Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Why The Law Forbids The Medicinal Use of Natural Substances

Sayer Ji, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

According to the FDA’s legal definition, a drug is anything that “diagnoses, cures, mitigates, treats, or prevents a disease.”

The problem with this definition is that there are numerous substances, as readily available and benign as those found on our spice racks, which have been proven by countless millennia of human experience to mitigate, prevent and in some cases cure disease, and which cannot be called drugs according to the FDA.

How can this be? Well, the FDA has assumed for itself Godlike power, requiring that its official approval be obtained before any substance can legally be used in the prevention and treatment of disease.

The FDA’s legal-regulatory control therefore is totalitarian and Napoleonic in construct; what it does not explicitly permit as a medicine is implicitly forbidden.

Historically the FDA has required new drugs undergo expensive and elaborate multi-phased clinical trials, which are out of the grasp of any ordinary interest who might want to demonstrate the efficacy of a non-patentable (and therefore unprofitable) herb, food or spice.

The average out-of-pocket cost for obtaining a new drug approval is US$ 802 million dollars.[1] Therefore, an investor putting capital into bringing to market a substance that does not lend itself to market exclusivity, and therefore cannot produce a return on investment, is committing economic suicide, if not also breaking the law. The investor actually has a legally-binding fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to make a profit. Hence, capital will not flow into any would-be commodity that can be produced or obtained with ease, including most things that grow freely on this Earth.


It is an interesting footnote in history that shortly after the Declaration of Independence, Congress declared that natural substances, e.g. water or salt, were God’s gift to mankind and that therefore products of nature should be limited in their patent protection. While this was a noble declaration, it has actually been used against those whose rights it would protect. It has forced private interests to synthetically alter natural substances -- for instance the burgeoning biotech field of recombinant DNA technology, i.e. genetically modified organisms (GMOs) -- for the sole reason that it guarantees them ownership/patent rights.

In fact, a medical system that legally requires profit threatens to destroy and/or incriminate itself if non-patented, non-profitable natural substances or therapies are employed. It also results in so much collateral damage to those it purports to serve that it could rightly be called a modern form of human sacrifice.

As a result, instead of choosing prospective medicines logically -- because they work, are easily accessible, and safe -- billions of dollars flow in the exact opposite direction, capitalizing only those substances which are unnatural' and, therefore, while proprietary are almost invariably unsafe, and whose access and administration can be intensively controlled.

Has The Attempt To Co-opt Medicine Through the Drug-Based Model Undone Itself? 

And yet, there is a silver lining to the story. Due to the fact that our bodies are ultimately constructed from the natural things (food, air and water), and obey very strict natural laws such as the well-known principle of chirality (handedness) – the fact that all amino acids in our body turn a beam of polarized light in the left-handed direction (L-lysine) and sugars to the right-handed direction (D-ribose) -- one cannot simply create biologically active, synthetic drugs arbitrarily, as a mistake in handedness (or similar property) could be fatal. Nature, therefore, still provides an elegant biomolecular architecture of irreproducible intelligence and complexity, from which synthetic analogs are modeled and/or derivatives are spun.

As a result, billions of dollars of drug industry and government money (i.e. tax payer money) flow into finding lead compounds for drug development.  Nature is put on the rack, if you will, and her secrets teased from her through innumerable animal and test tube experiments, in order to find compounds that can then be converted into synthetic, patented drugs.

Inadvertently, some of the very same companies and interests which require that natural substances not receive the same drug-approval status as synthetic ones, are funding research that prove basic vitamins, foods and spices are as effective or more effective – and usually much safer – than the drugs  they are developing to replace or supplant them.

This means that tens of thousands of studies do exist showing that natural substances may prevent and/or treat disease, at least in the in vitro (test tube) and animal models. These results often confirm traditional uses in Ayurvedic, Chinese, and other traditional systems of medicine, and therefore may be compelling enough for individuals or healthcare practitioners to use the information to inform their treatment decisions.

The Case For Curcumin In the Prevention and Treatment of Disease

The government biomedical and life sciences database known as Medline contains over 21 million published study citations, and is accessible to search through engines such as Pubmed.gov.  2.6 million of them contain reference to cancer.  115,000 of them remain after applying the “Complementary Medicine” filter.   2,625 of them can be found indexed on the GreenMedInfo.com database, referencing 612 natural substances of potential value. Turmeric, and particularly its polyphenolic constituent known as curcumin, which gives the spice its golden hue, is one of the most extensively studied natural compounds of all time, with 4588 references to it on the National Library of Medicine’s bibliographic database known as Medline [as of 2.25.2012]. And, yet, despite having been shown to have therapeutic value in over 500 disease states in animal and in vitro studies, it still has not been the subject of extensive human clinical research – for the reasons stated above.

GreenMedInfo.com, an open source natural medicine database, has indexed curcumin’s anti-cancer properties in over 50 cancers, with the top 10 most cancers researched in association with curcumin listed below.

Cancer Number of Articles
Breast Cancer 58
Colorectal Cancer 23
Colon Cancer 51
Prostate Cancer 42
Pancreatic Cancer 24
Cancers: Drug Resistant 40
Lung Cancer 37
Liver Cancer 27
Cancer Metastasis 32
Skin Cancer 15
Sources: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/substance/curcumin

As one can see, curcumin holds great promise. It has been repeatedly demonstrated to possess simultaneously both chemoprotective/chemosensitizing and radioprotective/radiosensitizing properties, meaning it is capable of reducing the adverse effects on healthy cells caused by chemotherapy and radiotherapy, as well as enhance the cancer-killing properties of these conventional therapies. It also has an exceptionally high margin of safety, at least an order of magnitude greater than commonly used conventional chemotherapy agents such as 5-fluoruracil.[2] Given these facts, curcumin, at the very least, should be considered an ideal candidate for use as an adjuvant in integrative cancer care, and perhaps as a first-line treatment alternative to conventional chemo-agents.

For additional information on the remarkable research supporting the use of Turmeric and Curcumin in medicine, watch the video below.  Join our Facebook research page on Turmeric for updates: Turmeric -- What The Research Reveals



This article first appeared at GreenMedInfo.  Please visit to access their vast database of articles and the latest information in natural health.


BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

18 comments:

Chris said...

why would anyone even listen to the FDA? fuck those clowns...

Anonymous said...

Right? The same people that tell you to eat mostly complex carbs. . .
The FDA is pretty much untrustworthy.

John said...

So that means most illegal drugs aren't drugs.

Anonymous said...

John, ahahahahahaha!

Tatiana Covington said...

The real reason is money.

Anonymous said...

What you have said is not true. the truth is pretty clear. You can use anything YOU want asa a medicine. You can eat dirt to cure cancer or one of your spice to fix a broken leg, the FDA does not care. What they have said is you cannot claim that a product you sell can cure or prevent a disease unless it actually does. So while you are free to take a megadose of a vitamin to cure cancer you cannot claim that will work if you are selling the vitamin to people. This is not very restrictive and seems incredibly fair to the majorit of citizens who have in the past been taken in by the snake oil salesmen. Why would you want anyone to be allowed to lie especially about something as important as our health ans safety.

David McElroy said...

I say let the FDA officials be tried by a jury of their peers. Throw them in a swimming pool full of leeches! Then deliver the AMA medical mafia for a trial of their own. Restore honest, caring medical practices to our world!

Anonymous said...

Well breathing keeps us alive and well also, so will they tax or try to contorl our breathing soon too ? How insane are we going to allow DC to get before we go after them ? God stated in His Word that all seeds and crops are His and He gives them FREELY to all for our health ! It is a stab in God's back trying to BE God to 'patent' seeds or crops, etc. DC thinks it is God and this is a direct attack on God, Christianity and Christians ! All of DC's Monsanto's actions are anti-God !

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, we have to listen to them, because in the case of cancer, for example, only chemo, surgery, and radiation are "legal." Openly recommending other modalities is "illegal," and healthcare professionals have had their licenses taken away and been prosecuted for such recommendations. I say this even though I have had people in my alternative medicine practice--and others of my acquaintance--who have been definitively cured of cancers through homeopathy, herbs, etc. So we have to fly "under the radar" to help people with these methods.

Anonymous said...

Not "healthcare professionals", quacks. When laetrile was "Openly recommended" people were duped out of their money and fed broken promises. You seem to want to bring back the snake oil salesmen. For you to even claim that "homeopathy, herbs, etc" can "cure" cancer makes you one of those quacks stealing money from sick old people and letting them die. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Anonymous said...

7:40 AM Anonymous: for you to even claim that petroleum derived synthetic drugs can "cure" cancer makes you one of those quacks stealing money from sick old people and letting them die. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 7:40AM, you're not very factual, I have taken responsibility for my own health, I research, study and put into practice many ideas. I have personally cured cancer in my body, the information is out there for everyone to use, the FDA is interested in the 'claims' people make to others. So I say, don't make 'claims', just do. If it works for you, you are allowed to make suggestions to others. Simple way to get around the FDA draconian perspective.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Doug to -
Anonymous 10:16 AM
They have a toxic chemo therapy that helps one in 20 cancer patients but how about all the toxic side effects on the people it didn't help? For many years they have been doing chemo and surgery, chopping people up and removing body parts, without any evidence it prolongs life or improves quality of life and then after 20 or more years they stop one of them because it's proven not to work but shame on someone for saying non invasive herbs and homeopathy works? There's too many psychotics following the advice of psychopaths - which one of the 2 are you?

Anonymous said...

Why would you care if petroleum derived synthetic drugs are used or plant derived "natural" drugs are used?? I don't het your point.

Cancer is a killer, there are a number of serious cancers that are a death sentence, if you get one of those it will kill you. There are some cancers that are treatable. No cancer is treatable by herbs and voodoo and the quacks selling this crap should go to jail. The alternative medical quack flying undewr the radar should be among those going to jail.

Anonymous said...

Cancer is a state of mind. Too much processed sugars, carbs, hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated fats blah blah blah. Read it, know it. If folk wants to improve health, look at our state of mind. When we clear our state of mind, we will naturally want to live in ways that are healthy. Exercise is amazing for health, and its not a drug, though does produce naturally occuring neuro transmitters and brain chemicals like endorphins that bring a natural 'high', and then there is meditation which is especially powerful for health in that we achieve deeper levels of concentration. A reduction in internal mental chatter brings with it amazing health results, a quiet mind, so blissful. Fact is....health IS a state of mind. Even someone who is very sick and dying, can have a happy disposition, peace of mind, and contribute to society...even if only one person receives benefit from them. Health is not just about our bodies. Some people would fight cancer conventionally, or by less 'orthodox' methods. I cannot say that one is right and one is wrong, its their choice, and theirs to believe in it, and to learn from their experience. They may die trying to survive, and go out thinking they did their best. The worst crap is, when people are coerced, manipulated and brainwashed into false beliefs, using mass media without checking the truth of the research (eg lies about cholesterol and statins) having their faith destroyed and being assaulted by negative and greedy attitudes. Lets examine our own motivations and ask ourself the vital question "is this purely for me and my own selfish needs, or do I care enough to want others to be happy and healthy" I think the heads of most corporations will find that selfish, greed motivated companies will always fail in the long run, and karma will run its course. I do not wish to be associated with such anymore, but in my ignorance suffered with my health. Ignorance is therefore not bliss. I wont ram my opinions down someones throat. I prefer to offer help to those who are receptive, and keep my own life choices for those who may one day notice them and come round to asking. Perhaps like a loving mother towards her own dear child, we can help, even in small ways. Regulatory bodies always inspire my suspicions. FDA is sick to the core and will stop at nothing to maintain the vested interests of core members...check out for yourself the associations. Personal experience...nothing like it.

Anonymous said...

Cancer is many different diseases. Some are genetic, some are caused by environmental factors and some are a combination of both. No cancer "is a state of mind" and your karma doesn't give it to you or protect you from it. Cancer is also a disease of old age, your chances of getting cancer double about every 7 years or so. If you are lucky enough to avoid the other two big diseases of old age, cancer and stroke, then you will probably die from cancer. Your voodoo or quack BS won't cure anything you are just to uninformed and inexperienced to know better.

Anonymous said...

Fact: Faith in holistic cures over Western medicine killed Steve Jobs ( http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/05/steve-jobs-dies-his-unorthodox-treatment-for-neuroendocrine-cancer.html )
Balance is key.

Tatiana Covington said...

The real reason is money.

Post a Comment