The Politics of Health - Part I

[Guest guest]

http://www.hfn-usa.com/articles/040827pl1.htm

 

 

The Politics of Health - Part I

 

This past July, the National Cholesterol Education

Program (NCEP-part of the National Institutes of

Health) recommended that doctors become more vigilant

in monitoring cholesterol levels. The guidelines,

which have been endorsed by the American College of

Cardiology and the American Heart Association, include

a new LDL* ( " bad " cholesterol) target of 70, instead

of 100.1 That's quite a difference from the 100 target

that was set in 2001.

 

*LDL is also the material that contributes most to the

build-up of plaque on artery walls. Plaque forms when

LDL combines with other substances and sticks to the

walls of arteries. Decreasing the amount of LDL

cholesterol in the blood is one factor in decreasing

risk of heart disease.

 

When the National Institutes of Health issued the

cholesterol guidelines in 2001, doctors responded by

prescribing statins to some 36 million Americans,

putting $20 billion a year into the coffers of

pharmaceutical companies. That's three times as many

as the 13 million who had been taking statins to

reduce their risk of heart disease. Dr. Scott Grundy,

author of the 2004 guidelines, estimates that the new

guidelines could increase that number by " a few

million. " And that's probably a conservative estimate,

since Dr. James Cleeman, coordinator of the NCEP,

estimates an additional seven million will be taking

statins. 2

 

The problem is, 1) a greater use of statins raises

health costs, especially for individuals who can not

afford to pay for the blood workup or expensive drugs,

and 2) statins can cause liver and muscle damage, and

in rare cases have led to kidney failure.

 

Something's rotten in the U.S.A.

 

In July 2003, Smart Publications issued a report

called “Lies and deception: How the FDA does not

protect your best interests.” The article discussed

the shocking truth about how the food and

pharmaceutical industries place their own scientists

and legal experts on scientific and government panels,

and how hundreds of men and women move in and out of

" revolving doors " as Federal regulators and directors,

and commissioners and scientists at the companies they

are supposed to regulate.3

 

We hate to say it, but it looks like the NCEP panel

moves through the revolving door, too. Days after the

release of the 2004 cholesterol guidelines, Newsday (a

Long Island, NY, newspaper) reported that some of the

panelists had ties to drug companies. In response to a

call for disclosure, NCEP officials posted the names

and affiliations of the panelists.4

The shocking truth

 

Seven of the nine NCEP panelists have financial

connections to Pfizer, the maker of the statin

Lipitor, the world's best-selling drug. Five of them

have served as consultants to Pfizer.

 

Seven of the panelists have financial connections to

Merck, the maker of another popular statin, Zocor.

Four of them have served as consultants to Merck.

 

Only one of the panelists has no financial connections

to any drug company. The other eight have received

research grants or honoraria for speaking engagements

from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Glaxo Johnson & Johnson,

Kline, Novartis, Smith and more than half a dozen

other drug companies. And guess what? Most of these

companies manufacture statin drugs.

 

When that disclosure didn't satisfy critics, the NCEP

issued a statement on their web site explaining that

the panel's draft proposals had been " subjected to

multiple layers of scientific review, " first by the

" NCEP's coordinating committee, " consisting of 35

representatives of leading medical, public health,

voluntary, community, and citizen organizations and

federal agencies, " and then by the scientific and

steering committees of the heart association and the

college of cardiology. " Altogether approximately 90

reviewers scrutinized the draft, " the note said.5 The

message to the public implied there is no need to

worry about pro-industry bias.

 

Dr. James Cleeman said that regardless of connections

to the drug industry, the advice to high-risk heart

patients to lower their LDL is sound science. We agree

that's it's important to monitor your cholesterol, but

can we trust scientists whose ethics are questionable?

 

And incidentally, there are plenty of safer ways to

maintain healthy cholesterol levels without the use of

statins, like eating a whole foods, natural diet rich

in omega 3- fatty acids, including a regular exercise

routine, and taking policosanol and salvia, salacia,

and emblica.

 

Policosanol: Start Improving Your Cholesterol Today .

.. .

http://www.hfn-usa.com/articles/040618policosanol.htm

 

Salvia: A Natural Remedy for Cardiovascular Ailments

and Much More

http://www.hfn-usa.com/articles/040820salvia.htm

 

Salacia Normalizes Blood Lipids and Insulin Levels,

and Helps You Lose Weight

http://www.hfn-usa.com/articles/040630salacia.htm

 

Emblica: The Ayurvedic Fruit Extract that Reduces

Cholesterol and Provides Potent Antioxidant Protection

http://www.hfn-usa.com/articles/040429emblica.htm

Low cholesterol has its own set of risks

 

There's also an important detail you should know about

low cholesterol levels. There is a compelling body of

evidence showing that very low cholesterol is a

potential predictor for depression and anxiety in both

men and women. And maintaining very low cholesterol

levels is what the NCEP is recommending.

 

In a study of 121 healthy young women, Duke

psychologist Edward Suarez found that those with low

cholesterol levels-below 160 mg/dl -- were more likely

to score high on measures of depression and anxiety

than women with normal or high cholesterol levels.6

 

Results of another eight-year Finnish study of 29, 133

men aged 50 to 69, published in the British Journal of

Psychiatry, found that those reporting depression had

significantly lower average blood cholesterol levels

than those who did not.7

 

And just recently, a Women's Health Study presented at

the ninth annual International Conference on

Alzheimer's Disease by Elizabeth Devore, a doctoral

candidate in epidemiology at the Harvard School of

Public Health, indicates that higher plasma HDL

cholesterol levels are associated with better

cognitive functioning in aging women.

 

Devore studied information provided by 4,081 women,

ages 66 and older and found that the women in the

highest quintile (median level of HDL of 73 mg/dL)

were five times less likely to show signs of cognitive

impairment.8

 

So the bottom line is this, be very wary of studies

that involve panels of experts who have ties to the

pharmaceutical industry. And be on the look out for

the independent studies we at Smart Publications bring

to you on a regular basis … because in the long run,

you're better off becoming responsible for your own

health, than listening to the medical pundits who have

ulterior motives--such as monetary perks from the

companies that make the drugs they are promoting.

 

What about us, at Smart Publications? Are we biased by

our financial ties to the sales of supplements?

Certainly. But we don't ask you to take our word as

the final authority. In fact, we have ALWAYS made a

point of providing the scientific references so you

can look at the original scientific data instead of

just taking our word for what we say. (And, in the

past year, we've gone a step further by providing live

links to scientific abstracts in each email broadcast

so it is extremely convenient for you to check up on

what we're saying.)

Current legislation you should know about:

Good news! - Trinity County California Votes to Ban

Genetically Engineered Crops

 

On August 3, 2004, Trinity County, California became

the second county in the nation to ban the production

of genetically engineered (GE) crops and animals. By a

vote of three to one, Trinity County Supervisors moved

to ban GE crops and animals in order to protect

Trinity's local economy, including its growing organic

sector, and the environment. The decision comes in the

wake of a March 2 ballot victory by voters in another

Northern California county, Mendocino, banning GE

crops.

 

This November four more of California's 59 counties

(Marin, Butte, Humboldt, and San Luis Obispo) will be

voting on ballot measures to ban genetically

engineered organisms (GMOs). Monsanto, the Farm

Bureau, and the Bayer corporation have vowed to crush

this growing " Biodemocracy " movement, but public

opposition to gene-altered crops has put the industry

on the defensive. On May 10, Monsanto was forced to

cancel plans to commercialize GE wheat, while other

GMOs in the pipeline--including trees, fish, and

biopharmaceutical crops, are facing increasing

opposition, not only in the U.S., but also across the

world.

 

Trinity's GE Ban has been supported by a broad

cross-section of county residents, including organic

consumers, farmers, businesses, home gardeners,

nurseries, social workers, students, church people,

teachers, environmentalists, government employees, and

investment, computer and health professionals. For

more information log onto:

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge-free.htm

 

(Just a note on our position with respect to GE foods.

We are in favor of basic research in genetic

engineering. This is nothing short of the most

powerful technology in human history. We are, however,

opposed to the adoption of such a powerful - life

altering -- technology before we really understand it

what it will do to our foods, health and the

ecosystem. And if you're thinking " well, but it isn't

a food safety issue? " think again. We don't know that

because the safety studies haven't been done! For an

exhaustive review of this topic see Seeds of Deception

by Jeffrey M. Smith.)

Senate Amendment 3225 withdrawn

 

On June 21 Senator Richard Durbin (IL) withdrew Senate

Amendment 3225 from a Department of Defense funding

bill. Citizens sent 12,500 letters to Congress in just

six days asking our Senators to oppose this amendment

and protect our health choices!

 

Senate Amendment 3225 threatened to restrict access to

certain dietary supplements on military bases and

place strict and unnecessary reporting guidelines on

manufacturers who sell vitamins and supplements on

these bases. This move would have set an unacceptable

precedent and could have been the beginning of other

policy moves that would undermine the Dietary

Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA). However,

due to lack of support from Senate leaders and an

outpouring of opposition from natural health consumers

nationwide, Sen. Durbin withdrew the amendment after

the issue was discussed on the Senate floor.

 

Senator Hatch agreed to work with Sen. Durbin and the

dietary supplement manufacturers on a legislative

strategy to create a system for reporting Adverse

Event Reports (AER's) to the FDA. This way the issue

will be given the consideration needed to create a

successful model for consumers and producers. This

issue will likely be included in an existing bill

sponsored by Sen. Hatch and Sen. Biden, the Anabolic

Steroid Control Act.

http://www.citizens.org/hill/s3225_victory.cfm

 

Consumer advocates

 

These groups inform Congress, editors, medical

professionals, and researchers about natural health

solutions, and keep consumers abreast of current

issues, with the hopes of changing public policy and

our healthcare system.

 

1. Integrity in Science Project at the Center for

Science (Although this group has been accused of using

corporate-funded research when it suits their own

agenda, they also do good work such as urging the FDA

to remove three of 11 scientists on one of its

advisory boards evaluating the link between serotonin

reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and suicide in youths

because they have been paid consultants for the

companies that make the drugs under investigation.)

 

Log onto this site -

http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/about.html - to find

out more about how this project seeks to:

* raise awareness about the role that

corporate funding and other corporate interests play

in scientific research, oversight, and publication;

* investigate and publicize conflicts of

interest and other potentially destructive influences

of industry-sponsored science;

* advocate for full disclosure of funding

sources by individuals, governmental and

non-governmental organizations that conduct, regulate,

or provide oversight of scientific investigation or

promote specific scientific findings;

* encourage policy-makers at all levels of

government to seek balance on expert advisory

committees and to provide public, web-based access to

conflict-of-interest information collected in the

course of committee formation;

* encourage journalists to routinely ask

scientists and others about their possible conflicts

of interests and to provide this information to the

public.

 

2. Campaign for Better Health-

http://www.betterhealthcampaign.org/ -launched in 2003

when a group of prominent health Organizations and

leaders including Deepak Chopra, Andrew Weil, The

National Foundation for Alternative medicine and the

center for mind-body medicine jointed together to

address health care issues in America, including

rising healthcare costs, and promote natural options.

The Better Health Action Network creates a powerful

voice for the millions of integrative health and

wellness supporters to bring integrative health and

wellness solutions to national attention.

 

3. Citizens For Health- http://www.citizens.org/ is

the national grassroots advocacy organization

committed to protecting and expanding your natural

health choices. The group believes that in order to do

that, natural health consumers must remain active,

visible and become a permanent voice in national,

state and local decisions impacting our health.

 

What can you do?

Become an advocate for change. Log onto the sites we

listed and get proactive! As you can see from the

positive reports we listed under " Good News, " we can

make a difference when we work together!

 

In next week's " The Politics of Health, part II, "

we'll tell you more about how to make an impact on

health policy, and two important bills pending in the

Senate.

References

 

1. Circulation: Journal of the American Heart

Association, July 13, 2004.

 

2. Johnson, Linda, " Groups Blast New Cholesterol

Guidelines, " Associated Press, July 17, 2003.

 

3. Edmonds Institute

http://www.edmonds-institute.org/door.html

 

4.

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/cholesterol/atp3upd04.htm

 

5. NHLBI Clinical Guidelines Development

Statement from Barbara Alving, M.D., Acting of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood

Institute, July 29. 2004.

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/new/press/04-07-29.htm

 

6. Edward C. Suarez. " Relations of Trait Depression

and Anxiety to Low Lipid and Lipoprotein

Concentrations in Healthy Young Adult Women. "

Psychosomatic Medicine 1999 61: 273-279.

 

7. T Partonen, J Haukka, J Virtamo, PR Taylor and J

Lonnqvist Association of low serum total cholesterol

with major depression and suicide. The British Journal

of Psychiatry 175:259-262 (1999)

 

8.

http://www.medicalpost.com/mpcontent/article.jsp?content=20040808_175041_1864

[Guest guest]

Thanks....Just stupendious!!! hope all can go thru this carefully! NG

 

-

" Frank " <califpacific

<alternative_medicine_forum >

Wednesday, September 01, 2004 4:54 AM

The Politics of Health - Part I

 

 

>

> http://www.hfn-usa.com/articles/040827pl1.htm

>

>

> The Politics of Health - Part I

>

> This past July, the National Cholesterol Education

> Program (NCEP-part of the National Institutes of

> Health) recommended that doctors become more vigilant

> in monitoring cholesterol levels. The guidelines,

> which have been endorsed by the American College of

> Cardiology and the American Heart Association, include

> a new LDL* ( " bad " cholesterol) target of 70, instead

> of 100.1 That's quite a difference from the 100 target

> that was set in 2001.

>

> *LDL is also the material that contributes most to the

> build-up of plaque on artery walls. Plaque forms when

> LDL combines with other substances and sticks to the

> walls of arteries. Decreasing the amount of LDL

> cholesterol in the blood is one factor in decreasing

> risk of heart disease.

>

> When the National Institutes of Health issued the

> cholesterol guidelines in 2001, doctors responded by

> prescribing statins to some 36 million Americans,

> putting $20 billion a year into the coffers of

> pharmaceutical companies. That's three times as many

> as the 13 million who had been taking statins to

> reduce their risk of heart disease. Dr. Scott Grundy,

> author of the 2004 guidelines, estimates that the new

> guidelines could increase that number by " a few

> million. " And that's probably a conservative estimate,

> since Dr. James Cleeman, coordinator of the NCEP,

> estimates an additional seven million will be taking

> statins. 2

>

> The problem is, 1) a greater use of statins raises

> health costs, especially for individuals who can not

> afford to pay for the blood workup or expensive drugs,

> and 2) statins can cause liver and muscle damage, and

> in rare cases have led to kidney failure.

>

> Something's rotten in the U.S.A.

>

> In July 2003, Smart Publications issued a report

> called " Lies and deception: How the FDA does not

> protect your best interests. " The article discussed

> the shocking truth about how the food and

> pharmaceutical industries place their own scientists

> and legal experts on scientific and government panels,

> and how hundreds of men and women move in and out of

> " revolving doors " as Federal regulators and directors,

> and commissioners and scientists at the companies they

> are supposed to regulate.3

>

> We hate to say it, but it looks like the NCEP panel

> moves through the revolving door, too. Days after the

> release of the 2004 cholesterol guidelines, Newsday (a

> Long Island, NY, newspaper) reported that some of the

> panelists had ties to drug companies. In response to a

> call for disclosure, NCEP officials posted the names

> and affiliations of the panelists.4

> The shocking truth

>

> Seven of the nine NCEP panelists have financial

> connections to Pfizer, the maker of the statin

> Lipitor, the world's best-selling drug. Five of them

> have served as consultants to Pfizer.

>

> Seven of the panelists have financial connections to

> Merck, the maker of another popular statin, Zocor.

> Four of them have served as consultants to Merck.

>

> Only one of the panelists has no financial connections

> to any drug company. The other eight have received

> research grants or honoraria for speaking engagements

> from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Glaxo Johnson & Johnson,

> Kline, Novartis, Smith and more than half a dozen

> other drug companies. And guess what? Most of these

> companies manufacture statin drugs.

>

> When that disclosure didn't satisfy critics, the NCEP

> issued a statement on their web site explaining that

> the panel's draft proposals had been " subjected to

> multiple layers of scientific review, " first by the

> " NCEP's coordinating committee, " consisting of 35

> representatives of leading medical, public health,

> voluntary, community, and citizen organizations and

> federal agencies, " ..........for further reading go

to original article in archives which is located a few

messages previous to this one.