demanded all marketers immediately remove from their materials any suggestions stating Electronic cigarettes help people stop smoking cigarettes.

What I find "Disgusting" is when a "bottom feeding ambulance chasing" law firm jumps in wanting to cash in on the E-cigarette market by filing a "class action" lawsuit against marketers of E-cigarettes.

Quote from the law firm's website: Thousands of people - even children - use e-cigarettes in the mistaken belief that these devices pose less risk than traditional cigarettes. In reality, they may be exposing themselves to dangerous, cancer causing chemicals.

Believe it Or Not ... Click Here

I recently posted this "Bottom Feeders" website on the "Law and the E-cigarette" forum...posting it here also to increase exposure.

 

[DaveP]

I've read the few actual lab analysis papers I could find on Ecigs and the only one that provides a negative slant is the FDA test. That one spotlighted the fact that trace amounts of diethylene glycol were found in one sample. If they were to do a side by side comparison of tobacco cigs and Ecigs the difference would be so dramatic that there would be no grounds for legalization of the tobacco product and the Ecig product would be so safe that the choice would be crystal clear.

There is no money for government in the Ecig, so they have to find a loophole to squash it in favor of the product that provides settlement money and heavy taxation.

 

[Petrodus]

All Good things come to an end
Or
Nothing on the Internet is Permanent

The Coast to Coast radio broadcast interview with guest attorney Jonathan W. Emord: "Secrets of the FDA: Suppressed Information" has been removed from YouTube.

The interview is still available for listening on the Coast to Coast website. However, one has to be a paid member to listen to it.

Coast to Coast AM

At least the "Shocking" truth about the FDA was available to every one for a while.

I have the entire interview archived (file type: flv) and because I have a website...I could put the interview back on the Net for the benefit of all. However, there may be some legal issues involved?

 

[JupiterV]

Thank you all for the factual, intelligent and informative discussion. Got a few people to send this to!!!