FDA Racketeering? What In the World is Going On?

So it is no big secret that I am a smoker. I choose an alternative way of smoking and that is through an electronic cigarette. Right now, the FDA wants to take my electronic cigarette away because they claim it is a "new drug", even though it contains approximately 589 ingredients less than tobacco before burning. It also uses vaporization, which means that it can also be noted it probably reduces the by-products associated with a combustionable cigarette by at least 4000 ingredients, including and not limited to the big ones, arsenic, acetic acid, acetone, ammonia, benzene, cadmium, carbon monoxide, hydrazine, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide... the list goes on... you get the picture.

In my quest to fight the FDA on this ridiculousness that the electronic cigarette should not be compared to the current pharmaceutical and FDA approved Nicotine Replacement Therapies (NRT's), but be compared to a cigarette, I have been running into some very interesting articles that concern me.

First, I do want to make a small disclaimer. I have always been a fan of the idea of the FDA. From all of my research, it is very important to note that the original reason the FDA was formed was due to concerns that businesses were selling products promising some golden miracle, when in fact, they were not. The FDA was also created to ensure that food manufacturing processes were clean and sanitary to not spread disease through the masses. I agree with this mission whole heartedly, however, lately, I am finding more and more instances of the FDA misleading the public under the guise of public health and eliminating some very good products and impeding on the small business, free market society that America should have.

In a nutshell, I think the FDA has accumulated too much power, through both legislation and just by taking it, and this greatly concerns me for the future of America, for both products that SHOULD be evaluated by the FDA and for those that really have no business being regulated by the FDA, such as tobacco. It dilutes their focus and also leads them to do things that well, are simply not in the best interest of the consumer.

One very important fact everyone should know about the FDA: In 1992, Congress passed new legislation that changed where the FDA gets their financial backing. Originally, the FDA was funded by the taxpayer which would mean, they work for the people. The new legislation stated that the FDA shall now receive a portion of their funding from the very companies who seek approval for their products. So now, the FDA is actually working for the pharmaceutical companies who wish to get you, the consumer, to not look at your diet when you have Irritable Bowel Syndrome, but take a small little pill. Did you know this? I didn't. I had no idea that the FDA was paid for in part by the very people who want us to use their drugs. This also puts into perspective why TV commercials regarding this drug and that drug have been running rampant on the television since 1997. Coincidence? Hmmm....

Today's journey, provided to me by a new blogger, http://gtjecig.blogspot.com, has set the wheels in motion again. In one of his posts he sent me to an article in Natural News titled FDA Running Extortion Racket: Natural Supplement Companies Threatened with Arrest if They Don't Pay Up. Now, many will read this article and my post and say that this is simply a conspiracy theory run a muck. However, if one does a very simple Google Search on FDA (insert any negative word from Sucks, Scams, Extortion, Bad for your Health, etc), there are a lot of groups of people out there who are very concerned about the future with the FDA in it. Add them all together, and you will find some very common threads. VERY Common and they are all very concerning.

Everything in the article was concerning... And it is definitely an excellent read. However, the passage I found most interesting was this:

"It is the FDA's position that there is no such thing as any food, beverage, supplement or herb that has any health benefit whatsoever. Merely making such a claim instantly qualifies your product as a "new and unapproved drug," according to the FDA.

Officially, the FDA claims all health products are inert and have no properties other than their macronutrients (fiber, carbohydrates, protein, etc.).

There is only one class of substances that have any biological effect on the human body, the FDA claims: Pharmaceuticals. Only those patented, synthetic chemicals are allowed to be described as having benefits to human health."

So wait. If I don't subscribe to the Western Philosophy of Medicine, then I can search out no products that might help my ailments? We are a very healthy household and watch what we put into our bodies. On those extremely rare occasions that we might become ill, the FDA makes it damn near impossible for me to seek out a company who I feel is honest, hard-working and provides a good quality product that might help me become better? And if I do find that company and take my business there instead of purchasing a pharmaceutical from the companies who pay the bills for the FDA, then when profits of said pharmaceutical companies start to lower and they find out why, the FDA can go and take my chosen "medicinal provider" away from me, forcing me to use a pharmaceutical or suffer? Where is my freedom of choice?

What is also interesting to note is that in early 2008, the very scientists at the FDA screamed foul on corruption, noting that even though the very FDA scientists said a product should not go to market, the FDA managers went ahead and released them on the public anyways. I wonder if the new assisted suicide drug, Chantix, was among those? (Which I will also note they have put a "black box warning" on Chantix as it has attributed to approximately 300 suicide attempts/deaths, yet is STILL on the market.)

Another instance of this craziness is when the FDA went after General Mill's cereal Cheerios. Apparently, Cheerios was making claims that a bowl of Cheerios every morning could help you reduce your cholesterol by 10 points. According to the FDA, this is a health claim and General Mills could not make such claims unless they could prove it with a clinical trial... which they did and guess what, the FDA wouldn't accept it. So even though they have been making these heart healthy claims on their boxes for years, all of the sudden they can't? Why the change of "heart" FDA? Let's see, what Cholesterol drugs have been brought to the market in the past 12 years?

The bottom line is: Something stinks at the FDA and it isn't the bathrooms after eating White Bread which is apparently bad for you (but ok by the FDA). There is a serious problem happening in one of our largest Agencies and unfortunately, it isn't just with the electronic cigarette. It goes way deeper than that. And now that the FDA will be funded by the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries, as consumers, we better watch out. Word of advice: If anyone suggests that they lower taxes by having the FDA completely funded by those seeking applications, it's all over...