Behind the Attack on Alternative Medicine

[Guest guest]

Behind the Attack on Alternative Medicine and the Natural Health Movement

 

And what you can do to help

http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/Behind%20Attack%20on%20Alternative%20Med\

icine.html

 

By CT SUPPORT FUND

 

In medicine, we see the dominating power of big pharmaceutical

corporations; spending millions to court doctors, influence research,

(all once deemed unethical) all the while expanding the mechanistic

model of the human body. Corporate support of medical schools seems to

be turning physicians into sales representatives, winning trips for

pushing one drug over another.

— James Redfield1

 

In a free society we should have choice regarding health care. Modern

medicine with all its innovations and advances does not have all the

answers, which is why alternative and complementary medicine continues

to flourish due to popular choice.

 

Unfortunately, powerful lobbies and special interests want to deny you

these choices. Their tactics include putting pressure on individuals,

businesses and organisations that offer treatment different from normal

“accepted” practice. This includes medical doctors and holistic

practitioners who use alternative therapies in their work.

 

The fight to defend your freedom of choice is heating up and taking

action now – especially if you’re a consumer of alternative therapies –

has become vitally important. This article will provide some background

on what this fight is about and why it affects you.

 

Medical Industrial Complex

 

“The medical establishment has become a major threat to health,” states

an article entitled ‘Too much medicine? Almost certainly’, recently

published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ). This particular issue of

the BMJ is well worth reading, devoted to exploring the question of

whether “increasing medical inputs will at some point become

counterproductive and produce more harm than good.”

 

The editorial even points a way forward away from the current medical

regime in which, “people may increasingly take charge, more consciously

weighing the costs and benefits of the ‘medicalisation’ of their lives.

Armed with better information about the natural course of common

conditions, they more judiciously assess the real value of medicine’s

never ending regimen of tests and treatments.”2

 

The same issue of the BMJ makes the somewhat controversial points, which

are significant admissions for a mainstream medical journal: “A lot of

money can be made from healthy people who believe they are sick,” and

further on, “the social construction of illness is being replaced by the

corporate construction of disease.” Also this: “A key strategy of the

alliances [corporate interests] is to target the news media with stories

designed to create fears about the condition or disease and draw

attention to the latest treatment.”3

 

It would appear there is a lot of money to be made from disease – not

from health.

 

The New England Journal of Medicine reports in 2003 there was, “a US$6.5

billion dollar bill on covered drugs and biologic products; 75% of which

went to doctors, primarily for specialities such as haematology,

oncology, urology; including injections, infusions, drugs and medical

devices.” The cost, of course, is paid by the taxpayer. The article goes

on to state: “Expenditures for drugs have grown almost twice as rapidly

as those for other health care services in recent years.”4

 

As consumers, we should be able to choose between mainstream medicine’s

drugs pathway and one of a multitude of alternative healing and

complimentary treatments on offer in our so-called democratic society.

 

People disillusioned with orthodox treatments are turning more toward

complementary therapies, diverting more funds away from the

pharmaceutical industries that monopolise orthodox treatments worldwide.

They are losing billions dollars per year in Australia alone to

complementary medicines over which they do not have absolute control (yet).

 

Dr. Andrew Weil says that in the United States, “30-40% of people [a

comparable number to Australia] report seeing alternative practitioners,

a number that represents billions of dollars. That’s enough money to

make medical institutions take notice. Many are adding more holistic

care options. They’re desperate. They can’t afford to lose their

clientele.”5

 

But it’s enough money to make the medical industrial complex want more

than just a piece of the action – they want to wrest control of

complimentary medicine and integrate what they can of it into the

‘system’. And they have long term plans to achieve their goals.

 

Codex Alimentarius

 

A daunting international agreement of which many remain unaware is the

Codex Alimentarius, a set of trade standards originally established to

protect consumer health and fair practices in the food trade, but also

incorporating guidelines for vitamin and mineral food supplements.

 

The Codex Alimentarius Commission was formed as a joint effort between

the United Nations and the World Health Organisation (WHO) back in 1963.

Today, it consists of delegates who overwhelmingly represent large

multinational pharmaceutical companies and government regulating

authorities including the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) in the US,

and the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia.

 

The guidelines are now intended to control the sale of supplements and

herbs and to regulate them as drugs to be manufactured solely by drug

companies. In accordance with these guidelines, and at each successive

Codex meeting, supplements are being slowly withdrawn from the public

domain.6,7

 

One of the Codex’s main goals is total harmonisation of the food and

drug laws of the world’s nations to their standards. This is part of the

free trade and privatisation agenda. According to Dr. Zoltan Rona, MD, a

well known defender of health freedom in Canada, “the name of the game

for Codex is to shift all remedies into the prescription category so

they can be controlled exclusively by the medical monopoly and its

bosses, the major pharmaceutical firms.”

 

Codex is dominated by the largest pharmaceutical companies, and it is

their profit interests that will determine – without any meaningful

review – the health and safety of all of us. Ultimately, the radical

measures being pursued by Codex will see the outlawing worldwide of all

non-prescription vitamins and health products.

 

The Codex guidelines, which set the recommended daily intake levels of

supplements, are gradually decreasing to a point so low as to make

therapeutic or prophylactic doses of supplements impossible, and

technically illegal.

 

One vitamin supplier in Scandinavia was pursued by police for supplying

vitamin C tablets that exceeded 200mg. In other words, the amount of

vitamin C contained in three oranges made this supplier a criminal.

Further to that, possession of one popular supplement, DHEA, in Canada

now attracts the same penalties as crack cocaine. The Canadian regulator

is now empowered to classify any substance as a drug, even if it is a

food that has been safely consumed for millions of years. They have the

power to recall or remove it from the market.8

 

Germany and Norway have already complied fully by regulating all

supplements and herbs as drugs. In a country with an age-old tradition

of natural medicine, no one can freely access these products now.

Vitamin C (above 200mg) is illegal, except by prescription and then only

from a pharmaceutical company. But first you have to convince your

doctor you need it.

 

The patenting of herbs and other plants is granting authority to

multinationals to “safely” lock up herbs for sale and profit. This is

being done in the name of “standardisation”, another requirement of

Codex. Patenting effectively grants not only sole rights to make or sell

a product – in this case a natural “product” – but to actually own it.

The ownership of a life form by an individual or corporation.

 

Australia signed the Codex agreement in 1992. There has already been a

Federal police raid on a couple in northern NSW, who planting a Chinese

herb in their garden to use as tea.9

 

The TGA is attempting to persuade New Zealand to “harmonise” to the same

level as Australia, including the prohibition of any therapeutic claim

made with respect to nutritional supplements, even where medical studies

exist to support these claims. So far New Zealand has resisted, placing

value on health freedom for its citizens. However, failure to

“harmonise” with Codex standards will result in sanctions against

governments by the World Trade Organisation.

 

The Pan Pharmaceutical “crisis”

 

Contrary to the impression created by the media hype, the recent Pan

Pharmaceutical crisis in Australia confirms the safety of dietary

supplements and alternative medicines as compared to drugs. When the

dust settled, though, just one product from Pan, an over-the-counter

travel sickness tablet, had caused harm. But the tarnish quickly spread

to the supplement industry as a whole, as a blanket recall caused people

to doubt not only the effectiveness of vitamins and supplements but

their safety.

 

Many fear the Pan Pharmaceutical products recall was part of a very real

conspiracy to undermine alternative medicine. Marcus Blackmore, chairman

and managing director of Blackmore Ltd, was quoted in the West

Australian as saying, “Where is the evidence that these products were

ever harmful? It’s like the weapons of mass destruction. The Government

just went ahead with what they wanted to do anyway.”10

 

Revealingly, TGA principal medical adviser Dr. John McEwen said Pan

Pharmaceutical products were dangerous and therefore all “consumers

should avoid taking their complementary or vitamin products”, however,

“he stressed consumers should not stop taking prescription medicines or

PBS pharmaceuticals.”11

 

Campaigner Graham Williamson states: “It is abundantly clear that

orthodox medicine is clutching at every straw in an attempt to label

alternative medicines as dangerous… Modern medical science is quite

simply attempting to mislead consumers because they realise their

position is fundamentally unpopular and flagrantly undemocratic. They

know they must falsely convince consumers that alternative medicines are

dangerous if they are to have any hope of obtaining the legislative

changes they are seeking.”12

 

Conspicuously absent from concerns about vitamin safety, however, was

any discussion of the much greater dangers of prescription drugs.

 

On the same day the Pan Pharmaceutical recall began the Australian

Broadcasting Commission (ABC), on its Four Corners program, was

screening a program about the dangers of the antidepressant Seroxat,

otherwise known as Aropax or Paxil.

 

One of the world’s top selling antidepressants, Aropax has been reported

to cause aggressiveness, hostility, violence, and suicidal behaviour.

One patient had killed his wife, daughter, and granddaughter after

taking two tablets of Paxil. This is in spite of the fact he had no

history of violence or aggressive behaviour prior to taking Paxil. A

subsequent court case, won by the family of the victim, revealed the

manufacturer of the drug had concealed evidence of the dangers of Aropax

for 15 years. The information was kept under lock and key.

Astonishingly, although a doctor was permitted access to the information

as a result of a court order, he was prevented from discussing or

publicising his notes. This drug, which was not withdrawn by the TGA,

attracted no official public warnings in Australia.13

 

Concerning adverse drug reactions, journalist Eve Hillary recently drew

attention to the pro-drug bias of government regulators: “…incredibly,

no large multi-national company has ever been shut down by a government

regulator after one of its products has been recalled, even if deaths

have occurred as a result of using the drug or chemical.”14

 

Eve Hillary further states: “Media disinformation is issued directly

from pharmaceutical company public relations departments on a daily

basis through journalists and industry-sponsored doctors embedded in the

media and other key positions.”15

 

In June the New York Times reported that the Pharmaceuticals Research

and Manufacturers of America would increase its lobbying budget by 23

per cent to US$150 million ($259 million) in the coming year. Its budget

includes more than US$2.5 million for such things as an “intellectual

echo chamber of economists and thought leaders” (read journalists), and

for the placement of articles by third parties and media relations

consultants.

 

The agency also set aside US$12.3 million to develop coalitions and

strategic alliances with doctors, patients, universities and influential

members of minority groups.

 

With this sort of money spilling into government hands, it will come as

no surprise when the Dietary Supplement Safety Bill, currently being

introduced in the US and backed by the pharmaceutical industry, is

passed. The Bill will effectively medicalise the dietary supplement

industry, force most manufacturers out of business, and allow a

pharmaceutical takeover of the industry.

 

In the UK, the situation is no different. Journalists Antony Barnett and

Mark Townsend have exposed the connections between science experts,

leading drugs firms and government ministers, stating: “Dozens of the

[uK] Government’s most influential advisers on critical health and

environmental issues have close links to biotech and drug corporations,

according to a dossier of Whitehall documents obtained by The Observer…

Many work as consultants for the firms, own shares in the companies or

enjoy lucrative research grants from them.”16

 

A Four Corners program which aired in Australia on February 19, 2001

exposed the pressure placed by the pharmaceutical industry on the

Federal Government’s advisers. The program explored how the government

overhauled the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC), whose

job is to advise which drugs should be publicly subsidised. Billions of

dollars in taxpayers’ money and industry turnover rest on the

deliberations of this committee.

 

Reporter Liz Jackson detailed meetings and conversations which led

ultimately to key committee members being dumped – members not in the

pocket of the pharmaceutical companies. “They have a zero tolerance

approach to people who criticise them,” said the drug companies’ public

enemy number one, ex-committee member Professor David Henry.

 

Stand Up and Defend Freedom of Choice!

 

Hiding behind the guise of “protecting the consumer”, government

bureaucrats and multinational corporations across the globe are moving

to strengthen their grip on the " sickness management industry " . Is it

coincidence that alternative health consumers on three continents are

facing the same struggle?17

 

But while these combined forces try to push through their agenda, public

support of and demand for, alternative therapies and products is on the

increase across the globe – despite the extra cost for the consumer,

despite the lack of media support, and despite having millions of

doctors rubbishing non-mainstream medicine every time they are asked

about it. The support for alternative therapies and natural health

products is on the increase because of the results experienced by consumers.

 

Thus, the campaign to kill the credibility of alternative therapies has

failed. It now seems other ‘tactics’ are being employed to remove public

access to these products and services, including restriction of product

entry into countries, the outright removal of products from shelves and

warehouses, and threats of legal action against strategically selected

targets from within the natural health movement.

 

One such strategic target appears to be Jennie Burke and her company,

Australian Biologics, against whom the Australian Competition and

Consumer Commission (ACCC) have recently issued a writ.

 

This case will have severe and widespread ramifications for all

manufacturers, distributors, retailers and practitioners involved in

non-mainstream health products and services, both in Australia and overseas.

 

Jennie Burke, [Med Tech, M.D.(M.A.) Dip NSc, Dip M.H.], was convenor of

three World Congresses on Cancer (1994, 1995, 1997). Doctors, medical

specialists and professors from all over the planet came to present and

hear of the many successful alternatives to mainstream cancer treatment.

Jennie, an internationally recognised expert in her field, is regularly

asked to give presentations at prestigious congresses in Europe, the USA

and China. Jennie is on several international advisory boards, including

the International Cancer and Nutrition Society, and is a member of both

the German and Austrian Societies of Oncology, the Medical Science

Network UK, Médecins Sans Frontières, and Physicians for Human Rights.

Australian Biologics is a private pathology laboratory, which primarily

uses Live Blood Analysis via Darkfield Microscopy, as well as Thermography.

 

Unlike the giant pharmaceutical companies who spend billions per year to

lobby, buy influence and market their products, the alternative health

products/services industry is fragmented and uncoordinated both

politically and legally. There is no effective or recognised body for

businesses or organisations to turn to in this situation. Individuals

and companies faced with this sort of scrutiny and legal challenge

usually give in and comply to avoid court action beyond financial reach.

 

Jennie has decided to fight the action, but cannot do so without public

support. If you are one of the many thousands of people touched by the

work of Jennie Burke, and/or Australian Biologics, now is the time to

email or post personal testimonials, plus any financial contribution you

consider appropriate.

 

For more than 200 years mainstream medicine has tried to run alternative

practitioners out of operation. It has sought to humiliate them, outlaw

them, imprison them, and deny them publicity and research funds.

 

Ms Burke has been forced to sell her home to establish a fighting fund,

and needs our support to avoid financial ruin as this case could drag on

for years. Of course, it would be much easier to give up than risk

financial ruin, but it is apparent we need to unite if we are to fight

for our rights of health care choice, and prevent multinational monopoly

of our herbs, vitamins and alternative therapies.

 

A petition requesting Australia rescind the Codex Agreement can be

obtained through the Darwin Holistic Health Centre which also has a

demonstration video called Holistic Therapies, available to help raise

funds for the current legal battle threatening freedom of choice of

health care in Australia. Donations are welcome. Please contact DHHC,

GPO Box 824, Darwin, NT 0801, Ph: 08 8941 1699, fax 08 981 3446.

 

If you have ever wanted to do something to help ensure the future of

alternative health products, services and therapies – now is the time.

This is more than just another court case – this is the court case we

need to win.

 

Jennie Burke/Australian Biologics Fighting Fund

 

Australian Biologics Blood Testing Services

 

Level 6, 383 Pitt Street,

Sydney NSW 2000.

 

Tel: 02 9283 0807;

Fax: 02 9283 0910; Email: austbio

 

For more information on Australian Biologics, Jennie Burke, Live Blood

Analysis, Thermography, the court case, and what else is at stake, visit

the website at: www.australianbiologics.com.au

 

Footnotes:

 

1. 'Intuiting The Twelfth Insight', www.celestinevision.com

 

2. Moynihan R, Smith R., ‘Too much medicine? Almost certainly’, BMJ

324(7342):859-860, 2002

 

3. Moynihan R, Heath I, Henry D., ‘Selling sickness: the pharmaceutical

industry and disease mongering’, BMJ 324(7342):886-890, 2002

 

4. Iglehart JK. Medicare and Drug Pricing. NEJM 348:16, 2003

 

5. www.family-friendly-fun.com/health/alternative/Andrew-Weil.htm

 

6. www.fsis.usda.gov/OA/codex

 

7. http://ahha.org/codex.htm

 

8. Eve Hillary, ‘TGA Skeletons: WHO Privatised the Regulator?’,

www.achn.org.au/TGA1.pdf

 

9. Ibid.

 

10. The West Australian, June 30 2003

 

11. The Australian, 28 April, 2003,

www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6349938%5E2,00.html

 

12. www.holistichealthtopics.com

 

13. Ibid.

 

14. Eve Hillary, ‘TGA Skeletons: WHO Privatised the Regulator?’,

www.achn.org.au/TGA1.pdf

 

15. Eve Hillary, Health Betrayal, Synergy Books 2003

 

16. The Observer, 13 July, 2003,

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,997205,00.html

 

17. Paragraphs in this section extracted from Nexus advertisement,

August-September 2003 edition.

 

____________________________

Compiled by the Complementary Therapies Fighting Fund 2003