Search Term: " Absurd "
5 Reasons the DEA's Marijuana Ruling Is Absurd and Indefensible
December 31, 2016 11:59 AM
On December 14, 2016, in the Federal Register, DEA Acting Administrator Chuck Rosenberg made cannabis a Schedule I controlled substance by making it illegal to use. People suffering from medical issues often use cannabis (CBD) and CBD oil in their treatment. Opponents to the new classification argue that cannabis should not be included in Schedule 1 drugs. For starters, they say it’s not psychoactive, addictive, or dangerous. Also, the US government has conducted research on the drug and concluded that it has medical benefits. In addition, it has been helpful in treating other coditions, like seizures and schizophrenia.
"While it’s possible to abuse marijuana (along with anything else), dependence and addiction are rare."
Weight Loss Supplements
October 18, 2008 10:50 AM
Big Pharma is teaming up with other anti-supplement cohorts to spearhead a petition urging the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to implement new limitations on manufacturers of weight-management supplements. It should come as no surprise that the large pharmaceutical corporation which helped launch the petition is the very same company that recently released the first-ever FDA-approved over-the-counter weight-loss drug. It is very evident that Big Pharma is after large amounts of money and will stop at nothing to eliminate its competition.
The pharmaceutical industry seems to have a lot riding on the over-the-counter weight-loss pills. Natural nutrition that works with the body to support healthy weight management is a huge threat to Big Pharma’s over-the-counter weight-loss drug profits. Consumers have become more and more aware of the fact that while nutrition supports health, just as nature intended, drugs can subject them to side effects that can even neutralize nutritional benefits. The over-the-counter weight-loss pill that has been recently approved acts on the body’s absorption of fats within the intestines, but meanwhile, stops the body’s ability to absorb important fat-soluble nutrients such as vitamins A, D, E, and K. As for the side effects associated with this weight loss drug, the drug’s manufacturer cautions that users may need to wear dark colored pants and bring a change of clothes to work.
As questionable as the drug is, it is the fact that the drug’s manufacturer is urging the FDA to crack down on the weight-management supplements that is most disturbing. The logic of this petition is that nutritional supplements should not be allowed to claim that they support healthy weight management, since being overweight should really be regarded as a state of disease. Only drugs may claim to have an effect on disease, according to this law. The real question is, when did being overweight, if only by a few pounds, categorized as a disease?
What’s even more Absurd is the fact that the petition claims that since being overweight is associated with a diseased state, then supplements that support healthy weight management are claiming to have an impact on those diseases. It appears as if the writers of the petition are trying to create a link between weight management and disease claims that do not exist, which makes the petition appear desperate and nonsensical as a result.
Meanwhile, nutritional supplement manufacturers are currently marketing their products truthfully, with any quality supplement intended to support weight management being promoted in conjunction with a healthy diet and exercise. If a healthy diet, exercise, and natural nutrition is consistently chosen by Americans, not only will they lose weight, but they will also elevate their overall state of health. This scenario is Big Pharma’s worst nightmare.
With America at a happy, energetic, and healthy weight, there is no need for synthetic medications, which leaves Big Pharma with no profits. If Big Pharma’s petition to limit weight-management nutrition fills you with anger, then start your own opposing petition to support natural health. Make your voice through the dollars you spend by patronizing independent natural health food stores and purchasing safe, natural nutritional supplements from companies that have no ties to the pharmacy industry.
NHA/Washington Update - Statistics Lie
April 06, 2007 04:57 PM
The mass media targets antioxidants with misleading stats.
The smear campaign against nutritional supplements continues in 2007, with headlines such as the following: “Antioxidants Don’t help You Live Longer,” “Antioxidants Might be Dangerous,” “Antioxidants Do Not Prevent Disease and May Increase Mortality.” Do you notice a theme? Antioxidants are the latest target for media manipulators seeking to steer the public away from life-enhancing nutrition.
The study that spawned these alarmist headlines, first published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, is a “meta-analysis”; this means it draws its conclusions from a number of different studies. In this case, 68 studies involving 232,606 people were analyzed. Meta-analyses are an example of how easily statistics can lie.
Like 2004’s infamous vitamin E-bashing meta-analysis (which proclaimed vitamin E to be deadly, even though it focused on elderly patients who were already stricken with disease), the recent meta-analysis of antioxidants has a preordained outcome—results are determined by which studies are chosen for analysis. Experts have pointed out significant flaws in the execution of this meta-analysis; for example, it includes studies that administered many different combinations of antioxidants, and in varying doses. In addition, these Hitler-skelter antioxidants and dosages are scattered across a wide range of people, everyone from male doctors to elderly nursing home patients. Finally, this meta-analysis neglected to include the most significant antioxidant study ever conducted in its findings. The china study, which in surveying 800 million people was one of the most comprehensive studies of its kind, verified antioxidants effectiveness in fighting cancer, heart disease and stroke. Why was it not included in the meta-analysis?
Even a junior high school science student would question this meta-analysis’s statistical significance. So how can mass media transform this flawed study into headlines that proclaim antioxidants will kill you?
The answer is because the media gets away with it. In our fast paced world, where celebrity rehab stints are front page news, fact-driven journalism is fading—and distracted news readers are enabling its demise. The solution? Consider media reports with awareness and intelligence, and never assume that headlines speak truthfully.
The recent antioxidant bashing study crumbles when subjected to awareness and intelligence. In addition to the obvious study flaws, and even more telling: stories coving the study with headlines proclaiming “antioxidants may increase mortality” are grievously misleading; as it turns out, the study did not identify any causes of death—which were surely diverse given that the study tracked over 200,000 diverse people. Believe the headlines, however, an antioxidants causing all the deaths when in fact they probably caused none—an example of the Absurd “association with out causation” logic that may destroy our right to take safe, natural supplements.
Continue investigating and you will find that Denham Harman, MD, PhD, the “father of the free radical theory of aging,” antioxidants pioneer and professor emeritus at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, is able-bodied and active at age 91. Harman takes antioxidants vitamin C, vitamin E and selenium daily—a revelation with more credibility than any antioxidant bashing hatchet-job study.
Educate yourself about antioxidants and other supplements that Congress is trying to take away from you. Fight to keep your health under your own control, always. Patronize the natural health food store that are committed to providing you with quality products and reliable knowledge. For more information, visit www.nha2007.com