-Caveat Lector-

------- Start of forwarded message -------
Subject: Fwd: Arianna's Latest Column
Date: 10/31/02 1:00:05 PM

Drugging Our Children The Legal Way

By Arianna Huffington

Chalk up another profitable victory for those promoting the legal
drugging of America's children -- also known as the good folks of
the pharmaceutical industry. Earlier this month, a federal judge
struck down a Food and Drug Administration regulation that
required drug makers to test medicines routinely given to
children.

As a result, America's legal drug pushers are once again free to
offer their potent concoctions for our kids' consumption without
having to prove that they are safe or effective for pediatric
use.

This is no small matter, given the skyrocketing number of
children being prescribed heaping helpings of powerful
mood-altering drugs. For instance, 1.5 million kids are currently
taking Prozac and its equivalents even though the FDA hasn't
approved these drugs for use by anyone under 18.

In making his ruling, U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy, Jr. made
it clear that the problem wasn't the FDA's attempt to protect our
kids, but Congress' failure to authorize them to do so. He
pointed out that earlier this year Congress considered but passed
on the chance to require drug companies to make sure that
products designed for grown-ups but regularly given to kids are,
in fact, safe for children to take.

Instead, our elected representatives -- no doubt under the
influence of the $18 million drug companies have donated to
congressional campaigns this election cycle -- approved an
industry handout, offering "financial incentives" to companies
willing to take the trouble to find out if their products are
dangerous for kids. Rewarding companies that bother to behave
with ordinary civic responsibility is becoming a bad habit for
Washington and it reveals their scary baseline assumption that,
left alone, big business can never be expected to do the right
thing.

Sens. Christopher Dodd, Mike DeWine, and Hillary Clinton are
cosponsoring a new bill that would supersede the federal court's
ruling and give the FDA legal authority to require drug testing
for children. "Children will be harmed if we don't pass this
legislation," warns DeWine. So far, the troika's efforts to bring
the bill to a vote have been thwarted by the drug companies'
loyal beneficiaries in the Senate.

But Capitol Hill is not the only pharmaceutical industry-friendly
place in Washington. The drug companies also appear to have found
an ally inside the highest echelons of the FDA.

In keeping with the White House's habit of assigning foxes to
guard the henhouses they used to stalk -- including the
tres-vulpine Harvey Pitt and Gale Norton -- last summer the
president appointed lawyer Daniel Troy as the FDA's general
counsel. While in private practice, Troy had successfully
challenged the agency's power to regulate drug companies --
particularly the companies' ability to freely promote and market
their products.

It probably shouldn't come as too much of a surprise then that,
from his lofty post, Troy has overseen a dramatic decrease in the
number of drug companies that have been reprimanded for running
false or misleading commercials -- even as the drug ads filling
our TV screens and magazines have multiplied. Of course, it could
just be that the drug companies have all joined the Boy Scouts
and are now being meticulously honest and trustworthy.

One of the pharmaceutical industry's weapons of choice in its
fight to free itself from federal oversight has been the First
Amendment, a tactic once favored by none other than Daniel Troy.
Groups aligned with the industry have successfully used free
speech arguments to convince courts to strike down regulations
barring drug companies from advertising so-called "compounded
drugs" and from telling doctors about unapproved uses for its
products -- such as giving adult drugs to children. The founding
fathers would have had to pop a lot of pills to conceive of this
perversion of the Bill of Rights.

Reeling from these rulings and under increasing pressure from the
drug industry, this spring the FDA invited interested parties to
comment on whether any of its other rules raise "First Amendment
issues". Among the flurry of feedback the agency received was a
suggestion from the ever-helpful gang at Pfizer that the FDA do
away with those pesky rules requiring drug companies to list a
product's side effects and replace them with a cheerful reminder
that since all medications come with some risks, patients should
always check with their doctor before taking them.

Makes sense. Why bother letting consumers know that downing a
brightly colored, widely advertised little pill might cause
nervousness, anxiety, insomnia, restlessness, suicidal thoughts,
self mutilation, manic behavior, and bad breath when a simple and
direct "Consult your doctor" -- or rather "consult your
overworked, underpaid, HMO-tormented physician" -- will suffice?
Who on earth takes a prescription drug without consulting their
doctor? It's not like patients can prescribe the drugs for
themselves, although now that I've said it, I fear I've given
drug companies and Daniel Troy an idea for the ultimate
regulatory rollback.

This kind of self-serving, the-public-be-damned thinking is
precisely why we need strong drug industry oversight in
Washington, not appointees and politicians beholden to their
deep-pocket patrons. Especially when our children's health and
well-being are at stake.

------
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe/unsubscribe, please visit
http://www.ariannaonline.com/columns/maillist.html.

-------- End of forwarded message --------
From


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A<>E<>R
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; I don't believe everything I read or send
(but that doesn't stop me from considering it; obviously SOMEBODY thinks it's 
important)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without 
charge or
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of 
information for
non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth
shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http://archive.jab.org/ctrl@;listserv.aol.com/
 <A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/ctrl@;listserv.aol.com/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to