TCM responds to Action on Ephedra Ban

[Guest guest]

Hi Judy

 

While there are those who interpret FDA words according to their own

minds.....some both in the herbal business (disagree) along with legal experts

who

have a totally different understanding and take on the situation and the FDA

statements in the 263 pages leading uo to their rule.

 

And as a matter of FACT..... some such as Dr. John Chen even went so far as

to directly double check information that I also received...first hand from the

horses mouth by asking probing questions and not taking any sidestepping

answers. The FDA seems to be very cooperative via phone in being alarmingly

forthcoming with their attitudes about Asian medicine (whatever that means) and

those attitudes don;t give me nor John Chen any warm fuzzies.

 

Contrary to what some are trying to have the profession believe.....there are

much so called Traditional Asian formulas that ARE IN FACT distributed as

dietary supplements. Here... one must use a simple basis of logic along with

logical sequence. It takes no rocket science to figure this out.

 

First of all....what might be available at the moment may NOT be available in

a very short time. Therefore that statement is irrelevant in terms of any

meaning especially in trying to convince the profession that the FDA has no

other

negative agenda regarding treating herbs as ILLEGAL DRUGS. They do!!!

 

Next.....That the FDA's final regulation finding dietary supplements

containing

ephedrine alkaloids to be adulterated says it does not affect the use

of ephedra preparations in traditional Asian medicines. This statement needs

to be coupled with the statement wherein they make claim that the majority of

Traditional Asian medicines are NOT being marketed as dietary supplements.

That is a false statement to say the least. Even Bob Flaws openly stated, I

believe not too long ago, in this group that his products are sold as dietary

supplements.

 

Therefore it only appears that Traditional Asian medicine (whatever TAM

means) is sort of...maybe....exempted. But they are definitely NOT exempted.

Exemptions are CLEAR and to the point and would be stated as such.

 

It is quite interesting that even the AOMAlliance seems to be more closely

representing the events.

 

As has been stated by others..... that suggest that some hard line positions

not be judged. Then maybe we should very clearly remember who takes what stand

and leave the final judgement to as they say.....the proof when it is pudding.

 

Richard