Did you know that 80% of the employees of the FDA work only on approval of new drugs, and less than 20% work on enforcement? This makes it very plain that the FDA's primary purpose is to approve new (and all too dangerous drugs). Not much else matters unless several people die from these drugs. Just ignore the many side effects, which should be a clue to future problems.

Did you know that way too many of the persons on the board that approves new drugs have vested interests (stocks, friends, boards of directors, grants, etc) of the very drug companies they are supposedly protecting US from? Recently, a study printed in the Journal of the American Medical Assn showed clearly that there are distinct conflicts of interest in over 30% of all drugs approved, but less than 1% recused themselves from such approval meetings, as they are legally and morally required to do. In a recent case 10 of the 32 FDA drug advisers on the board that originally approved the controversial painkillers Celebrex, Bextra and Vioxx had financial ties to the industry. That's a powerful set of voters to influence that board. There are way too many persons on that board that are "consultants" to drug companies; on the board of directors of drug companies; have grants from drug companies, etc. For more facts and info on this see: http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm'ID=2184

Did you know that the FDA is partially funded by the drug companies? I .was very surprised to learn that under the 1992 Prescription Drug User Fee Act drug companies were allowed to actually fund the FDA! The so-called "Government Agency" that is supposed to protect us from bad food and drugs is paid for by the very companies they are supposed to regulate. Even in the Roman Empire, the phrase "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" was well known - "who watches the watchers?" A conflict of interest! You bet!

Did you know that some companies actually falsify test results, or slant them in such a way that serious side effects are minimized? You can see the same thing on TV ads where a nice voice informs you, "you may experience mild effects", or similar words. This leads most to believe that ALL such side effects will be mild, and not life threatening. Drug advertising is generally false advertising with a spin.

Did you know that the FDA banned ALL Tryptophan (free form amino acid) because one "bad" batch from one of three Japanese manufacturers was contaminated? The other two manufacturers have never had any problem, and even the "bad manufacturer" corrected the problem immediately. No more problems all over the world, including the US, but that particular amino acid is still not available except as a prescription! Guess what the costs now are! And who gets the profits? Also, compare with Tylenol and other drugs that have actually killed many people, but they were back on the shelves in weeks. Could this be another hint that the FDA is more interested in helping drug companies than we, the people?

Did you know that the RDA (Recommended Daily Allowance of vitamins and minerals) was first produced by cereal labs? And, it's definitely not a recommendation for good health. It was originally called MDA - actually a minimum daily allowance of vitamins and minerals that simply avoids the worst dietary diseases of pellagra, beri-beri, and scurvy. (It was changed from Minimum to Recommended by lobbyists of the cereal and other food companies more interested in money than in health.) So, if you think that those once daily vitamin and mineral tablets are keeping you healthy, think again!

Did you know that no US Medical Journal dares to print papers or articles about "Alternative", "Holistic", or "Orthomolecular" therapies, even when they've been proven for years to be better than the drug therapies? Why not? Simple, all such journals and magazines are largely, or completely dependant on drug advertising to stay in business. They all know that "biting the hand that feeds" is bad. Even Prevention magazine, which was an excellent source of such articles sold out years ago, and cannot be trusted for drug truth. (The Lancet, published in England, is funded by the Government, and does publish a lot of true info about drugs and alternate health.) When I was about 10 or 12, my father told me, "Never trust anyone with a vested interest". I didn't really know what he meant, but he explained it, and I've found it good advice since.

Did you know that the FDA actually spends part of that 20% of that valuable "employee time listed above actually prosecuting anyone who claims to "cure" any disease? Their claim is that only a Medical Doctor can "cure", and that's their basis for prosecuting. That's the reason why no one can claim that such therapy as EEG Biofeedback (neurofeedback) or hypnosis can "cure" anything. Clinicians (who may also be "doctors" such as PhD's) must be careful to never use that "c" word. This is in spite of the proven facts that EEG BF does cure most ADD/ADHD/Autism, depression, insomnia, and many other such "brain problems". And it does all that much better than any drugs ever prescribed. That's why my Auditory Brain Wave Training system (much cheaper and similar in use and effects to EEG BF) also cannot say on any of my web pages that word - "cure". We all have to use "training" instead. Free speech - where did it go?

In my not so humble opinion, I do not trust the FDA at all. I certainly do not trust the drug manufacturers, and this brings me to not trusting most Medical Doctors, because they are "brainwashed" by the drug industry, and bribed from their third year in medical school by the drug industry. A good old adage is "For good health stay away from doctors and hospitals".