(NewsTarget) More than four out of five Americans think
drug companies have too much influence over the Food and
Drug Administration, and 84 percent believe that
advertisements for prescription drugs with safety concerns
should be outlawed, reveals a striking new survey from
Consumer Reports.
The survey results, released today, are based on a
telephone survey of 1,026 American adults conducted by the
Consumer Reports National Research Center. They reveal the
Food and Drug Administration to be alarmingly out of touch
with the concerns of the American people. Some of the most
interesting results include:
• 96 percent agreed the government should have the power
to require warning labels on drugs with known safety
problems. As Consumer Reports explains, "Right now,
the Food and Drug Administration must negotiate safety
warning labels with a drug maker."
• 84 percent agree that drug companies have "too
much influence over the government officials who regulate
them." More than two-thirds of those surveyed are
concerned that drug companies actually pay the FDA to
review and approve their drugs. It's a situation that turns
drug companies into the "customers" of the FDA.
(See related cartoon, The
Puppets of Big Pharma)
• 92 percent agree that pharmaceutical companies should
disclose the results of ALL clinical trials, not just the
ones with positive results that they wish to publicize.
(Currently, drug companies can bury negative drug trials,
and the FDA has in fact been caught conspiring with drug
companies to keep negative drug data secret from the
public.)
• 93 percent think that the FDA should have the power to
demand follow-up safety studies from drug companies.
Currently, the FDA has no authority to require follow-up
safety studies on drugs after they are introdued to the
market. This is a serious oversight shortfall, given that
many problems with drugs only appear after widespread use.
(Patients are widely used as guinea pigs in any new drug
launch.)
• 60 percent agreed that doctors and scientists with a
financial conflict of interest should not be allowed to
serve on FDA advisory boards (what were the other 40
percent thinking?). Currently, doctors who earn hundreds of
thousands of dollars each year in "consulting
fees" from drug companies are not only allowed to vote
on the recommendations for FDA approval of their drugs, there
is not even any FDA requirement to disclose such conflicts
of interest. (See
related cartoon on FDA Conflicts of Interest)
New rules proposed by the FDA would reduce this level of
corruption by allowing doctors to receive a maximum of
$50,000 per year from companies impacted by their
decisions. (Thereby making the FDA numerically less corrupt
than it is now, but still tolerating blatant conflicts of
interest. It's like setting a "bribery ceiling.")
• 91 percent said they had seen a drug advertisement on
television or in print (a "victory" accomplished
by the FDA legalizing such ads in 1998), and 26 percent
said they asked their doctor for a brand-name medication
after learning about it from an advertisement. This is the
purpose of advertising, of course: To increase sales of
drugs, not -- as is claimed by Big Pharma and the FDA
-- to "educate" patients about medical
treatments.
• 75 percent agreed that the allowing of drug advertising
has resulted in the over-prescribing of pharmaceuticals.
Fifty-nine percent said the government should restrict
pharmaceutical advertising, and 26 percent said they
"strongly agree" with such restrictions.
Direct-to-consumer advertising is the bread and butter of
Big Pharma, and it is the primary reason the industry has
exploded its revenues and influence since 1998. The
invention and marketing of fictitious diseases via
television advertising has proven instrumental to the drug
industry's successful pushing of medically unjustified
drugs onto consumers. (See the Disease
Mongering Engine to invent your own fictitious diseases
and disorders right now!)
• The survey further revealed 54 percent of consumers
think that viewing drug advertisements allows them to
"take charge of their health care." The survey
did not, however, reveal whether these people were in fact
suffering from deterimental cognitive side effects at the
moment they were taking the survey. Statistically, it seems
reasonable to assume that approximately half of the
adults taking the survey were on drugs at the time they
were answering the survey questions.
• More than half of those surveyed said they are
currently taking prescription drugs, indicating that more
than half of American adults are now on drugs. Forty
percent said they have experienced a negative reaction
(side effect) from taking prescription medications. (See
related cartoon on side effects.)
Most side effects go unreported, and there is currently no
enforced legal requirement that doctors or drug companies
report known side effects to the FDA. According to the Journal
of the American Medical Association, prescription
drugs currently kill approximately 100,000 Americans each
year. None of those deaths are accurately recorded as
"death by pharmaceuticals."
• As mentioned earlier, 84 percent agree that
advertisements should be outlawed for drugs with safety
concerns. The United States is the only advanced nation
in the world that allows drug companies to advertise
directly to consumers. It was legalized in 1998 by the
FDA, following political pressure and influence from the
drug companies who knew that being able to promote
fictitious diseases and push brand-name drugs would result
in windfall profits. (Some drugs are sold at markups as
high as 300,000% over the cost of their ingredients.)
The makers of Vioxx and Paxil had studies that
indicated safety problems for years, but did not release
those results to the public. - Consumer Reports
The real threat of
pharmaceuticals
Interestingly, the survey did
not ask consumers the following question: How many
Americans do you think is acceptable for the drug companies
to kill each year?
Because right now, that number is, conservatively, about
100,000 American citizens. More realistic estimates put it
at double that number, or 200,000. I've often stated that
pharmaceuticals kill more Americans each year than diet in
the entire Vietnam War, and the number of Americans killed
by acts of terrorism are dwarfed by the number killed by
prescription drugs that the FDA and drug companies
unquestionably knew were killing people. It's not that
these deaths were truly accidental... they were fully
documented but ignored anyway by an industry that is now
clearly a very real threat to the health and safety of the
American people.
This is no exaggeration: The number of people killed by
FDA-approved pharmaceuticals since 9/11 is equivalent to
dropping a nuclear bomb on a major U.S. city. International
terrorists could not even hope to cause the number of
casualties in the United States that have been achieved by
the drug companies working in conspiracy with the FDA.
If we don't put limits on the influence and corruption of
the drug companies by banning drug ads and demanding
serious FDA reforms, the body count will only get worse.
Consumers are finally waking up to this reality, and
they're increasingly demanding "get tough"
solutions that would require the FDA to protect the people
instead of protecting Big Pharma profits.
As Bill Baughan, a senior policy analyst with Consumers
Union (Consumer Reports), said, "Consumers expect
Congress to take their concerns about drug safety
seriously, and deliver legislation that will prevent future
Vioxx-type disasters. Failure to act this year on the
strongest possible bill, when more than 80 pecent of
Americans agree that Congress should do whatever is
necessary to ensure drug safety, would equate to gross
legislative malpractice."
Most Americans agree with
NewsTarget
What's really interesting
about these results is that they show most Americans agree
with NewsTarget on issues like drug advertising, ending
conflicts of interest at the FDA, requiring all clinical
trials to be published, and other similar topics covered in
this survey.
Meanwhile, very few Americans agree with the FDA or
the wishes of organizations like the American Medical
Association and drug companies themselves -- most of which
like things just fine the way they are.
Drug companies, of course, would love to maintain the
status quo and continue conducting business as usual. But
thanks to grassroots consumer advocacy campaigns such as
StopDrugAds (www.StopDrugAds.org), and sites like this one,
the real story about the dangers of pharmaceuticals are no
longer being censored and kept from the public.
The word is out: Pharmaceuticals are now the 4th leading
cause of death in America. The best way to protect
Americans from these dangerous, deadly products is to enact
sweeping reforms that end the medical racket currently
being operated by the FDA / Big Pharma tag-team.
Unfortunately, many of the very lawmakers who will vote on
this pending legislation are, much like FDA advisors,
"on the take" from the very same pharmaeutical
companies that stand to be impacted by their vote. And no
lawmakers that I know of are abstaining from the vote due
to conflicts of interest. The reality is that Big Pharma
has bought Congress, and whatever vote that will soon
emerge is a far cry from the real reforms we'd see if our
national lawmakers weren't financially beholden to the drug
companies for their own reelection campaigns.
Thus, if Congress actually manages to pass a law that would
eliminate drug company influence over FDA decision makers,
it would be a clear case of lawmakers under the
influence of drug money passing laws to eliminate the
influence of drug money for others, but not for themselves.
Worked to keep deadly drugs on the market as long as
possible before reluctantly pulling them (usually
only after being sued by groups like Public Citizen).
The astonishing story of Rezulin, a diabetes drug, is
a good example.
Repeatedly banned and confiscated herbs and
nutritional supplements that compete with
prescription drugs. Ephedra, for example, was banned
by the FDA based on a political agenda, not good
science.
Ordered the destruction of recipe books promoting
stevia, a natural sweetener that competes with sales
of aspartame (yes, the FDA actually ordered the books
to be destroyed).
Been caught red-handed accepting bribes.
Voted to put deadly drugs right back on the market
even after such drugs were recalled by their
manufacturer.
Openly opposed the banning of junk food advertising
to children during World Health Organization
meetings.
Suppressed information about the harm caused by
dangerous drugs in order to prevent the press and the
public from learning the truth about them.
Attempted to silence its own drug safety scientists
to prevent them from going public with the truth
about dangerous drugs.
Censored scientific information about the benefits
of natural foods like cherries by threatening cherry
growers with legal action if they did not remove
scientific information about cherries from their
websites. (See FDA
tyranny and the censorship of cherry health facts)
Pursued and shut down companies selling genuine
cancer cures that provably work better than any
prescription drug (such as Lane Labs' MGN-3).
Vigorously argued against making "optimal
health" a goal of the Codex Alimentarius
discussions, striking the phrase from the final
report.
Rigged its drug safety review panels with decision
makers who have substantial financial ties to drug
companies, even while refusing to disclose such
blatant conflicts of interest.
Planned, organized, and took part in armed
"SWAT-style" raids on vitamin shops, pet
food stores, and even a church.
Knowingly approved harmful food additives for
widespread use in the food supply (such as aspartame,
which has a rather dubious history and has been
proven toxic in several studies), even when its own
safety experts recommended denying approval.
Allowed the continued legal use of harmful,
cancer-causing food additives in the national food
supply such as sodium nitrite (which causes cancer
and yet is intentionally added to nearly all
processed meats).
Refused to ban a poisonous artificial fat from the
food supply (hydrogenated oils) for decades, even
though the World Health Organization urged member
nations to outlaw the substance in 1978. Hydrogenated
oils continue to harm infants, children, and adults
today.
It is clearly time to reform not merely the FDA, but the
entire medical industry. Drug companies are running amok,
and this new Consumer Reports survey reveals that consumers
are finally fed up with it.
Content is copyright by
various sources, as named, and is provided here strictly in accordance with the
Fair Use provisions of the U.S. Copyright Act for your own personal,
non-commercial use. No profit is made from the provision of this material to you
from our archives.