<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Big Pharma | Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</title>
	<atom:link href="https://anh-usa.org/tag/big-pharma/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://anh-usa.org</link>
	<description>ANH Protects Free Speech About Natural Health Modalities, Bioidentical Hormone Replacement Therapy, Homeopathy and Access To Natural Therapies.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2017 19:20:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	

 
	<item>
		<title>Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Myth of Safe and Effective Drugs—Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, as Summarized on Green Medicine Radio</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/institutional-corruption-of-pharmaceuticals-and-the-myth-of-safe-and-effective-drugs-journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics-as-summarized-on-green-medicine-radio/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=institutional-corruption-of-pharmaceuticals-and-the-myth-of-safe-and-effective-drugs-journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics-as-summarized-on-green-medicine-radio</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/institutional-corruption-of-pharmaceuticals-and-the-myth-of-safe-and-effective-drugs-journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics-as-summarized-on-green-medicine-radio/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2017 19:20:10 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Transparency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDA]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=63842</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>(Why the incredibly long title to this article? Because some might dismiss a shorter title for the article as “just another rant by a “crazy health food nut.” Hard to do that when the title includes the source, a professional journal, published by the American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics, whose website—www.aslme.org—tells us the [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/institutional-corruption-of-pharmaceuticals-and-the-myth-of-safe-and-effective-drugs-journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics-as-summarized-on-green-medicine-radio/">Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Myth of Safe and Effective Drugs—Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, as Summarized on Green Medicine Radio</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(<em>Why the incredibly long title to this article? Because some might dismiss a shorter title for the article as “just another rant by a “crazy health food nut.” Hard to do that when the title includes the source, a professional journal, published by the American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics, whose website—www.aslme.org—tells us the organization originated in 1911.)</em><br />
Do you listen to Green Medicine Radio? Broadcast and “streamed on-line” from KVI AM 570, it’s a two hour “live broadcast,” “call-in” radio program from 12 noon to 2 PM Pacific Time. Callers ask about health concerns and what might be done about them; answers are based on “what does Nature do?” as well as on 44 years of clinical experience and nearly 100,000 medical journal articles accumulated—and actually read—since 1973.<br />
Green Medicine Radio also has a website, <a href="http://www.greenmedicineonline.com">www.greenmedicineonline.com</a> where nearly every two hour broadcast is archived, starting in October 2010.<br />
Entire programs or any segment of any one program can be accessed and heard at any time of the day or night.<br />
On June 10th (2017), the opening remarks (thankfully for listeners, these opening remarks are limited to 20% or less of the entire two hour program) were based on the June 2017 issue of<em>Green Medicine Newsletter</em>whichhad just been published. In that issue, an article about research fraud was published which included a very short quote taken directly from theFall 2013 issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics,pages 590-600. The title of thearticle being quoted actually was“Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Myth of Safe and Effective Drugs.”<br />
This article was originally published in 2013 and the situation it describes continues to worsen. Instead of just listening to my opinions about what government and industry have done to your health care for the last century, I thought listeners to Green Medicine Radio should hear what a 2013 faculty member at the Harvard Center for Ethics, a health policy professor at York University in Toronto, and a research fellow at Harvard Medical School had written.<br />
So in addition to listening to all the questions and answers about health concerns with those who called that day, here’s what listeners to Green Medicine Radio also heard.<br />
<strong>    From page 590:  </strong>“An extensive range of studies and lawsuits already documents strategies by which pharmaceutical companies hide, ignore, or mis­represent evidence about new drugs; distort the medi­cal literature; and misrepresent products to prescribing physicians.” Also from page 590: “&#8230;through large-scale lobbying and political contributions, the pharmaceu­tical industry has influenced Congress to pass legis­lation that has compromised the mission of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)…turn­ing to industry-paid ‘user fees’ since 1992 has biased funding to limit the FDA’s ability to protect the public from serious adverse reactions to drugs… industry has commer­cialized the role of physicians and undermined their position as independent, trusted advisers to patients.”<em>(My comment: these medico-legal experts are telling us FDA can’t be trusted!)</em><br />
From page 591: “…these companies are mostly developing drugs that are mostly little better than existing products but have the potential to cause widespread adverse reactions even when appropriately prescribed…This deviation from the principles of health care by institutions allegedly dedicated to health care is institutional corruption. We present evidence that industry has a hidden business model to maximize profits on scores of drugs with clin­ically minor additional benefits.”<em>(My comment: it’s been obvious for years that the goal of the “health care industry” is profits, not our health.)</em><br />
Page 592: “…Congress has authorized billions in taxpayer contribu­tions to support R&amp;D, exemptions from market competition, and special privileges…lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry have successfully pressured Congress to provide sev­eral forms of market protection beyond patents…The preponder­ance of drugs without significant therapeutic gain dates back at least 35 years…An analysis of data from the National Science Foundation by Donald Light and Joel Lexchin indicates that pat­ent-based pharmaceutical companies…in fact devote only 1.3 percent of revenues…to discovering new molecules…revenues spent on pro­motion is about 19 times more than the amount spent on discovering new molecules.” (<em>My comment: taking “tax dollars” from all of us to support R&amp;D—research and development—of patent medicines to be sold at insanely high prices is not only unethical, but also immoral.)</em><br />
Page 593: “Most new drugs approved and promoted since the 1970s lack additional clinical advantages over exist­ing drugs and (as with all drugs) they have been accompanied by harmful side effects…a total of 6.8 percent of hospital patients having serious ADRs.Applying this 6.8 percent hospital ADR rate to the 40 million annual admis­sions in U.S. acute care hospitals indicates that up to 2.7 million hospitalized Americans each year have experienced a serious adverse reaction…an estimated 128,000 hospitalized patients died annually, matching stroke as the 4th leading cause of death. Deaths and serious reactions outside of hospitals would significantly increase the totals…An analysis conducted in 2011, based on a year of ADRs reported to the FDA, came to similar conclu­sions: Americans experienced 2.1 million serious injuries, including 128,000 patient deaths…in 1933…Employees of drug makers wrote to Congress, arguing that requiring companies to make honest claims about safe drugs would put thou­sands out of work.” (<em>My comment: according to a 2015 report from the U.S. National Poison Data System, there were zero—0—deaths from dietary supplements in 2013, which appears to be the ‘most recent’ data analyzed by this group.)</em><br />
Page 594: “In his review of new pharmaceutical products in the 1940s and 1950s, Dr. Henry Dowling, an AMA senior officer and expert, found that companies launched 200-400 a year but only three on average were clini­cally useful.Physicians, swamped with far more drugs than they could know much about, relied on sales reps to brief them, entertain them, and leave an ample supply of free samples as gifts that the physi­cians could then give to their patients…three key features of the mod­ern drug-testing system actually work for industry profits and against the development of safe drugs that improve health.” (<em>My comment: Patent medicines—as just noted—are almost entirely about insanely high profits, and minimally about for good health and product safety.) </em><br />
Page 595: “Articles that present the conclusions of commercially funded clinical trials are at least 2.5 times more likely to favor the sponsor’s drug than are the conclusions in articles discussing non-commercially funded clinical trials…companies are much less likely to publish negative results, and they have threatened researchers who break the code of secrecy and con­fidentiality about those results.Positive results are sometimes published twice (or even more often) under different guises. This further biases a method of statistically combining the results of multiple studies and clinical guidelines used for prescribing. The result is a massive distortion of the clinical evidence.….For decades, the FDA has kept silent about these practices and about the discrepan­cies between the data submitted to the FDA by com­panies and the findings published in journal articles, to the detriment of patients but much to the benefit of the companies.”<em>(My comment: That last sentence says that FDA supports false information—lying—about patent medicines.)</em><br />
Page 596: “After approval, aggressive marketing of new drugs to doctors for both approved and unapproved uses before good safety information is available maxi­mizes the number of patients exposed to risks from the roughly 25 to 40 new NMEs [New Molecular Entities] approved annually.Field studies find that most drug representatives do not discuss adverse side effects.” (<em>My comment: If patent medicine companies don’t tell “the whole truth” to physicians, how can non-physicians trust the patent medicines prescribed?</em><br />
Page 597: “A 15-month investigation by the Committee on Government Reform of the U.S. House of Represen­tatives found ‘a growing laxity in FDA’s surveillance and enforcement procedures, a dangerous decline in regulatory vigilance, and an obvious unwillingness to move forward even on claims from its own field offices.…The resulting 2006 report also documented a 53.7-percent decline in warning letters. Since then, FDA leadership has shifted to talking about being a ‘partner’ with industry to get more drugs to patients more quickly. For the reasons we explained above, the proportion of new products with clinical advantages seems to have moved from about 1 in 8 down to 1 in 12, while the proportion with serious harms has gone up from 1 in 5 towards 1 in 3 as the number of drugs given priority status increases.”     (<em>My comment: FDA’s recent regulatory campaign against compounding pharmacies was actually enabled by a law—the Drug Quality and Security Act of 2013—that was passed by Congress because of the “New England Compounding Center disaster”; this disaster happened because FDA neglected to follow-up on “warning letters” they had sent to that very same New England Compounding Center, allowing them to continue for several years the very same unsafe compounding practices criticized in those original “warning letters”!</em>)<br />
Pages 597, 598, 599, and 600 contain 85 reference citations backing up every assertion made by the authors of this article. Now, I hope you have that pen or pencil to record where to go “on-line” to download the entire article to your own computer. Into the search engine, put the words “Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals.” When I did this yesterday, the third entry on the first Google page was a downloadable-for-free “pdf” of the entire article. This entire article describes—with footnote documentation—the largest problem in American health care. No wonder that safe, effective natural medicine has been attacked by the FDA for most of the 20th and (so far) all of the 21<sup>st</sup> century. No wonder so-called “health care” is so expensive, with patent medicine companies charging $1,000 per pill for “new drugs.” Until this racket ends, true health care—and freedom of choice in your own health care will continue to be attacked and suppressed!</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/institutional-corruption-of-pharmaceuticals-and-the-myth-of-safe-and-effective-drugs-journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics-as-summarized-on-green-medicine-radio/">Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Myth of Safe and Effective Drugs—Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, as Summarized on Green Medicine Radio</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/institutional-corruption-of-pharmaceuticals-and-the-myth-of-safe-and-effective-drugs-journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics-as-summarized-on-green-medicine-radio/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Acid Blockers Cause Brain Damage, Kidney Disease? </title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/acid-blockers-cause-brain-damage-kidney-disease-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=acid-blockers-cause-brain-damage-kidney-disease-2</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/acid-blockers-cause-brain-damage-kidney-disease-2/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2016 13:06:15 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dangerous Drug Effects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pulse of Natural Health]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=48329</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Increase the risk of Alzheimer’s by 50%? Kidney disease by up to 50%? Unfortunately, that’s exactly what the science suggests. Over the years, we’ve written extensively about the dangers of stomach acid drugs—conventional medicine’s completely wrongheaded answer to stomach pain and acid reflux. Scientists aren’t certain what causes acid reflux, but a leading hypothesis is that it’s [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/acid-blockers-cause-brain-damage-kidney-disease-2/">Acid Blockers Cause Brain Damage, Kidney Disease? </a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Increase the risk of Alzheimer’s by 50%? Kidney disease by up to 50%? Unfortunately, that’s exactly what the science suggests.<br />
Over the years, we’ve <a href="https://anh-usa.org/acid-blockers-also-affect-your-brain/"><strong>written extensively</strong></a> about the dangers of stomach acid drugs—conventional medicine’s completely wrongheaded answer to stomach pain and acid reflux.<br />
Scientists aren’t certain what causes acid reflux, but a leading hypothesis is that it’s caused by a stomach environment that is not acidic enough. The lack of acid in the stomach short-circuits the signal needed to close the pyloric valve.<br />
Stomach pain apart from acid reflux may also be caused by a lack of stomach acid. It sounds counterintuitive, but the lack of acid leads to poor digestion, causing undigested food to ferment in the gut. This leads to painful intestinal gas and other symptoms of “bad bacteria” (such as <em>helicobacter</em> bacteria) taking hold. Here, too, more acid, not less, will help.<br />
Despite this evidence, conventional medicine gives us proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to treat stomach pain and acid reflux, which work by <em>eliminating</em> acid production—thus <a href="https://anh-usa.org/stomach-trouble-too-little-acid/"><strong>making the problem even worse</strong></a>.<br />
Unfortunately, the bad news doesn’t stop there. Recent studies have revealed a frightening spectrum of side effects caused by acid blockers:</p>
<ul>
<li>A <a href="http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2487379&amp;version=meter+at+0&amp;module=meter-Links&amp;pgtype=Blogs&amp;contentId=&amp;mediaId=%25%ADID%25%25&amp;referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F&amp;priority=true&amp;action=click&amp;contentCollection=meter-links-click"><strong>large study </strong></a>published in <em>JAMA Neurology</em> found PPIs to be linked with dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. The study found that regular use of PPIs increased the risk for dementia by as much as 52% compared with nonusers.</li>
<li>Two <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151027100724.htm"><strong>new studies </strong></a><a href="http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2481157"><strong>have linked </strong></a>acid blockers with chronic kidney disease. The increase in risk is cited as 20–50%.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/common-heartburn-drugs-may-increase-heart-attack-risk/"><strong>Another study </strong></a>found that PPIs may raise the risk of heart attack by 15–20%. Other studies have shown that PPIs damage the lining of blood vessels and thus promote cardiovascular events.</li>
</ul>
<p>The link with <a href="https://anh-usa.org/acid-blockers-also-affect-your-brain/"><strong>pneumonia and other infectious diseases</strong></a> was established years ago. This may be because acid is a barrier to infectious organisms getting inside your body.<br />
Because stomach acid helps digest food, too little stomach acid can lead to nutrient deficiencies (since it is harder for the body to extract minerals and vitamins from food) and food poisoning. Reduced calcium absorption, for instance, leaves people who regularly take PPIs susceptible to bone fractures.<br />
It can also be <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/02/15/465279217/popular-heartburn-pills-can-be-hard-to-stop-and-may-be-risky"><strong>hard to stop taking</strong></a> PPIs once started. When patients stop taking them, fermentation can cause pain. It may also be hard to re-establish the ability to produce acid.<br />
Given these dangers, why do doctors continue to suggest these drugs to their patients? As always, it is instructive to follow the money. Blockbuster drugs in this class such as Prevacid, Prilosec, and Nexium bring in billions of dollars each year and are some of the most <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/are-acid-reflux-drugs-overused/"><strong>widely prescribe</strong><strong>d</strong></a> drugs in the US. Nexium alone brings in about <a href="http://consumerhealthchoices.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/BBD-PPIs-Full.pdf"><strong>$6 billion a year</strong></a>. With so much money at stake, drug companies presumably do not want us to learn the truth, and drug companies are often the only source of information on the subject for doctors.<br />
The good news is that stomach pain can be managed without using these dangerous drugs. Restoring stomach acid with hydrochloric acid supplements both helps the stomach signal the pyloric valve to close and also helps control the <em>helicobacter</em> bacteria. Lifestyle changes can also help reduce stomach pain and acid reflux, such as losing weight and eating a healthy diet.</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/acid-blockers-cause-brain-damage-kidney-disease-2/">Acid Blockers Cause Brain Damage, Kidney Disease? </a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/acid-blockers-cause-brain-damage-kidney-disease-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2015 18:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miscellaneous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pulse of Natural Health]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=17032</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>As consumers demand safer and more natural foods, the market is starting to comply. So why doesn’t Big Medicine do the same? Action Alert! Consumers, according to the New York Times, have been leaving Big Food in droves, and are increasingly buying organic (not to mention free-range, cage-free, grass-fed, and/or locally sourced) foods. After years [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/">Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As consumers demand safer and more natural foods, the market is starting to comply. So why doesn’t Big Medicine do the same? <strong><em><a href="https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/">Action Alert!</a></em></strong><br />
Consumers, <strong><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/opinion/a-seismic-shift-in-how-people-eat.html">according to the <em>New York Times</em></a></strong>, have been leaving Big Food in droves, and are increasingly buying organic (not to mention free-range, cage-free, grass-fed, and/or locally sourced) foods. After years of denial, some in the food industry have finally decided to actually listen to consumers:</p>
<blockquote><p>General Mills <strong><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/business/no-more-artificial-colors-for-trix-or-reeses-puffs.html">will drop</a> </strong>all artificial colors and flavors from its cereals. Perdue, Tyson and Foster Farm have begun to <strong><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/01/business/perdue-and-the-race-to-end-antibiotic-use-in-chickens.html?module=CloseSlideshow&amp;region=SlideShowTopBar&amp;version=SlideCard-9&amp;action=click&amp;contentCollection=Business%20Day&amp;pgtype=imageslideshow">limit the use</a></strong> of antibiotics in their chicken. Kraft declared it was <strong><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/21/business/kraft-to-drop-preservatives-from-its-macaroni-and-cheese.html">dropping</a></strong> artificial dyes from its macaroni and cheese. Hershey’s will <strong><a href="https://www.thehersheycompany.com/newsroom/news-release.aspx?id=2017846">begin to move away</a></strong> from ingredients such as the emulsifier polyglycerol polyricinoleate to “simple and easy-to-understand ingredients” like “fresh milk from local farms, roasted California almonds, cocoa beans and sugar”….Brands such as Amy’s Kitchen, with its organic products, and Kind bars are taking some of the space on shelves once consumed by Nestlé’s Lean Cuisine and Mars.</p></blockquote>
<p>Food manufacturers are acquiring healthier brands (for example, last year General Mills <strong><a href="http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/general-mills-to-buy-annies-for-820-million-in-cash/">purchased</a></strong> Annie’s Homegrown—famous for its organic mac and cheese—for $820 million, over four times the company’s current revenues, a huge price). They are also introducing a tremendous number of gluten-free products, although these typically are overloaded with sugar.<br />
All of this represents some serious damage control. Soda sales are down by 25%—because people are learning about how unhealthy sodas are, and are drinking more water. Orange juice sales have dropped 45%. It wasn’t long ago that people thought orange juice to be a health food. Now they realize that flooding the system with fructose (fruit sugar) is not a good idea, even if it’s natural fructose. Eating oranges is entirely different because of the pulp, which slows down the intake of the sugar.<br />
In addition, consumers are replacing packaged cereals with yogurt and granola. McDonald’s overall sales figures have been in a huge downward spiral for three years. Sales of raw fruits and vegetables are up 10%, and freshly prepared foods in grocery stores are up by nearly 30%, despite the high cost. Consumers are voting every time they make a purchase at the grocery store—and every vote counts.<br />
So if Big Food is gradually bending to new kinds of consumer demand, why is Big Medicine still resisting any change at all?<br />
When we refer to Big Medicine, we mean the American Medical Association (AMA), the medical professionals affiliated with them, big hospitals, the insurance industry, and medical device manufacturers. But we especially mean Big Pharma, the pharmaceutical industry. This industry earns immense profits, mostly fueled by government granted monopolies (patents and FDA approvals). It uses these profits to control not only Big Medicine but the FDA and other government arms including Congress and the White House.<br />
Big Pharma pays lip service to <a href="http://payne.house.gov/press-release/reps-payne-jr-mullin-introduce-resolution-recognize-health-and-wellness-coaches"><strong>“preventive medicine,”</strong></a> but this just means persuading doctors to prescribe more drugs and vaccines, especially to children and older people, even though these two groups are rarely included in drug trials.<br />
Why is big medicine so immune to consumer influence? One reason is that since the advent of Medicare in the 1960s, government and insurance companies have paid more and more of the medical bills. Consumers sill pay them, but because the money is channeled through other parties, they lose their influence.<br />
But this is changing for unexpected reasons. The drafters of Obamacare wanted to eliminate Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and other vehicles. After many voices, including ANH-USA’s, opposed this, the idea shifted to eliminating insurance policy deductibles, which would indirectly eliminate HSAs.<br />
As we all know, deductibles did not decline. Instead they’ve recently skyrocketed. This is very hard on the poor and middle class, but ironically, has shifted more power to consumers.<br />
Given that the consumer vote does matter, we have the following request: for the next three months, we’re asking you to make major changes in both your food and medical purchases. As much as you are able, make a concerted effort to choose only “real” foods, meals you have to actually cook yourself, containing the freshest, organic, sustainable ingredients you can find. No sodas, not even diet sodas (<strong><a href="https://anh-usa.org/artificial-sweeteners-contribute-to-diabetes/" target="_blank">see our article on artificial sweeteners</a></strong> in this issue of <em>Pulse</em>). No fast food. Nothing overly processed.<br />
Most of our readers will already be here, but try to take it to the next level.<br />
In addition, talk to your physician or healthcare professional about finding healthier alternatives to prescription drugs. If they respond with a blank stare or rabid opposition, <strong><a href="https://anh-usa.org/find-a-practitioner/">look for an integrative physician with assistance from our website</a></strong>. Let’s see how big a change we can really make in the food and medical industry!<br />
In addition, two congressional representatives, Donald M. Payne, Jr. (D-NJ) and Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), co-chairs of the Congressional Men’s Health Caucus, understand the government’s intransigence and refusal to do more than pay lip service to health and wellness and decided to do something about it. They recently <strong><a href="http://payne.house.gov/press-release/reps-payne-jr-mullin-introduce-resolution-recognize-health-and-wellness-coaches">introduced a House resolution</a></strong> expressing support for health and wellness coaches.<br />
This may seem like tokenism, but the AMA will not like it. They regard health coaches as competition for their doctors. Let’s be sure that Congress knows someone other than the AMA is watching.<br />
National Health and Wellness Coach Recognition Week will also be celebrated January 11-17, 2016.<br />
<strong><em>Action Alert!</em></strong> Write to your representative and senators and ask them to support <strong><a href="https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hres552/text">H. RES. 552</a> </strong>in support of health and wellness coaches and National Health and Wellness Coach Recognition Week. <strong><em>Please send your message today.</em></strong><br />
<a href="https://anh-usa.org/?p=17021" target="_blank"><img decoding="async" class="aligncenter wp-image-15336 size-full" src="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Take-Action1.png" alt="Take-Action" width="150" height="39" /></a><br />
&nbsp;<br />
<em>Other articles in this week&#8217;s </em>Pulse of Natural Health:<br />
<strong><a href="https://anh-usa.org/small-and-organic-farmers-survive-latest-round-of-fda-food-rulemaking/">Small and Organic Farmers Survive Latest Round of FDA Food Rulemaking</a></strong><br />
<strong><a href="https://anh-usa.org/artificial-sweeteners-contribute-to-diabetes/">Artificial Sweeteners Contribute to Diabetes</a></strong></p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/">Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Action Alert: Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=action-alert-big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2015 18:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crony Capitalism]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=17021</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Related article: Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen Trouble Taking Action? Click here. [advanced_iframe securitykey=&#8221;6e57147c0272690f2f93432c343c720bbd534446&#8243; src=&#8221;https://secure3.convio.net/aahf/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&#38;page=UserAction&#38;id=2763&#8243; id=&#8221;iframe2763&#8243; name=&#8221;iframe2763&#8243; width=&#8221;100%&#8221; height=&#8221;1500&#8243; ]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/">Action Alert: Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Related article: </strong><strong>Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen</strong><br />
<strong>Trouble Taking Action? Click <a href="http://aahf.convio.net/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&amp;id=2763" target="_blank">here</a>.</strong><br />
[advanced_iframe securitykey=&#8221;6e57147c0272690f2f93432c343c720bbd534446&#8243; src=&#8221;https://secure3.convio.net/aahf/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&amp;page=UserAction&amp;id=2763&#8243; id=&#8221;iframe2763&#8243; name=&#8221;iframe2763&#8243; width=&#8221;100%&#8221; height=&#8221;1500&#8243; ]</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/">Action Alert: Big Food vs. Big Medicine: One Fluid, the Other Frozen</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-big-food-vs-big-medicine-one-fluid-the-other-frozen/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Evidence that Antidepressants Are Causing an Epidemic of Violence</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/new-evidence-that-antidepressants-are-causing-an-epidemic-of-violence/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=new-evidence-that-antidepressants-are-causing-an-epidemic-of-violence</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/new-evidence-that-antidepressants-are-causing-an-epidemic-of-violence/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2015 20:17:26 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crony Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pulse of Natural Health]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=16581</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>An article in the current British Medical Journal explains why the link is stronger than previously thought. Action Alert! ANH-USA has researched dozens of the most high-profile cases of violent crimes over the last few decades. We found that in just under half of the cases (eleven out of twenty-three), the perpetrator was documented to be [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/new-evidence-that-antidepressants-are-causing-an-epidemic-of-violence/">New Evidence that Antidepressants Are Causing an Epidemic of Violence</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An article in the current <em>British Medical Journal</em> explains why the link is stronger than previously thought. <strong><em><a href="https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-tell-congress-antidepressants-are-dangerous/" target="_blank">Action Alert!</a></em></strong><br />
ANH-USA has researched dozens of the most high-profile cases of violent crimes over the last few decades. We found that in just under half of the cases (eleven out of twenty-three), the perpetrator was documented to be taking, or had recently stopped taking, some form of antidepressant or antipsychotic medication.<br />
In another seven cases, the killer had been on these medications earlier. We suspect that number is even higher, but the information is either not publicly available or not known.<br />
Other publications support these findings. <em>Mother Jones</em> <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data"><strong>looked at all mass shootings</strong></a> from 1982 through 2015—seventy-two incidents altogether. Of these, more than half of the perpetrators (forty-three) had shown signs of mental illness prior to the crime. Given the propensity of conventional doctors to prescribe antidepressants and other antipsychotic drugs (more on this below), it does not seem like a large leap to assume that many of these perpetrators were taking medications.<br />
The FDA recognizes this, and many antidepressants carry “black box warnings,” the most stringent precaution a drug label can carry before being removed from the market. Many antidepressants carry a black box warning of an increased risk of suicidal thoughts and behavior. <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mad-in-america/201101/psychiatric-drugs-and-violence-review-fda-data-finds-link"><strong>Dr. Robert Whitaker notes</strong></a> that there is also a shocking risk of increased violence to others, which is not highlighted in the black box.<br />
<a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/01/07/top-ten-legal-drugs-linked-to-violence/"><strong>Important research</strong></a> has shown major drugs like Paxil and Prozac to be linked with violence at a substantially higher rate than other drugs—users of Paxil are 10.3 times more likely to do violence to themselves or others, while users of Prozac are 10.9 times more likely to commit acts of violence. <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2301661"><strong>Other evidence</strong></a> shows that people who have exhibited <em>no propensity for violence or aggression </em>can develop violent behavior soon after beginning antidepressants. (You can find still more evidence of the link between antidepressants and violence in<strong> </strong><strong><a href="https://anh-usa.org/take-this-antidepressant-and-you-too-may-have-a-violent-psychotic-break/">our previous coverage of the topic</a></strong>.)<br />
The FDA relies on studies conducted by major drug companies themselves, which may not be reliable. Even if the data is pristine, the interpretation will almost certainly be skewed in favor of the drug.<br />
Consider the case of Paxil. Fourteen years ago the manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), published a study which was interpreted to mean that Paxil was safe and effective for teens. A new analysis of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/17/health/antidepressant-paxil-is-unsafe-for-teenagers-new-analysis-says.html?_r=0"><strong>that same data</strong></a>, published this week in the prestigious <em>British Medical Journal</em>, found the exact opposite to be true—that teenagers on Paxil did no better than a placebo on a standard depression assessment, and that GSK had seriously downplayed the drug’s dangerous side effects!<br />
This reinterpretation was only possible because GSK, to its credit, allowed the data to become public. It should be noted, however, that this was only done once the patent had gotten older and was thus less valuable.<br />
Suicide and violence are just two side effects of antidepressants. There have been a total <a href="http://www.cchrint.org/psychiatric-drugs/antidepressantsideeffects/"><strong>134 warnings from regulatory agencies in eleven countries</strong></a> including:</p>
<ul>
<li>30 warnings that antidepressants cause heart problems</li>
<li>21 warnings that they cause birth defects</li>
<li>6 warnings that they cause anxiety</li>
<li>5 warnings that they cause mania or psychosis</li>
<li>4 warnings that they cause death</li>
<li>4 warnings that they cause hallucinations or delusional thinking</li>
<li>4 warnings that they cause involuntary movements</li>
<li>2 warnings that they cause sexual dysfunction</li>
</ul>
<p>There is a great deal we don’t know, partly because so much of drug companies’ research on these drugs is kept secret. But the correlation between violent crime and the use of these legal, mind-altering prescription drugs is too strong to be ignored, while scientific evidence of the connection continues to mount. So why hasn’t the FDA done anything?<br />
The answer should be clear enough. Antidepressants are some of the most commonly prescribed drugs in the US. <a href="http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/a-glut-of-antidepressants/?_r=0"><strong>About 10% of Americans</strong></a>—30 million people—are on antidepressants, which includes 25% of women in their 40s and 50s. Antidepressant use has increased an astounding <a href="http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/astounding-increase-in-antidepressant-use-by-americans-201110203624"><strong>400% in recent years</strong></a>. This translates into billions of dollars in profits worldwide for the pharmaceutical industry. And drug company money represent a substantial percentage of the FDA’s operating budget.<br />
What is especially tragic about the wide use of antidepressants and their connection to violence and other terrible side effects is the fact that there are far safer, natural alternatives. <a href="https://anh-usa.org/natural-treatment-depression/"><strong>We’ve reported before</strong></a> about some of these.<br />
Sometimes depression is triggered by a life event or series of events. But what conventional medicine generally fails to notice is the connection between the brain and the body—how the body, and especially the gut, can have a profound effect on the brain, and vice versa. In some cases, it is a simple nutrient that is missing. It is often B vitamins, or it may be a mineral such as magnesium.<br />
An integrative approach to medicine also addresses the imbalances in the body that may cause our mood to be out of whack. Consider that <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gut-second-brain/"><strong>95% of the body’s serotonin, the chemical that most depression drugs try to increase</strong></a>, is found in the gut. The standard American diet does not optimize either serotonin or gut health, <a href="http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/21/grains-causing-gut-leaks.aspx"><strong>leading to leaky gut syndrome</strong></a> and sustained inflammation.<br />
<a href="http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/12/is-a-leaky-gut-causing-you-to-pack-on-the-pounds.aspx"><strong>Antibiotic use</strong></a> can also lead to gut dysbiosis and leaky gut because they destroy the good bacteria lining the intestines, allowing pathogenic bacteria to colonize. When the lining of the digestive system becomes permeable, toxic substances and bacteria leak into the bloodstream, triggering food sensitivities, inflammation, and autoimmune problems.<br />
Additionally, hormone imbalances <a href="http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/when-depression-starts-in-the-neck"><strong>caused by hypothyroidism</strong></a>, which often goes undiagnosed, may cause mental health problems. Many people taking antidepressant medications, then, should really be addressing the underlying thyroid issue.<br />
To find an integrative doctor in your area who won’t simply prescribe Prozac but will address the root cause, <strong><a href="https://anh-usa.org/find-a-practitioner/" target="_blank">click here</a></strong> for some helpful links.<br />
This is a life-or-death issue. How many more violent crimes will we have to endure before something is done about SSRIs and other mental health medications?<br />
A <a href="http://wmra.org/post/sign-times-active-shooter-drill-uva-medical-center"><strong>recent news story</strong></a> told of new protocols and training at the University of Virginia Medical Center, preparing staff for the possibility of a gunman on a shooting rampage, which the Emergency Manager Coordinator views as an “unfortunate inevitability.” The irony of this is completely lost on the hospital staff. They see no connection whatsoever between the drugs they are prescribing and the “inevitable” shooter they are preparing for.<br />
In 2011, ANH submitted a Citizen Petition to the FDA asking them to expand the current black box warning on antidepressants to include the danger of violent actions toward other people, in addition to the current suicide warning. This request has so far fallen on deaf ears. This time, we are reaching out to Congress to see if they can urge the FDA to act on this crucial issue.<br />
<strong><em>Action Alert!</em></strong> Congress recently observed Mental Health Awareness Month. Write to your legislators and urge them to take meaningful steps towards addressing this serious issue—such as directing the FDA to update their black box warnings of antidepressants to include warnings of increased violent behavior. <strong><em>Please send your message immediately.</em></strong><br />
<a href="https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-tell-congress-antidepressants-are-dangerous/" target="_blank"><img decoding="async" class="size-full wp-image-15336 aligncenter" src="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Take-Action1.png" alt="Take-Action" width="150" height="39" /></a></p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/new-evidence-that-antidepressants-are-causing-an-epidemic-of-violence/">New Evidence that Antidepressants Are Causing an Epidemic of Violence</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/new-evidence-that-antidepressants-are-causing-an-epidemic-of-violence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Natural Health News Briefs: September 29, 2015</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/natural-health-news-briefs-september-29-2015-1/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=natural-health-news-briefs-september-29-2015-1</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/natural-health-news-briefs-september-29-2015-1/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2015 20:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=16575</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Statins Age You Faster?—New Study A recently published study in the American Journal of Physiology has shown that statins—anti-cholesterol drugs—are disrupting our stem cells. Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that have the ability to create different kinds of cells (such as skin, muscle, or bone cells). They are central to the body’s ability to heal [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/natural-health-news-briefs-september-29-2015-1/">Natural Health News Briefs: September 29, 2015</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h3><strong>Statins Age You Faster?—New Study</strong></h3>
<p>A recently published <a href="http://ajpcell.physiology.org/content/early/2015/07/23/ajpcell.00406.2014"><strong>study</strong></a> in the <em>American Journal of Physiology</em> has shown that statins—anti-cholesterol drugs—are disrupting our stem cells.<br />
Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that have the ability to create different kinds of cells (such as skin, muscle, or bone cells). They are central to the body’s ability to heal itself and also seem to be <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2600921/"><strong>involved in the body’s aging process</strong></a>.<br />
Dr. Reza Izadpanah, a stem cell biologist at Tulane and the lead author of the study, <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/608210/statins-age-you-faster-new-research-suggests-long-term-use-warning"><strong>was quoted</strong></a> as saying,</p>
<blockquote><p>Our study shows statins may speed up the aging process. People who use statins as a preventive medicine for heath should think again, as our research shows they may have general unwanted effects on the body which could include muscle pain, nerve problems, and joint problems [as well].</p></blockquote>
<p>Even after a only a few weeks on statins, many patients begin feeling years older. Patients experience memory loss, muscle pain, diabetes, cataracts, liver dysfunction, diabetes, and fatigue.<br />
Despite the <a href="https://anh-usa.org/the-grave-dangers-of-statin-drugs-and-the-surprising-benefits-of-cholesterol/"><strong>long laundry list of negative side effects</strong></a> that have been linked to statin use, they are one of the most widely prescribed drugs in existence: one in four Americans are on this medication.<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<h3><strong>Doctors, Already Buried in Needless Paperwork, Face a New</strong><strong> Avalanche </strong><strong>of It</strong></h3>
<p>On October 1, new regulations go into effect that will expand the set of codes that doctors use to describe illnesses and injuries to insurance companies. The number of codes is increasing from 14,000 to a staggering 70,000.<br />
As <a href="https://anh-usa.org/who-does-the-american-medical-association-really-work-for/"><strong>we noted previously</strong></a>, imagine being required to use an online drop down menu to search through 70,000 options to find just the right one. It’s a bureaucratic nightmare.<br />
Many of the codes are absurdly detailed. For example, why should a doctor have to note that an injury was sustained in a prison swimming pool, or in a human stampede while resting or sleeping? Believe it or not, each of those circumstances, plus thousands more, has its own unique code. Dr. Julian Whitaker, <a href="http://www.drwhitaker.com/health-healing-newsletter/"><strong>in his October 2015 newsletter</strong></a>, found these ridiculous examples as well: “burn due to water skis on fire,” “struck by turtle,” “hurt at opera,” and “sucked into jet engine”!<br />
It isn’t just bureaucrats who have a stake in this nonsense. So does the American Medical Association, which has a very lucrative government granted monopoly in coding services.<br />
&nbsp;</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/natural-health-news-briefs-september-29-2015-1/">Natural Health News Briefs: September 29, 2015</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/natural-health-news-briefs-september-29-2015-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>How a Monopoly Is Turning the Date Rape Drug into a Blockbuster Moneymaker</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/monopoly-drug-moneymaker/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=monopoly-drug-moneymaker</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/monopoly-drug-moneymaker/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=14255</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Patent protection means you get to charge whatever the market will bear. In this case, it bears a 935% increase in the price tag.</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/monopoly-drug-moneymaker/">How a Monopoly Is Turning the Date Rape Drug into a Blockbuster Moneymaker</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em> </em><br />
<img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-14259" title="Expensive medicine" src="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/patentdrug1-300x200.jpg" alt="Expensive medicine" width="300" height="200" />Patent protection means you get to charge whatever the market will bear. In this case, it bears a 935% increase in the price tag.<br />
Xyrem is the brand name for sodium oxybate. Sodium oxybate is the sodium salt of γ-hydroxybutyric acid, or GHB—the “date rape drug.” It’s an old drug—even older than aspirin—and it’s FDA-approved for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness caused by narcolepsy.<br />
Basically, the very qualities that make it <a href="http://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/9795464">ideal for drugging young women in bars</a> also allows narcoleptic patients to get a deep night’s sleep in order to encourage daytime wakefulness. If its approval can be extended to other patients who have trouble sleeping, the sky will be the limit on how successful this drug can be for its manufacturer, Jazz Pharmaceuticals.<br />
According to <a href="http://www.grantspub.com/archives/index.cfm?filteryear=2014">“Narcolepsy Blues,”</a> a recent article from <em>Grant’s Interest Rate Observer</em>, Xyrem generated a second-quarter sales growth this year of 43%, despite the fact that between 2006 and 2013, Jazz raised the price of Xyrem by 935%. A year’s worth of the medicine now costs $65,146; its gross profit margins are close to 100%—far better than 60% of the other drugs made by Jazz.<br />
In 2002, Xyrem was granted seven years’ market exclusivity under the FDA orphan drug program: there were no similar drugs to treat cases of excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy caused by narcolepsy. Even though GHB is classified as a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act#Schedule_I_controlled_substances">Schedule 1 drug</a>, which “has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States” and may not be marketed or prescribed, Xyrem (the sodium salt of GHB) is listed as a <a href=" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act#Schedule_III_controlled_substances">Schedule 3 drug</a>, which has a currently accepted medical use and may be prescribed. There is no reason for this distinction except as a means to give Jazz greater sales.<br />
How can they do this? Patents are granted by the patent and trademark office. They can be granted anywhere along the development lifeline of a drug and can encompass a wide range of claims. Patents can last up to up to twenty years. On the other hand, <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm079031.htm">market exclusivity is granted by the FDA</a> upon its approval of a drug. These are exclusive marketing rights, and can run from 180 days to seven years. Drugs can have patent exclusivity, market exclusivity, both, or none. It all depends on what criteria they fit.<br />
Now, five years after its Orphan Drug Act market exclusivity expired, Xyrem still faces no competition. Even though other companies have filed applications for generic versions of the drug—not to mention different formulations of the drug—Jazz has also managed to get a patent on how they distribute the drug, since it is a controlled substance. This is facing legal challenges, but until it is resolved, Jazz maintains its monopoly, selling the drug at ludicrously high prices—and reaping a financial bonanza.<br />
Another example is Sovaldi, a drug developed by Gilead Sciences to treat hepatitis C; which can cost up to $84,000 for a single course of treatment. Not all high prices are <a href="http://healthblog.ncpa.org/should-politicians-fix-the-price-of-sovaldi/">because of greed alone</a>: the invention of a new drug—which includes the R&amp;D costs of all the molecules that fail the process, not to mention the drug approval process itself—costs, according some estimates, between an average of $1.2 billion to as much as $5 billion.<br />
The monopoly on certain drugs, and high R&amp;D costs that the FDA’s approval process virtually ensures, may be <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2012/06/11/end-the-fda-drug-monopoly-let-patients-choose-their-medicines/">keeping many beneficial treatments off the market</a>. The great pity of it all is that FDA approval doesn’t guarantee, or even promise, drug safety. Each year there are, on average, <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Surveillance/AdverseDrugEffects/ucm070434.htm">526,527 adverse events for FDA-approved drugs</a>—275,421 of which have “serious outcomes,” including death.<br />
So much for the FDA being “<a href="http://www.fda.gov/drugs/resourcesforyou/consumers/ucm143462.htm">the consumer watchdog for safe and effective drugs</a>”!</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/monopoly-drug-moneymaker/">How a Monopoly Is Turning the Date Rape Drug into a Blockbuster Moneymaker</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/monopoly-drug-moneymaker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>39</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Over 10,000 American Toddlers Are Being Given ADHD Drugs</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/toddlers-adhd-drugs/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=toddlers-adhd-drugs</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/toddlers-adhd-drugs/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2014 18:20:48 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Transparency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regenerative Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=13490</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>And once again, our country’s disadvantaged kids are being unnecessarily medicated nearly three times more often.</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/toddlers-adhd-drugs/">Over 10,000 American Toddlers Are Being Given ADHD Drugs</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignleft size-large wp-image-13505" title="Girl looks very upset at the thought of taking her medicine" src="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Adhd-children-1024x1001.jpg" alt="Girl looks very upset at the thought of taking her medicine" width="165" height="162" srcset="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Adhd-children-1024x1001.jpg 1024w, https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Adhd-children-300x293.jpg 300w, https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Adhd-children-768x751.jpg 768w, https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Adhd-children.jpg 1394w" sizes="(max-width: 165px) 100vw, 165px" /><br />
And once again, our country’s disadvantaged kids are being unnecessarily medicated nearly three times more often.<span id="more-13490"></span><br />
According to CDC officials, more than 10,000 American toddlers—children who are just 2 or 3 years old—<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/17/us/among-experts-scrutiny-of-attention-disorder-diagnoses-in-2-and-3-year-olds.html?_r=1">are being medicated</a> for alleged attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (<a href="http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/07/09/ADHD-Childlike-Behavior-or-Serious-Condition.aspx">ADHD</a>).<br />
There are <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/17/us/among-experts-scrutiny-of-attention-disorder-diagnoses-in-2-and-3-year-olds.html?_r=1">few studies</a> on the impact of psychostimulant ADHD drugs like methylphenidate (Ritalin) or amphetamines (like Adderall) in children this young. However, we do know that the <a href="http://www.webmd.com/drugs/drug-9475-Ritalin+Oral.aspx?drugid=9475&amp;drugname=Ritalin+Oral&amp;pagenumber=6">side effects of ADHD drugs</a> include stunted growth, insomnia, hallucinations, high blood pressure, involuntary movements, aggressive behavior, heart attack, brain hemorrhage, stroke, migraines, and seizures. <a href="http://sharpbrains.com/blog/2014/05/19/use-and-misuse-of-adhd-drugs-and-nootropics-among-teenagers-and-toddlers/">Emerging evidence</a> also suggests that Ritalin can cause long-term damage to developing prefrontal cortexes, resulting in “rigid behavior, difficulties with multitasking, or problems with short-term memory” later in life.<br />
Technically, there is not even a diagnosis for ADHD in children under 3 years old. In part, this is because “hyperactivity and impulsivity are developmentally appropriate for toddlers”—meaning that we’re medicating kids just for being kids.<br />
Another fact illuminated by the CDC study: toddlers on <a href="https://www.healthcare.gov/do-i-qualify-for-medicaid/">Medicaid</a>—free or low-cost healthcare provided by the government for low income families—are disproportionately <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/17/us/among-experts-scrutiny-of-attention-disorder-diagnoses-in-2-and-3-year-olds.html?_r=1">more likely to be prescribed ADHD drugs</a>. The CDC analysis, which studied Medicaid recipients in Georgia and projected the data nationally, found that one in 225 toddlers on Medicaid are being medicated for ADHD. <strong>This means at least 10,000 poor kids are being drugged for a medically nonexistent disorder.</strong> By way of comparison, only 4,000 toddlers covered by private insurance are being given ADHD meds.<br />
Researchers also found that “effective non-pharmacological treatments,” including providing “a more structured environment” for children, were being ignored.<br />
It’s not just ADHD drugs—here’s what else kids and adults on Medicaid are more likely to be prescribed:<br />
<strong>Powerful anti-psychotic medications. </strong>Kids on Medicaid are prescribed powerful antipsychotic medications at a rate <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/12/health/12medicaid.html?pagewanted=print">four times higher</a> than children on private insurance: from 2001 to 2004, 4% of Medicaid kids aged 6 to 17 received anti-psychotic drugs (less than 1% of kids on private insurance did).<br />
Poorer kids are also more likely to be drugged for <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/12/health/12medicaid.html?pagewanted=print">less severe conditions than middle class kids</a>. For example, while anti-psychotics are intended to treat disorders like schizophrenia, autism, and bipolar disorder, poorer kids are more likely to be prescribed <a href="https://anh-usa.org/medicaid-psychiatric-drugs/">these dangerous meds</a> for ADHD and simple misbehavior. This is called “off label” prescribing: it’s perfectly legal, though there are no long-term studies on the effect of these very dangerous drugs on children when prescribed for less severe conditions.<br />
<strong>Antibiotics—for colds. </strong>More than half of adult Medicaid patients with colds or respiratory track infections <a href="http://www.healio.com/infectious-disease/respiratory-infections/news/online/%7Bf5858749-d6d9-412d-a9c0-25d0369a9a17%7D/medicaid-patients-often-prescribed-unnecessary-antimicrobials">were prescribed antibiotics in 2007</a>—although antibiotics are not recommended in these cases and such inappropriate prescribing directly contributes to the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/30/us-health-antibiotics-idUSKBN0DG11E20140430">global antibiotics resistance</a> crisis.<br />
<strong>Addictive opioids. </strong><a href="https://anh-usa.org/one-in-five-pregnant-women-take-opioid-painkillers/">As we recently reported</a>, one in five pregnant women now take opioid painkillers. What’s worse, women on Medicaid are being prescribed painkillers during pregnancy<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/science/surge-in-prescriptions-for-opioid-painkillers-for-pregnant-women.html?_r=0"> at much higher rates</a>: 23% of women on Medicaid, compared to 14% of women with private insurance, are being prescribed opioids (Medicaid covers the medical expenses for 45% of American births).<br />
Additionally, <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5842a1.htm">a CDC report</a> that analyzed opioid overdose deaths in Washington State from 2004 to 2007 found that 45.4% percent of overdose deaths were among persons enrolled in Medicaid. The overdose death rate was 30.8 per 100,000 people in the Medicaid-enrolled population, and just 4 per 100,000 in the non-Medicaid population.<br />
What’s going on here? Why are our country’s poor so much more likely to be prescribed dangerous drugs?<br />
Over all, <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/04/less-than-half-of-doctors-in-nations-largest-cities-are-accepting-medicaid-now-study/?print=1">research has shown</a> that Medicaid patients don’t fare much better than those without insurance. Here’s why:</p>
<ul>
<li>Medicaid often reimburses doctors much less for non-drug interventions like counseling and therapy than it does for drug prescriptions.</li>
<li>Some characteristics of disadvantaged neighborhoods—which form much of the Medicaid population— may contribute to misbehavior in kids. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/17/us/among-experts-scrutiny-of-attention-disorder-diagnoses-in-2-and-3-year-olds.html?_r=1">According to Dr. Nancy Rapport</a>, a child psychiatrist who specializes in underprivileged youth, home environments can lead to “symptoms” of ADHD: “In acting out and being hard to control, they’re signaling the chaos in their environment. Of course only some homes are like this—but if you have a family with domestic violence, drug or alcohol abuse, or a parent neglecting a two-year-old, the kid might look impulsive or aggressive. And the parent might just want a quick fix, and the easiest thing to do is medicate. It’s a travesty.”</li>
<li><a href="http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stories/2012/august/06/third-of-medicaid-doctors-say-no-new-patients.aspx">Fewer and fewer doctors will see Medicaid patients</a>, particularly since the Affordable Care Act vastly expanded the Medicaid program. It’s reasonable to assume that the doctors who do accept Medicaid patients have less and less time to spend with their patients, and are thus much more likely to use a “take these drugs and call me in the morning” approach. This is especially true of psychiatrists: <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2013/08/20/attention-medicaid-patients-the-doctor-wont-be-seeing-you/">a full 56%</a> are not open to seeing new Medicaid patients. Since there can be extremely long wait times for psychiatrists accepting Medicaid, it’s often pediatricians that prescribe the medications. Not only are Medicaid kids not spending enough time with doctors, they’re likely not even seeing the right ones: only <a href="http://rci.rutgers.edu/~cseap/MMDLNAPKIDS/Antipsychotic_Use_in_Medicaid_Children_Report_and_Resource_Guide_Final.pdf">one in five children</a> are receiving treatment for emotional and behavior “disorders” from an “appropriately trained professional.”</li>
<li>Particularly when Uncle Sam is footing the bill, “selling” cash cow psychiatric drugs to poor kids is a favorite pastime of drug companies. <a href="http://www.alternet.org/print/drugs/toddler-3-different-psychiatric-meds-how-drugging-kids-became-big-business">In 2008 alone</a>, psychiatric drugs netted $40.3 billion to Big Pharma; meanwhile, prescriptions for psychiatric drugs for kids rose nearly 45% between 2002 and 2007. <a href="http://www.alternet.org/print/drugs/toddler-3-different-psychiatric-meds-how-drugging-kids-became-big-business">In 2009</a>, Pfizer was forced to pay a $2.3 billion settlement for illegally paying 250 child psychiatrists to promote the off-label prescription of Geodon—a powerful antipsychotic—to teens. One doctor was given $4,000 a day to promote its off-label use at conferences to doctors who had no idea he was being paid to do so.</li>
</ul>
<p>Whatever the reasoning, over-prescription of dangerous drugs to kids—regardless of their socioeconomic status—is killing our children.<br />
Take, for example, <a href="http://www.alternet.org/print/drugs/toddler-3-different-psychiatric-meds-how-drugging-kids-became-big-business">the case of four-year-old Rebecca Riley</a>. On December 13, 2006, paramedics arrived at her Massachusetts home to find her slumped over her parents’ bed, dead. Medical examiners identified the cause of death brought on by the medications she was prescribed for ADHD and bipolar disorder when she was just two years old: Depakote, Seoquel, and Clonidine. None of the drugs Rebecca was prescribed are approved by the FDA for use in children her age.<br />
What kind of society treats its children this way? Is nothing more important than drug company profits?</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/toddlers-adhd-drugs/">Over 10,000 American Toddlers Are Being Given ADHD Drugs</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/toddlers-adhd-drugs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kickbacks, Bribes, and Money Laundering: China’s Big Pharma Scandal</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/china-big-pharma-scandal/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=china-big-pharma-scandal</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/china-big-pharma-scandal/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2014 18:00:33 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crony Capitalism]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=13493</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>But it’s just a mirror for our own government’s “addiction” to prescription drugs and the drug industry. Is your physician taking kickbacks too?</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/china-big-pharma-scandal/">Kickbacks, Bribes, and Money Laundering: China’s Big Pharma Scandal</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignleft size-large wp-image-13494" title="Para" src="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bribary-1024x682.jpg" alt="Para" width="211" height="140" srcset="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bribary-1024x682.jpg 1024w, https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bribary-300x200.jpg 300w, https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bribary-768x512.jpg 768w, https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bribary-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bribary.jpg 1688w" sizes="(max-width: 211px) 100vw, 211px" />But it’s just a mirror for our own government’s “addiction” to prescription drugs and the drug industry. Is <em>your</em> physician taking kickbacks too?<span id="more-13493"></span><br />
“<a href="http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-05-15/why-china-s-hooked-on-drugs">Why China’s Hooked on Drugs</a>,” a recent Bloomberg article, details how <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminshobert/2013/09/04/three-ways-to-understand-gsks-china-scandal/">the GlaxoSmithKline</a> scandal betrays deeper problems in the Chinese healthcare system: China’s addiction to prescription drugs.<br />
Last month, China’s Ministry of Public Security publicly accused GSK’s top executive in China of “orchestrating a nationwide network of bribery.” According to Chinese police, GSK funneled $494 million USD to travel agencies that laundered the money into bribes for doctors, who were paid for conferences and meetings they never attended.<br />
It’s worth noting that GSK is also <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/business/international/glaxosmithkline-under-investigation-by-serious-fraud-office.html">under investigation by the UK’s Serious Fraud Office</a> for possible bribery in the UK, Iraq, and Poland. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/business/glaxosmithkline-agrees-to-pay-3-billion-in-fraud-settlement.html?pagewanted=all">Meanwhile, in the States</a>, GSK in 2012 pled guilty to criminal charges and paid $3 billion in fines for promoting antidepressants for unapproved uses and failing to report safety data on its diabetes drugs.<br />
Admittedly, GSK isn’t the only bad actor in the Chinese healthcare market. In the 1980s, China transformed its “largely free” government-subsidized healthcare system into one where governments contributed very little to public hospitals. The problem? The government continued to regulate prices for hospital services. This equation—setting prices that allow little revenue for hospitals, plus catastrophic budget cuts—led to hospitals and doctors increasingly relying on pharmaceutical sales to supplement their revenues.<br />
Fast forward a few decades: hospitals and the doctors they employ have become increasingly reliant on kickbacks and drug mark-ups, and Chinese patients are prescribed more and more pharmaceutical drugs. Chinese patients in urban healthcare settings are now prescribed 2.6 drugs per visit, which is a whole drug over the WHO average.<br />
The Bloomberg article went on to detail the Chinese epidemic of pharmaceutical overtreatment, driven by the mutual greed of Big Pharma and willing doctors.<br />
The article asks, “Chinese patients—already struggling with growing medical bills—paid higher prices for drugs that, in many cases, they probably didn’t need. That’s a despicable outcome if true, and it raises an unsettling question: Did GlaxoSmithKline’s alleged bribery network have a negative effect of public health inside and outside of China?”<br />
Yes, of course. But Bloomberg is somehow ignoring the elephant in the room: why have we done nothing about <em>legal </em>Big Pharma bribery—which clearly has a “negative effect of public health”—right here in the United States? For more on this, please see <a href="https://anh-usa.org/pharma-scandal-not-just-china/" target="_blank">our next article</a>.</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/china-big-pharma-scandal/">Kickbacks, Bribes, and Money Laundering: China’s Big Pharma Scandal</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/china-big-pharma-scandal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pharma Scandal: Not Just in China</title>
		<link>https://anh-usa.org/pharma-scandal-not-just-china/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=pharma-scandal-not-just-china</link>
					<comments>https://anh-usa.org/pharma-scandal-not-just-china/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2014 17:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Autonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crony Capitalism]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anh-usa.org/?p=13496</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>We should look deeply into the mirror that the GSK/China scandal has provided for the US—what we see isn’t very pretty.</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/pharma-scandal-not-just-china/">Pharma Scandal: Not Just in China</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignleft size-large wp-image-13497" title="Money in medical field" src="https://anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/crony-capitalism-drug-1023x683.jpg" alt="Money in medical field" width="249" height="166" />We should look deeply into the mirror that the GSK/China scandal has provided for the US—what we see isn’t very pretty.<span id="more-13496"></span><br />
There is no denying that Americans are over-drugged and over-treated. As this week’s article on drugs for toddlers details, pharmaceutical companies are actively peddling lucrative psychiatric drugs to one of our most vulnerable populations—poor children. But Americans from all walks of life are ensnared in Big Pharma’s net.<br />
In 2013, <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/drug-use-therapeutic.htm">the percentage of Americans who reported taking at least one prescription in the past month</a> was 48.5%; two or more drugs, 21.7%; and five or more drugs, 10.6%. <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db42.pdf">From 2007 to 2010,</a> one out of every four children and nine out of ten older adults used at least one prescription drug; <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/drug-use-therapeutic.htm">75.1%</a> of doctors’ office visits resulted in drug therapy.<br />
Then there’s the second component of this scandal: the millions in bribery money. It may be that the profitable corruption taking place in the United States is a bit more subtle than the one besetting China, but it’s still a huge problem.<br />
Take, for example, Washington’s revolving door: decision-makers who produce Big Pharma-friendly policies are richly rewarded with top-level industry jobs. As detailed in <em><a href="http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/ac2-books/crony-capitalism-in-america/">Crony Capitalism in America 2008–2012</a>, </em>even the rules purporting to close DC’s revolving door are riddled with loopholes. For instance, some rules only apply to registered lobbyists, not “senior advisors” or ex-lobbyists. That’s why it was perfectly legal for the Obama administration to appoint William B. Schultz as general counsel of Health and Human Services, despite the fact that he had represented medical and drug companies regulated by the agency, and was described as a “veteran lobbying presence.”<br />
<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Government-industry_revolving_door">Other “classic” examples</a> of revolving door officials include:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Claude Burcky</strong>,<strong> </strong>who took a job at Abbott Laboratories after negotiating a US/Australia trade deal that “undercut access to affordable medicines for Americans and Australians.”</li>
<li><strong>Peter Pitts</strong> who, after serving as the FDA’s associate commissioner for external affairs, joined a major lobbying firm to “counsel pharmaceutical, biotech, and food companies…on driving thought leadership on food and health issues facing the industry.”</li>
<li><strong>Michael Taylor</strong>,<strong> </strong>the perfect example of a revolving door “sandwich.” He started as an attorney for Monsanto, then “stopped by” the FDA long enough to draft FDA’s policies decreeing that GMOs are “generally recognized as safe” and are exempt from labeling, and then went <em>back </em>to Monsanto, before returning to a key FDA job in the Obama administration.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/05/obamacare-fowler-lobbyist-industry1/print">Elizabeth Fowler</a></strong>, who<strong> </strong>wins the dubious recognition of being the “embodiment of corporatist revolving-door greasing.” She started as a top aide for Sen. Max Baucus, then left to become a lobbyist for <a href="http://www.wellpoint.com/">WellPoint</a>, the nation’s largest health insurance provider. She then went <em>back </em>to Sen. Baucus’s office, where she became the acknowledged architect of the Obamacare legislation (which, of course, was a huge gift to the private insurance industry). Ms. Fowler then joined the White House in order to oversee the implementation of Obamacare, only to leave for a senior-level lobbying position at Johnson and Johnson.</li>
</ul>
<p>Is it possible that their previous and future employers didn’t influence the decisions of these revolving door officials? Sure. Just like it’s statistically possible to win the lottery.<br />
For an even more subtle example of bribery, take a look at <a href="https://anh-usa.org/fda-negotiating-more-money-from-pharma/">user fees</a>, the millions of dollars paid by Big Pharma to the FDA for the drug approval process: in 2013, <a href="http://www.dotmed.com/news/story/18067">the FDA requested</a> a 2013 $4.5 billion budget, <strong>40% of which would be paid directly by the pharmaceutical industry </strong>via user fees.<br />
Of course, it’s not just government officials who are to blame: it’s still perfectly legal for doctors to take gifts from pharmaceutical reps. But thanks to <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/does-your-doc-have-ties-to-big-pharma-how-youll-be-able-to-find-out/">the Sunshine Act</a>, all pharmaceutical and medical device companies will be required to publically report all payments to doctors over $10, starting in fall 2014.<br />
Want to know if your doctor takes cash from Big Pharma? <a href="http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/">ProPublica’s “Dollars for Docs”</a> tool can show whether your doctor accepts drug company money, and in what amounts.</p><p>The post <a href="https://anh-usa.org/pharma-scandal-not-just-china/">Pharma Scandal: Not Just in China</a> first appeared on <a href="https://anh-usa.org">Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://anh-usa.org/pharma-scandal-not-just-china/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
