To solidify and ensure a healthcare system based on drugs, Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment have escalated their campaign to “prove” that nutraceuticals are:<\/p>\n
A) Dangerous and\/or
\nB) Ineffective<\/p>\n
… and that they thus require severe regulatory restriction on their use.<\/p>\n
1) Dangerous drug interactions – The actual or potential “dangerous” interaction of a drug and a nutraceutical is always ascribed to the nutraceutical, never to the drug (no one asks who needs the drug if there is a safer nutraceutical alternative).<\/p>\n
2) Adverse reactions – Medical research -often BigPharma-clandestinely-sponsored- showing any adverse reaction of a nutraceutical, no matter how benign, is heralded as evidence of its “danger”. A description of the adverse reactions of myriads of FDA “approved” drugs requires a full-page of illegibly-small print and includes the most serious medical conditions, at times life-threatening.<\/p>\n
3) Mortality – To the best of my knowledge, there has not been a single fatality from the use of nutritional supplements in the past decade. Properly prescribed, FDA-approved drugs kill over 100,000 people each year.<\/p>\n
A favorite ploy used in medical research to ensure a finding of ineffectiveness of a nutraceutical is to use it:<\/p>\n
1) At too low a level
\n2) For too short a period of time
\n3) Isolated from its naturally coexisting factors
\n4) Use the wrong compound
\n5) In extreme and confounding conditions<\/p>\n
1) Low levels of nutraceuticals – Using low levels, the medical establishment has “proven” and publicized the ineffectiveness of Vitamin C in infection and cancer and dl-alpha tocopherol (not natural mixed-tocopherols) in Cardiovascular Disease (CVD). Studies demonstrating their effectiveness when used at higher levels (and in natural form) have been buried and ignored.<\/p>\n
2) Too short a period of time – Using Vitamin C for too short a period of time (and at too low levels), Mayo Clinic was able to “prove” the ineffectiveness of Vitamin C for life prolongation in cancer. These studies were published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Linus Pauling’s rebuttal was rejected by the Journal for publication. (In the History of Medicine, this should ensure the Journal’s immortality.)<\/p>\n
3) Isolated compounds – Pick any one of the B-Complex vitamins at a time, use it for a prolonged period, in high concentrations and in the absence of the other naturally occurring B-complex vitamins. Prove its side effects or “toxicity”, thus proving the dangers of high-potency vitamin supplements in general. Reductionism is guaranteed to work this way.<\/p>\n
4) Wrong compound. Using synthetic and isolated dl-alpha tocopherol acetate, medical researchers were able to prove the ineffectiveness of “Vitamin E” against CVD. Positive studies using natural mixed-tocopherols have been ignored.<\/p>\n
5) Extreme and confounding conditions – Pick dying patients on multiple drugs. Show that a nutraceutical used in such a short-term acute situation failed to rescue them. Prove by this that the nutraceutical is ineffective or dangerous for the general public. Do not fault the drugs and\/or the extreme medical conditions for this outcome.<\/p>\n
The mainstream mass media, with substantial ad revenues from BigPharma, gives front-page headlines to the “dangers” and “ineffectiveness” of nutraceuticals. Myriads of health organizations and societies which receive either BigPharma or HHS support\/funding pitch in or remain conveniently silent on this travesty.<\/p>\n