| FDA Approved, so what's that worth? |
|
|
| by Pamela Drew | |
| Monday, 31 March 2008 | |
|
The snarky muckraker in me would answer that an FDA approval is like a lottery ticket worth billions. Thanks to changes in the law under the Bush Administration, an approval now means companies are not subject to many of the lawsuits they used to be. Congress went so far as to allow protection to companies who got approvals with studies found to be fraudulent, so long as it got through to the FDA approval, no harm comes to the drug maker and no suits will haunt their profitability. We know that FDA approved is worth its weight in gold to sellers, but what about us? What does it mean when a product has the term "FDA approved" on the label? When the FDA is quoted with a health claim on a food product, what does it tell us as consumers? What it tells me is to put it down and find something without claims or look closely at the ingredients. It shouts to me like a warning that some slick marketing may be involved. Understand that sellers are not the best source for their own reviews. Of course they say wonderful things to encourage you to buy, that's the game and we consumers know that. But we trust names and organizations, to add credibility and its a public relations scam. Sometimes there's nothing nefarious afoot, like the heart logo on the raw oats. They deserve a heart. Oatmeal is a healthful choice and good for cookies, yum. :~) But every food with the same heart logo can hardly make the same measure for goodness. Products use these claims that may be true in the very tiniest way to sell to consumers trying to make healthful choices. That's fine when the product really has a healthful effect. What processors and marketing try for is the candy bar with the mist of green tea that they can sell as having some antioxident benefit when there's no way in the world the touted ingredient is in a significant enough concentration to deliver a benefit. The logos are one more selling feature on the supermarket shelves with pink ribbons and associations who are claiming to raise awareness or funds for a good cause while making a buck on food. No one in the board rooms of America's most powerful corporations is worried about our health. Their job is to worry about healthy profits. The job of protecting us from corporate interests falls to the government. It is the charter and mission of the FDA to keep corporations from going too far and and risking public health for corporate profits. The problem is that the system is broken and the FDA works for the food and drug industries. The FDA approval on products have declined to the point there not worth much more than a buyer beware sign. The classic extremes are easy to see by examples. Look at Monsanto's bovine growth hormone and the milk from treated cows. That was approved in 1994 and is still banned in the industrialized world, yet the FDA has conducted no followup studies to see if the negative health effects predicted in the animal studies are appearing in consumers, increases in diabetes, arthritis, breast and colon cancer, ets. A brand new report from the CDC puts colon cancer as the second leading cause of death for Americans claiming 54,000 lives a year yet Monsanto milk remains on the market with no move to establish a link or prove safety.
It's a don't look don't find policy that's much easier with food than drugs. Drugs leave a paper trail that is overseen by doctors. Doctors report the negative effects and know what the patients are taking to a far greater extent than any food information system in place. The newest revelation from the FDA tells us they are doing a terrible job with the drug approvals and if it weren't for the doctors watching millions would continue taking expensive and ineffective drugs.
The CDC will react to localized outbreaks like E-coli but who knows what the numbers of subtle ailments can be missed with ingredients? What do you miss by not looking at all? This should not happen, period. If the studies were not working to lower the bar and raise the margin of error, but instead an open process with a precautionary principle we would be fine. Tossed to the lap of oily fingered friendsters, not good for the public at all. My policy is to take all the approvals with a grain of salt, it's one important piece of identifying a consumable but only one. One primary source that helps me for so many products and claims is Consumers Union who publish the reports to choose cars and stereos, well they do so very much more. The new Greener Choices section has an eco-labels feature to identify the true value of food labels with respect to their claims from purity to preservasion and social movements. Knowledge is power so go take the power that belongs to you and make an informed choice about what happens to your body and your cash. Bookmark:            Trackback(0)
Comments (0)
 Write comment
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| Next > |
|---|
