Government Aims to Dictate Your Vitamin Dosages

Draconian limits on vitamin dosage amounts could be coming if the feds get their way. Action alert!

That bottle of 1000mg vitamin D capsules in your medicine cabinet could soon be contraband. Important entities are meeting to discuss how to restrict the kinds of supplements you can take under the guise of “harmonization” of supplement standards. If they’re allowed to move forward, it’s possible that the federal government could adopt restrictions on vitamin doses that can be legally sold, as Europe has already done.

At the request of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently convened a workshop to “assess methodological approaches that could be applied uniformly across countries in setting nutrient intake recommendations,” with particular attention on how standards could be set for population subgroups such as young children and women of reproductive age. “Nutrient intake recommendations” include upper levels of intake, which are used to restrict the vitamin dose that a supplement can contain.

This workshop is another in a series of meetings NAS is involved in with other entities, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations, who are both sponsors of Codex, to discuss limits on vitamin doses. As we reported previously, Codex is an intergovernmental body whose goal is to establish international standards regarding food safety and food ingredients, with the goal of promoting “fair trade practices” and consumer protections. Codex standards on supplements, however, are widely expected to follow Europe’s draconian restrictions, where selenium, for example, is limited in supplement form to that found in one-third of a Brazil nut.

It is extremely concerning that NAS is working to establish upper limits for supplements on multiple fronts. To be clear, NAS cannot create standards—they merely make recommendations. But government bodies listen closely to NAS, and as we discussed in our previous article, it isn’t clear whether the FDA can ban therapeutic supplements doses on its own, without public involvement. If the agency decides, following recommendations from NAS, that vitamin D, for example, over a certain amount “presents a significant or unreasonable risk of illness or injury”—the legal definition of an adulterated supplement—the FDA may be able to ban it. The agency recently placed restrictions on certain bulk caffeine products along similar lines, so the path seems open for similar actions against other products.

Of additional concern is that NAS has proven that it does not understand the science of supplements. Recall that their “experts” recommended that adults ingest 600 IU of vitamin D each day, and they established an upper level (the level above which supposedly poses a danger to adults) of 4,000 IU. Any real experts will tell you this is nonsense; the Vitamin D Council recommends 5,000 IU of vitamin D for adults, and it’s not uncommon for an integrative physician to recommend higher levels when needed. For this reason, we don’t want NAS anywhere near a discussion that could lead to supplement restrictions.

What the NAS, Codex, and European authorities don’t seem to understand is that, to gain the beneficial effects of certain vitamins, they must at times be taken in therapeutic doses. Consider vitamin C. Research has indicated that therapeutic doses of vitamin C impart many benefits. Students who supplemented with hourly doses of 1000mg vitamin C for six hours and then three times daily afterwards exhibited an 85% decrease in cold and flu symptoms compared to those who took decongestants. Therapeutic vitamin C regimens also have heart protective benefits, including reducing damage caused by heart attacks and lowering coronary heart disease risk. For comparison, the “safe” upper limit set by the NAS for vitamin C is 2,000mg. (Note that the upper levels currently set by the NAS are meant to serve merely as a guide, that is, they are non-binding.)

In the past, NAS has studied and published upper limits for a handful of vitamins and minerals, mostly for educational purposes. Our concern is that now, NAS is increasingly meeting and consulting with governmental bodies from other countries who have been responsible for setting upper limits and then banning supplements above those limits, as the European Union has done. Will the US head down the same road? It’s unclear as of yet, but these recent developments are not encouraging.

Compared to other parts of the world, the US enjoys relative freedom in our choices regarding therapeutic doses of supplements. We must act now, in the initial stages of the multiple processes underway at NAS, to make sure it stays that way.

Action Alert! Write to Congress and the FDA, the agency that would be responsible for any future bans on supplements, and tell them not to limit therapeutic doses of supplements in the US. Please send your message immediately. 

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2uX2lCn via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2JTpwSB

Is State-Driven Healthcare Coming?

Groups are still working to overturn Obamacare with block grants to states. Action Alert!

Conservative groups, including the Heritage Foundation, Galen Institute, former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), and others, have released a proposal for repealing Obamacare. While the proposal does not create the consumer-driven, parallel healthcare system that ANH-USA advocates, it contains many ideas and reforms that would break the straight-jacket that is constraining our health insurance market—and could pave the way to the parallel healthcare system we’d like to see develop nationwide.

The plan contains many of the same proposals as the Graham-Cassidy bill that failed to pass in 2017. Essentially, the idea is to turn health insurance over to the states. If California wants to create a single-payer system, it would allow it to do so. If another state likes Obamacare, it can keep it. If another wishes to create a consumer-driven system, then it allows that. This is accomplished through converting Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion and subsidies to block grants to states to set up their own healthcare markets. Giving states this freedom is a positive step, especially since some have indicated already they are eager to move down a more consumer-driven path.

Although the penalty for not purchasing insurance has been eliminated, it’s still the law that Americans must buy insurance, and that insurance still needs to follow Obamacare requirements in most cases. This plan promises to eliminate the red tape created by Obamacare and to allow states to innovate solutions to keep premiums down: “States would no longer be bound by Obamacare’s mandates such as essential health benefits, minimum loss ratio requirements, single risk pools, and 3:1 age rating requirements.”

Eliminating essential health benefits and single risk pools are key reforms for which ANH has been fighting. Essential health benefits mean that insurers must cover a range of services by law, including drug rehab and pregnancy services, which many of us will never use. If you want a plan that doesn’t cover those services, tough luck.

Freeing states from single risk pools is also crucial. ANH has long fought for catastrophic-only plans to be available, the idea being that consumers interested in integrative healthcare not covered by normal insurance could purchase a bare-bones plan, then pay out of pocket for integrative services. Under Obamacare, bare-bones plans are not available to most consumers, so those who want integrative services have to pay for a full healthcare plan they won’t use, in addition to integrative services. Some reform efforts proposed the sale of catastrophic-only plans, but kept them in the same risk pool as other plans—meaning that when older, sicker Americans purchased more expensive Obamacare plans, the cost of cheaper plans would go up to compensate (check our previous article for more explanation on this point). Allowing separate risk pools, as this new plan does, will address this issue and allow affordable plans to be offered.

HSAs (health savings accounts) also get a mention in the new proposal. The proposal promises to “roughly double” the maximum HSA contributions for individuals (currently capped at $3,450) and families (currently capped at $6,850), although no specific figures are offered, and makes HSAs compatible with more plans. ANH has long-supported expanding HSAs, especially to cover supplements, though it’s unclear whether the proposal will include that reform, as there is no official legislative language yet.

ANH prefers a consumer-led system that would be available to residents of all states. In fact, a consumer-led system could even coexist with Obamcare, and people could decide for themselves which option they prefer.  But this new approach would be better than the existing system, which is at risk of collapse. Allowing states to do their own thing would also provide many experiments that would be useful in establishing what works and what does not. States would have to take this seriously because they compete with each other. Those who make the wrong choices would see their economic prospects fade while other states add employers and jobs.

Action Alert! Write to Congress and tell them you support reforming Obamacare to allow states to innovate solutions to rising healthcare prices. Please send your message immediately.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2NIzV5V via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2mHhmDI

Government Aims to Dictate Your Vitamin Dosages

Draconian limits on vitamin dosage amounts could be coming if the feds get their way. Action alert!

That bottle of 1000mg vitamin D capsules in your medicine cabinet could soon be contraband. Important entities are meeting to discuss how to restrict the kinds of supplements you can take under the guise of “harmonization” of supplement standards. If they’re allowed to move forward, it’s possible that the federal government could adopt restrictions on vitamin doses that can be legally sold, as Europe has already done.

At the request of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently convened a workshop to “assess methodological approaches that could be applied uniformly across countries in setting nutrient intake recommendations,” with particular attention on how standards could be set for population subgroups such as young children and women of reproductive age. “Nutrient intake recommendations” include upper levels of intake, which are used to restrict the vitamin dose that a supplement can contain.

This workshop is another in a series of meetings NAS is involved in with other entities, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations, who are both sponsors of Codex, to discuss limits on vitamin doses. As we reported previously, Codex is an intergovernmental body whose goal is to establish international standards regarding food safety and food ingredients, with the goal of promoting “fair trade practices” and consumer protections. Codex standards on supplements, however, are widely expected to follow Europe’s draconian restrictions, where selenium, for example, is limited in supplement form to that found in one-third of a Brazil nut.

It is extremely concerning that NAS is working to establish upper limits for supplements on multiple fronts. To be clear, NAS cannot create standards—they merely make recommendations. But government bodies listen closely to NAS, and as we discussed in our previous article, it isn’t clear whether the FDA can ban therapeutic supplements doses on its own, without public involvement. If the agency decides, following recommendations from NAS, that vitamin D, for example, over a certain amount “presents a significant or unreasonable risk of illness or injury”—the legal definition of an adulterated supplement—the FDA may be able to ban it. The agency recently placed restrictions on certain bulk caffeine products along similar lines, so the path seems open for similar actions against other products.

Of additional concern is that NAS has proven that it does not understand the science of supplements. Recall that their “experts” recommended that adults ingest 600 IU of vitamin D each day, and they established an upper level (the level above which supposedly poses a danger to adults) of 4,000 IU. Any real experts will tell you this is nonsense; the Vitamin D Council recommends 5,000 IU of vitamin D for adults, and it’s not uncommon for an integrative physician to recommend higher levels when needed. For this reason, we don’t want NAS anywhere near a discussion that could lead to supplement restrictions.

What the NAS, Codex, and European authorities don’t seem to understand is that, to gain the beneficial effects of certain vitamins, they must at times be taken in therapeutic doses. Consider vitamin C. Research has indicated that therapeutic doses of vitamin C impart many benefits. Students who supplemented with hourly doses of 1000mg vitamin C for six hours and then three times daily afterwards exhibited an 85% decrease in cold and flu symptoms compared to those who took decongestants. Therapeutic vitamin C regimens also have heart protective benefits, including reducing damage caused by heart attacks and lowering coronary heart disease risk. For comparison, the “safe” upper limit set by the NAS for vitamin C is 2,000mg. (Note that the upper levels currently set by the NAS are meant to serve merely as a guide, that is, they are non-binding.)

In the past, NAS has studied and published upper limits for a handful of vitamins and minerals, mostly for educational purposes. Our concern is that now, NAS is increasingly meeting and consulting with governmental bodies from other countries who have been responsible for setting upper limits and then banning supplements above those limits, as the European Union has done. Will the US head down the same road? It’s unclear as of yet, but these recent developments are not encouraging.

Compared to other parts of the world, the US enjoys relative freedom in our choices regarding therapeutic doses of supplements. We must act now, in the initial stages of the multiple processes underway at NAS, to make sure it stays that way.

Action Alert! Write to Congress and the FDA, the agency that would be responsible for any future bans on supplements, and tell them not to limit therapeutic doses of supplements in the US. Please send your message immediately. 

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2uX2lCn via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2v23B6e

Is State-Driven Healthcare Coming?

Groups are still working to overturn Obamacare with block grants to states. Action Alert!

Conservative groups, including the Heritage Foundation, Galen Institute, former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), and others, have released a proposal for repealing Obamacare. While the proposal does not create the consumer-driven, parallel healthcare system that ANH-USA advocates, it contains many ideas and reforms that would break the straight-jacket that is constraining our health insurance market—and could pave the way to the parallel healthcare system we’d like to see develop nationwide.

The plan contains many of the same proposals as the Graham-Cassidy bill that failed to pass in 2017. Essentially, the idea is to turn health insurance over to the states. If California wants to create a single-payer system, it would allow it to do so. If another state likes Obamacare, it can keep it. If another wishes to create a consumer-driven system, then it allows that. This is accomplished through converting Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion and subsidies to block grants to states to set up their own healthcare markets. Giving states this freedom is a positive step, especially since some have indicated already they are eager to move down a more consumer-driven path.

Although the penalty for not purchasing insurance has been eliminated, it’s still the law that Americans must buy insurance, and that insurance still needs to follow Obamacare requirements in most cases. This plan promises to eliminate the red tape created by Obamacare and to allow states to innovate solutions to keep premiums down: “States would no longer be bound by Obamacare’s mandates such as essential health benefits, minimum loss ratio requirements, single risk pools, and 3:1 age rating requirements.”

Eliminating essential health benefits and single risk pools are key reforms for which ANH has been fighting. Essential health benefits mean that insurers must cover a range of services by law, including drug rehab and pregnancy services, which many of us will never use. If you want a plan that doesn’t cover those services, tough luck.

Freeing states from single risk pools is also crucial. ANH has long fought for catastrophic-only plans to be available, the idea being that consumers interested in integrative healthcare not covered by normal insurance could purchase a bare-bones plan, then pay out of pocket for integrative services. Under Obamacare, bare-bones plans are not available to most consumers, so those who want integrative services have to pay for a full healthcare plan they won’t use, in addition to integrative services. Some reform efforts proposed the sale of catastrophic-only plans, but kept them in the same risk pool as other plans—meaning that when older, sicker Americans purchased more expensive Obamacare plans, the cost of cheaper plans would go up to compensate (check our previous article for more explanation on this point). Allowing separate risk pools, as this new plan does, will address this issue and allow affordable plans to be offered.

HSAs (health savings accounts) also get a mention in the new proposal. The proposal promises to “roughly double” the maximum HSA contributions for individuals (currently capped at $3,450) and families (currently capped at $6,850), although no specific figures are offered, and makes HSAs compatible with more plans. ANH has long-supported expanding HSAs, especially to cover supplements, though it’s unclear whether the proposal will include that reform, as there is no official legislative language yet.

ANH prefers a consumer-led system that would be available to residents of all states. In fact, a consumer-led system could even coexist with Obamcare, and people could decide for themselves which option they prefer.  But this new approach would be better than the existing system, which is at risk of collapse. Allowing states to do their own thing would also provide many experiments that would be useful in establishing what works and what does not. States would have to take this seriously because they compete with each other. Those who make the wrong choices would see their economic prospects fade while other states add employers and jobs.

Action Alert! Write to Congress and tell them you support reforming Obamacare to allow states to innovate solutions to rising healthcare prices. Please send your message immediately.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2NIzV5V via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2LosMLs

2 Minute Warning July 26,2018

Take Action!
Join Suzanne Somers In Protecting Bioidentical Hormones

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2JVHZha via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2A8j5eT

2 Minute Warning July 26,2018

Take Action!
Join Suzanne Somers In Protecting Bioidentical Hormones

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2JVHZha via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2OiJ8TF

Action Alert: Support State-Driven Healthcare

http://default.salsalabs.org/api/widget/template/e61ef339-ebd2-4e31-b6fa-7ae66ec738ba/?tId=7057b667-2d2f-42cc-899b-eed6a697fa4d

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2uLzYqq via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2LN9Qls

Action Alert: Support State-Driven Healthcare

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2uLzYqq via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2mGBYvP

Australia Fines Parents Who Deviate From Vaccine Schedule

Australia is further clamping down on vaccine choice by instituting a biweekly $20 fine for parents whose children are not “up to date” on their vaccinations.

Previously parents who didn’t have their kids vaccinated lost an end of the year tax benefit worth around $500. The new fine costs parents about the same, but it’s now assessed throughout the year to “serve as a reminder.”

Other countries have begun similar policies. As we’ve noted in previous coverage, France has made eleven vaccines mandatory; Italy twelve; and Germany, fines parents $2,800 for “failing to seek medical advice” on vaccinating their children.

Meanwhile California’s persecution of Dr. Sears [ link} shows that they have non-legislatively removed the medical exemption provision from their vaccine mandate act.

Part of the reason countries and California can even consider such policies is because there is so much confusion and misinformation about vaccines. Here is what Australians were saying in a Libertarian thread on Reddit about the new Australian fine system.

1. “Mandatory vaccines are safe…”

This is demonstrably false. The U.S. Vaccine Court— set up after Congress decided to shield vaccine makers from all liability for their products—has paid out $3.5 billion to 5,000 Americans for vaccine injuries. Also very few studies have been done comparing unvaccinated and vaccinated populations, which would be the real test of vaccine safety. What evidence there is suggests that unvaccinated children are generally healthier than vaccinated children. In fact the National Academy of Sciences, which advises the government on health matters, concluded in 2013 that “key elements of the [vaccine]schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines—have not been systematically examined in research studies.”

2. “The scientific and medical case in favor of mandatory vaccinations is overwhelmingly in favor of their efficacy.”

Also false. For example, the latest flu vaccine (for the 2017-18 flu season) was only 17% effective against the strain that caused 80% of flu infections. Since 2003, the flu vaccine hasn’t been more than 60% effective, and is usually considerably lower. Yet this vaccine puts mercury and adjuvants such as aluminum directly into a child’s bloodstream, where the liver cannot provide any protection. Or the child even receives in utero.  Other vaccines, such as the pertussis shot, have also been shown to be ineffective. Despite high vaccination rates for MMR, we still see outbreaks of mumps, suggsting that protection from vaccines are not strong or wane quickly.

3. “Generally I believe in the freedom to make your own choices so long as it hurts nobody else, and not vaccinating can hurt others.”

This is essentially the herd immunity argument, one of the main pillars behind efforts at forced vaccination. The herd immunity hypothesis states that a very high percentage of a community must be vaccinated in order to protect everyone (the herd) from a disease. This theory isn’t supported by the facts. For one thing it was developed out of observations of natural immunity, not vaccination. With vaccines, however, the evidence plainly shows that unvaccinated children may catch infectious diseases from vaccinated children. The CDC has reported measles outbreaks in schools with vaccination levels above 98%. Much of the current shingle epidemic seems related to the vaccination.

The conversation on vaccines has been polluted so deeply that blatant falsehoods can be repeated as if they are self-evident truths.

 

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2zTyq2x via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2LbdoSk

Australia Fines Parents Who Deviate From Vaccine Schedule

Australia is further clamping down on vaccine choice by instituting a biweekly $20 fine for parents whose children are not “up to date” on their vaccinations.

Previously parents who didn’t have their kids vaccinated lost an end of the year tax benefit worth around $500. The new fine costs parents about the same, but it’s now assessed throughout the year to “serve as a reminder.”

Other countries have begun similar policies. As we’ve noted in previous coverage, France has made eleven vaccines mandatory; Italy twelve; and Germany, fines parents $2,800 for “failing to seek medical advice” on vaccinating their children.

Meanwhile California’s persecution of Dr. Sears [ link} shows that they have non-legislatively removed the medical exemption provision from their vaccine mandate act.

Part of the reason countries and California can even consider such policies is because there is so much confusion and misinformation about vaccines. Here is what Australians were saying in a Libertarian thread on Reddit about the new Australian fine system.

1. “Mandatory vaccines are safe…”

This is demonstrably false. The U.S. Vaccine Court— set up after Congress decided to shield vaccine makers from all liability for their products—has paid out $3.5 billion to 5,000 Americans for vaccine injuries. Also very few studies have been done comparing unvaccinated and vaccinated populations, which would be the real test of vaccine safety. What evidence there is suggests that unvaccinated children are generally healthier than vaccinated children. In fact the National Academy of Sciences, which advises the government on health matters, concluded in 2013 that “key elements of the [vaccine]schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines—have not been systematically examined in research studies.”

2. “The scientific and medical case in favor of mandatory vaccinations is overwhelmingly in favor of their efficacy.”

Also false. For example, the latest flu vaccine (for the 2017-18 flu season) was only 17% effective against the strain that caused 80% of flu infections. Since 2003, the flu vaccine hasn’t been more than 60% effective, and is usually considerably lower. Yet this vaccine puts mercury and adjuvants such as aluminum directly into a child’s bloodstream, where the liver cannot provide any protection. Or the child even receives in utero.  Other vaccines, such as the pertussis shot, have also been shown to be ineffective. Despite high vaccination rates for MMR, we still see outbreaks of mumps, suggsting that protection from vaccines are not strong or wane quickly.

3. “Generally I believe in the freedom to make your own choices so long as it hurts nobody else, and not vaccinating can hurt others.”

This is essentially the herd immunity argument, one of the main pillars behind efforts at forced vaccination. The herd immunity hypothesis states that a very high percentage of a community must be vaccinated in order to protect everyone (the herd) from a disease. This theory isn’t supported by the facts. For one thing it was developed out of observations of natural immunity, not vaccination. With vaccines, however, the evidence plainly shows that unvaccinated children may catch infectious diseases from vaccinated children. The CDC has reported measles outbreaks in schools with vaccination levels above 98%. Much of the current shingle epidemic seems related to the vaccination.

The conversation on vaccines has been polluted so deeply that blatant falsehoods can be repeated as if they are self-evident truths.

 

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2zTyq2x via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2uPLvEi

Action Alert: No GMOs in Wildlife Refuges

http://default.salsalabs.org/api/widget/template/4c47ca76-f7c5-49b1-8635-4a3eda97fc4a/?tId=30563d2f-8508-4aca-a596-dad84e806766

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2NlVE3a via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2zQVLlx

Action Alert: No GMOs in Wildlife Refuges

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2NlVE3a via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2Lts37E

Join Suzanne Somers: Save Bioidenticals

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2NSPwRf via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2zQsk2S

Join Suzanne Somers: Save Bioidenticals

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2NSPwRf via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2mn1YvO

Would You Put Eight Teaspoons of Sugar in Your Water?

Probably not, but the fact is that this and even more sugar is added to common foods, likely without your knowledge. We need meaningful sugar labeling on food packages.  Action Alert!

If someone is caught putting cocaine in a child’s snack pack, they go to jail, as it should be. Yet an entire industry has been hiding copious amounts of highly addictive, poisonous sugar in our food. It may sound outlandish, but it’s true: for years, Big Sugar has been actively working to get Americans addicted to sugar, which is more addictive than cocaine—and not just through traditionally sweet items like candy. Now, foods that masquerade as health foods—low-fat yogurt, sports drinks, and many others—are loaded with sugar, and it’s making us drug-addicted and obese. Big Sugar can get away with this in large part because they can obscure the amount of sugar in a product by listing it in grams, rather than a more relatable measurement like teaspoons.

The food industry has engineered us to crave sugar. Industry insiders all but admit that the responsibility for today’s obesity epidemic lies largely at their feet. Tremendous amounts of research and investment has gone into making foods not just tasty, but so irresistible that consumers cannot control their cravings. For example, food companies have added sweetness to foods that aren’t typically sweet: bread, pasta sauce, and yogurt are loaded with sugar. The food industry intentionally creates products with the right “bliss points” of sugar in the hope that we get addicted, continuously buying their junk. In fact, studies have found that rats prefer sugar to cocaine—even rats that are already addicted to cocaine.

Consider these examples of hidden sugar:

• Common 20oz sports drinks contain 32 grams of sugar—or about 8 teaspoons;
• A large, flavored coffee can contain 25 teaspoons of sugar, three times more than what is in a 12oz cola;
• Vitamin Water contains 32 grams of sugar, or 8 teaspoons;
• A single cup of low-fat yogurt can contain up to 47 grams of sugar, which is 12 teaspoons.

The list goes on. The point is that, most people would not add twelve teaspoons of sugar to their yogurt, let alone 25 teaspoons of sugar in their coffee. The only way you can get most people to consume that much is by obscuring the information, which is what putting it in grams on the nutrition facts label does.

It should be noted that our addiction to sugar has in part been fueled by dieticians on the take from Big Sugar. The main narrative pushed by Big Sugar is that a calorie is a calorie, and obesity is a result of “energy imbalance.” Coca-Cola funded a non-profit to pedal this idea, but the government is doing it for them, too: the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website lists “energy imbalances” first in a list of the causes of obesity. We’ve noted the crony ties between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Big Sugar in previous articles. Registered Dietitians are in on this too. The trade association for Registered Dietitians is the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND), an organization that lists Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Kellogg’s among their corporate sponsors and that has endorsed Kraft Singles and small cans of soda as a snack. The game is rigged when the so-called “experts” telling us what to eat accept large contributions from companies pedaling sugar.

The same is happening all over the world. A recent investigation in Australia found that Big Sugar is using general practitioners to push industry propaganda disguised as dietary advice. A “fact sheet” sent to doctors from Kellogg’s, for example, advised a diet high in carbohydrates to patients with type-2 diabetes—advice that “borders on insanity,” in the words of one physician.

Make no mistake: all of this sugar is making us fat. When we consume more sugar than we need, the excess is converted by the liver to fat, and then distributed throughout the body for storage—in most people, places like the stomach and hips. When those areas become full, fat begins to spill over into your organs such as the heart, liver, and kidneys, which raises blood pressure, weakens the immune system, and decreases metabolism. (For more on this, check out our Scientific Director Dr. Rob Verkerk’s recent piece on this topic.)

There’s more. In the past we’ve covered the multitude of dangers associated with consuming sugar, but here are some highlights:

• Most people know that sugar causes Type 2 diabetes, and that Type 2 diabetics have a higher risk of developing Alzheimer’s. However, study after study is demonstrating that Alzheimer’s may actually be another form of diabetes.
• Sugardumbs you down.A 2012 UCLA study showed that rats fed a sugary diet had a decrease in brain energy metabolism and synaptic activity.
• Sugar damages your heart. Recent research has found a direct, independent link between sugar overconsumption and heart disease.
• Healthy blood sugar levels = graceful aging. A 2013 study showed that higher blood sugar levels were associated with a decrease in memory recall and learning ability. It also suggested that maintaining healthy blood sugar levels—whether or not you’re diabetic— “could prevent age-related cognitive decline.”

In light of these dangers, it is time to change how sugar is labeled on food packages. The FDA recently began revamping the nutrition facts label. It included reforms such as using larger fonts to indicate the serving size, servings per container, and caloric information, eliminating “calories from fat” since the type of fat is more important than the amount, and adding an “added sugars” line as a subsection of total sugars. These are some positive steps, but not enough—listing added sugars in grams continues to obscure the real sugar content of the food.

Action Alert! Write to Congress and tell your representatives you want sugar labeled in teaspoons rather than grams. Please send your message immediately.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2malZWt via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2L6x8FK

Is the HPV Vaccination Preventing Your Pregnancy?

The data say yes: yet the FDA might approve the vaccine for adults. Action Alert!

A new study shows that women aged 25-29 who received the HPV vaccine have a lower probability of becoming pregnant. This is just the latest in a stream of evidence that points to the dangers of the HPV vaccine, particularly to those already infected with the virus—yet the FDA is considering a request from Merck to expand the population to whom the vaccine can be marketed. If the request is granted, it would be another example of how the agency sells out consumers for the benefit of the vaccine industry.

In addition to the study on the HPV vaccine preventing pregnancies, the government’s vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) lists a startling 57,287 adverse events from the vaccine, including 419 deaths—far more than any other vaccine. A World Health Organization study demonstrated that the vaccination has a tendency to produce clusters of serious adverse events. The American College of Pediatricians raised concerns that the vaccine could be linked to premature ovarian failure. And let’s not forget the former Merck doctor who said that Gardasil “will become the greatest medical scandal of all time,” that it “serves no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturer,” and, like some other vaccines, that it can cause “Guillain-Barré syndrome, paralysis of the lower limbs, vaccine-induced MS, and vaccine-induced encephalitis.”

Consider, too, that for women who have already been exposed to certain strains of the HPV virus, vaccination can actually increase the risk of precancerous lesions by 44%. That’s right: if you are already infected with HPV, getting vaccinated could increase your risk of getting cancer. To put this in perspective, 79 million Americans are infected with HPV, and about 14 million are newly infected each year, making HPV the most common sexually transmitted infection. The CDC says that “HPV is so common that almost every person who is sexually active will get HPV at some time in their life.”

Despite substantial evidence of the dangers of vaccinating for HPV, the FDA has granted a request from Merck, the manufacturer of the Gardasil vaccine, to conduct a “priority review” for an expanded application of the vaccine, so it can be given to adults aged 27-45 as well as children. Priority review, as opposed to standard review, simply means that the agency is on an accelerated timeline: priority reviews take six months, standard reviews take ten months.

Merck originally asked for the expanded application in 2008, but the FDA rejected the request and asked for more long-term data. Not much seems to have changed. Gardasil’s current label references a study on 3,000 women aged 27-45 and states there was “no statistically significant efficacy” demonstrated by the vaccine in preventing cervical cancer or cervical lesions. Instead, Merck is pinning its hopes to observational data that supposedly demonstrates that the Gardasil vaccination can protect women from acquiring new HPV infections.

Given all this evidence, the discussion should be whether the HPV vaccine should be given to anyone—certainly not if it should be given to more people. Is the government so beholden to vaccine manufacturers that they will turn a blind eye to this evidence?

If the government won’t protect our health, it is up to consumers to educate themselves. Check out our documentary, Manufactured Crisis: HPV, Hype & Horror.

Action Alerts! Write to the FDA and tell them not to expand the application for the HPV vaccine. Please send your message immediately.

State-based action alerts! Check to see if your state is below and take action to prevent HPV mandates. Please send your message immediately. 

NJ

NY

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2utbrWb via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2Ji7Gbp

Forced Vaccination Moves Forward in California

The state has sent a clear message: medical exemptions to vaccines will not be tolerated. State-based Action Alert!

Dr. Bob Sears, a California pediatrician, has been placed on a 35-month probation period by the state medical board for daring to write letters recommending a medical exemption for a toddler from childhood vaccinations.

Dr. Sears will still be able to practice but will be supervised by another physician. He is also required to take an ethics class and forty hours of medical education training for each year of probation. According to a Facebook post from Dr. Sears, the medical board is preparing four more similar cases against him—all for medical exemptions to vaccines.

As we reported at the time, Dr. Sears made the recommendation for a medical exemption based on the mother’s description of serious adverse reactions to previous vaccinations.

It seems clear that this case—along with the other accusations the board is preparing—is clearly intended to intimidate other doctors in the state and thereby shut down any medical vaccine exemptions, the only exemptions left under law. This case sets a legal precedent for when a medical exemption is acceptable, at a time when states are increasingly threatening to eliminate all other exemptions.

By initiating legal action for recommending medical exemptions, California is in effect banning all exemptions to vaccines. What kind of country are we living in, when parents have no choice about what gets put into their children’s bodies?

Action Alert! California residents, write to the state legislature, and tell them that the medical board is intimidating doctors who are recommending medical exemptions to vaccines, and thus eliminating all exemptions. Please send your message immediately.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2m9xI7Q via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2L6x60A

Victory for Healthcare Reform!

You spoke, they listened: a new rule means more Americans will have better choices in healthcare.

The Department of Labor recently finalized a rule that expands access to association health plans. This is the result of an executive order from President Trump aimed at promoting healthcare options in the US.

The idea behind association health plans is that small businesses and the self-employed with a common profession or interest, or those who share the same geographic location, can band together and be counted as a “large-group” (equivalent to an employer) for health insurance purposes.

As we pointed out in our previous coverage of the rule, the great advantage here is that “large-group” plans are subject to fewer mandates than under Obamacare – such as having to offer “essential health benefits.”  Large-group plans also have more leeway in setting premiums, which can be based on the health of the group (which is barred under the ACA for small-group plans).  Associations that gain large-group status could therefore offer less expensive coverage if they were made up mainly of younger, healthier members.

The final rule effectively allows association health plans to operate as an independent market, separate from the Obamacare exchanges, allowing more leeway to adjust to consumer preferences. This is an important step towards a more consumer-driven healthcare market that ANH strongly supports—although it is a step than could be reversed by the next president.

The Congressional Budget Office predicts that 400,000 people who would have been uninsured will enroll in association plans and 3.6 million people who already had coverage will move to association plans.

It remains to be seen whether the rule will stand up to legal scrutiny. New York and Massachusetts are already threatening to sue the Trump administration over the rule. But, as it stands now, plans can start being offered as soon as September 1.

Recall, too, that another final rule is in the works to lengthen the duration of short-term health plans from 90 days to a full year. These plans also do not need to adhere to Obamacare regulations.

With the failure of Congress to repeal or replace Obamacare with a consumer-driven alternative, we’re happy to see these important steps being taken to expand the healthcare options for Americans.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2utbpxx via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2LbBxEm

Would You Put Eight Teaspoons of Sugar in Your Water?

Probably not, but the fact is that this and even more sugar is added to common foods, likely without your knowledge. We need meaningful sugar labeling on food packages.  Action Alert!

If someone is caught putting cocaine in a child’s snack pack, they go to jail, as it should be. Yet an entire industry has been hiding copious amounts of highly addictive, poisonous sugar in our food. It may sound outlandish, but it’s true: for years, Big Sugar has been actively working to get Americans addicted to sugar, which is more addictive than cocaine—and not just through traditionally sweet items like candy. Now, foods that masquerade as health foods—low-fat yogurt, sports drinks, and many others—are loaded with sugar, and it’s making us drug-addicted and obese. Big Sugar can get away with this in large part because they can obscure the amount of sugar in a product by listing it in grams, rather than a more relatable measurement like teaspoons.

The food industry has engineered us to crave sugar. Industry insiders all but admit that the responsibility for today’s obesity epidemic lies largely at their feet. Tremendous amounts of research and investment has gone into making foods not just tasty, but so irresistible that consumers cannot control their cravings. For example, food companies have added sweetness to foods that aren’t typically sweet: bread, pasta sauce, and yogurt are loaded with sugar. The food industry intentionally creates products with the right “bliss points” of sugar in the hope that we get addicted, continuously buying their junk. In fact, studies have found that rats prefer sugar to cocaine—even rats that are already addicted to cocaine.

Consider these examples of hidden sugar:

• Common 20oz sports drinks contain 32 grams of sugar—or about 8 teaspoons;
• A large, flavored coffee can contain 25 teaspoons of sugar, three times more than what is in a 12oz cola;
• Vitamin Water contains 32 grams of sugar, or 8 teaspoons;
• A single cup of low-fat yogurt can contain up to 47 grams of sugar, which is 12 teaspoons.

The list goes on. The point is that, most people would not add twelve teaspoons of sugar to their yogurt, let alone 25 teaspoons of sugar in their coffee. The only way you can get most people to consume that much is by obscuring the information, which is what putting it in grams on the nutrition facts label does.

It should be noted that our addiction to sugar has in part been fueled by dieticians on the take from Big Sugar. The main narrative pushed by Big Sugar is that a calorie is a calorie, and obesity is a result of “energy imbalance.” Coca-Cola funded a non-profit to pedal this idea, but the government is doing it for them, too: the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website lists “energy imbalances” first in a list of the causes of obesity. We’ve noted the crony ties between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Big Sugar in previous articles. Registered Dietitians are in on this too. The trade association for Registered Dietitians is the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND), an organization that lists Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Kellogg’s among their corporate sponsors and that has endorsed Kraft Singles and small cans of soda as a snack. The game is rigged when the so-called “experts” telling us what to eat accept large contributions from companies pedaling sugar.

The same is happening all over the world. A recent investigation in Australia found that Big Sugar is using general practitioners to push industry propaganda disguised as dietary advice. A “fact sheet” sent to doctors from Kellogg’s, for example, advised a diet high in carbohydrates to patients with type-2 diabetes—advice that “borders on insanity,” in the words of one physician.

Make no mistake: all of this sugar is making us fat. When we consume more sugar than we need, the excess is converted by the liver to fat, and then distributed throughout the body for storage—in most people, places like the stomach and hips. When those areas become full, fat begins to spill over into your organs such as the heart, liver, and kidneys, which raises blood pressure, weakens the immune system, and decreases metabolism. (For more on this, check out our Scientific Director Dr. Rob Verkerk’s recent piece on this topic.)

There’s more. In the past we’ve covered the multitude of dangers associated with consuming sugar, but here are some highlights:

• Most people know that sugar causes Type 2 diabetes, and that Type 2 diabetics have a higher risk of developing Alzheimer’s. However, study after study is demonstrating that Alzheimer’s may actually be another form of diabetes.
• Sugardumbs you down.A 2012 UCLA study showed that rats fed a sugary diet had a decrease in brain energy metabolism and synaptic activity.
• Sugar damages your heart. Recent research has found a direct, independent link between sugar overconsumption and heart disease.
• Healthy blood sugar levels = graceful aging. A 2013 study showed that higher blood sugar levels were associated with a decrease in memory recall and learning ability. It also suggested that maintaining healthy blood sugar levels—whether or not you’re diabetic— “could prevent age-related cognitive decline.”

In light of these dangers, it is time to change how sugar is labeled on food packages. The FDA recently began revamping the nutrition facts label. It included reforms such as using larger fonts to indicate the serving size, servings per container, and caloric information, eliminating “calories from fat” since the type of fat is more important than the amount, and adding an “added sugars” line as a subsection of total sugars. These are some positive steps, but not enough—listing added sugars in grams continues to obscure the real sugar content of the food.

Action Alert! Write to Congress and tell your representatives you want sugar labeled in teaspoons rather than grams. Please send your message immediately.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2malZWt via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2zzefXE

Is the HPV Vaccination Preventing Your Pregnancy?

The data say yes: yet the FDA might approve the vaccine for adults. Action Alert!

A new study shows that women aged 25-29 who received the HPV vaccine have a lower probability of becoming pregnant. This is just the latest in a stream of evidence that points to the dangers of the HPV vaccine, particularly to those already infected with the virus—yet the FDA is considering a request from Merck to expand the population to whom the vaccine can be marketed. If the request is granted, it would be another example of how the agency sells out consumers for the benefit of the vaccine industry.

In addition to the study on the HPV vaccine preventing pregnancies, the government’s vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) lists a startling 57,287 adverse events from the vaccine, including 419 deaths—far more than any other vaccine. A World Health Organization study demonstrated that the vaccination has a tendency to produce clusters of serious adverse events. The American College of Pediatricians raised concerns that the vaccine could be linked to premature ovarian failure. And let’s not forget the former Merck doctor who said that Gardasil “will become the greatest medical scandal of all time,” that it “serves no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturer,” and, like some other vaccines, that it can cause “Guillain-Barré syndrome, paralysis of the lower limbs, vaccine-induced MS, and vaccine-induced encephalitis.”

Consider, too, that for women who have already been exposed to certain strains of the HPV virus, vaccination can actually increase the risk of precancerous lesions by 44%. That’s right: if you are already infected with HPV, getting vaccinated could increase your risk of getting cancer. To put this in perspective, 79 million Americans are infected with HPV, and about 14 million are newly infected each year, making HPV the most common sexually transmitted infection. The CDC says that “HPV is so common that almost every person who is sexually active will get HPV at some time in their life.”

Despite substantial evidence of the dangers of vaccinating for HPV, the FDA has granted a request from Merck, the manufacturer of the Gardasil vaccine, to conduct a “priority review” for an expanded application of the vaccine, so it can be given to adults aged 27-45 as well as children. Priority review, as opposed to standard review, simply means that the agency is on an accelerated timeline: priority reviews take six months, standard reviews take ten months.

Merck originally asked for the expanded application in 2008, but the FDA rejected the request and asked for more long-term data. Not much seems to have changed. Gardasil’s current label references a study on 3,000 women aged 27-45 and states there was “no statistically significant efficacy” demonstrated by the vaccine in preventing cervical cancer or cervical lesions. Instead, Merck is pinning its hopes to observational data that supposedly demonstrates that the Gardasil vaccination can protect women from acquiring new HPV infections.

Given all this evidence, the discussion should be whether the HPV vaccine should be given to anyone—certainly not if it should be given to more people. Is the government so beholden to vaccine manufacturers that they will turn a blind eye to this evidence?

If the government won’t protect our health, it is up to consumers to educate themselves. Check out our documentary, Manufactured Crisis: HPV, Hype & Horror.

Action Alerts! Write to the FDA and tell them not to expand the application for the HPV vaccine. Please send your message immediately.

State-based action alerts! Check to see if your state is below and take action to prevent HPV mandates. Please send your message immediately. 

NJ

NY

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2utbrWb via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2maIESs

Forced Vaccination Moves Forward in California

The state has sent a clear message: medical exemptions to vaccines will not be tolerated. State-based Action Alert!

Dr. Bob Sears, a California pediatrician, has been placed on a 35-month probation period by the state medical board for daring to write letters recommending a medical exemption for a toddler from childhood vaccinations.

Dr. Sears will still be able to practice but will be supervised by another physician. He is also required to take an ethics class and forty hours of medical education training for each year of probation. According to a Facebook post from Dr. Sears, the medical board is preparing four more similar cases against him—all for medical exemptions to vaccines.

As we reported at the time, Dr. Sears made the recommendation for a medical exemption based on the mother’s description of serious adverse reactions to previous vaccinations.

It seems clear that this case—along with the other accusations the board is preparing—is clearly intended to intimidate other doctors in the state and thereby shut down any medical vaccine exemptions, the only exemptions left under law. This case sets a legal precedent for when a medical exemption is acceptable, at a time when states are increasingly threatening to eliminate all other exemptions.

By initiating legal action for recommending medical exemptions, California is in effect banning all exemptions to vaccines. What kind of country are we living in, when parents have no choice about what gets put into their children’s bodies?

Action Alert! California residents, write to the state legislature, and tell them that the medical board is intimidating doctors who are recommending medical exemptions to vaccines, and thus eliminating all exemptions. Please send your message immediately.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2m9xI7Q via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2uoWLYd

Victory for Healthcare Reform!

You spoke, they listened: a new rule means more Americans will have better choices in healthcare.

The Department of Labor recently finalized a rule that expands access to association health plans. This is the result of an executive order from President Trump aimed at promoting healthcare options in the US.

The idea behind association health plans is that small businesses and the self-employed with a common profession or interest, or those who share the same geographic location, can band together and be counted as a “large-group” (equivalent to an employer) for health insurance purposes.

As we pointed out in our previous coverage of the rule, the great advantage here is that “large-group” plans are subject to fewer mandates than under Obamacare – such as having to offer “essential health benefits.”  Large-group plans also have more leeway in setting premiums, which can be based on the health of the group (which is barred under the ACA for small-group plans).  Associations that gain large-group status could therefore offer less expensive coverage if they were made up mainly of younger, healthier members.

The final rule effectively allows association health plans to operate as an independent market, separate from the Obamacare exchanges, allowing more leeway to adjust to consumer preferences. This is an important step towards a more consumer-driven healthcare market that ANH strongly supports—although it is a step than could be reversed by the next president.

The Congressional Budget Office predicts that 400,000 people who would have been uninsured will enroll in association plans and 3.6 million people who already had coverage will move to association plans.

It remains to be seen whether the rule will stand up to legal scrutiny. New York and Massachusetts are already threatening to sue the Trump administration over the rule. But, as it stands now, plans can start being offered as soon as September 1.

Recall, too, that another final rule is in the works to lengthen the duration of short-term health plans from 90 days to a full year. These plans also do not need to adhere to Obamacare regulations.

With the failure of Congress to repeal or replace Obamacare with a consumer-driven alternative, we’re happy to see these important steps being taken to expand the healthcare options for Americans.

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2utbpxx via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2maE2Mf

Cocaine For Kids: How Big Food Makes Children Addicts

Take Action!

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2JfjRpp via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2uaMiQM

Action Alert: California Residents, Fight Back Against Forced Vaccination

http://default.salsalabs.org/api/widget/template/b340cc2b-dd34-411d-bd2b-a34ff37105a5/?tId=3a7d7683-882e-413a-8e01-ceb48fb710bd

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2L1IHhK via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2ukGR0M

Action Alert: Tell the FDA Not to Approve the HPV Vaccine for Adults

http://default.salsalabs.org/api/widget/template/1c0c13e8-469e-49ac-afac-94de436f4243/?tId=c3c3193d-ce5f-4506-b7cc-05c3d27b41f7

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2JdmZlV via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2ua37vm

Action Alert: Tell Congress to Change the Way Sugar is Labeled

http://default.salsalabs.org/api/widget/template/c13c3e9f-fb9e-457a-8a1c-0affed42b517/?tId=39027fdc-74a3-42af-868b-41de9ea94129

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2L1IFq8 via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2ujt8Ye

Manufactured Crisis: HPV, Hype & Horror

http://default.salsalabs.org/api/widget/template/4283b5e2-9597-4a7c-9bdd-406ef6e02889/?tId=75161360-8b06-4fc1-8ae3-a472fc3b80b1

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2tOQFU5 via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2ua2TV2

Cocaine For Kids: How Big Food Makes Children Addicts

Take Action!

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2JfjRpp via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2KMRfcN

Action Alert: California Residents, Fight Back Against Forced Vaccination

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2L1IHhK via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2N8lYh8

Action Alert: Tell the FDA Not to Approve the HPV Vaccine for Adults

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2JdmZlV via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2KRxYat

Action Alert: Tell Congress to Change the Way Sugar is Labeled

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2L1IFq8 via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2N7mBaV

Manufactured Crisis: HPV, Hype & Horror

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2tOQFU5 via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr https://ift.tt/2KNu95U

Protect Estriol and Other Bioidentical Hormones

If the FDA is not dissuaded, millions of women will lose access to life-saving hormones that are often safer than the alternatives currently on the market.

How is Access to Bioidentical Hormones Threatened?

In implementing the Drug Quality and Security Act of 2013, FDA began accepting nominations to the “Difficult to Compound List.” When finalized, compounding pharmacies will no longer be able to make items that appear on this list. Bioidentical estriol, estradiol, and progesterone are crucial hormones women need when going through menopause or fertility challenges, or when struggling with other hormonal imbalances.  All three are currently nominated for the “Difficult to Compound List.” In the case of compounded bioidentical estriol, which has no FDA-approved alternative, consumer access would be eliminated if the agency places it on the list.

Estriol’s nomination is especially concerning given the FDA’s demonstrated hostility toward this hormone. In 2008, the agency ruled that pharmacies could not compound medicines containing estriol without first obtaining an investigational new drug authorization.^[1]The FDA remains unconvinced of estriol’s safety despite acknowledging that the agency is unaware of any adverse events associated with estriol^[2]in addition to the fact that this hormone has a USP monograph.^[3]The FDA’s position on estriol could be influenced by a 2005 Citizen’s Petition from a major drug manufacturer that urged the FDA to undertake enforcement actions against pharmacies producing bioidentical hormone products that competed with the drug maker’s own products.^[4]

FDA action on these three bioidentical hormones – estriol, estradiol, and progesterone – could come as early as March 2018. That is when the FDA’s Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee (PCAC) is next expected to meet. PCAC has the responsibility of considering FDA staff recommendations concerning all substances nominated for the “Difficult to Compound List.”

What are Bioidentical Hormones?

Unlike conventional hormone therapy that uses synthetic and animal-derived hormones that are slightly different from a woman’s own hormones, bioidentical hormones are biochemically the same as those made by the ovaries during a woman’s reproductive years. Bioidentical hormones are used chiefly to relieve and control the symptoms of menopause.

Custom-made bioidentical hormones are extremely popular with patients: up to 2.5 million US womenaged 40 years or older may use compounded hormone therapy annually, accounting for 28% to 68% of hormone therapy prescriptions.^[5]

Are Bioidentical Hormones Safe?

Yes, especially relative to some of the FDA-approved products on the market. A review of the clinical literature concluded that bioidentical hormones are associated with lower risks, including the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease, and are more effective than synthetic or animal-derived hormones.^[6]

On the other hand, studies have consistently demonstrated that synthetic hormones are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.^[7],[8],[9]Synthetic and animal-derived hormones have also been shown to produce negative cardiovascular effects and to negate the cardio-protective effects of estrogen.^{[10],[11], [12]}

Are Bioidentical Hormones Difficult to Compound?

No. The arguments used to support the notion that bioidentical hormones are difficult to compound do not hold up to scrutiny. Extensive internal testing by pharmacies as well as third-party testing ensure that compounded hormone preparations are homogenous and reflect dosages and strengths found on the product labels. Ingredients purchased by compounders are guaranteed by the manufacturer to adhere to certain specifications. The increasing popularity of compounded hormone medicines also attests to patient and doctor satisfaction with the efficacy of these products.

Estriol in the Crosshairs

Access to estriol is particularly threatened, as there are no FDA-approved drugs for bioidentical estriol—meaning that if the FDA decides that estriol is on the “Difficult to Compound List,” patients will lose access to this hormone. Estriol has proven benefits beyond treating postmenopausal symptoms: it has been shown to reduce cardiovascular risk, help with osteoporosis, and reduce brain lesions in individuals with multiple sclerosis. Studies have also shown estriol to be safer compared with more potent estrogens.^[13]

What is ANH Seeking?

The Alliance for Natural Health (ANH) asks members of Congress send a letter to FDA directing the agency to preserve consumer access to compounded hormones that do not present safety concerns.

 

[1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3127562/

[2]https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23959867_The_Bioidentical_Hormone_Debate_Are_Bioidentical_Hormones_Estradiol_Estriol_and_Progesterone_Safer_or_More_Efficacious_than_Commonly_Used_Synthetic_Versions_in_Hormone_Replacement_Therapy

[3]http://www.pharmacopeia.cn/v29240/usp29nf24s0_m30840.html

[4]https://www.law.uh.edu/healthlaw/perspectives/2008/(BP)%20compounding.pdf

[5]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4547729/

[6]https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23959867_The_Bioidentical_Hormone_Debate_Are_Bioidentical_Hormones_Estradiol_Estriol_and_Progesterone_Safer_or_More_Efficacious_than_Commonly_Used_Synthetic_Versions_in_Hormone_Replacement_Therapy

[7]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15908197

[8]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12419080

[9]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15551359

[10]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9012659

[11]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6596830

[12]http://equimed.com/news/general/research-reveals-dangers-of-conjugated-equine-estrogens-for-women

[13]http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2008/8/Estriol-Its-Weakness-is-its-Strength/Page-01

from The Alliance for Natural Health https://ift.tt/2L2kGnf via Aloe for Health

from https://ift.tt/2JbZeun