Thursday, June 25, 2009

OUR CORRUPT FDA - What they don't want you to know

What the horribly Corrupt FDA doesn't want you to know! and the information you must know, that could save your and your loved ones life!



This following article gives us a glimpse into how the FDA handles criticism: they just reflect, and say the public can't handle the truth. Well all the while they are manipulating the data/science, and working for Big Pharma.

Isn't it nice to know that government is not looking out for you or your health. But be assured they are definitely looking out for those that hand them piles of cash for election campaigns. The FDA is a horrible symptom of a deadly disease we have in our government. It's called "for sale to the highest bidder".


from Fierce Pharma - http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/fda-reform-advocates-want-more-clinical-data-transparency/2009-06-25
and the Wall Street Journal - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124588492308150255.html

FDA Pressed for Transparency

By JARED A. FAVOLE

WASHINGTON -- Consumers, doctors and scientists told the Food and Drug Administration Wednesday the public deserves to know more about how the agency makes complex scientific decisions about the medicine and food Americans consume.

Consumers said the FDA needs to more rigorously oversee clinical trials to ensure patients get treated fairly; doctors urged the FDA to flag safety concerns with drugs and devices as quickly as possible; and scientists recommended the agency air dissenting opinions by FDA scientists.

These thoughts were balanced, in part, by industry representatives who said that, while they agree the FDA should explain decisions more thoroughly, confidential commercial information shouldn't reach public eyes.

The meeting is part of an FDA effort to counter accusations that it makes decisions without explaining them. The FDA has long faced criticism, some of which was repeated at the meeting, that it sits on safety information that should be public and works too closely with industry.

For instance, the FDA faced criticism that it was too slow to remove the painkiller Vioxx from the market after the drug was linked to an increased risk of heart attacks. The drug was removed from the market in 2004. The agency has been under fire in the last several years for not quickly releasing information showing that the diabetes drug Avandia, made by GlaxoSmithKline, may increase a patients' risk for heart attacks.

It's too early to tell what recommendations, if any, the agency will implement. But FDA officials, including Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein, and the heads of nearly every division within the agency, eagerly questioned consumers and scientists about their recommendations and said over and again they looked forward to reading more details in written testimony.

Steve Findlay, a senior health-policy analyst at the Consumers Union, said the FDA should tell the public, through its Web site, whenever agency officials have meetings with industry representatives. Such disclosure, Mr. Findlay said, would help restore the FDA's credibility. FDA officials appeared open to the idea, but questioned what meetings would warrant telling the public about.

Mr. Findlay said "important" meetings, but acknowledged the FDA will have to decide what that means.

This highlights a broader challenge the FDA will wrestle with as it decides to make decisions more transparent: What should it release? What can it release? And is there such a thing as "too much information'?

For instance, Francesca T. Grifo, of the non-profit Union of Concerned Scientists, said the agency should allow FDA scientists to publicly air opinions about a drug or medical product when they disagree with a final agency decision.

Mr. Sharfstein questioned such a move, saying scientists often "disagree sharply," and airing those differences might erode the public's trust in FDA decisions. In the last several years, veteran FDA scientists have complained to Congress and the White House that they have been silenced when they disagree with agency managers. Some have also said they've been forced to manipulate scientific data.

"I don't think that the idea that we might confuse someone is powerful enough to actually silence an opinion that might in fact save a life," Ms. Grifo said.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How did we get to this dark place in our history you might ask? Because our government has been bought and over influenced by huge lobbying efforts that don't have your interest as an American Citizen in mind.

A great read and important information at -

soulful sepulcher - http://bipolarsoupkitchen-stephany.blogspot.com/2009/06/12-million-day-pharma-lobbying-congress.html

No comments:

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Terms and conditions on the use of the contents of the “Is Something Not Quite Right with Stan - A Mental Health Blog” site are for informational and entertainment purposes only. Stan does not represent or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or reliability of the information or content (collectively, the "Materials") contained on, distributed through, or linked, downloaded or accessed from this website.

Stan encourages you to make your own health care and legal decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care and/ or legal professional. The information posted here should not be considered medical advice and is not intended to replace consultation with a qualified medical professional if they exist. I do not answer specific medical questions.

Third party information is gathered from sources that Stan believes to be reliable. However, in no event shall Stan, or any third parties mentioned on this site be liable for any damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the content whether or not Stan is advised of the possibility of such damages.

Stan reserves the right, in its sole discretion and without any obligation, to make improvements to, or correct any error or omissions in any portion of the displayed materials.

You hereby acknowledge that any reliance upon any Materials shall be at your sole risk.

Disclaimer of Liability

The user assumes all responsibility and risk for the use of this web site and the Internet generally. Under no circumstances, including negligence, shall anyone involved in creating or maintaining this web site, or shall the website writer or any commenter’s be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, or lost profits that result from the use or inability to use the web site and/or any other web sites which are linked to this site.

Nor shall they be liable for any such damages including, but not limited to, reliance by a visitor on any information obtained via the web site; or that result from mistakes, omissions, interruptions, deletion of files, viruses, errors, defects, or any failure of performance, communications failure, theft, destruction or unauthorized access.

ALL CONTENT ON THIS WEB SITE IS PROVIDED TO YOU ON AN "AS IS," "AS AVAILABLE" BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. Stan MAKES NO WARRANTY AS TO THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, CURRENCY, OR RELIABILITY OF ANY CONTENT AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS WEB SITE.

In states which do not allow some or all of the above limitations of liability, liability shall be limited to the greatest extent allowed by law.

Disclaimer of Endorsement - Reference to any products, services, hypertext link to the third parties or other information by trade name, trademark, supplier or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation by me. Nor is an endorsement by me is implied by such links. They are for convenience only, as an index in a public library.

Information Subject to Change - Any information on this web site may be removed without notice. Information may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Furthermore, the information may change from time to time without any notice.

GENERAL INFORMATION - The information contained in this online site is presented and intended to provide a broad understanding and knowledge critical to psychiatric practices and humorous social interaction. The information should not be considered complete and should not be used in place of communication and consultation.

NO WARRANTIES “Is Something Not Quite Right With Stan - A Mental Health Blog” MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES THAT USE OF THE WEB SITE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT ANY CONTENT YOU MAY OBTAIN FROM THE WEB SITE IS FREE OF VIRUSES.

This site is not a monologue of truth. It is a catalyst for public debate about medical conduct and for entertainment purposes. The reader is urged to confront officials to clarify issues mentioned herein. This site is designed strictly to provide information for critical, literary, academic, entertainment, and public usage. A qualified and trustworthy medical professional must be consulted regarding medical issues, treatments, diagnoses, etc.; if they exist in all actuality or truth.