The Politics of "Drugs" vs "Foods"
by Linsey McLean
I really would hate to have to be in their shoes-policing position that must draw the line, determine the gray area, and decide just what is a drug and what is not. I really would hate to be in their shoes.
We all know, or think we know, just what is a drug and what is not. What is it that constitutes a drug? If it is manufactured in the laboratory? If it is totally synthetic, a creation of man's biotechnology? If it produces desirable effects? Is it a drug if we use it only a certain way? Is baking soda a drug if it is removing odors from your refrigerator, or only so if fed to swimmers, runners, and racehorses? Just what constitutes a label of "drug?"
The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act defines the word "drug" as a substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease. If we get really technical, then all vitamins, minerals, proteins, carbohydrates, and even water itself qualify because there is a "disease" defined and diagnosed for deficiencies of them all for which they can treat, prevent, and cure. Does that make them all "drugs?"
The FDA further complicates the semantics by ruling vitamins and minerals as "foods," but then certain brands of vitamins and minerals are still prescription - often with the same ingredients at the same potencies that OTC supplements have. There is, however, a difference in the script pills - their price - the script ones being more expensive. Since they require a prescription from a doctor, they are covered by health insurance like other medications. Does this make Rx vitamins and minerals "drugs" and OTC ones not? It's so confusing, it's crazy.
The FDA has ruled OTC vitamins and minerals as "foods." Webster's Dictionary defines "food" as protein, carbohydrates, fats, minerals, vitamins, and other supplementary substances that nourish and sustain life. Indeed these all do. Each of them creates a "disease" in the body. Well, then, according to philosophical principles of logic that I learned in college, a food can indeed be a drug - and vice versa. But these two are supposed not to be the same thing. We see now that the problem lies in our semantics; our laws are not clear.
Many supplements fall under the grey area and are subject to different interpretations of the law, depending on who is doing the interpreting, and where his perspective is coming from. It's sad that some people have ever gone to jail over this.This situation is really the crux of sports medicine today. Trainers of both human and animal athletes are very much aware that essential nutrition from common food sources is less than optimum for truly superior performance. Well documented studies have been informing us of the continuing depletion of trace minerals in our farm ground in all 50 states. The problem is compounded by the fact that plants (our ultimate source of nutrition) don't require the same minerals or amounts of minerals that the animals who eat the plants do. They uptake them only incidentally. The availability of trace minerals and calcium and magnesium is compromised by the new superphosphate fertilizers. Farmers can't afford to fertilize with high levels of trace minerals toward the ultimate nutrition of animals and people they will feed. There is just no payback as measured in accordingly larger crop production.
Since minerals cannot be synthesized in the body like most vitamins can, the bottom line reads "our foods are just not as nutritious now as they have been in the past." Mineral supplements are becoming more important day by day, to treat and prevent marginal mineral deficiencies that may interfere with the quality of life on a daily basis, and certainly do for an athlete trying to pump our more energy than the athlete in competition next to him. Minerals are necessary to fuel enzymes and drive biochemical pathways in the body. A mineral of some kind is necessary for nearly every biochemical reaction in the body. So, considering these environmental conditions, does this make mineral supplements "drugs?"
Here we go again...I would like to address the question of Health Massages and "Drug vs.Food" status, particularly in the area of mineral supplements. Most consumers as well as industry leaders feel that there is a great need to completely revamp the traditional ideas on "drugs" vs. "nutrients". Many years ago when the FDA was founded, there was limited knowledge of what anything did due to the limited technologies of testing. Contributing to that was the ignorance of benefits of "nutrients" assumed to be in our food sources and corresponding lack of interest on the part of the general public and researchers, particularly of minerals.
Nowadays, the opposite is true. With new concern about chemical contaminants, pesticide residues and soil mineral deficiencies documented in every state, we are coming into an age where we will have to be more conscientious about food and nutrition and have to supplement increasingly more just to make up for what we now lack compared to 10 or 20 years ago. It is well know that our plants, our food sources, do not have the same mineral requirements for health as the animals who eat those plants - man included. Therefore, agriculture itself is not affected as much as we, ourselves, are, and our animal food sources.
More and more, as we shift our medical attention from quantity of living years toward the quality of life, we are shifting medical focus of treatment to fine tuning the biochemistry of both our animals as well as ourselves. This new knowledge will enhance efficiency at all levels of our economy.
For ourselves will now, and in the future, be dealing with subtle medical problems that are triggered by marginal (sub-clinical) mineral deficiencies in susceptible segments of our population. These problems may not be life threatening, but can significantly alter the quality of life for significant portions of our population. These problems may not be life threatening, but can significantly alter the quality of life for significant portions of our population. With education on proper supplementation great quantities of dollar savings in government funded health care can be realized, and we can teach the public how to be more responsible in their own health care. Thus empowering the people so that they can control the quality of health care professionals by only patronizing those who are educated in holistic complementary medicine.
The obsolete allopath will go bankrupt or change. Miracle cures (often used in multilevel marketing via testimonials) and not on placebo generated by hype meetings that more closely resemble religious revivals than educational information seminars. (Incidentally, the average productive life of these products and companies is usually only three years. These products of multilevel marketing are also overpriced up to 17 times, due to the many levels of payout that is built into them.
The price to consumers is beyond extraordinary compared to conventional marketing, and the few at the top get rich quick and then move on to another set up, while the company fades away, leaving "distributors" with cases of unsold and poorly salable goods in their basements. Watch these programs. I have personal experience several times over. Productive hype of these products and companies is usually only 3 years.
Determining whether a product is a food or a drug also needs to be addressed. Does it stimulate or shuttle body processes toward biochemical pathways not normally found in nature?
All elements do something. Legitimate biochemical activity reporting must be allowed. Wild claims that extrapolate real data to the point of ridiculousness should not. If a chemical or product is legitimate, then it will stand on its own merit by way of its biochemical activity in the body.
Determining whether a product is a food or drug also needs to be addressed. Does it stimulate or shuttle body processes toward biochemical pathways not normally found in nature?
Just because a product has an action - and every product of industry has an action or it wouldn't have been produced, should not qualify it as a drug. Psyllium, for example, has an action that be used as therapeutic in the case of bowel regulation. However, it is a natural agricultural product and should not have been listed as a drug in the first place unless we also listed prunes, apples, etc. Removing products in categories such as this from the drug status would solve many headaches for the FDA and save taxpayers many dollars just in lawsuits such as that with cereal companies, alone.
Nutritional, vitamin/mineral supplements should be allowed to educate the public responsibly on how they can help improve the quality of life for those who choose to purchase them. These allowances will also make better quality foods and supplements more competitive in the marketplace against the hype of poor quality junk food and its mega dollar advertising. Consumers have never before in history been more interested in learning to help themselves and better the quality of their lives.
The FDA should continue to be the protectorate watchdog of the consumer, but needs to revamp its guidelines to better serve the needs of today's consumer and allow more quality education of the actions and uses of industry products. Manufacturers should be allowed to make health claims if they are backed by scientific studies and should be required to produce such documentation if the question arises. These recommendations should incorporate the scientific data with the dosage reported to provide actions stated.
If we are going to continue breeding practices that reduce our gene pool, we are bound to see some of our "best" and possibly inbred horses exhibit eccentric chemistries that may prevent them from expressing their "best" genes.
Can our already economically depressed industry afford to junk all those born not so perfect and keep only those so perfect that they need no help at all?
Let's get real here. There is no body born so perfect that it can do it all alone. The semantics thing has got to be resolved, for the health food industry as well as sports medicine. It is only a matter of time before another great discovery is found, research by a university published, and the focus of attention will be hit by all the same old rhetoric. The story is always the same - for everything that works, that is. As I said before, I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.
© 2007 Vita Royal Products Inc.
