Geoffrey C. Kabat
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- September 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780231166461
- eISBN:
- 9780231542852
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Columbia University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7312/columbia/9780231166461.003.0006
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health
The dangers of herbal supplements were highlighted when a number of young women attending a weight loss clinic in Brussels, Belgium developed kidney failure. It turned out that the herb Aristolochia ...
More
The dangers of herbal supplements were highlighted when a number of young women attending a weight loss clinic in Brussels, Belgium developed kidney failure. It turned out that the herb Aristolochia had been mistakenly substituted for another benign herb. Scientists linked the type of kidney damage found in the women in Brussels to a long-standing mysterious disease in the Balkans, referred to as Balkan Endemic Nephropathy. Studies using molecular techniques have shown that the cause of both conditions is a compound in the Aristolochia plant, which can cause kidney damage as well as a rare cancer of the upper urinary tract. This research underscores the dangers of certain herbal supplements.Less
The dangers of herbal supplements were highlighted when a number of young women attending a weight loss clinic in Brussels, Belgium developed kidney failure. It turned out that the herb Aristolochia had been mistakenly substituted for another benign herb. Scientists linked the type of kidney damage found in the women in Brussels to a long-standing mysterious disease in the Balkans, referred to as Balkan Endemic Nephropathy. Studies using molecular techniques have shown that the cause of both conditions is a compound in the Aristolochia plant, which can cause kidney damage as well as a rare cancer of the upper urinary tract. This research underscores the dangers of certain herbal supplements.
J. Howard Beales, Timothy J. Muris, and Robert Pitofsky
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- September 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199989287
- eISBN:
- 9780199346325
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199989287.003.0008
- Subject:
- Law, Competition Law
This chapter examines one particular aspect of consumer protection law—advertising substantiation—highlighting its merits and defending it against recent transgressions. It analyzes the FTC's 1972 ...
More
This chapter examines one particular aspect of consumer protection law—advertising substantiation—highlighting its merits and defending it against recent transgressions. It analyzes the FTC's 1972 Pfizer decision, which established the principle that an advertiser must possess and rely upon a “reasonable basis” to substantiate its advertising claims. This doctrine has allowed the Commission to determine on a case-by-case basis whether an advertiser's evidence is sufficient to support its claim without being constrained by overly rigorous or formalistic tests. The chapter explains why “competent and reliable scientific evidence” is the appropriate standard for health-related claims about foods, and discusses the application of the standard to dietary supplements. It explains why repudiation of the Pfizer factors cannot be justified as fencing in relief.Less
This chapter examines one particular aspect of consumer protection law—advertising substantiation—highlighting its merits and defending it against recent transgressions. It analyzes the FTC's 1972 Pfizer decision, which established the principle that an advertiser must possess and rely upon a “reasonable basis” to substantiate its advertising claims. This doctrine has allowed the Commission to determine on a case-by-case basis whether an advertiser's evidence is sufficient to support its claim without being constrained by overly rigorous or formalistic tests. The chapter explains why “competent and reliable scientific evidence” is the appropriate standard for health-related claims about foods, and discusses the application of the standard to dietary supplements. It explains why repudiation of the Pfizer factors cannot be justified as fencing in relief.
Lewis A. Grossman
- Published in print:
- 2021
- Published Online:
- October 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780190612757
- eISBN:
- 9780197606582
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190612757.003.0009
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
This chapter examines how, as the popularity of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has risen since the 1970s, American law—once thoroughly dominated by the orthodox medical ...
More
This chapter examines how, as the popularity of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has risen since the 1970s, American law—once thoroughly dominated by the orthodox medical establishment—has accommodated this growth. To an underappreciated degree, CAM advocates have persuaded legislators and regulators to make American law more hospitable to unorthodox treatments. The chapter explores this phenomenon at both the federal and state levels. It then turns to the philosophically and organizationally related modern movements resisting orthodox medical compulsion. It does so first by discussing the modern antivaccination movement and then by considering the medical freedom activism that surged during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020—activism that bore striking resemblances to the Progressive-Era battle against “state medicine.”Less
This chapter examines how, as the popularity of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has risen since the 1970s, American law—once thoroughly dominated by the orthodox medical establishment—has accommodated this growth. To an underappreciated degree, CAM advocates have persuaded legislators and regulators to make American law more hospitable to unorthodox treatments. The chapter explores this phenomenon at both the federal and state levels. It then turns to the philosophically and organizationally related modern movements resisting orthodox medical compulsion. It does so first by discussing the modern antivaccination movement and then by considering the medical freedom activism that surged during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020—activism that bore striking resemblances to the Progressive-Era battle against “state medicine.”
Gail B. Mahady, Sheila M. Wicks, and Rudolf Bauer
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- April 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780199398911
- eISBN:
- 9780199398942
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199398911.003.0026
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health
This chapter discusses botanicals and the use of complementary and alternative medicine in children and adults, including factors to consider in evaluation, management, treatments, and safety.
This chapter discusses botanicals and the use of complementary and alternative medicine in children and adults, including factors to consider in evaluation, management, treatments, and safety.
Michael B. Bracken
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- October 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780300188844
- eISBN:
- 9780300189551
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Yale University Press
- DOI:
- 10.12987/yale/9780300188844.001.0001
- Subject:
- History, Environmental History
The press and other media constantly report news stories about dangerous chemicals in the environment, miracle cures, the safety of therapeutic treatments, and potential cancer-causing agents. But ...
More
The press and other media constantly report news stories about dangerous chemicals in the environment, miracle cures, the safety of therapeutic treatments, and potential cancer-causing agents. But what exactly is meant by “increased risk”—should we worry if we are told that we are at twice the risk of developing an illness? And how do we interpret “reduced risk” to properly assess the benefits of noisily touted dietary supplements? Demonstrating the difficulty of separating the hype from the hypothesis, the author of this book clearly communicates how clinical epidemiology works. Using everyday terms, he describes how professional scientists approach questions of disease causation and therapeutic efficacy to provide readers with the tools to help them understand whether warnings of environmental risk are truly warranted, or if claims of therapeutic benefit are justified.Less
The press and other media constantly report news stories about dangerous chemicals in the environment, miracle cures, the safety of therapeutic treatments, and potential cancer-causing agents. But what exactly is meant by “increased risk”—should we worry if we are told that we are at twice the risk of developing an illness? And how do we interpret “reduced risk” to properly assess the benefits of noisily touted dietary supplements? Demonstrating the difficulty of separating the hype from the hypothesis, the author of this book clearly communicates how clinical epidemiology works. Using everyday terms, he describes how professional scientists approach questions of disease causation and therapeutic efficacy to provide readers with the tools to help them understand whether warnings of environmental risk are truly warranted, or if claims of therapeutic benefit are justified.
Sally Squires
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- November 2020
- ISBN:
- 9780195174991
- eISBN:
- 9780197562239
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780195174991.003.0032
- Subject:
- Computer Science, History of Computer Science
Twenty years ago, if someone had suggested that nutrition news would regularly make the “A” section of major newspapers—and often the front page—I probably would have laughed. Sure, through the ...
More
Twenty years ago, if someone had suggested that nutrition news would regularly make the “A” section of major newspapers—and often the front page—I probably would have laughed. Sure, through the years, the occasional nutrition or weight-related story has made it to the front page. In 1998, a committee convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute changed the definition of “overweight.” Twenty-nine million Americans went to sleep thinking they were fine and woke up to learn that the government now said they needed to shed 6 to 12 pounds to be at a healthy weight. That story, which I covered for the Washington Post, made it not to just to the front page but above the fold. The straight news story began this way: . . . The federal government plans to change its definition of what is a healthy weight, a controversial move that would classify millions more Americans as being overweight. . . . . . . Under the new guidelines, an estimated 29 million Americans now considered normal weight will be redefined as overweight and advised to do everything they can to prevent further weight gain. Those who are already experiencing health effects, such as high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol or diabetes, will be encouraged to lose small amounts of weight—about six to 12 pounds—to bring them back to safer weight levels. . . . But in a follow-up piece that I did for the Health section, I had a little more fun with the off-the-news lead and wrote this: . . . What do Olympic gold medal skier Picabo Street and Baltimore Orioles third baseman Cal Ripken Jr. have in common? . . . . . . According to new federal guidelines, they are both overweight. . . . . . . So what should they and the millions of other adults suddenly classified as overweight do about their extra pounds? Athletes like Street and Ripken may be special cases, but what about the rest of us? . . . In this follow-up story, I was able to offer a more in-depth explanation of the body mass index—a screening measure for determining a healthy weight that has replaced the old Metropolitan Life Insurance height and weight charts, which used body frame size, height, and gender to offer healthy body weight.
Less
Twenty years ago, if someone had suggested that nutrition news would regularly make the “A” section of major newspapers—and often the front page—I probably would have laughed. Sure, through the years, the occasional nutrition or weight-related story has made it to the front page. In 1998, a committee convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute changed the definition of “overweight.” Twenty-nine million Americans went to sleep thinking they were fine and woke up to learn that the government now said they needed to shed 6 to 12 pounds to be at a healthy weight. That story, which I covered for the Washington Post, made it not to just to the front page but above the fold. The straight news story began this way: . . . The federal government plans to change its definition of what is a healthy weight, a controversial move that would classify millions more Americans as being overweight. . . . . . . Under the new guidelines, an estimated 29 million Americans now considered normal weight will be redefined as overweight and advised to do everything they can to prevent further weight gain. Those who are already experiencing health effects, such as high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol or diabetes, will be encouraged to lose small amounts of weight—about six to 12 pounds—to bring them back to safer weight levels. . . . But in a follow-up piece that I did for the Health section, I had a little more fun with the off-the-news lead and wrote this: . . . What do Olympic gold medal skier Picabo Street and Baltimore Orioles third baseman Cal Ripken Jr. have in common? . . . . . . According to new federal guidelines, they are both overweight. . . . . . . So what should they and the millions of other adults suddenly classified as overweight do about their extra pounds? Athletes like Street and Ripken may be special cases, but what about the rest of us? . . . In this follow-up story, I was able to offer a more in-depth explanation of the body mass index—a screening measure for determining a healthy weight that has replaced the old Metropolitan Life Insurance height and weight charts, which used body frame size, height, and gender to offer healthy body weight.
