It’s been awhile since we bashed Natural News for its continuing lack of the most basic research skills. Case in point: I was discussing wheat with a friend, who helpfully forwarded me a link about why wheat is so bad. It kinda sorta reads like science, or at least journalism. But it isn’t. Take this doozy (please!):
“So how did the “staff of life” become a weed of disease?
For starters, wheat is not the same today. It has been hybrid (sic) over time to resist fungus, grow more quickly, and be more pliable for industrial bread baking. 50 years or so ago, wheat contained only five percent gluten. Today, it is 50 percent gluten.”
HUH? First, I’m shocked that no one bothered to question that factoid. I read ALL the comments, one from an RN, several from people who seemed to be fairly articulate. Did NO ONE bother to Google this? Then it occurred to me that this crowd may not even know what gluten IS. Definition? Two words. Wheat protein.
So I walked over to the pantry and picked up a bag of flour (I’m apparently unaffected by the demon wheat). Nutrition Facts: protein is 13%. Then I checked it with Wikipedia: wheat protein 10-15%.
Let’s be clear about this. 50% protein in a plant would be amazing! Every hunger and poverty relief agency in the world would LOVE to have a plant with that level of protein (moringa comes close). It would be the biggest “superfood” in the world overnight. But alas, it is just not true. Unfortunately, most of what NN publishes cannot be taken as fact. And who needs a “news” source that you need to constantly check?
Really? Not one reader questioned that? Really?
This just in via Facebook.
Outside Magazine sez
“Americans spend hundreds of millions of dollars on fish oil supplements every year, but studies have never been able to prove their effectiveness.”
I would not recommend seeking health advice from Outside. Sorry, guys.
What the author misses here is that intervention trials for preventive medicine are essentially impossible. We can’t get 1,000 humans to eat Purina Human Chow and live in a controlled environment for decades. Our long lifespan and “confounding variables” make this kind of trial unrealistic.
Further, there’s not enough money in supplements to have drug-like evidence. Try to find such evidence for any food, for example intervention trials that prove orange juice is good for you.
In nearly 100 years of regulation by the FDA, the only over-the-counter drugs approved for the prevention of any disease are fluoride toothpaste, sunscreen, aspirin for blood thinning, and anti-ulcer drugs for preventing indigestion.
Now take a look at the link below. Omega 3 proves more effective than aspirin as an anti-inflammatory. Heart disease, cancer, arthritis, liver disease and many other conditions are now known to be related to whole-body inflammation. The research cited below tested specifically for inflammatory compounds (cytokines) in the blood.
“Aspirin alone had no effect on any factor versus baseline, but EPA+DHA, with and without aspirin, significantly reduced concentrations of 8 of 9 factors. Although EPA+DHA plus aspirin reduced concentrations of a subset of the factors compared to baseline, neither aspirin alone nor the combination significantly reduced the level of any analyte more robustly than EPA+DHA alone.”
omega-3 inflammation – PubMed – NCBI
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) plans to introduce legislation to regulate dietary supplements more strictly. Seems the Senate has been unable to do much of anything. Maybe they can agree on some supplement bashing?
Food and drug attorney Justin Prochnow (Greenberg Traurig, Denver) comments on the issue:
Once again, Senator Durbin has taken a run at introducing legislation designed to restrict dietary supplements. The amount of inaccuracies and lack of knowledge in the press release is shocking. Durbin lumps 2 oz energy shots, which are clearly supplements, with other products. Does he really think 2 oz replaces a normal serving? He indicates that dietary supplements contain potentially unsafe additives right next to beverages that have undergone FDA approval. FDA approval? Is that a new regulation I am unaware of? While additives in foods and beverages must be approved food additives or GRAS [generally recognized as safe], there is no requirement for FDA approval and many ingredients are self-affirmed GRAS without specifically FDA approval.
As I see it, the issue is not the need for more regulations — the FDA just needs to enforce the regulations that are already on the books.
I would like to believe Durbin really has public health and safety in mind, but frankly, I don’t. The press release (as usual) says the bill is “Designed to Protect Consumers of Dietary Supplements.” FYI, Senator, proper use of pharmaceutical drugs kills around 300,000 Americans each year and injures two million more. (“proper use” meaning this doesn’t include the additional numerous cases of overdose, suicides and accidents such as pharmacy or physician error). By comparison, supplements are responsible for fewer deaths, meaning ZERO, Senator. Of course, the Senator should know this. It’s hardly new. In 1971 (!) the cost of caring for victims of drug toxicity accounted for 1/7 of hospital stays at a cost of $300 million a year. In 1998 the Journal of the AMA reported that over 2 million patients had a serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) and the 106,000 deaths put drug reactions between the 4th and 6th leading causes of death among all Americans. It seems obvious that drug toxicity, not supplement labeling, is a serious problem we need to address. Instead, Durbin is again demonizing supplements, especially “energy drinks” and “shots.”
Ironically, the specific supplements he takes aim at are energy products, which owe their activity to the most often-consumed and most socially sanctioned drug in the world — caffeine.
Durbin’s press release is HERE
We would like to believe that our alternative natural health care media would give us the facts that the mainstream media doesn’t. But do they? Or are we being fed more scare tactics than serious, objective, investigative journalism? And couldn’t we please have news that steers clear of partisan attacks and punditry?
Perfect example: “Natural News.” I’m sick of their fear mongering, ideological BS and hyperbole. Why does a supposedly health-focused publication run “stories” like this: “Democrats want to spend us into oblivion” and “Destroying America’s economy one tax at a time.” And who the hell needs yet another “news source” to “inform” us about Anthony Weiner’s wiener? Ugh.
But apart from obvious right wing attack politics, many of the stories are fringe conspiracy nuttery. For example, we’re supposed to take seriously their conspiracy theory that the US Army and Navy caused the earthquake and tsunami in Japan that led to the nuclear disaster still playing out there? Oh, please! The super secret HAARP transmitter, they say, is the means by which the evil empire can summon up earthquakes and tsunamis.
“Numerous credible reports and scientific observations reveal that HAARP technology is fully capable of being used as a scalar weapon, meaning it can emit strong electromagnetic pulse bombs that can alter weather or trigger seismic fault lines.”
Well, how original! Hugo Chavez blamed the Haiti quake on the HAARP project, Jesse Ventura has a YouTube video on it (“a real-life doomsday machine.. that can destroy the world”), and conspiracy theorists have been blaming it for everything from cold winters in Europe to multiple earthquakes and eruptions all over the world.
Frankly, it’s embarrassing for anyone who cites any article from Natural News because they regularly veer into this kind of absurd conspiracy talk.
Is Natural News just gullible? Or intentionally misleading? I think it’s the latter. Check out this “quote mining” from the HAARP article. Quote mining is a well known trick to support one’s point through, well, lying.
According to Natural News, former Secretary of Defense William Cohen admitted this HAARP technology exists and can control climate, volcanoes and earthquakes. Here’s how Natural News quotes Cohen:
Cohen had this to say as part of his response about the type of technology that existed, even back then: “‘Others are engaging even in an eco-type terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.”
Wow. Cohen admits that? FALSE! Let’s look at the original quote. Cohen is talking about how “false threats” can waste time and “paralyze the agency for weeks and months and years even.”
“The same thing is true about just the false scare of a threat… There are some reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler [Future Shock] has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. “
Know what? That’s flat out dishonest to take a quote out of context intentionally in order to reverse its meaning. And I don’t care to be terrorized by intentional distortions, by the “Health Ranger” or anyone else.
For those who don’t know about HAARP (link to HAARP website at U of Alaska), it’s a high altitude research project. It’s not top secret: it’s not classified at all. You can tour the facility in Alaska any time. The total budget is $250 million, yet we’re supposed to believe they have created a Sci-Fi worthy Death Star?? For the record, the transmitter only works directly over the station in Alaska. The signal it is capable of generating is “more than 11 million times weaker (smaller) than the Earth’s background field.”
This is an epic fail for Natural News, but if you think it’s an anomaly, take a look at the other stories on the site. What do YOU think? Truth or spin?
There are plenty of real issues to be concerned about. Do you really want your emotions jerked around by junk journalism?
Another black eye for the so-called “ethical pharmaceutical” business. In what is being called “the biggest research fraud in medical history,” a member of Pfizer’s “speaker bureau” has pled guilty to fabricating dozens of drug studies. Dr. Scott Reuben, working on a $75,000 grant from Pfizer produced a research study on their drug Celebrex. Naturally, the drug was found to be remarkably effective against pain. Well, except there were no patients in the study. It was completely fabricated.
This isn’t a first for the good (for business) doctor. The peer-reviewed (and shame on the reviewers) journal Anesthesia and Analesia had to retract 10 papers authored by Reuben. Another 21 Reuben articles were apparently also fabricated according to London’s The Day. Reuben received nearly a half million from Pfizer, which I guess he has to give back, and possibly pay a $250,000 fine on top of that. Maybe even jail time.
But for Pfizer and the other companies that got rave reviews from “ethical research,” nothing. Bextra and Vioxx were also beneficiaries of Reuben’s fairy tale “research.” But these drug companies are not treated as conspirators. They’re “victims” of this fraud. Coverage in The Day fills in the details.
Reuben’s studies, five of which were funded by Pfizer, had bolstered claims about the post-surgery effectiveness of such painkillers as Pfizer’s Celebrex and Merck’s Vioxx.
Reuben’s attorneys said a bipolar disorder with “alternating periods of mania and depression fueled his misconduct.”
Oh poor guy. I’m sure we can all understand how depression could make someone want to fake dozens of scientific articles. No, we can’t. That’s a BS defense.
Meanwhile, these bogus “research studies” have been used to bolster claims of effectiveness for Celebrex and other drugs, as the public is fed the fiction that we have the best research in the world and the safest and most effective drugs. Yes, we have the best research results money can buy, and the best “approving for dollars” system too.
This corporate medical/scientific corruption hurts us all, and the media is only too happy to trot out the results of these “studies” while lapping up billions in pharma advertising.
And it’s not like this is new. Before this “biggest drug research fraud case in history,” there was the former biggest in 1989 when NJ physician Robert Fogari pled guilty to taking $2 million from drug companies for investigational new drug research that he never conducted. Fogari “investigated” new drugs for nine drug companies including Ciba-Geigy, Johnson & Johnson, Warner-Lambert, Pfizer, Upjohn, Syntex, and Merck, Sharp & Dohme. Fogari had his employees list persons who were not in the study and make up patients. He failed to do the urine, stool and blood tests and forged signatures of radiologists and others. The doctor also failed to report the deaths of two
patients in the “study” in order to “maintain a favorable impression” with the drug companies who hired him. At least the deaths were presumably not caused by the drugs they didn’t take as a part of the study they weren’t in that never took place.
Fogari admits he did not conduct any legitimate research during the whole eight year period.
A year earlier, Constantine Kostas admitted that of the 85 subjects in his clinical trial of Cipro, only 15 had actually been given Cipro. I suppose it hardly matters, since Kostas also faked the results of lab tests and examinations that never took place.
All of this is especially irksome to those of us who have endured Big Pharma’s war on herbs and supplements. How many of the so-called “research studies” on herbs funded by big pharma are also bogus? It’s easy to find such “studies” in which the patients chosen were inappropriate, or the protocol designed in ways that appear destined to fail. Indeed, “failure” of an alternative medicine is exactly what the drug companies want to see.
In a recent BBC article (hat tip to Ed Smith of Herb Pharm for noting this) Prince Charles is quoted as saying “herbal medicine must be regulated.” Here in the United States, we often hear legislators and especially FDA officials calling for stricter regulation of herbal products and other dietary supplements. So my first reaction to the BBC article was “oh, no! The orthodox medical establishment has gotten to Prince Charles.” I even wondered if his opinion was colored by the fact that he is now in the herbal medicine business with his own herbal product line.
Prince Charles has been a consistent supporter of alternative medicine, and made a special appearance by video at the Columbia medical school course on botanical medicine. The Prince has been a consistent supporter of homeopathy and traditional herbal remedies. So this seemed like a bit of a betrayal of his former position.
On further thought, though, I had to reflect on the drama surrounding regulation of herbal products and nutritional products by the European Union. The “drama” featured a clash of different regulatory approaches employed by Great Britain and Germany. In Germany, nutritional and herbal products are regulated as drugs, and the German position has been adamantly in support of the entire world treating these products as such. Read more
Industry experts are proclaiming victory in getting a law passed that requires dietary supplement (and OTC drug) manufacturers to report all serious “adverse events” to their products to the FDA, which will, of course, make those reports public. The idea is that this will be seen as a “responsible” act by industry and help stem the tide of negative publicity about supplements. Oh really? With the obvious bias in the media against supplements, each reported (but not proven) “reaction” will likely be used to hammer dietary supplements. Does anyone think that reports of OTC “adverse events” will get the same exposure? Face it, another aspirin overdose or a liver destroyed by Tylenol is simply not news. Especially to media outlets heavily sponsored by drug companies.
Besides, a supplement manufacturer has no right to ask for a customer’s medical records, to see if she already had a health condition or risk factor that might explain the apparent reaction to a supplement. Marketers of supplements simply can’t fully investigate complaints, which may or may not be related in any way to the supplement. I’m reminded of the infamous case of a fatality attributed by the Texas Health Department to an ephedra supplement. Yes, the ephedra supplement user died, but the coroner blamed the knife wound. In another “ephedra fatality” it was probably the extreme blood alcohol coupled with the head on auto collision. Chaparral was said to be so dangerous it had caused a rash of liver failures. There have been none before or since. Same with kava. And scullcap, that turned out to be germander, itself probably innocent. Again, no problems before or since.
Maury Silverman, a literature researcher and staunch supporter of supplements argued unsuccessfully to have the language of the new law require the disclosure of simultaneous drug use, which may better explain the “adverse event”. For example, if someone takes an herbal supplement and a Tylenol, seriously, which one is more likely to have caused that liver toxicity?
It was formed in 1998 in the wake of the mass backlash by organic comsumers against the U.S Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)controvercial proposed regulations for organic food.
Last year, they launched boycotts against several of the larger organic dairies, protesting “factory farm” conditions instead of the “family farm” operations they support. They say:
While USDA bureaucrats drag their feet on closing key loopholes in national organic organic standards, retailers, wholesalers and major “organic” brands are continuing to sell milk and dairy products labeled as “USDA Organic, even though most or all of their milk is coming from factory farm feedlots where the animals have been brought in from conventional farms and are kept in intensive confinement, with little or no access to pasture.
Horizon Organics counters:
ALL of our products are certified organic. Organic is all we’ve ever done and all we’ll ever do.
- We have been farming organically for 15 years.
- Our founders worked with other industry leaders to develop the USDA Organic Seal.
- We only operate farms and work with farmer partners who are certified organic and compliant with the standards.
Well, I’d like all the cows to have lots of pasture and the workers to have AC too, but seriously folks, if we want hundreds of millions of people to have organic milk and other organic products, things are going to get pretty large scale. And that’s a good thing, right? More organic feed means less agrochemicals in the environment and less pesticides in dairy products. I’ll admit it. I’m in it for the environment, and the people, not the cows. Sorry.
So why is this on Herb News? Because now OCA is taking on supplements too in their so-called Nutri-Con campaign. They claim some supplements contain partially hydrogenated oils, which they say is “one of the most toxic food ingredients known to mankind.” Oh please! Few supplements contain them, and the amount in an entire bottle would be less than a slice of pie. Oops, I mean a tablespoon of the crust of a slice of pie. Why the scare tactics, guys?
OCA has joined the shrill, pharma-sponsored attacks on dietary supplements. While they do highlight some companies they consider ethical and who do not use such ingredients, the net effect of attacks on supplements is an erosion of public and professional confidence in them.