A recent article from the Associated Press http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jJ6ymBVg8DzG8BDHwfWbr-ex1KKgD98LUR380 is reporting that more people are putting their faith in alternative medicine. The occasion for such reportage is the FDA’s release of its first guidelines for good manufacturing practices in the supplemental industry, an aspect of modern health culture that is unregulated in this country. Concerned interest groups say the rules are flimsy. However, this is the first step to give the FDA more presence in this growing field.
The article is mainly skeptical about the possible health benefits of alternative medicines. The rise in popularity is attributed to the public’s growing distrust of the medical industry. Interestingly, the AP reporter focuses on prescription drugs.
“Mainstream medicine and prescription drugs have problems, too. Popular drugs such as the painkillers Vioxx and Bextra were pulled from the market after serious side effects emerged once they were widely used by consumers. But at least there are regulatory systems, guideline-setting groups and watchdog agencies helping to keep traditional medicine in line.”
Unfortunately, the safeguards cited above are not as reliable as we would like to believe. In her book, The Truth About the Drug Companies, Dr. Marcia Angell draws upon her extensive experience as editor of the New England Journal of Medicine to reveal some of the ways drug companies evade regulations and prevent objective research for the sake of their profit margins.
Perhaps the most disturbing of these methods is the use of CROs (contract research organizations) to conduct the clinical trials that are the brick and mortar of any drug’s claim to legitimacy. Clinical trials are how drugs get FDA approval and doctor support before you are prescribed anything. CROs are for-profit companies that cater to the drug company’s need for data and reports, the paper life of their industry. Because of this financial relationship, the CROs are less committed to presenting evidence and objective analysis. More likely, the purpose is to make the drugs look better than they are by skewing data. This is as simple as altering dosage, suppressing unwanted data, or overemphasizing the positive results.
The result of such activities is clear. In the AP article, Dr. Josephine Briggs, who directs the federal agency that studies supplements and unconventional therapies, said “If we had highly effective, satisfactory conventional treatment we probably wouldn’t have as much need for these other strategies and as much public interest in them.”