|
2005 Ron Paul Chapter 48
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.
Congressional Record [.PDF]
Introducing The Consumers Access To Health Information Act
12 May 2005
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 12, 2005
2005 Ron Paul 48:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to enhance the health and liberty of American citizens by
introducing the Consumers Access to Health
Information Act of 2005. This act ensures consumers
can receive truthful information about
how foods and dietary supplements can cure,
mitigate, and prevent specific diseases. The
act does this simply by correcting an erroneous
court decision and thus restoring congressional
intent to allow consumers to have
access to information regarding the health
benefits of dietary supplements without government
interference.
2005 Ron Paul 48:2
In 1990, responding to the demands of the American people that the federal government
respect consumers’ right to receive information
about the ways foods and dietary supplements
can improve their health, Congress passed the
Nutrition Labeling and Education Act. The intent
of that act was to allow the manufacturers
of foods and dietary supplements to provide
consumers with accurate and specific information
regarding the curative and preventive effects
of foods and dietary supplements. However,
the Food and Drug Administration, FDA,
ignored repeated efforts by Congress to protect
consumers’ First Amendment rights to receive
truthful information about the health benefits
of foods and dietary supplements.
2005 Ron Paul 48:3
Incredibly, in the case of Whitaker v. Thompson, 353 F.3d 947 (2004), rehearing
den. 2004 U.S.D. App. LEXIS 4617 (D.C. Cir.
March 9, 2004) the United States Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit supported the FDA’s
interpretation of Congress’s intent and rejected
the clear restraints of the First Amendment by
ruling that the FDA had the authority to censor
information regarding the specific benefits of
foods and dietary supplements.
2005 Ron Paul 48:4
Mr. Speaker, under the D.C. Circuit’s absurd interpretation of federal law, the only way food
and drug manufacturers can transmit information
about the health benefits of their products
is by going through the lengthy and expensive
FDA drug approval process. Because of this
court decision, manufacturers are reluctant to
provide all but the most general health information,
thus ensuring that consumers remain
ignorant about how they can cure or avoid diseases
by making simple changes in their diet.
2005 Ron Paul 48:5
There are numerous examples of how the FDA’s grocery store censorship negatively impacts
Americans’ health. Several years ago,
the FDA dragged manufacturers of Cholestin,
a dietary supplement containing lovastatin,
which is helpful in lowering cholesterol, into
court. The FDA did not dispute the benefits of
Cholestin. Instead, the FDA attempted to deny
consumers access to this helpful product simply
because the manufacturer did not submit
Cholestin to the FDA’s drug approval process.
2005 Ron Paul 48:6
The FDA’s treatment of the manufacturer of Cholestin is not an isolated example of how
current FDA policy harms consumers. Even
though coronary heart disease is the nation’s
number-one killer, the FDA waited nine years
until it allowed consumers to learn about how
consumption of foods and dietary supplements
containing soluble fiber from the husk of psyllium
seeds can reduce the risk of coronary
heart disease. Thanks to the FDA, the American
public is also prevented from learning
about possible ways to prevent cancer, Alzheimer’s,
high blood pressure, urinary tract infection,
and numerous other diseases.
2005 Ron Paul 48:7
At a time when health care costs are rising it is absurd for the federal government to prevent
Americans from learning about how they
increase their chances of staying healthy by
making simple changes in their diets. However,
this bill is about more than physical
health; it is about freedom. The First Amendment
forbids Congress from abridging freedom
of all speech, including commercial speech.
The type of prior restraint the FDA exercises
over these health claims has also been
thought to be particularly repugnant to the
First Amendment. In a free society, the federal
government must not be allowed to prevent
people from receiving information enabling
them to make informed decisions about
whether or not they will use dietary supplements
or eat certain foods. I, therefore, urge
my colleagues to take a step toward restoring
freedom by cosponsoring the Consumer Access
to Health Information Act.
| |
