"Natural” supplements are filled with dangerous junk

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Ouch - this blog takes it to the largely unregulated "wild west" of "natural" supplements - as they point out if "big pharma" were to rip consumers off like this they'd be in court pronto - but it seems the illuminati/NWO/reptiloids have a soft spot for an industry that can feed us rubbish!


The researchers used a technique called DNA barcoding technology, which is a taxonomic method that uses a short genetic marker in an organism’s DNA to identify it, even if it is mixed in with DNA from other organisms, to examine the ingredients in 44 herbal products from 12 companies in Canada.

Results:
•Only two of the companies provided authentic products without substitutions, contaminants or fillers.
•Overall, nearly 60% of the herbal products contained plant species not listed on the label.
•Only 50% actually contained the plant claimed on the label.
•About 32% substituted another plant.
•About 20% contained contaminants of a variety of non-plant sources.
•About 20% contained fillers.

Yes, you read that right. Of the 44 herbal products studied, only about half actually contained the plant product that was claimed on the label. Moreover, the 20% that used fillers used rice, soybeans and wheat (probably GMO, ironically).




posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


more and more incentive to only consume what you grow yourself. i would rather go without ..fill in the blank ...nutrient then swallow their franken pills.



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...

truly the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Metaphysique
 


Bugger - it's a fair cop guv!



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


My cardiologist told me once that some of these energy drinks out there right now have the same effects on your heart as coc aine. Think twice before you pick up that energy drink!!



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 04:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Emerys
 


Caffeine does not have the same effect as coc aine.

Your cardiologist is a fear monger and I'd change docs..



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 11:48 PM
link   
There are plenty of natural supplements that have no additives.
Generally, really good supplements do not have the word natural in their name.
The companies that do this are commercial companies, many of which are OWNED by big pharma
They've slowly been infiltrating them for years now, as they would like to make supplements by prescription only.
This has proved hard to do, so instead, they just make supplement quality much much lower.
Let me see if I can find which pharm cos own what vitamin companies.
I've seen merck on the back of vitamin labels. I know that.
Then we have stuff like Johnson and Johnson.

There are a couple of very good companies that only use the best stuff, no additives.
I can post them if anyone is interested.



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Oh my god. I did not know this.
Emergen C is one of my main stays, and Pfizer bought it last year.
I had no idea
Ohhhhhhhhhh nooooo...

www.reuters.com...

And so far, just a cursory search, Pfizer owns Centrum too, which I believe is the biggest vitamin Co in the USA, and they make stuff targeting the elderly specifically.


www.naturalnews.com...
edit on 10/15/13 by PtolemyII because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Here, Merck is making vitamins too.
So when you think big pharma isn't involved, guess again.
They own it all.

www.nutraingredients.com...

I would guess every major pharmaceutical Co, now owns a huge portion of the vitamin and supplements trade.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 04:41 PM
link   
And this deserves a little more attention than its getting. I always try to purchase radiation and GMO free products and talk to the staff alot. Wonder if we have any better standards here in Canada?



posted on Oct, 30 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Here we go.
ANTI supplement campaign revealed.


The FDA can count on mainstream media to mislead the public. Let’s get the truth out and stop this bill. Action Alert!Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL)’s bill, S.1424, is meant to “improve the safety of dietary supplements by [requiring] manufacturers of dietary supplements to register dietary supplements with the Food and Drug Administration and to amend labeling requirements with respect to dietary supplements.” Sounds innocuous, doesn’t it? But as we reported in August, this is nothing but a smokescreen—a naked power grab for the FDA and an attempt to regulate safe dietary supplements as if they were dangerous FDA-approved prescription drugs.A recent article in Newsday quotes “a top agency official” (probably FDA’s Division of Dietary Supplement Programs director Dan Fabricant, who is quoted extensively in the article) as saying that 70% of supplement companies have violated FDA’s manufacturing rules over the last five years—with the clear implication that such manufacturing violations somehow puts the American public at risk.
There is no mention of the nature, context, or seriousness of these alleged violations, and no link to any official reports or documentation.The article declares that the number of adverse events caused by supplements “outstrips” those triggered by prescriptions drugs. This is totally false. The Newsday article’s author, Delthia Ricks, tells us that approximately “6,300 people nationwide complained about adverse reactions to dietary supplements between 2008 and 2012, according to FDA statistics. But the actual number may be more than eight times higher, some experts say, because most people don’t believe health products can make them sick.” This “eight times higher” claim has no basis in fact, and no documented source.
Even if it were true, this number is far less than for prescription drugs.The 6,300 figure averages to 1,575 per year, which is extremely low considering that 157 million Americans—half the US population—take supplements. This is in comparison to 526,527 adverse events for prescription drugs, 275,421 of which had “serious outcomes,” including death.Why would we want to let the agency regulate supplements as if they were drugs when the drugs they approve cause over 400 times the adverse events than supplements do? When the Government Accountability Office (GAO) looked at the number of adverse events for supplements at the request of Senator Durbin, it was unable to uncover anything alarming, as we reported back in March.On the contrary, the GAO report showed that FDA-approved drugs caused 80% of Poison Control fatalities. More than 100,000 calls to Poison Control Centers, 56,000 emergency room visits, 2,600 hospitalizations, and nearly 500 deaths each year are attributed to acetaminophen (Tylenol) alone!The Newsday article goes on to describe, in detail, the FDA’s authority to regulate the vitamin supplement industry, noting the agency’s inspection of supplement company facilities, and its ability to issue product warnings, recalls, and seizures and levy steep fines against companies that run afoul of FDA regulation. Inexplicably, the article then quotes Dan Fabricant as saying, “There is little the FDA can do to exercise more power over supplement safety without an act of Congress,” and concludes that FDA has “limited power” to regulate supplements. In what universe does that statement make sense?The only way it makes sense is if mainstream media pieces like this Newsday article are viewed as propaganda: a concerted alliance between the media, the FDA, and legislators like Sen. Durbin to weaken the public’s determination to keep dietary supplements freely available. Lest this sound too conspiratorial, we need to remember that drug advertising is what keeps much of print media alive in these days of online competition.The theme of adverse events is very much echoed in Durbin’s legislation. His bill requires that the FDA, together with the Institute of Medicine (IOM), compile a list of dietary ingredients (supplements) that might lead to adverse events, or are otherwise deemed risky in some way—based on completely arbitrary or nonexistent standards. Given the FDA’s profound bias against supplements, and the skewed, anti-science recommendations of the IOM’s vitamin D report, these are hardly trustworthy sources of guidance!



More here :

www.anh-usa.org...





new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join