Obama’s New Military ‘International Order’
May 24, 2010
WashingtonPost.com
by Michael D. Shear
President Obama on Saturday offered a glimpse of a new national security doctrine that distances his administration from George W. Bush’s policy of preemptive war, emphasizing global institutions and America’s role in promoting democratic values.
In a commencement speech to the graduating class at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, the president outlined his departure from what Bush had called a “distinctly American internationalism.” Instead, Obama pledged to shape a new “international order” based on diplomacy and engagement.
Obama has spoken frequently about creating new alliances, and of attempts to repair the U.S. image abroad after nearly a decade in which Bush’s approach was viewed with suspicion in many quarters.
Unlike Bush, who traveled to West Point in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to announce his American-centered approach to security, Obama on Saturday emphasized his belief in the power of those alliances.
“Yes, we are clear-eyed about the shortfalls of our international system. But America has not succeeded by stepping outside the currents of international cooperation,” he said. “We have succeeded by steering those currents in the direction of liberty and justice — so nations thrive by meeting their responsibilities, and face consequences when they don’t.”
In his speech — the ninth wartime commencement in a row — the commander in chief, who is leading two foreign wars, expressed his faith in cooperation to confront economic, military and environmental crises.
“The international order we seek is one that can resolve the challenges of our times,” he said in prepared remarks. “Countering violent extremism and insurgency; stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and securing nuclear materials; combating a changing climate and sustaining global growth; helping countries feed themselves and care for their sick; preventing conflict and healing its wounds.”
And yet, as he calls for global cooperation, Obama has intensified the U.S. war in Afghanistan. And his administration has repeatedly confronted the dangers of Islamic terrorism on U.S. soil, including unsuccessful attempts to down a Detroit-bound airliner and explode a car bomb in New York’s Times Square.
To the men and women in the hall, many of whom are headed to Afghanistan because of the expansion of the war the president announced here six months ago, Obama pledged “the full support of a proud and grateful nation.”
The president expressed confidence in the military’s ability to succeed in Afghanistan. But he warned of a “tough fight” ahead as the United States helps the Afghan people rebuild civil institutions and a security system so they can battle the Taliban and other extremists on their own.
“We have brought hope to the Afghan people; now we must see that their country does not fall prey to our common enemies,” Obama said. “There will be difficult days ahead. But we will adapt, we will persist, and I have no doubt that together with our Afghan and international partners, we will succeed in Afghanistan.”
In Iraq, he said, the United States is “poised” to end its combat operations this summer, leaving behind “an Iraq that provides no safe haven to terrorists; a democratic Iraq that is sovereign, stable and self-reliant.”
“You, and all who wear America’s uniform, remain the cornerstone of our national defense and the anchor of global security,” he said. “And through a period when too many of our institutions have acted irresponsibly, the American military has set a standard of service and sacrifice that is as great as any in this nation’s history.”
Civilians, he added, must answer the call of service as well, by securing America’s economic future, educating its children and confronting the challenges of poverty and climate change. The country must always pursue what he called the “universal rights” rooted in the Constitution.
“We will promote these values above all by living them — through our fidelity to the rule of law and our Constitution, even when it’s hard; and through our commitment to forever pursue a more perfect union,” he said.
Obama praised the cadets’ pursuit of being “soldier-scholars” and lauded the records of academic excellence the Class of 2010 has set. He also noted that the class’s top two graduates are women, reflecting, the “indispensable role” that women play in the modern military.
“Here, in the quiet of these hills, you have come together to prepare for the most difficult tests of our time,” Obama said. “You signed up knowing your service would send you into harm’s way, and did so long after the first drums of war were sounded. In you we see the commitment of our country, and timeless virtues that have served our nation well.”
Click here to continue reading the full report
Doctor Linked Autism To Vaccine, Banned To Practice
May 24, 2010
Google.com
by Maria Chang
Britain’s top medical group banned a doctor who was the first to publish peer-reviewed research suggesting a connection between a common vaccine and autism from practicing in the country, finding him guilty Monday of serious professional misconduct.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s research led to millions of parents worldwide abandoning the shot for measles, mumps and rubella, even though the study was later widely discredited.
Wakefield, 53, then moved to the U.S. and set up an autism center in Texas, where he has a wide following, but faces similar skepticism from the medical community. The ruling in Britain only applies to his right to practice medicine in the U.K., not in other countries.
Wakefield was not immediately available for comment. He has the right to appeal the ruling, which takes effect within 28 days.
Vaccination rates in Britain have never recovered since Wakefield’s research was published in 1998 and there are measles outbreaks in the country every year. The disease is also on the rise in the U.S.
Numerous other studies have been conducted since then and none have found a connection between autism and any vaccine.
Wakefield has been a central figure in the anti-vaccine lobby and has garnered much support from parents suspicious of vaccines, including some Hollywood celebrities. In February, U.S. actress Jenny McCarthy, who has an autistic son, issued a statement with her former partner Jim Carrey.
“It is our most sincere belief that Dr. Wakefield and parents of children with autism around the world are being subjected to a remarkable media campaign engineered by vaccine manufacturers,” McCarthy and Carrey said in February. “Dr. Wakefield is being vilified through a well-orchestrated smear campaign.”
Britain’s General Medical Council struck Wakefield from the medical register Monday and found him guilty of “serious professional misconduct.” The council was investigating how Wakefield and colleagues carried out their research, not the science behind it.
Wakefield and colleagues published a study in the medical journal Lancet in 1998 alleging a link between autism and the vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella.
At the time, Wakefield was working as a gastroenterologist at London’s Royal Free Hospital and did not have the ethical approval to conduct the study. He had also been paid to advise lawyers representing parents who believed their children had been hurt by the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine.
Ten of the study’s authors later renounced its conclusions and it was retracted by the Lancet in February.
In 2005, Wakefield founded a nonprofit autism center in Austin, Texas, but quit earlier this year.
In January, Britain’s medical council ruled that Wakefield and two other doctors acted unethically and showed a “callous disregard” for the children in their study. The medical body said Wakefield took blood samples from children at his son’s birthday party, paying them 5 pounds (today worth $7.20) each and later joked about the incident.
In a statement then, Wakefield said the medical council’s investigation was an effort to “discredit and silence” him to “shield the government from exposure on the (measles) vaccine scandal.”
In Monday’s ruling, the medical council said Wakefield abused his position as a doctor and “brought the medical profession into disrepute.”
In the U.S., several court rulings have found no connection between vaccines and autism. More than 5,500 claims have been filed by families seeking compensation for children believed to have been hurt by the measles vaccine.
At least a dozen British medical associations including the Royal College of Physicians, the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust have issued statements verifying the safety of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine.
“I hope this ruling will finally persuade the public and some misguided journalists that Dr. Wakefield behaved irresponsibly,” said Dr. Jennifer Best, a virologist at King’s College University in London. “(The measles) vaccine is a safe vaccine.”
Click here to read the full report
Select Sunscreens Linked To Cancer
May 24, 2010
AOLNews.com
by Andrew Schneider
Almost half of the 500 most popular sunscreen products may actually increase the speed at which malignant cells develop and spread skin cancer because they contain vitamin A or its derivatives, according to an evaluation of those products released today.
AOL News also has learned through documents and interviews that the Food and Drug Administration has known of the potential danger for as long as a decade without alerting the public, which the FDA denies.
The study was released with Memorial Day weekend approaching. Store shelves throughout the country are already crammed with tubes, jars, bottles and spray cans of sunscreen.
The white goop, creams and ointments might prevent sunburn. But don’t count on them to keep the ultraviolet light from destroying your skin cells and causing tumors and lesions, according to researchers at Environmental Working Group.
In their annual report to consumers on sunscreen, they say that only 39 of the 500 products they examined were considered safe and effective to use.
The report cites these problems with bogus sun protection factor (SPF) numbers:
* The use of the hormone-disrupting chemical oxybenzone, which penetrates the skin and enters the bloodstream.
* Overstated claims about performance.
* The lack of needed regulations and oversight by the Food and Drug Administration.
But the most alarming disclosure in this year’s report is the finding that vitamin A and its derivatives, retinol and retinyl palmitate, may speed up the cancer that sunscreen is used to prevent.
A dangerous additive
The industry includes vitamin A in its sunscreen formulations because it is an anti-oxidant that slows skin aging.
But the EWG researchers found the initial findings of an FDA study of vitamin A’s photocarcinogenic properties, meaning the possibility that it results in cancerous tumors when used on skin exposed to sunlight.
“In that yearlong study, tumors and lesions developed up to 21 percent faster in lab animals coated in a vitamin A-laced cream than animals treated with a vitamin-free cream,” the report said.
The conclusion came from EWG’s analysis of initial findings released last fall by the FDA and the National Toxicology Program, the federal government’s principle evaluator of substances that raise public health concerns.
EWG’s conclusions were subsequently scrutinized by outside toxicologists.
Based on the strength of the findings by FDA’s own scientists, many in the public health community say they can’t believe nor understand why the agency hasn’t already notified the public of the possible danger.
“There was enough evidence 10 years ago for FDA to caution consumers against the use of vitamin A in sunscreens,” Jane Houlihan, EWG’s senior vice president for research, told AOL News.
“FDA launched this one-year study, completed their research and now 10 years later, they say nothing about it, just silence.”
On Friday, the FDA said the allegations are not true.
“We have thoroughly checked and are not aware of any studies,” an FDA spokesperson told AOL News. She said she checked with bosses throughout the agency and found no one who knew of the vitamin A sunscreen research being done by or on behalf of the agency.
But documents from the FDA and the National Toxicology Program showed that the agency had done the research.
“Retinyl palmitate was selected by (FDA’s) Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition for…
Click here to continue reading the full report
Allergic: ‘Less Prone To Cancer’
May 24, 2010
Telegraph.co.UK
Scientists found children with allergies to airborne substances were 40 per cent less likely to develop leukaemia than other youngsters while asthma sufferers were 30 per cent less likely to get ovarian cancer than others.
The research was reported in the Daily Mail, which said evidence was growing that putting up with allergies does provide a medical advantage.
Dr Zuber Mulla, an epidemiologist at Texas Tech University, who led the ovarian cancer study, told the newspaper: “More work is still needed, but the numbers show that allergy is a statistically significant protective factor.”
The report said doctors at Cornell University in New York State found children with airborne allergies also had reduced rates of throat, skin, lung and intestinal cancer.
Canadian studies showed that having an allergy or hay fever lowered the chances of getting pancreatic cancer by up to 58 per cent.
Dr Ronald Crystal, chief of pulmonary and critical-care medicine at Weill Cornell Medical Centre, told the newspaper: “Allergies are a general activation of our immune systems. It’s hard to prove, and I’ve heard some scepticism, but it’s a concept in this field and the studies add to that.
The research into leukaemia and cancer was carried out at Minnesota University.
Click here to read the full report
Monsanto Running An Unfair Market Monopoly
May 23, 2010
NautralNews.com
by David Gutierrez
Chemical and agricultural giant DuPont has accused rival Monsanto of maintaining a seed monopoly, in a complaint filed with the U.S. Departments of Justice and Agriculture.
“Monsanto has engaged in numerous practices that improperly seek to expand the scope of intellectual property rights at the expense of competition, innovation, and choice,” the 18-page DuPont report reads.
DuPont, which owns the genetically modified seed company Pioneer Hi-Bred International, is Monsanto’s main competitor in the agricultural biotech field. The two companies are already in court over a failed licensing deal.
The complaint alleges that Monsanto controls 98 percent of the U.S. market in soybeans, 79 percent of the market in corn and 60 percent of the market in patented soy and corn genetics. It accuses the company of using coercive tactics to rope farmers and seed dealers into agreements that make them dependent on its patented and expensive products.
“The ag biotech trait market is firmly in the grip of a single supplier, acting as a bottleneck to competition and choice… it also threatens the global goals for agriculture in the 21st Century doubling the world’s food supply by 2050,” the report reads.
Monsanto has been accused of many of the same practices by biotechnology critics, who allege that Monsanto’s herbicide-resistant crops increase reliance on Monsanto chemicals and point to the company’s aggressive prosecution of farmers who save and replant Monsanto seed. The company has also been known to sue farmers whose crops become genetically contaminated through cross-pollination with Monsanto-modified crops.
Although biotech critics tend to single out Monsanto as the world’s largest supplier of genetically modified seed, they also level many of the same criticisms at DuPont, Bayer, and other biotech companies. Big seed companies in general have come under fire for encouraging farmers to plant expensive modern hybrids over native varieties, thus reducing seed diversity and exposing the world to a greater risk of food shortage.
The DuPont complaint comes ahead of five planned Department of Justice and Agriculture hearings into concerns about competition and monopoly in the agricultural marketing sector.
Click here to read the full report
Ultrasounds Are Harmful To The Fetus
May 24, 2010
NaturalNews.com
by Mike Adams
Ultrasound is extremely damaging to the health of any unborn child (fetus). The natural health community has been warning about ultrasound for years, but mainstream medicine, which consistently fails to recognize the harm it causes, insists ultrasound is perfectly safe and can’t possibly harm the health of a fetus.
Now, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is funding a project that aims to temporarily sterilize men by blasting their scrotums with ultrasound. The burst of ultrasound energy, it turns out, disrupts the normal biological function of the testes, making the man infertile for six months.
Ultrasound, in other words, contains enough energy to temporarily deaden the testes and basically destroy sperm function for half a year. So why is it considered “safe” to blast an unborn baby with the same frequencies?
Ultrasound is loud. It no doubt causes tissue disruption and damage in a fetus, and it certainly creates stress and shock for the baby. And yet conceited yuppie parents just can’t get enough of it! They want to SEE a picture of their little baby before it’s even born, so they subject it to tissue damage and ultrasound trauma in order to get a snapshot they can show off to their yuppie friends. Just to clarify, I’m not opposed to medically necessary ultrasound that has a reasonable justification concerning the health of the mother of the baby. What I’m strongly opposed to is ultrasound used to take pictures of the fetus or to satisfy the curiosity of the parents. This “recreational” ultrasound is extremely selfish, conceited and may pose a very real danger to the health of the baby.
It’s so American, isn’t it? Damage the baby so we can get a snapshot to post on Facebook. What a way to welcome a baby into the world: Blast it with piercing high-frequency energy in order to impress your friends! Don’t forget to vaccinate them, too, as soon as they are born. (And yes, some parents-to-be seriously subject their babies to ultrasound just so they can take pictures. It’s demented!)
Sound is very easily transmitted through fluids, by the way, and the fetus is floating in a sac of amniotic fluid that transmits the ultrasound energy right at them.
Click here to continue reading the full report
Euro Plunges As Other Currencies Flourish
May 24, 2010
Finanance.Yahoo.com
The dollar veered higher against the euro and other major currencies Monday after the Spanish government’s takeover of a regional bank reminded traders of the piles of troubled debt on the books of Europe’s banks.
The government debt crisis in Europe, the resulting expectations of economic slowdown there and fears of instability in its banking sector could hurt China’s exports and postpone any plans for the yuan, said Win Thin, currency strategist at Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. in New York.
Also on Monday, President Hu Jintao reaffirmed that China would allow currency reform but did not give a timetable for action. Economists expect that allowing the yuan to rise versus the dollar would make U.S. exports more appealing and help curb the U.S. trade deficit. But shrinking economies in Europe would hurt demand for China’s goods, perhaps causing the government to delay a change in exchange-rate policy.
In midday trading in New York, the euro fell to $1.2400 from 1.2587 late Friday. Last Wednesday, it hit a four-year low at $1.2146 after Germany, acting alone, unexpectedly instituted curbs on speculative selling of European government debt and shares of major financial institutions.
The euro has suffered this year as the debt crisis in Greece roiled credit markets. A nearly $1 trillion financing deal was put together by the International Monetary Fund and the European Union, to stem fears of default from spreading to other countries. But it quickly triggered concerns about European economies contracting because cuts in government spending and raised taxes are also mandated by the aid package.
Over the weekend, worries intensified as the Bank of Spain took over regional savings bank CajaSur after merger talks with another regional savings bank, Unicaja, fell apart.
The Spanish government insisted that the country’s financial system is “absolutely solvent,” but CajaSur’s failure reminded markets of broader weakness in the European banking sector, said Dan Cook, senior market analyst at IG Markets, in a research note.
“Sovereign debt risk is spreading from the public to the private sector,” Cook said.
More banks may need rescue. The IMF recently warned about damage to Spain’s bank balance sheets from the real estate recession and 20 percent unemployment. The Bank of Italy last week suspended rules that required Italian banks to reflect the fallen value of European government bonds on their balance sheets, which fueled fears that an Italian bank could be in trouble.
Jacques Cailloux, chief eurozone economist at the Royal Bank of Scotland, estimates that there is around euro2 trillion, or $2.5 billion, of debt issued by public and private sector institutions from Greece, Spain and Portugal held by financial institutions outside these indebted countries.
“The cost of this could grow exponentially if we see a whole series of institutions fail,” said David Gilmore of Foreign Exchange Analytics in Essex, Conn.
In other midday trading in New York, the British pound slipped to $1.4444 from $1.4468 after a package of spending cuts from the new coalition government. The dollar rose to 90.42 Japanese yen from 89.81 yen and to 1.1557 Swiss francs from 1.1481 francs.
But the dollar fell to 1.0587 Canadian dollars from 1.0626 Canadian dollars, and lost ground against the Brazilian real and Australian dollar.
Click here to read the full report
Vitamin D Deficiencies Are Epidemic
May 24, 2010
NaturalNews.com
by Ethan Huff
Vitamin D is an amazing nutrient that protect the body from all sorts of diseases and problems. Researchers continually uncover new links between lack of vitamin D and disease, illustrating the fact that it is vital to good health. However recent studies have also found that most people are deficient in vitamin D.
A team of doctors from the McGill University Health Centre in Canada was surprised to find that about 59 percent of people evaluated were deficient in vitamin D and about 25 percent were severely deficient. Published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, the study is allegedly the first to illustrate a definitive link between vitamin D deficiency and an accumulation of fat in muscle tissue.
“Because it [vitamin D deficiency] is linked to increased body fat, it may affect many different parts of the body. Abnormal levels of vitamin D are associated with a whole spectrum of diseases, including cancer, osteoporosis, and diabetes, as well as cardiovascular and autoimmune disorders,” explained Dr. Richard Kremer, lead investigator of the study.
The main reason why people are generally lacking in vitamin D is because people spend much more time indoors than they used to. Especially with computers, people often spend their entire days inside cubicles where they are exposed to little or no sunlight.
Vitamin D is not produced in the body on its own. It is created when skin is exposed to sunlight. Some foods contain vitamin D, but in minimal amounts compared to what can be achieved from sun exposure. Most people also do not consume enough vitamin D-rich food to obtain adequate amounts of it.
The McGill study highlights an important link between vitamin D and obesity that, until now, has been largely ignored. Vitamin D deficiency contributes to decreased muscle and increased fat, which is a condition that is increasingly common in industrialized nations. Though diet also plays a role in obesity, it is striking to see vitamin D playing a role in the condition as well.
Perhaps the reason why vitamin D deficiency is linked to all sorts of serious diseases has more to do with the increase in visceral fat that it causes, which in turn leads to such health problems. This study seems to confirm that notion.
The best way to address vitamin D deficiency is to get more sunlight. But when this is not possible, particularly throughout the winter months when the sun is at a lower angle and the ultraviolet (UV) rays are at a minimum, supplementation with vitamin D is the next best option.
The study itself did not confirm one way or another the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation in reducing fat and increasing muscle, however tests have shown that supplementation does increase blood levels of vitamin D. Many people take vitamin D supplements to alleviate their deficiency and have experience good results.
Currently, the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of vitamin D is between 200 and 400 international units (IU) per day, depending on age. Recent studies are showing that these recommendations are too low to maintain optimal health. Some are suggesting that these guidelines be updated to amounts upwards of 1,000 IU per day, including the Canadian Cancer Society.
On a typical summer day, 15 to 20 minutes of sunlight exposure will result in the skin producing about 40,000 IU of vitamin D. At this point, the mechanism that produces it shuts off in order to prevent the body from making too much.
With these levels in mind, many naturopathic doctors recommend supplementing with up to 10,000 IU a day or more. Many believe it is difficult to take too much vitamin D because the safe upper limits are much higher than previously thought.
Currently, the best form of vitamin D is D3, or cholecalciferol, because it is the precursor to the type created by the body from sunlight exposure. Vitamin D3 can be safely taken at amounts much higher than the RDA guidelines.
Safe tanning beds are another option for achieving optimal vitamin D levels without taking a supplement. Despite recent reports that they are unsafe and cause skin cancer, some tanning beds can be used properly and safely to obtain UV rays when regular sunlight is not an option. These beds use electronic ballasts instead of magnetic ballasts that emit electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs), which can cause cancer and other health issues.
Dr. Mercola, another trusted source of natural health information, has a helpful directory of healthy tanning locations across the country. There are also companies that sell these tanning beds for home use.
If you are unsure about your vitamin D levels and wish to consult with your physician, a simple blood test will determine your levels. Whichever route you choose to take, just be sure to get enough vitamin D. Your body will thank you.
Click here to read the full report
Toddlers Given Unapproved Antipsychotic Drugs
May 24, 2010
NaturalNews.com
by David Gutierrez
Children between the ages of two and five are being treated with antipsychotics at twice the rate they were ten years ago, according to a study conducted by researchers from Columbia University and published in the journal Health Affairs.
“It is a worrisome trend, partly because very little is known about the short-term, let alone the long-term, safety of these drugs in this age group,” researchers Mark Olfson said.
Although a handful of antipsychotics have been approved by the FDA for use in children, they are intended for older children because few if any studies have been conducted into the effectiveness or safety of the drugs in younger children.
Researchers examined prescription data on more than one million children between the ages of two and five. They found that from 1999-2001, approximately one out of every 1,300 children in this age group was being treated with an antipsychotic drug. By 2007, the rate was one in every 630. Among the oldest children (five-year-olds), the rate has always been higher. In 1999-2001, one in every 650 children was receiving an antipsychotic, while in 2007 one in every 329 was.
Although the drugs are intended for the treatment of severe conditions such as schizophrenia and some forms of autism, the study found that they were being used most commonly for hyperactivity, disruptive behavior, and children with mental developmental disabilities.
Olfson noted that antipsychotics should only be used in four- and five-year-olds as an absolute last resort, when no other form of non-drug therapy has been effective. He questioned whether there is ever any justification for giving the drugs to two- or three-year olds. Yet the study found that less than 50 percent of children under the age of six who are on antipsychotics have ever received any mental health services, including therapy or even a health assessment by a mental health professional.
“You don’t see the kinds of mental health services you would expect to see if we were dealing with the most profoundly disturbed toddlers,” Olfson said.
Few studies have been done into the effects of psychotropic drugs on a child’s developing brain.
Click here to read the full report
Senate Votes To Maintain Big Pharma’s Monopoly
May 24, 2010
NautralNews.com
by David Gutierrez
The United States Senate recently rejected two separate proposals that would have allowed the importation of cheaper medication from other countries, apparently in order to preserve a deal between the pharmaceutical industry and the White House.
The proposals were part of a wider effort to reform the U.S. healthcare system, in large part by cutting unnecessary costs.
Drug importation was first proposed by Sen. Byron Dorgan, a Democrat from North Dakota, in an amendment to the healthcare bill. The amendment would have allowed U.S. wholesale and retail drug distributors, including pharmacies, to import products from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan or New Zealand, where price controls keep drug costs much lower than in the United States. The amendment eventually gained more than 24 sponsors from both major parties.
“This issue isn’t rocket science,” Dorgan said. “The American people are charged the highest prices in the world. They want Congress to stand up for their interests and do something about it.”
According to Dorgan and co-sponsor Sen. John McCain, a Republican from Arizona and former presidential candidate, drug importation could cut $80 billion off the country’s health spending over the next decade.
The United States spends $2.5 trillion on health care every year.
A vote on Dorgan’s proposal was blocked on December 10 by fellow Democratic Sen. Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, who expressed concerns over the safety of imported medications. Like the FDA and the White House, Carper objected that the quality of imported drugs could not be assured.
“Senator Dorgan’s amendment could potentially allow unsafe, counterfeited drugs into the United States, contaminating our drug supply,” Carper said. “This is a complicated issue that affects people’s lives. We should make sure that the FDA says it’s safe before we reimport drugs from other countries.”
“My amendment includes strong safeguards to prohibit drug counterfeiting and other practices that would put the consumer at risk,” Dorgan replied. “It applies only to FDA-approved prescription drugs produced in FDA-approved plants from countries with comparable safety standards.”
Other Senators charged that the real motive behind the claim of safety concerns was to preserve a recent deal between the White House and the pharmaceutical industry, in which the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) agreed to fund $80 billion worth of health care reform by accepting higher taxes and price agreements. According to a number of congressional staffers and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists, the deal included a verbal promise by President Obama to not support drug importation.
“There’s great dissension in the Democrat caucus over Senator Dorgan’s amendment,” McCain said. “If it passes, as it should, it breaks the agreement that the White House made with PhRMA. So the White House, as well as PhRMA, has been over here lobbying furiously.”
PhRMA denied that it had made any such deal, but the group and the White House both made statements earlier in the year saying that drug importation will not be necessary if Congress approves a healthcare bill implementing lower prices on U.S.-made drugs.
The $315 billion pharmaceutical industry has been the biggest healthcare-related industry to support the White House’s healthcare reform effort. It is also one of the most influential lobbies in the country.
“People are walking on eggshells,” Dorgan said. “If we pass legislation allowing people freedom to import drugs, the pharmaceutical industry might not support the health care amendment.”
In the end, Dorgan’s proposal, which needed 60 votes to be incorporated into the healthcare bill, failed 51-48. A separate amendment that would have allowed the importation of drugs specifically approved by the FDA also failed, 56-43.
“The drug industry has a lot of clout in this town, and they demonstrated that tonight,” Dorgan said after the vote. “This is not over.”
Click here to read the full report
