Senate bill S 510 vote imminent - procedural vote passes 74-25
- Thread starter halfevildruid
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Yikes! As if the FDA doesn't already have too much power. Our government wants to give them even more power!
It looks to me as if this bill would give FDA the power to outlaw vitamins and other supplements, leaving the coast clear for big pharma's same products to cost 10 times (or more) the price we pay now.
Examples:
Now we can get the prescription version of fish oil at the Pharmacy for $149.72 for 100 capsules instead of paying $11.99 for 120 Nature's Bounty capsules (same dosage).
Big Pharma has also come up with a prescription replacement for Slo-Niacin, a B-vitamin that helps to lower cholesterol. The vitamin version costs $15.99 for 100 of the 500 mg. tablets. The prescription drug Niaspan costs $227.66 for 90 500 mg. tablets.
God knows how FDA would twist around a new set of powers in their quest to rid the world of e-cigarettes. I'm calling both my Senators on Monday.
Examples:
Now we can get the prescription version of fish oil at the Pharmacy for $149.72 for 100 capsules instead of paying $11.99 for 120 Nature's Bounty capsules (same dosage).
Big Pharma has also come up with a prescription replacement for Slo-Niacin, a B-vitamin that helps to lower cholesterol. The vitamin version costs $15.99 for 100 of the 500 mg. tablets. The prescription drug Niaspan costs $227.66 for 90 500 mg. tablets.
God knows how FDA would twist around a new set of powers in their quest to rid the world of e-cigarettes. I'm calling both my Senators on Monday.
There is nothing I can do,but call my Senators and tell them thank you for voting "No". I really think Corker(Tenn),Alexander(Tenn),Enzi(Wyoming),and Vitter(La.) could be successfully lobbied. Texas Senators.especially Cornyn are very sensible and Cornyn is very honest.
What's really striking is that in this day and age of near-instant communication with anyone in the world, the government seems to think that people are unable to make an informed decision without their guidance. While it's true that the vast majority of people don't know a thing about how a particular substance will affect their bodies, it's also true that that information is widely available.
Anecdotal evidence is becoming more and more reliable, since it can be reported in real-time. If someone is taking (for example) fish oil caplets from Naturemade, and they experience oily discharge, every person that they know will know about it approximately 0.05 seconds after they leave the bathroom (and in some cases, WHILE they are in the bathroom).
While studies are always good (eliminate all of the variables, collect all pertinent data, etc), we are fast approaching something similar to a hive mind, in which all experiences and lessons learned from them are available to everyone who seeks them.
It could be argued that individual experiences are subjective, while scientific studies are objective, but lately I have a hard time believing the latter.
Anecdotal evidence is becoming more and more reliable, since it can be reported in real-time. If someone is taking (for example) fish oil caplets from Naturemade, and they experience oily discharge, every person that they know will know about it approximately 0.05 seconds after they leave the bathroom (and in some cases, WHILE they are in the bathroom).
While studies are always good (eliminate all of the variables, collect all pertinent data, etc), we are fast approaching something similar to a hive mind, in which all experiences and lessons learned from them are available to everyone who seeks them.
It could be argued that individual experiences are subjective, while scientific studies are objective, but lately I have a hard time believing the latter.
One word for this..........................Monsanto. One of the most evil companies in this world.
What irritates me the most is how many people are so willfully ignorant and complacent, more than content to sit back and wait for information to be spoon fed to them. They show no initiative to educate themselves or take advantage of the fact that we do have access to a wealth of information, but will respond with disbelief and hostility when they discover they've been 'lied to'. So many people have this idea that if my government says it's okay then it's okay and if my government says it's bad then it must be bad....just assuming that everyone acts out of good will and never stopping to consider what other motives lurk beneath the surface that contribute to the decisions being made. Then these same people who don't want the government telling them they can't have a toy with their happy meal or whether or not they can have an abortion finally decide to react, but only when it hits close to home. You know, like anti-smoking zealots who are thrilled at the increasingly draconian regulations against smoking or tobacco use in general and who have no problem with companies not hiring people who have nicotine in their system (regardless of how it got there) but they are incensed that pot is still illegal and they don't think what they do on their own time is their boss's business. It's all fine and good when it's someone else's vice/hobby that is being infringed upon but they don't make the connection between the rights of those people and their own until it's too late.
Crumpet, well said. To me, the essence, the very strength of Democracy is the "collective agreement" of "We the People...."
to respect, tolerate, Not interfere and many times fight and die for our fellow man's right to do and say as he or she chooses - within the confines of 'reasonable and nonoppressive' laws - no matter how strenuously we personally may abhor, disagree or secretly revile their particular choices. "We the people...." have quite sadly and tragically been breaching this "collective agreement" for some time now and I fear many are unaware of the steady diminution of our country's strength and the corrosive affects on our collective character as we give way to bigotry, greed, dishonesty, self-righteousness and intolerance
to respect, tolerate, Not interfere and many times fight and die for our fellow man's right to do and say as he or she chooses - within the confines of 'reasonable and nonoppressive' laws - no matter how strenuously we personally may abhor, disagree or secretly revile their particular choices. "We the people...." have quite sadly and tragically been breaching this "collective agreement" for some time now and I fear many are unaware of the steady diminution of our country's strength and the corrosive affects on our collective character as we give way to bigotry, greed, dishonesty, self-righteousness and intolerance
Thank goodness Lincoln got voted out of Arkansas last election. With a name like Boozman, the new one can't be all bad can he? 
I did follow the link for the petition though which sends a letter to her and Pryor both. The fact that Pryor voted for it irritates me though. He hails from this area where we have a lot of farmers' markets and fruit stands. Can't believe he didn't take into account that those would probably be one of the FDA's targets. 
I did follow the link for the petition though which sends a letter to her and Pryor both. The fact that Pryor voted for it irritates me though. He hails from this area where we have a lot of farmers' markets and fruit stands. Can't believe he didn't take into account that those would probably be one of the FDA's targets. Follow the money. Take a look at who their top contributors are. The top industry contributor for Enzi is Pharma. "Health Care Professionals" rank very high on each of their lists of contributors, as do health insurance companies. What "health care professionals" includes, I'm not certain; but given the cozy relationship between Pharma and health care providers, I doubt we have a majority of "health care professionals" on our side. Doctors, for sure, don't want the supplement market cutting into their drug pushing business. I'd be willing to bet that health insurance companies aren't big supplement fans either, and I know for sure that Pharma isn't.
If you are going to try to lobby any of these guys, especially Enzi, you better bring a pocketful of cash. Money talks louder than phone calls. Yes, Luisa, even to Republicans.
Thank goodness Lincoln got voted out of Arkansas last election. With a name like Boozman, the new one can't be all bad can he?
Why be surprised? Once again, follow the money. Boozman's top industry benefactor was health care professionals. They were also high on Pryors' list of contributors. They have to protect their drug pushing doctors. Farmers of the type who sell at markets and fruit stands are not among their contributors, but "Crop Production & Basic Processing", IOW Big Agribusiness, is a substantial donor to both of them. Also "Food processing and Sales" is one of Boozman's top industry segments.
Big Agribusiness and Food processors would love to eliminate farmers markets and fruit stands. How dare farmers cut out the middleman. You should just buy your fruits and vegetables from the frozen food section of your grocery store like a good consumer!
Last edited:
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
The weblinked article posted at the beginning of this thread didn't even address the legislation (S. 510), but rather was an irresponsible tirade against the FDA.
S. 510 will further protect public health from food borne diseases. The key concern I (and the American Council on Science and Health) had had about the legislation has eliminated (an amendment by Sen. Diane Feinstein that would have banned BPA, which is used to line the inside of cans to preserve food).
Industry Opposition Scuttles Bipartisan Senate Bid for BPA Curbs - NYTimes.com
Just because FDA Deputy Commissioner Josh Sharfstein has abused his (and the FDA's) authority on the issue of electronic cigarettes doesn't mean that the FDA doesn't do a lot of important work protecting public health.
S. 510 will further protect public health from food borne diseases. The key concern I (and the American Council on Science and Health) had had about the legislation has eliminated (an amendment by Sen. Diane Feinstein that would have banned BPA, which is used to line the inside of cans to preserve food).
Industry Opposition Scuttles Bipartisan Senate Bid for BPA Curbs - NYTimes.com
Just because FDA Deputy Commissioner Josh Sharfstein has abused his (and the FDA's) authority on the issue of electronic cigarettes doesn't mean that the FDA doesn't do a lot of important work protecting public health.
I didn't say I was surprised sailorman, just irritated. 
Sad to know that Boozman probably won't be any better than the senator he replaced though.
And not all doctors come down on the side of Pharma, though I imagine a large number of them probably do. Just like not all doctors side with the FDA on the e-cig. My own doctor would be more likely to hand you a bottle of OTC supplements than he would a prescription if he felt they would be just as beneficial. Which reminds me, I need to take him the link to that petition when I go in on the 6th.
Sad to know that Boozman probably won't be any better than the senator he replaced though.And not all doctors come down on the side of Pharma, though I imagine a large number of them probably do. Just like not all doctors side with the FDA on the e-cig. My own doctor would be more likely to hand you a bottle of OTC supplements than he would a prescription if he felt they would be just as beneficial. Which reminds me, I need to take him the link to that petition when I go in on the 6th.
Most doctors would just as soon hand you a bottle of OTC supplements, if they thought you'd be there either way. The problem is that too many doctors are too cozy with Pharma and are fully aware that the advertising Pharma is allowed to do nowadays drives customers....err..I mean patients, to their offices.
Doctors and Pharma have a symbiotic relationship. Pharma is allowed to do the advertising that doctors cannot do. The doctor acts as the on-site salesman. It's just like a Toyota commercial that sends you to your local dealer. When a consumer responds to a pharma ad to "ask your doctor about XXXX", that is money in the doctor's pocket. A significant percentage will make an appointment specifically to discuss the drug advertised.
Doctors and Pharma have a symbiotic relationship. Pharma is allowed to do the advertising that doctors cannot do. The doctor acts as the on-site salesman. It's just like a Toyota commercial that sends you to your local dealer. When a consumer responds to a pharma ad to "ask your doctor about XXXX", that is money in the doctor's pocket. A significant percentage will make an appointment specifically to discuss the drug advertised.
Actually, most doctors would hand you a prescription, probably for whatever medication the last rep. mentioned when they brought lunch for the whole clinic. I agree that most doctors are too cozy with the pharmaceutical companies and have dealt with way too many of them. I spent years being handed one new and expensive prescription after another, rather than being diagnosed with the real problem which a daily dose of one inexpensive medication and monthly blood work would take care of. According to studies I've read, anywhere from $8,000 to $13,000 a year is spent on each doctor by pharma reps in gifts, free meals, education, etc.
For an example of your Doctor/Pharma relationship, take a look at the AMA. They've been spouting the FDA line on e-cigs while their magazine is full of pharma advertisements and they except funding for at least a portion of their training seminars.
For an example of your Doctor/Pharma relationship, take a look at the AMA. They've been spouting the FDA line on e-cigs while their magazine is full of pharma advertisements and they except funding for at least a portion of their training seminars.
Stormfinch, the amount spent on the physicians may be correct over the course of a year, but it's not spent buying lunch for the whole clinic. IF the rep gets 10 minutes with the doc on a visit, they're doing well. They may pick up some quicky food for the staff to "grease" their way in to see the doc, but nothing extravagant.
so instead of buying my melatonin at walmart for $3, i may as well go get an ambien prescription. that's exactly what i don't want to do.
- Status
Similar threads
