Friday, March 23, 2012

Court Rules Against FDA In Landmark Health Freedom Case

Mike Barrett
Activist Post

If you are the maker or seller of health supplements, or follow the decisions made by the Food and Drug Administration, then you probably know of the blatant corruption and injustice revolving around the FDA.

Through examining and following the FDA’s decisions, anyone can see that the organization continuously pushes pharmaceutical drugs while censoring health food and supplements, and their ability to heal. Such is the case with a company known as Fleminger, Inc. and their product, green tea.

In 2004, Fleminger Inc. submitted a health claim petition to the FDA for their green tea product. Scientific research is available showcasing green tea’s ability to boost the immune system, promote graceful aging, and help to fight cancers, and so Fleminger Inc. rightfully thought to promote these health advantages.

But the FDA responded a year later with a proposed disclaimer stating “FDA concludes that it is highly unlikely that green tea reduces the risk” of breast cancer and prostate cancer – advantages Fleminger Inc. wanted to promote.

In 2010, after threatening to seize Fleminger Inc.’s products, although using the exact language proposed by the FDA, the organization sent over another revised claim which they insisted the company state:
Green tea may reduce the risk of breast or prostate cancer. FDA does not agree that green tea may reduce the risk because there is very little scientific evidence for the claim.”

Being shocked and appalled by the FDA’s force, Fleminger created a suit in the US District Court. The Food and Drug Administration simply gave Fleminger no choice but to use their exact words in claims or risk facing the tyranny of the FDA. Thankfully, judge Bryant ruled in favor of Fleminger, saying:
 The FDA’s language effectively negates the substance–disease relationship claim altogether….There are less burdensome ways in which the FDA could indicate in a short, succinct and accurate disclaimer that it has not approved the claim without nullifying the claim altogether.
Unfortunately, companies promoting food and supplements are seldom allowed to showcase specific health benefits resulting from use of their product. As shocking as it may seem, the FDA deems food and supplements as drugs if they are marketed with health claims. Furthermore, these ‘drugs’ would need to go through costly drug trials, and can’t be patented like all other real drugs can be.

This is the case with Diamond Foods and their walnuts. In response to the company's claims that walnuts possess health benefits, the FDA sent the company a letter informing them of their wrongdoing. According to the FDA, claims made by Diamond Foods that omega-3's found in walnuts produce health benefits make their walnuts “drugs”. As far as the FDA is concerned, these “drugs” cannot be legally marketed in the United States without an approved new drug application.
There are many cases similar to those experienced by Fleminger Inc. and Diamond Foods. Why is the FDA absurdly censoring foods and natural supplements while promoting prescription drugs? Well, to put it simple, the organization simply does not care about your health.

Explore More:
  1. Court Rules Smokers May Sue Tobacco Industry Over Disease Such as Lung Cancer
  2. GMO Crops Continually Banned Around the World in Display of Health Freedom
  3. FDA Claims Walnuts to be Illegal Drugs | Government Lunacy at its Best
  4. U.S. Appeals Court OKs Health Care Law
  5. FDA Issues New Rules on Sunscreens
  6. New Government Regulations Signify Crackdown on Natural Health
    This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.


    This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


    If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


    Anonymous said...

    Those who write these articles should never omit the probability of FDA officials having massive conflicts of interest and that, because of these, cannot be objective in their assessments. Is it true? It should be easy enough to research and publish the credentials of FDA personnel who make decisions to see what industries they came from before being hired by the government agency.

    Easy... Conflicts of interest almost always compromise objectivity and honesty.

    Carroll said...

    Without actually knowing, I would imagine that the FDA functions much like other government agencies where "retired" corporate executives (in this case from the pharmacutical industry) are hired for the purpose of re-cyling them into enfluential government positions.

    Anonymous said...

    too bad the americans don t have somebody to standup for there healthfreedom..maybe we could hire the french or maybe it should be illegal for a government employee to work for a corperation that has direct involvement etc etc.if an investigation were ever done ...

    Anonymous said...

    The FDA Commissioner, Margaret Hamburg made a decision(s) favorable to a former employer that manufactures mercury dental fillings while head of the FDA. Her husband, who is not an FDA official, participated in some of the FDA decision making also. Call her office and ask her to explain herself: 301-796-5000 or 888-463-6332; e-mail her at and - FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg's conflict of interest with amalgam rule

    Post a Comment