On September 11, 2001 our nation was subjected to the most devastating attack since Pearl Harbor. In the months that followed, we set aside our petty differences and came together in common cause to defend our freedom. What many of us do not realize, however, is that on September 10th, the day before Osama Bin Laden’s thugs killed thousands in the World Trade Center bombing, another vicious assault on our freedom occurred.

The perpetrator of this crime, however, was not some fanatical group of foreign extremists. Nor was it some homegrown radical organization. It was the United States Senate. Louisiana Senator John Breaux and his colleagues on the Senate Select Committee on Aging held a hearing on September 10th that was in fact the opening shot in a battle to deny Americans one of their most precious freedoms – the freedom to choose the form of medical therapy they would employ to ensure their own health.

The failure of the committee to provide even a semblance of balance in the representatives it selected to testify would dismay any American. All but two of the dozen witnesses either represented federal agencies with a vested interest in expanding the scope of their influence and power, or were long-standing critics of dietary supplements and alternative medicine. Indeed, the very title of the hearing “Swindlers, Hucksters and Snake Oil Salesmen, the Hype and Hope of Marketing Anti-Aging Products to Seniors” clearly demonstrates that Senator Breaux and his colleagues had made up their minds well in advance of any testimony that might have been presented. Similarly, the Government Accounting Office report you commissioned was titled “Health Products for Seniors, Anti-Aging Products Pose Potential for Physical and Economic Harm.” Most Americans have the impression that the GAO, like the Congress, was supposed to present balanced analyses of issues. The title of the GAO report hardly meets this standard.

Had Breaux so chosen, the hearing could have provided the American public with important information about the alternatives available to them when conventional medicine fails. Instead, he used the forum as nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt to expand federal regulatory authority, as a theatrical prop to discredit all companies in the industry. It was little more than a Kangaroo Court aimed at pillorying the dietary supplement industry. This tactic can be effective, but few would have expected a body as august as the United States Senate to engage in such a charade. Especially given the track record of conventional medicine in regard to cancer.

It is now 30 years since President Nixon declared “war on cancer”. Despite spending vast amounts of money on traditional medicine, current statistics paint a chilling picture:

• One person dies every minute from cancer.
• Three people are diagnosed with cancer every minute.
• It is anticipated that within a few years one person out of every two will be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetime.
• The fifth leading cause of death in America is from prescription drugs used as directed.

The real area of the Attorney General’s concerns – dietary supplements -- does pose a viable threat. That threat, however, is not to consumers, but rather to the profits of the pharmaceutical industry! It is important to remember that the original role of the FDA was safety – let us ask the FDA to rule on the safety of nutritional supplements. If they are found to be safe an individual should have the right to choose to use anything they desire. Don’t forget that aspirin – because of its toxicity – could probably not, today, pass the FDA’s stringent Phase I, II, III trials!!

Perhaps the committee’s energies could be redirected to address the real problem facing our Senior citizens, the abject failure of traditional medicine to successfully treat chronic diseases.

While the press coverage Breaux and his colleagues envisioned never materialized – overshadowed by the events of September 11th – they have not given up their crusade to take away our medical freedom of choice. Indeed, the National Institute on Aging has embarked on a nationwide campaign to discredit the very notion that alternative and complementary medicine have any role in society. Using the field of anti-aging medicine as an excuse, they are funding seminars, issuing reports and conducting other government-sponsored activities with one purpose in mind: to gain control over your health care choices. Bear in mind, like the war on terrorism, the battle to defend your right to medical choice will be a long one.

CLOSE THIS WINDOW