FDA
posted 05-12-2004 03:36 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know it's quite popular - and who knows, sometimes quite true given some of current Bush debacles - to cite government conspiracies, corporate lobbying, etc. to backup arguments on the lack of safety of many food products. But I keep hoping someone will take a step back and not resort to such cliched arguments. As someone who has had a some experience with both the food industry and the FDA, let me point out a couple of things.
First, companies don't lobby government agencies. Lobbying is a formal process by which groups can influence the legislature. The FDA is in the executive branch of the government and has nothing to gain or lose by changing policy for someone like Monsanto. The FDA's mandate is sent down from the Sec. of HHS and ultimately the president, if he chooses to become involved. There is no motivation for the FDA to maliciously undermine public health efforts and allow products that are harmful onto the market - in fact it's quite the opposite. The public nature of the process prevents such egregious acts from occurring for the most part. Certainly for something that has gone on for as long as the use of aspartame has. Which leads me to another important point: that the amount of documented, scientific, rigorous testing that food additives go through is very extensive and more importantly - expensive. Aspartame took 20-30 yrs. to make it to market after it was synthesized in the 1950s. Why would any company in their right mind invest such capital for a wildly unknown ROI unless it was a slam dunk? Lastly, some of the negative examples of things like Ephedra and saccharine are much longer stories that are hard to cover here. Ephedra was something the FDA faught hard against ever since the DSHEA act was passed. Congress lowered the standards for dietary supplements and hindered the FDA's ability to enforce their mission to protect the public's health. DSHEA was a poorly thought out law (unlike some opponents, i acknowledge that it had good intentions) and allowed such untested and dangerous products as ephedra to come in alongside Ginkgo Biloba and Ginseng. Saccharine's approval was the result of another special act of Congress to override the Delaney clause of the Food Additives ammendment to the FD&C. This happened because of - yes - successful lobbying. However, the FDA once again was set to enforce their policy protecting the public helath until congress stepped in.
Government agencies are hugely unwieldy beareaucracies that obviously often run slowly and inefficiently. But the EPA, HUD, FDA, and all the rest are good organizaitons that are indeed doing important and powerful work to protect, educate, and improve the lives of all of us. That may have gotten a little corny there - but look into some of these issues yourself. But please, use reputable sources (newspapers, books, and government reports) and not hearsay from internet forums and random websites.
