Protect the American People from Dental Mercury and the FDA!

Dear Legislator,

I am writing to you at the suggestion of the Natural Solutions Foundation to request that you compel the NIH to release an independent evaluation of a highly suspect and corrupt process through which mercury amalgams were given a predetermined clean bill of health despite a Congressional mandate for a meaningful evaluation of the health hazards posed by continued use of mercury in dental fillings.

This evaluation was never carried out in a forthright and independent fashion. Instead, the dental arm of the FDA provided a blueprint to the consultant chosen to receive this contract outlining the desired mercury-favoring results. A meeting coordinator was selected without background or experience in developing this kind of report and the coordinator inverted the terms of reference of the report from "finding evidence of harm", the Congressional mandate, to "proof that the product is unsafe".

Two FDA Scientific Advisory Committees rejected the report leading NIH Chairman Elias Zerhouni to hire an independent CPA firm to do an investigation and report on this process and report. To date, despite 2 freedom of information requests, the CPA's evaluation has not been released to the public.

This is representative of the corrupt, industry friendly, health hostile practices of the FDA and segments of the NIH. Since this sort of shenanigan provides immediate harm through poor decision making (e.g., retaining mercury in dental amalgams) and undermines the highly significant mandate of the FDA to safeguard American health, food and products, I strongly urge you to take the following steps:1. Compel NIH Chairman Zerhouni to release the CPA report and the underlying documents upon which it is based to the public immediately since the health of your constituency is very seriously impaired by the secrecy and failed report involved here.2. Compel the FDA to commission a new and truly independent study on the the dangers posed by dental mercury under Congressional oversight3. We ask Federal legislators old hearings on the feasibility, impact and mechanisms for splitting the FDA up into two separate agencies to regulate food and drugs without contamination of food regulation by drug interests and vice versa since clean, unadulterated food and supplements are a direct threat to the economic health of the pharmaceutical industry which provides a significant portion of the operating budget of the FDA through drug company "User fees"4. We ask State Legislators to hold hearings on the feasibility, impact and mechanisms for banning all medical uses of mercury in your State since the continued use of mercury poses a well-documented health hazard to the people of your State5. Introduce legislation to ban mercury from all medical uses and making its use or introduction into the human body a felony offense.

The Natural Solutions Foundation, http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/, would be happy to provide scientific and technical support to assist in all steps of this process.

Thank you for your commitment to my health and well-being. I will be following your steps on this issue closely.

Regards,
UltimateeBookStore.com

Please Oppose All Restricitions on Nutritional Free Speech

Dear Legislator:

I am writing to my National and State Legislators to urge you to resist current pressures to adopt laws that restrict Free Speech about Nutrition. Such a law was adopted a few years ago in Ohio with bad results. This week, Legislators in New Jersey are being asked to adopt a law granting a monopoly on speech about Nutrition to Dietitians who are poorly trained in Nutrition (A2933 in the Assembly and S1941 in the Senate). Similar bills are pending in other states as well.

I urge you to oppose all such bills on the State and Federal levels. On the Federal level, such restrictions are often imposed through FDA regulations and I urge my Federal representatives to exercise their oversight obligation to make sure that travesties such as FDA's recent attempt to impose a new regulatory category, "CAM Product" continue to fail to be implemented.

At a minimum true Health Freedom requires the free flow of truthful and not misleading information about these matters of personal concern. That's why Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in Thompson v. Western States Medical Center, decided on April 29, 2002 - 535 U.S. 357:

"If the First Amendment means anything, it means that regulating speech must be a last - not first - resort."

"We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making bad decisions with the information."
"Even if the Government did argue that it had an interest in preventing misleading advertisements, this interest could be satisfied by the far less restrictive alternative of requiring ... a warning that the [product] had not undergone FDA testing and that its risks were unknown."

Without such free and open access to commercial information, part of the Free Speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution for the united States of America, we are not adults making decisions about our own bodies and health.

Health Freedom is a very important issue to me and I will remember to cast my votes for Legislators who are leaders in the effort to achieve and maintain the fullest Freedom of Speech in Nutrition.

Please see the Natural Solutions Foundation's important web site, http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/ for more information about this.

Regards,
UltimateeBookStore.com

Please Co-Sponsor the Science Free Speech Act - H.R. 7120

Dear Representative,

Utah Congressman Chris Cannon has recently introduced a bill, the Science Free Speech Act, H.R. 7120-- this bill would protect the public's right to know truthful information about health and nutrition.

Click here (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dvknc7z_183gtpwt5nh) to read Congressman Cannon's Science Free Speech Act, HR 7120 and here (http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.00a10d0c-947d-43a0-ab30-ab9f7bc222ff) to read his very important and articulate "Dear Collegue" letter and attachments which document how irrational and destructive the FDA's lopsided war on supplements and truthful statements has become.

As one of your constituents, I urge you to immediately become a Co-Sponsor and strong supporter of this important bill. Health Freedom is a "litmus test' issue for me and your support of this bill is something I will take into account when voting for Congress.

I agree with the US Supreme Court in Thompson v Western States, 535 U.S. 357:

"If the First Amendment means anything, it means that regulating speech must be a last - not first - resort... We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making [even] bad decisions with the information..."

Regards,
UltimateeBookStore.com

Become A Co-Sponsor or Introduce H.R. 6635, H.R. 6636, H.R. 6637

As one of your constituents I want to express my concerns regarding Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in our food supply and other products, including clothing. I am writing to you at the suggestion of the Natural Solutions Foundation, http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/, to express my grave concerns about unlabeled and potentially dangerous Genetically Modified Organisms which have been approved and widely disseminated in the absence of science of sense.

Under what is called the "Precautionary Principle", many countries around the world have placed moratoriums on the sale of GMO products and some have banned these products. However, without any serious testing, the United States government has not only allowed GMO ingredients in our food supply, but the FDA has actually tried to forbid companies from truthfully advertising “GMO Free” products. As my Congressperson, I want you to take a lead in reversing this trend. The Precautionary Principle, in essence, hold agencies and countries to the standard that is something has not been shown to be safe, it cannot be used, grown, offered or sold.

Genetically Modified Organisms do not meet the Precautionary Principle because they are administratively, not scientifically, deemed to be equivalent to unmodified organisms while excellent science substantiates that they pose special high level dangers for consumers, farmers and the environment. Disturbingly, these dangers are not temporary since, once the novel DNA, the antibiotic resistant DNA and the promoter virus are introduced into the DNA of the consumer, or of other organisms in the environment, the consequences are totally unpredictable and have been shown to be highly dangerous. Once loosed, however, the novel DNA cannot be called back, like the genie in the bottle.

Congressman Dennis Kuchinch has introduced three important bills to comprehensively regulate GMO products since they are virtually unregulated now. These bills are:
• H.R. 6636, The Genetically Engineered Food Right To Know Act, which would require mandatory labeling of all foods that contain or are produced with GM material. No such labeling is permitted at this time in the US.

• H.R. 6635, The Genetically Engineered Safety Act, which would require that GE foods follow a food safety review process to prevent contamination of food supplies by pharmaceutical and industrial crops. This Act would also require that the FDA screen all GE foods to ensure they are safe for human consumption. No such safety review is permitted at this time in the US.

• H.R. 6637, The Genetically Engineered Technology Farmer Protection Act, places liability from the impacts of GM crops on the biotechnology companies that created the GMOs, and protects farmers from lawsuits by biotechnology companies. No such liability exists at this time for pharmaceutical plants and animals once approval is granted by the acting agencies for the organism and the same is true for non drug modifications as well.

These flaws in the regulatory structure are of great concern to me and I believe that they should be deep concerns of yours as well since more than 80% of all food consumed in the US today contains GMO food or ingredients. Lethal allergies, auto immune disease (including diabetes in children), birth defects and sterility rates are rising and can be, in large measure, laid squarely at the door of a dangerous food supply, including GMOs in most of what we eat.

I urge you to become a co-sponsor of these bills or to introduce sister legislation in the Senate in order to protect us from the currently unknown potential threats of GMO products. This is a very important matter to me and I am among the over 80% of the public that a recent NY Times / CBS poll indicated wants mandatory GMO labeling.

As a concerned citizen, I will be watching your active stance on these bills and look forward to sharing the news of your co-sponsorship and support for these measures with other constituents in your district.

Regards,
UltimateeBookStore.com

Lead in Lipstick: More enduring than love?

By Lisa Frack
February 12, 2009

With Valentine's Day right around the corner, there's a lot of puckering up to be done. But if you're not into lead poisoning, we recommend that you go natural. That's right, ditch the lipstick, ladies.

Yeah, we've talked about this before. More than once, I'm sure. The 1979 ban on lead in certain products (house paint and gasoline come to mind) was very successful, dramatically reducing blood lead levels. Good news, right? Restricting lead = less lead poisoning. Simple, even.

So why is there still lead in lipstick, then? Easy: it makes lipstick stay on your lips longer, and the FDA has (once again) not stepped up to the plate. Here's how the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics sums it up:

More than a year after the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics reported that popular brands of lipstick contain lead, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has still not released the results of its own testing of lead in lipstick, despite pressure from senators and repeated calls from health groups.

In Oct. 2007, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics reported that 61% of lipsticks it tested contained lead. In Nov. 2007, Sens. John Kerry, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein urged FDA to test a range of lipsticks for lead, publicly report the results, and take immediate action to reduce consumers' exposure to lead from cosmetic products.

Fourteen months later, FDA has made no public statements, issued no reports, and taken no action to reduce consumers' exposure.

Why am I not surprised?

What you can do. As always, there's the personal and the political. To prevent your own exposure, you should use lead-free lipstick or no lipstick at all. Because lead is not a listed ingredient, it is impossible to identify lead-free brands without testing. Going without is safer.

To get political, you can ask the FDA to step up to the plate and ban lead in lipstick. You can also contact the folks who make your favorite lipstick and let them know that you like their product - but would prefer it without a dose of lead, please and thank you.

For more on the useful properties of lead, the 2007 New York Times article, "The Pernicious Allure of Lead" is fascinating - showing the poisonous metal's unbeatable usefulness over time.

Source: http://www.enviroblog.org/2009/02/lead-in-lipstick-more-enduring-than-love.html

Did You Have Your Bowl of Cholesterol Drugs This Morning?

By Susie Madrak


I guess we have to start getting prescriptions for this stuff, huh?
WASHINGTON (AFP) – Popular US breakfast cereal Cheerios is a drug, at least if the claims made on the label by its manufacturer General Mills are anything to go by, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has said.
"Based on claims made on your product's label, we have determined that your Cheerios Toasted Whole Grain Oat Cereal is promoted for conditions that cause it to be a drug," the FDA said in a letter to General Mills which was posted on the federal agency's website Tuesday.
Cheerios labels claim that eating the cereal can help lower bad cholesterol, a risk factor for coronary heart disease, by four percent in six weeks.
Citing a clinical study, the product labels also claim that eating two servings a day of Cheerios helps to reduce bad cholesterol when eaten as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol, the FDA letter says.
Those claims indicate that Cheerios -- said by General Mills to be the best-selling cereal in the United States -- is intended to be used to lower cholesterol and prevent, lessen or treat the disease hypercholesterolemia, and to treat and prevent coronary heart disease.
"Because of these intended uses, the product is a drug," the FDA concluded in its letter.
Not only that, but Cheerios is a new drug because it has not been "recognized as safe and effective for use in preventing or treating hypercholesterolemia or coronary heart disease," the FDA said.
That means General Mills may not legally market Cheerios unless it applies for approval as a new drug or changes the way it labels the small, doughnut-shaped cereal, the FDA said.
General Mills defended the claims on Cheerios packaging, saying in a statement that Cheerios' soluble fiber heart health claim has been FDA-approved for 12 years, and that its "lower your cholesterol four percent in six weeks" message has been featured on the box for more than two years.

Source: crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/did-you-have-your-bowl-cholesterol-dr