Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday January 27 2016, @03:36PM   Printer-friendly
from the avoid-the-amateur-biotics dept.

The "good bacteria," or probiotics, that fill the pomegranate drink are everywhere these days, in pills and powders marketed as super supplements. Probiotics are said to improve digestive and immune health. They're touted as potential treatments for conditions ranging from inflammatory bowel disease to eczema to tooth decay. Some marketing campaigns even hint that they can prevent the flu.

Scientific evidence, however, does not necessarily support those claims.

Studies in rodents and small groups of humans point to possible health benefits of consuming probiotics. But there have been only a few large human trials — in large part because Food and Drug Administration rules have dissuaded food companies and federally funded researchers from conducting the types of studies that could confirm, or refute, the proposed benefits of consuming "good" microbes.

http://www.statnews.com/2016/01/21/probiotics-shaky-science/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 27 2016, @04:48PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 27 2016, @04:48PM (#295396)

    If they want to prove that it works, they have to do very serious and expensive tests to prove that and that it is safe. However, if they _don't_ do the tests, they can sell it without any proof of safety, as long as they only hint at health benefits. Good thing the FDA is protecting everyone!

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday January 27 2016, @05:11PM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday January 27 2016, @05:11PM (#295412) Journal

    People want to eat healthy or pretend to eat healthy, and don't want a prescription to eat lunch. That's where the 'F' (and 'U'?) in Food and Drug Administration comes in.

    The FDA could crack down (harder) on non-food supplements with some simple changes to regulatory law, but there's a lot of money and homeopaths invested in keeping powdered shark fin, ginseng, weight loss caffeine powders, etc. on the market.

    At the very least fecal transplants [wikipedia.org] are regarded as a legitimate medical treatment.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 27 2016, @06:23PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 27 2016, @06:23PM (#295446)

    You are grossly misinformed if you think the FDA could be doing more. They were hamstrung by Congress in the 1990s, specifically by Orrin Hatch, with legislation written by the supplement industry. The law forbids regulation and specifically exempts them from even needing to prove it is safe, which was the standard before. The only concession the FDA got was that the industry cannot claim to cure anything without going through actual tests to show that they do, which is where that standard "This product does not treat, cure, etc." comes from. That law needs to be overturned first before the FDA can do anything more.