Concerns about weakening FDA authority to restrict unproven treatments
President-elect Donald Trump has selected ‘vaccine conspiracy theorist’ Robert Kennedy Jr. as the next health chief. Under the ‘Make America Healthy Again (MAHA)’ policy, major changes are expected in the health sector.
On the 14th (local time), the New York Times (NYT) published an article summarizing the various health foods and symptomatic treatments that Kennedy Jr. can handle when he was selected as a candidate for Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). He claimed that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suppressed a variety of treatments.
The NYT believed that the Kennedy Department of Health and Welfare would mainly carry out standard work, such as assessing the impact of ultra-processed foods (UPF), which contain a large number of preservatives and flavorings. However, it is pointed out that the FDA’s authority, such as warning of products with health risks, may also be weakened.
The first example pointed out was raw milk. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have warned that human consumption of raw milk poses a high risk of developing bacterial diseases, including diseases that can cause kidney failure and death.
Although raw milk contains a large amount of high-risk viruses that can infect humans, Kennedy Jr. is known to have often argued for the effectiveness of consuming raw milk while running as an independent candidate in this presidential election.
Chelation therapy is also a subject of controversy. This therapy refers to treatment that uses specific drugs to excrete heavy metals from the body. The problem is that Kennedy Jr. previously claimed that the therapy could also be helpful in treating autism.
NYT, citing medical experts, pointed out that there are still only a few studies on chelation for the treatment of autism, and that there have been cases of deaths from heart attacks while trying to apply chelation to the treatment of autism. The FDA has warned of the risks of applying chelation for this purpose.
The stem cell field, which is considered the core of future medicine, was also cited as a source of concern. As research results showed that stem cells are effective in treating type 1 diabetes and macular degeneration, various clinics promoted similar treatments without FDA approval.
The FDA has taken a series of enforcement actions in response. The NYT is concerned that the stem cell field may also be included in the ‘FDA oppression’ mentioned by Kennedy Jr. The context is that indiscriminate stem cell treatment may be permitted.
Hydroxychloroquine, which was approved for emergency use as a COVID-19 treatment during the first Trump administration, is also a cause for concern. At the time, the FDA granted emergency use approval, but this did not last long, and side effects such as disruption of heart function were reported.
The NYT is concerned that the FDA’s restrictions on this series of drugs and treatments could lead to a crisis at the Kennedy Department of Health and Welfare.
[서울=뉴시스]
-
- great
- 0dog
-
- I’m sad
- 0dog
- I’m angry
- 0dog
-
- I recommend it
- dog
Hot news now
– What are the potential risks associated with promoting unproven treatments in public health?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Dr. Emily Reed, Public Health Expert
Time.news Editor: Welcome, Dr. Reed! Thank you for joining us today. There are some significant developments on the horizon concerning the FDA’s authority, especially with President-elect Donald Trump’s selection of Robert Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services. What’s your initial reaction to this news?
Dr. Reed: Thank you for having me! It’s definitely a surprising turn of events. Robert Kennedy Jr. has garnered attention for his controversial views on vaccines and alternative treatments. His selection raises serious concerns about the future oversight of unproven treatments and the potential weakening of the FDA’s regulatory powers.
Time.news Editor: Indeed, the New York Times highlighted his stance on various treatments, such as raw milk consumption and chelation therapy. How could this affect public health?
Dr. Reed: There’s a real risk here. For instance, the FDA has consistently warned against raw milk consumption due to the high risk of bacterial diseases. If Kennedy Jr. promotes such unproven treatments without adequate scientific support, it could lead to public health crises—people could become seriously ill from consuming products deemed unsafe by medical authorities.
Time.news Editor: And what about chelation therapy? It’s a treatment that has been suggested for various conditions, including autism, despite the lack of substantial evidence supporting its efficacy.
Dr. Reed: Exactly. While chelation therapy is effective for heavy metal poisoning, its use for autism is controversial and largely unproven. The FDA has issued warnings about the associated risks, including severe health complications. Promoting such treatments without rigorous testing could lead to tragic outcomes. It’s crucial that any health official promotes evidence-based medicine rather than anecdotal successes.
Time.news Editor: The article also mentioned stem cell therapies. Given the potential of stem cells in medicine, how can we ensure safe practices in this area?
Dr. Reed: The promise of stem cells is indeed great, but it needs to be approached with caution. Many clinics are offering stem cell treatments without FDA approval, which means these procedures might not be safe or effective. A shift in the FDA’s authority could open the floodgates for unregulated treatments that already pose a risk to patients.
Time.news Editor: The FDA has previously had to intervene regarding drugs like hydroxychloroquine, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Are you concerned that the authority necessary to manage such situations might be compromised under Kennedy Jr.?
Dr. Reed: Absolutely. The hydroxychloroquine situation is a prime example. The FDA initially granted emergency use authorization, but as evidence emerged about its ineffectiveness and potential side effects, they had to step back. If the FDA’s regulatory power is weakened, we could see a resurgence of similar situations where unproven treatments could circulate without proper oversight, putting public safety at risk.
Time.news Editor: With all these potential changes, what do you foresee for the future of public health in the U.S.?
Dr. Reed: The overarching concern is that a de-emphasis on scientific rigor could lead to policies that favor alternative therapies over evidence-based medicine. It’s vital for health officials to advocate for public education about the importance of scientifically validated treatments rather than giving in to populist sentiments. Maintaining strong, independent regulatory agencies like the FDA is crucial for safeguarding public health.
Time.news Editor: Thank you for sharing your insights, Dr. Reed. This topic is not only timely but incredibly important for everyone’s health!
Dr. Reed: Thank you for having me! It’s critical that we remain vigilant and proactive in defending evidence-based practices in health care.