SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Homeopathic medicines make up a multi-billion dollar industry in the United States. Despite being included in the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has never enforced the requirement that the homeopathic industry demonstrate safety or efficacy of its products prior to putting them on the market. Although drug regulation falls within the purview of the FDA, labeling the products is regulated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
In 2015 both the FDA and FTC announced workshops to review how over the counter (OTC) homeopathic products are marketed. Both agencies have the authority to increase the regulation and labeling requirements for these products. The reviews generated thousands of public comments, and the FTC is the first to release their decision in a Staff Report and an Enforcement Policy Statement.
In summary, there is no basis under the FTC Act to treat OTC homeopathic drugs differently than other health products. Accordingly, unqualified disease claims made for homeopathic drugs must be substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence. Nevertheless, truthful, nonmisleading, effective disclosure of the basis for an efficacy claim may be possible. The approach outlined in this Policy Statement is therefore consistent with the First Amendment, and neither limits consumer access to OTC homeopathic products nor conflicts with the FDA's regulatory scheme. It would allow a marketer to include an indication for use that is not supported by scientific evidence so long as the marketer effectively communicates the limited basis for the claim in the manner discussed above.
Essentially, any homeopathic product that isn't backed up by competent and reliable scientific evidence must communicate on its label that:
- there is no scientific evidence that the product works
- the product's claims are based only on theories of homeopathy from the 1700s that are not accepted by most modern medical experts.
Though largely seen as a win for consumer awareness, Slate notes the potential for this to backfire by noting that those who seek out homeopathic medicine will only have their resolve strengthened by seeing a statement pointing out that the contents of the bottle they are holding are not endorsed by the scientific community.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 27 2016, @05:29PM
The spurs are gone. They dissolved. No, it's not a lifetime thing, taking those megadoses. Unlike the various drugs that the pharmaceuticals give you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @08:07PM
What caused them in the first place?
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 27 2016, @08:46PM
I don't know, really. I read and heard a few things about chemical imbalance in the body, but I didn't chase very far after explanations.
http://www.emedicinehealth.com/bone_spurs/article_em.htm [emedicinehealth.com]
emedicine makes no mention of chemical balances, instead, suggesting physical problems with how the bone(s) function. Stress or rubbing of the bones probably counts for something, but a lot of people who are stressed and work hard don't develop spurs.
It's possible that genetics plays a part in it. My mother had bone spurs several times. Each time, she dealt with the pain up to a point, then had surgery. She would be off of her feet for a couple of weeks, then just hobble around the house very carefully for another two or three weeks. Around week six to eight, she would be getting out of the house, and playing catch-up with all her friends.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Monday November 28 2016, @08:54AM
Or it could be that the spurs went away for entirely unrelated reasons. The scientific method exists for a reason.
Given any treatment, it will work effectively for some proportion of the population, for any disease, even if that treatment is closing one eye and dancing on top of a teddy bear while tying your shoelaces. It's plain statistics.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!