General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsShould the FDA crack down on homeopathic “remedies”?
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/should-the-fda-crack-down-on-homeopathic-remedies/"In the category of potentially dangerous complementary or alternative medicine, I can think of few products worse than ones claimed to relieve asthma, yet dont actually contain any medicine. Yet these products exist and are widely sold. Just over a year ago I described what might be the most irresponsible homeopathic treatment ever: A homeopathic asthma spray. If there was ever a complementary or alternative product that could cause serious harm, this is it:
Among the different treatments and remedies that are considered alternative medicine, homeopathy is the most implausible of all. Homeopathy is an elaborate placebo system, where the remedies lack any actual medicine. Based on the idea that like cures like (which is sympathetic magic, not science), proponents of homeopathy believe that any substance can be an effective remedy if its diluted enough: cancer, boar testicles, crude oil, oxygen, and skim milk are all homeopathic remedies. (I think Berlin Wall may be my favorite, though vacuum cleaner dust is a runner-up). The dilution in the case of homeopathy is so significant that theres mathematically no possibility of even a trace of the original ingredient in the typical remedy they are chemically indistinguishable from a placebo. To homeopaths, this is a good thing, as dilution is claimed to make the medicine-free remedy more potent, not less. As would be expected with inert products, rigorous clinical trials confirm what basic science (and math) predicts: homeopathys effects are placebo effects.
...
Do the current FDA standards provide adequate consumer protection, given the marketing of homeopathy for the treatment of very real conditions, like asthma? These products may be labelled not a rescue inhaler, but its fair to ask why they are sold at all, when they offer no plausible benefit. Last week the FDA issued a warning about homeopathic asthma inhalers:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers not to rely on asthma products labeled as homeopathic that are sold over-the-counter (OTC). These products have not been evaluated by the FDA for safety and effectiveness.
..."
------------------------------------
Selling worthless crap is one thing, but convincing people to use it for actual conditions is another.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Hypocritical? Dangerous?
get the red out
(13,468 posts)I don't go for very many limits on personal choices. I know that will get me flamed. And no, I'm not a "tea partier". And yes, I believe in science and take pharmaceuticals (sorry to those offended by my purchasing things from big pharma). I offend everyone about equally.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)get the red out
(13,468 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Interesting.
get the red out
(13,468 posts)Are tobacco products legal? You bet! They ARE toxic. A perception that people might not see a Dr if these products exist just isn't solid evidence of harm. Rights in a free country shouldn't be removed by profiling. Especially when toxic items are openly sold. A person might drink to toxic levels if we let liquor be sold, how did that work out?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)What a strange response.
get the red out
(13,468 posts)Just not in agreement with YOU.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)get the red out
(13,468 posts)because of what we think people will do with it in existence? People have a lot more rights than that. Attack me all you want. It doesn't matter. It is a far more complex issue than telling me off for pointing it out. Do you agree with the "war on drugs"? I don't, I don't want a war on people's choices any more than I want to keep marijuana illegal.
But I'm just a bad person since I have a different point of view. Not the first time I've been thought of that way.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Yes.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)It's not like the government has a good track record of telling the truth.
Marijuana is an actual medical plant. It has specific medical uses, and it works. So why is it not legally medicinal? Are you saying no one should use Marijuana as medicine because the FDA hasn't approved it?
I agree that snake oil salesmen should be called out, but you can't protect all the stupid people in the word, you just can't.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Because you completely ignore why homeopathy is dangerous--it takes money and time away from someone who's sick for them to spend on legitimate treatments, endangering their health.
get the red out
(13,468 posts)It's a product, it can't do anything. Just like a cigar can't smoke itself.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)get the red out
(13,468 posts)Sorry you are opposed to such.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)phil89
(1,043 posts)The harm comes from people thinking they are treating illness when they are not. Taking a phoney cure for asthma could kill a person because they think it's as good as empirically validated treatments.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)that actually work. It's a two way street. Marijuana is the best example. Are you saying Cancer patients shouldn't be allowed to ease the suffering related to the "cure" because the FDA has not approved Marijuana as an anti nausea drug?
I see people emphatically on both sides of the street here. Hate to tell you, but there should be a middle ground. Some natural remedies actually do work and some are just snake oil.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)get the red out
(13,468 posts)No issue with that.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"sorry to those offended by my purchasing things from big pharma). I offend everyone about equally...."
Monday is pretty much the best day available for melodramatic self-martyrdom, regardless of its irrelevancy.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)I mean, seriously, this is your argument?
Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)We're talking about asthma, which could kill someone.
And a scam is a scam is a scam. Have you looked at how much they charge people? If that's ok, then let's let all the scam artists out of prison.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)petronius
(26,603 posts)a specific medical purpose should be backed up by evidence - if it can't be, the claim should not be permitted in advertising and labeling.
People should be allowed to buy whatever they want, as long as it's not actively unsafe, but the seller shouldn't be allowed to say "for the relief of XYZ" unless the product demonstrably offers some relief...
Dorian Gray
(13,501 posts)exactly
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Coconut Oil is a new fad cure-all. The people selling it do not make any claims about "the relief of XYZ" on their labels or advertising. Instead, a huge volume of web pages will make that claim for them.
We've separated the snake oil salesmen from the snake oil producers.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)side effects and aren't going to harm or kill anyone?
Marr
(20,317 posts)Many efficacious drugs have harmful side effects. It's just a question of whether the benefits outweigh the potential (or guaranteed) negatives.
They're already required to list side effects.
PasadenaTrudy
(3,998 posts)LuvNewcastle
(16,856 posts)They need to regulate a lot of the supplements as well. They should at least check to make sure that any kind of drug or supplement has the ingredients that the label claims. Homeopathic shit should just read "water" on the label.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)ripcord
(5,537 posts)I make good money off of selling them spheres.
bhikkhu
(10,724 posts)as in - it should be tested to see that it does what it claims for the sake of basic public health. People who are sick should be able to buy medicine that effectively treats their maladies. It shouldn't be legal for corporations (big and small) to sell phony medicines in drug stores around the country.
NickB79
(19,258 posts)Yet we let quacks sell fucking WATER to treat life-threatening diseases.
Yes, crack down on that shit.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)First kick the door open and yell "CRACK DOWN!"
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)When all the dilutions are done, there's not one molecule left of the "active ingredient" left in your glass of water or sugar pills.
When cancer patients are taking homeopathetic sugar pills instead of chemotherapy, and dying as a result, it's time to crack down.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Whether the FDA does anything or not. It's snake oil.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)You can't regulate beliefs or behaviors, and that's what this would be an attempt to do. You can't save everyone from themselves. I wouldn't want to live in a society that tried.
Where I live, manufacturers of homeopathic products already have to be extremely cautious in their wording. As get the red out said, the products aren't toxic. IMO in this case it's the beliefs that are toxic. So don't just swing the ban hammer and risk smashing people's civil liberties in the process - start educating people.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Seriously. You have to be joking.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Other people have different views and priorities than you do. This is a surprise to you?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)That doesn't justify an opinion that scams are a-ok.
Try again.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)It's a voluntary reporting system for people (doctors and patients) who, if a product is suspected of causing a problem, especially a serious problem, are able to report it to the FDA:
https://www.safetyreporting.hhs.gov/fpsr/WorkflowLoginIO.aspx?metinstance=B6B4A4454B17C32FAD09A273459828803AB2BA5A
If the FDA sees a trend for one particular product, sometimes they can yank it from the market. I think they should also require the manufacturer to perform clinical trials for safety to continue marketing.
That's about the only way to keep an eye on 'dietary supplements', as the FDA calls them . Regulation similar to pharma is too expensive and isn't feasible.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)bananas
(27,509 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)They only do harm.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)sold medicine when empirical testing proved that the medicine did nothing.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Unfortunately, those are allowed to be sold with impunity, as well.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)And the any health claims are likely based on empirical testing.
I think there should be oversight of the claims made by supplement manufacturers.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)And, no, their health claims are not based on good research.
It's time to regulate the scam artists. It's long past time.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)In other words, how serious is the issue in real life? I can't find any data, not even speculations.
Given that people are still dying from unregulated OTC meds, as well as from unnecessary medical interventions and other iatrogenic causes (PDF) I think your outrage might be better directed elsewhere. I know that homeopathic use offends your sense of decency, but if you're going to agitate for banning a non-toxic substance, you'd better have some numerical evidence of harm to present.
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/medicine/usamed/deaths.htm
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Treatments that can actually provide benefit are somehow bad, because, well, since they can provide benefits, they sometimes have side effects.
Interesting, but not very helpful, perspective.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Nope.
Did I say homeopathics were good?
Nope.
I just think that anything as sweeping as the ban you're hinting at ought to have some evidence to back it up.
Got evidence?
phil89
(1,043 posts)You need to ask for that BEFORE the scammers start lying to people to sell them fake cure all.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Regulation always comes after harm is detected. You need some kind of actual evidence of harm to regulate the sale of something .
What's your evidence?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)So, how many people do you think die from lack of access to enough food, safe water or rudimentary medical care around the world?
http://www.wfp.org/hunger/stats
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24482102/ns/health-childrens_health/t/million-children-die-lack-health-care/
http://water.org/water-crisis/water-facts/water/
The total listed in just those articles is 14 million a year. Mostly children, who have no choice in the matter.
437 people? OMG, it's a fucking epidemic of stupidity! Quick somebody, regulate something!
I hope you don't get any splinters from that hobby-horse you're riding.
Toodles!
valerief
(53,235 posts)but (1) only make life worse for you and (2) prevent someone who can REALLY help you from being elected.
hunter
(38,326 posts)... I've never been able to convince deeply entrenched dingbats otherwise.
Rex
(65,616 posts)That goes for anything.