|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/17/2009 2:39:11 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: draexo
This is a pointless discussion.
It's a very important discussion. Neither the FDA nor the EPA have the right to ban things based on their patent status and conflicts of interest. Yet, in this situation (and many others) that's exactly what they do.
quote:
There have been serious injuries due to red yeast rice.
Making things up doesn't substantiate your point. People have died from drinking too much water too. More people have died from relevant pharmaceuticals and there have been no documented deaths due to red yeast rice. Studies show it to be safer and more effective than pharmaceuticals. For those who may not like it, simply don't take it, but don't punish those who would benefit from it.
quote:
While I do not disagree with all of your points - for example cigarettes - we need to regulate dangerous substances.
Banning safe and effective substances (red yeast rice) just because they compete with patented products is not the solution.
quote:
If you want Red Yeast Rice on the market you need to standardize it and manufacturer it with some standards. That rarely happens with herbals and alternate medicines.
I never argued against making sure that what's on the label is what's actually in the bottle. Proper labeling is important, but banning safe substances just because they may contain contaminants (which is not why it was banned) is not the solution. Eliminating the contaminants is the solution (and lovastatin is not a contaminant, being that red yeast rice naturally produces it). Water is subject to potential contamination as well, should we ban that too? The FDA did not mention contamination (other than lovastatin which is produced naturally and is not a contaminant) in their ban since that wasn't an issue.
They even said they banned it because it contained lovastatin (not anything else and not because anyone was injured due to red yeast rice) and in some studies (synthetic) lovastatin (not the naturally occurring stuff in red yeast rice) was found to have some side effects (yet lovastatin is not banned). Yet, in the red yeast rice studies (which contains much less lovastatin than the lovastatin studies the FDA referred to), there were far fewer side effects.
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2007/new01678.html
Everything they mention is "potential dangers" (ie: of interaction, etc...) yet even water is potentially dangerous. Most of what they mention is not based on evidence from studies from red yeast rice itself, just all speculation. As far as potential drug interaction, certainly, patients should ask their doctors about the situation if they are taking other drugs, but banning the substance is definitely not the solution.
If the FDA was afraid of the lack of standards, they could have set some (ie: check for potential contaminants, ensure proper labeling), but banning it was not the solution. The FDA tried to ban all dietary supplements (ie: vitamins) at one time when the DSHEA was passed to prevent it. The FDA isn't interested in protecting us, they are interested in protecting the profit margins of rich and powerful corporations. By taking away our health freedoms they are causing more harm than good. People are now forced to take more dangerous, less effective drugs with more side effects just because large corporations want higher profits. This isn't right. If you don't want to take red yeast rice, don't, but you have NO right to take rights away from others. Let them decide.
There is a reason why power was taken away from the FDA in terms of dietary supplements, because they keep playing patent favoritism and ban anything not under patent so that rich companies continue to make lucrative profits at everyone else's expense. The EPA does it too. It is not the government's job to play patent favoritism (thanks to their conflicts of interest) and to base a product's regulation (or banishment) on it's patent status. This needs to stop.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 4/17/2009 3:07:59 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/17/2009 3:10:30 AM
|
|
|
Matthew-59
Posts: 2703
Joined: 1/7/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: justpassinby
Let me put in my 2 cents about red yeast rice. And that's all it's worth, because I know very little about red yeast rice. However, my sister-in-law got most of the family on that, and a marine oil called "Rescue" to lower cholesterol. It's a natural alternative to dangerous drugs, and I can understand the concern that when something good comes along, that the FDA wants to step in and regulate it. The reasons I heard were the same as already cited: Lovastatin which is a form of the statins that cholesterol lowering drugs have.
However, if this sounds like a conspiracy (about removing natural supplements) there is even a bigger one going on that even some natural health doctors and people seem reluctant to admit. It's the Cholesterol Conspiracy. It's not how high it is that is the problem (including LDL). It's what happens to it that's the problem, and cholesterol is good and a precursor to vitamin D. So lowering it won't help.
I hope I'll like this conspiracy section because I post like this over on the health forums and some people (maybe from the medical field) tend to take great offense at hearing the truth. Without vitamin D, we are more susceptible to heart disease and cancers, and people believe the mainline drug companies (who make money off of this stuff) and then wonder why later on we're praying in church for them because they tried to stay healthy and have cancer or whatever.
Although I take supplements myself and believe in natural means, I do tend to notice some natural health advice that is misguided (or maybe mainline establishment info under the guise of natural ways). It's one thing to differ in opinion about the type of cure that doctors and naturalists debate, but it's another thing to disagree on the condition to begin with, the stance I am taking here. So, eat those eggs and meat, and don't worry about the higher cholesterol. Rather, try the antioxidants that prevent oxidization of cholesterol.
I agree with this post. ^^^
I heard a medical doctor on "Creation In The 21st Century" hosted by Carl Baugh on TBN, say this exact same thing. His claim was that most doctors are having their patients lower their cholesterol to very dangerously low levels. Most think LDL is "bad" cholesterol, but not so. It's the oxidation of it that makes it bad. Taking Vit. D and antioxidants is more healthy than getting ones cholesterol too low.
My Mom has been taking Red Yeast Rice for two years, and I think her cholesterol level it too low. She now is experiencing Alzheimer's disease symptoms, which is exactly what this doc on that show said could happen if cholesterol levels are too low. He mentioned other symptoms too... most concerning brain functions. There were others too, but I can't remember what they were right now. I taped the broadcast so I can show it to my Mom. Not sure if it can be found on this website, but it's worth a try: www.creationevidence.org
_____________________________
 Matthew 
5:9
"Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/17/2009 3:15:29 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
Another interesting thing people should look into.
quote:
It is now time for appropriate congressional committees to review openly and aggressively the entire matter of L-Tryptophan. This will provide a needed forum where political, corporate, and scientific issues of the FDA L- Tryptophan regulatory policy may be addressed. There exists ample precedent for such hearings: in the 1980's and early 1990's, for example, such investigations uncovered favoritism in the approval of generic drugs and the bribery of FDA officials.officials.
http://www.lef.org/fda/fdaban95.html
This is nothing new, the FDA (and even the EPA and other governmental agencies) has had a history of playing patent favoritism. They ban products because they compete with more expensive, more dangerous, and less effective patented products just to protect the profit margins of rich and powerful corporations (due to conflicts of interest). This needs to stop. It's going on today just like it always has been, this corruption is nothing new and it didn't magically disappear. We need to resist it. These people with conflicts of interest should be held accountable.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/17/2009 3:25:52 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Matthew-59
My Mom has been taking Red Yeast Rice for two years, and I think her cholesterol level it too low. She now is experiencing Alzheimer's disease symptoms, which is exactly what this doc on that show said could happen if cholesterol levels are too low. He mentioned other symptoms too... most concerning brain functions. There were others too, but I can't remember what they were right now. I taped the broadcast so I can show it to my Mom. Not sure if it can be found on this website, but it's worth a try: www.creationevidence.org
I think I remember reading about a study that said that people that naturally have high cholesterol shouldn't have their cholesterol artificially lowered too much. Can't remember, but I think it recommended taking fewer cholesterol drugs and to accept a slightly higher than normal cholesterol (but not too high, so the drugs are needed to lower it below what it would be without the drugs according to those conducting the study).
I think this might have been it.
quote:
A study called the Honolulu Heart Program was published in 2001. It looked at more than 8,000 individuals and made this statement: "Long-term persistence of low cholesterol concentration actually increases the risk of death. Thus, the earlier the patients start to have lower cholesterol concentrations, the greater the risk of death."
http://www.naturalnews.com/025891.html
(generally, I recommend against pharmaceuticals, I'm just posting relevant literature to your post).
BTW, thanks for your input.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 4/17/2009 3:37:08 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/17/2009 3:41:38 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Matthew-59
I do wish there was a way to right the wrongs and injustices going on, but I personally believe it's a sign of the times we live in... the end times right before Jesus returns.
I think corruption has almost always been going on, not just now. However, I do think we are getting closer to the end times.
quote:
When He sets up His kingdom, then and only then will all of this corruption fade away immediately.
I agree that corruption will always exist until He comes back. However, that's no excuse for us to avoid resisting corruption.
Btw, I responded to one of your posts (my response to post 27 is post 29).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/21/2009 8:31:55 AM
|
|
|
draexo
Posts: 121
Joined: 1/26/2007
From: Saratoga County, New York
Status: offline
|
One of the professional magazines I received just published a short article on Red Yeast Rice, dated April 9th, 2009.
I would copy and paste... but that violates the TOS of the forums. To sum it up,
Red Yeast Rice lowers cholesterol, but product variability is significant. The active ingredient in the 12 products evaluated contained from .10mg to 10.99mg of lovastatin per capsule, with directions of 4 to 6 capsules daily. Of course it will lower cholesterol! It might also give you muscle aches and pains, which if ignored, could lead to kidney failure.
Also of concern was that 4 of the 12 products contained the previously mentioned citrinin, a nephrotoxin.
Two of the products contained no citrinin and lowered cholesterol the greatest. They were manufactured by N3 Oceanic and Sylvan.
The cardiologist in charge of the study said until these products are standardized, to use them with caution.
I would like to add a note here as well - the Red Yeast Rice contains lovastatin. This product is a statin and has all the side effects associated with statins, especially when you get into the higher doses.
_____________________________
The truth will set you free!
TRUTH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/21/2009 12:01:49 PM
|
|
|
justpassinby
Posts: 785
Joined: 3/16/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: draexo
One of the professional magazines I received just published a short article on Red Yeast Rice, dated April 9th, 2009.
I would copy and paste... but that violates the TOS of the forums. To sum it up,
Red Yeast Rice lowers cholesterol, but product variability is significant. The active ingredient in the 12 products evaluated contained from .10mg to 10.99mg of lovastatin per capsule, with directions of 4 to 6 capsules daily. Of course it will lower cholesterol! It might also give you muscle aches and pains, which if ignored, could lead to kidney failure.
Also of concern was that 4 of the 12 products contained the previously mentioned citrinin, a nephrotoxin.
Two of the products contained no citrinin and lowered cholesterol the greatest. They were manufactured by N3 Oceanic and Sylvan.
The cardiologist in charge of the study said until these products are standardized, to use them with caution.
I would like to add a note here as well - the Red Yeast Rice contains lovastatin. This product is a statin and has all the side effects associated with statins, especially when you get into the higher doses.
So? What are you saying? That red yeast rice should be regulated as a drug and only doctors give the stuff out (or maybe not at all) and growing such stuff may be as bad as marijuana, or are you taking my stance saying that we should not take any of this stuff at all, drugs included?
_____________________________
Link to Genealogy of Christ
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/22/2009 10:48:09 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: draexo
It might also give you muscle aches and pains, which if ignored, could lead to kidney failure.
Too much water might kill you as well, but most of your complaints seem like scare tactics and speculation. Sure it "might" be harmful (so could too much water) but it's shown to be safer and more effective than drugs.
quote:
Also of concern was that 4 of the 12 products contained the previously mentioned citrinin, a nephrotoxin.
I'm not arguing against making sure that the products don't contain contaminants (unless they mention those "contaminants" on the label). But banning the product is not the solution.
quote:
The cardiologist in charge of the study said until these products are standardized, to use them with caution.
Everything should be used with caution to some degree or other. Bans are not the solution.
quote:
I would like to add a note here as well - the Red Yeast Rice contains lovastatin. This product is a statin and has all the side effects associated with statins, especially when you get into the higher doses.
No, it does not have all the side effects associated with statins, at least not for many people who have taken it. Studies have shown it to be safer and more effective than many statins with fewer side effects (even when it contains more than just trace amounts of lovastatin). On other places where you can post, people who have taken it in the past were happy with it because it had fewer side effects than drugs and worked well. Those people shouldn't be denied it. You're basing your statements on speculation and scare tactics and not evidence. The fact that this stuff competes with pharmaceuticals is no reason to ban it.
quote:
This product is a statin and has all the side effects associated with statins
This is like saying, "ascorbic acid is a vitamin and has all the side effects of vitamins when taken in high doses. So lets ban all foods with vitamin C." Studies show that red yeast rice, with more than just trace amounts of (naturally occurring) lovastatin, is better for your health than drugs.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 4/22/2009 11:26:29 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 4/22/2009 11:34:51 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: justpassinby
So? What are you saying? That red yeast rice should be regulated as a drug and only doctors give the stuff out (or maybe not at all) and growing such stuff may be as bad as marijuana, or are you taking my stance saying that we should not take any of this stuff at all, drugs included?
It's hypocritical, they want to be able to sell a synthetic version of a naturally occurring substance at patent prices and ban the naturally occurring substance from naturally occurring sources (that have been used for hundreds of years by the Chinese and is shown to be safe). Yet modern republicans try to turn around and say that it's ok for pharmaceutical companies to sell dangerous drugs that have been rushed through testing and, even if they hurt and kill people, these companies should be preempt from lawsuits. Their view is that if a drug is dangerous no one is forcing a patient to take it and that people should have a right to take it and they use that to justify the legalization of the drug and preemption laws if the drug injures or kills people. That same logic doesn't apply to naturally occurring, safer and more effective (and cheaper) unpatented products for some reason. What's the difference? Patented drugs make pharmaceutical corporations rich, red yeast rice competes with pharmaceutical corporations and so it doesn't. So it's ok to give consumers a choice over whether or not they want to take a dangerous product to the extent that giving such freedoms help the rich and powerful pharmaceutical industry. To the extent that it may harm the pharmaceutical industry, such freedoms should be banned. This is clearly all about profits and has little to do with what's best for the American people.
Then modern republicans claim that they want fewer regulations but what they really want is less regulation for the rich and the powerful so that they can act in their own best interest (even if it comes at the expense of the poor and the powerless) and more regulation for the individual to the benefit of rich and powerful corporations. They only want fewer regulations to the extent that it helps rich and powerful entities (free markets, etc...), to the extent that it may harm rich and powerful entities they want more regulations.
quote:
ORIGINAL: draexo
One of the professional magazines I received just published a short article on Red Yeast Rice, dated April 9th, 2009.
What magazine was this, if you don't mind me asking?
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 4/22/2009 12:24:57 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 7/1/2009 12:14:19 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
Here is an article detailing the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide and how it has caused so much death and infrastructure damage. Even terrorists use the stuff and dihydrogen monoxide withdrawal leads to certain death. If inhaled it can cause death as well.
Foolish politicians were even almost convinced into banning the substance because of its dangers.
http://www.snopes.com/science/dhmo.asp
Of course anyone who knows what dihydrogen monoxide is would be opposed to its ban. Dihydrogen monodixe is WATER. Yes, it has caused many deaths and infrastructure damages (ie: hurricane Katrina), yes, withdrawal from the substance leads to certain death. Yes terrorists use the stuff (they are people too and, as such, they need water to live). Yes, if inhaled it can cause death (people drown). The point is that anything can sound like it should be banned if worded correctly. The same is true for red yeast rice. Just because things are potentially dangerous is no excuse to ban them. Anyone can come up with some fake pretext to ban something (when the real reason for banning it is because it competes with some patented product and they want to reduce competition) and to even make that pretext sound good. We should be more critical of these things and ask ourselves questions like, "is the real reason the FDA is against red yeast rice and other non patentable products that have laws making it difficult for the FDA to artificially reduce competition on them (ie: in the name of product safety) because the FDA wants to aid certain companies in creating monopolies."
Also, one doesn't necessarily need patents to artificially create less competition in favor of rich and powerful corporations. Take Taxol as an example.
quote:
The government agency NCI gave BMS a contract which provided the private firm with exclusive rights to use the data from government funded human use clinical trials, and also gave the firm an exclusive "first right of refusal" to harvest the bark of the Pacific Yew tree from federal lands. In return for these privileges and benefits, BMS only agreed to provide the government with a few kilos of Taxol for use in research that BMS would "own," and to use BMS's "best efforts" to commercialize Taxol, a drug with world wide sales of hundreds of millions of dollars per year. BMS was not obligated to pay the government any money in royalties for the exclusive use of its research data, but it did agree to a vaguely written "fair pricing" clause in the contract.
When Taxol entered the U.S. market it was priced at a wholesale price of $4.87 per milligram, or more than $9,000 for a completed treatment for some types of cancer.
http://www.cptech.org/pharm/bariloche.html
It's very plausible agencies like the FDA would regulate a product in favor of allowing one corporation to use it over another in the name of product safety (when the real reason is that the FDA is trying to help certain companies and it has nothing to do with product safety). Certainly the government (which includes the FDA) is not immune to this kind of corruption. So when reading about such issues we should always be skeptical about the FDA's (and other government agencies) true motives and we shouldn't be so quick to assume the FDA's intent is the best interest of the American people.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 7/1/2009 11:27:23 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 7/1/2009 8:33:49 AM
|
|
|
justpassinby
Posts: 785
Joined: 3/16/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
Here is an article detailing the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide and how it has caused so much death and infrastructure damage. Even terrorists use the stuff and dihydrogen monoxide withdrawal leads to certain death.
LOL. Yes I remember reading that on snopes a few months ago. I actually found a web site that gave that link. And I agree with your stance that what the FDA does is not "out of safety" but is rather a so-called altruistic statement uttered to bamboozle the people into following along. The real reason is always something to do with money, power and control.
_____________________________
Link to Genealogy of Christ
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 7/11/2009 12:29:34 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
Found this interesting.
quote:
Pharmaceutical companies are manipulating the intellectual property rights system and are "actively trying to delay the entry of generic medicines onto their markets," a top EU official said of an EU inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector released Wednesday. As a result, there has been a decline in the number of innovative medicines getting to the market, it says.
Surprise, Surprise: Pharma Abusing IP Laws To Prevent Competition
More evidence that pharmaceutical corporations have incentive to suppress competing products from the market, especially unpatented ones. The same thing goes for red yeast rice and other natural products, it has little to do with product safety and more to do with corporate profits.
Should we encourage a system that gives incentive to suppress competing products in favor of patented ones?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 7/12/2009 10:16:02 AM
|
|
|
draexo
Posts: 121
Joined: 1/26/2007
From: Saratoga County, New York
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: justpassinby
quote:
Here is an article detailing the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide and how it has caused so much death and infrastructure damage. Even terrorists use the stuff and dihydrogen monoxide withdrawal leads to certain death.
LOL. Yes I remember reading that on snopes a few months ago. I actually found a web site that gave that link. And I agree with your stance that what the FDA does is not "out of safety" but is rather a so-called altruistic statement uttered to bamboozle the people into following along. The real reason is always something to do with money, power and control.
Very true - but I am still against Red Yeast Rice for the reasons I cited above - basically a lack of standarization/controls.
_____________________________
The truth will set you free!
TRUTH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 7/12/2009 11:34:59 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: draexo
Very true - but I am still against Red Yeast Rice for the reasons I cited above - basically a lack of standarization/controls.
No one is arguing against good controls, we are arguing against the government making laws intended to benefit rich and powerful corporations (and not the American public). This is what the FDA is doing in this case (and many other cases). Of course I don't expect them to tell you that their intent is to benefit the profit margins of special interest groups, they will make up some other reason.
Also, do you think smoking should be banned?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 7/13/2009 7:32:32 PM
|
|
|
draexo
Posts: 121
Joined: 1/26/2007
From: Saratoga County, New York
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: draexo
Very true - but I am still against Red Yeast Rice for the reasons I cited above - basically a lack of standarization/controls.
No one is arguing against good controls, we are arguing against the government making laws intended to benefit rich and powerful corporations (and not the American public). This is what the FDA is doing in this case (and many other cases). Of course I don't expect them to tell you that their intent is to benefit the profit margins of special interest groups, they will make up some other reason.
Also, do you think smoking should be banned?
It should be. Maybe some day it will be. What good comes from smoking?
I was talking to someone who specializes in substance abuse patients. He told me the marijuana of the 60's is nothing like todays. Todays is 10 times as strong. Even 20 times.
_____________________________
The truth will set you free!
TRUTH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 8/1/2009 9:45:58 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1157
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
More updates on the RYR issue
quote:
But now investigators from Chestnut Hill Hospital in Flourtown, PA report that they performed a small study in which 62 patients who were unable to take statins (due to muscle pain caused by the drugs) were randomized to take either RYR or placebo. After a 12-week period of time (during which all participants also engaged in an intensive lifestyle-management program), those who had been randomized to RYR had significantly improved cholesterol levels.
Furthermore, despite their previous intolerance of statin drugs, all but two of these patients seemed to tolerate RYR without any problems.
Red Yeast Rice Still Effective?
I also found this post by someone interesting.
quote:
ORIGINAL: T.
FDA appears to be deliberately trying to undermine the efficacy of RYR ... In other countries RYR is allowed to be used, with patients benefitting from it positively. Why not in the USA?
I could answer that. Because in the U.S. we value corporate interests over the interests of the general public.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
RE: Red Yeast Rice and the FDA - 
