REVIEWThe Rise of Tyranny: How Federal Agencies Abuse Power and Pose Risks to Your Life and Liberty (paperback)
Publisher: Sentinel Press (phone: 202-466-6937)/$24.95 (148 pages)
Date of Publication: 2008
Reviewed by James J. Gormley (member, National Book Critics Circle)
In 1996, historian Joseph Ellis, in his seminal biographical look at Thomas Jefferson, entitled
American Sphinx, noted: “ […] since the end of the Cold War in 1989, the American government has replaced the Soviet Union as our domestic version of the Evil Empire."
Ellis, far from demonizing the U.S., was looking at our country from a perspective that Thomas Jefferson would have had. Said Ellis: “The underlying logic […] clearly regards the entire federal edifice that has developed in post-Jeffersonian America […] as both dangerous and dispensable.”
Jonathan Emord, a gifted Constitutional scholar and defender of American liberty with whom I have had a number of conversations over the last 14 years, says it this way in this masterful call-to-action,
The Rise of Tyranny: “Indeed, our federal government has become a bureaucratic oligarchy scarely resembling the limited federal republic the founders created.”
Emord has crossed swords with, and beaten, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) several times and correctly embarrassed other Federal agencies, such as the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), in a string of precedent-setting decisions and opinions after the Reagan era ended.
A former Federal attorney of the old school of zealous, eager and honest anti-regulation, anti-big-government reformers who called themselves Reagan Revolutionaries, Emord lays out a damning indictment of what he describes as bloated, un-accountable government agencies that are in many ways in charge of our healthcare and our civil liberties.
Emord makes a case against what he details as the overt stranglehold of our Federal agencies by Big Pharma and agri-biotech. He discusses the FDA’s approvals of unsafe drugs, its censorship of health information and competition and the government’s elimination of innovation in medicine.
He pulls no punches in his condemnation. Emord writes, for example: “The [FDA], the Drug Enforcement Administration [DEA] and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services [CMS] are three paradigms of combined legislative, executive and judicial powers that have devolved into cesspools of abuse and corruption.”
Fortunately, he also lays out a detailed action plan for Americans to follow in order to restore the liberties for which our country’s founding fathers and our country’s average citizens have fought, struggled and, in many cases, died in order to pass on to us.
Far from being a conspiracy theorist or anarchist alarmist, Emord is, to many, a modern-day American patriot who writes, in the book’s epilogue: “If that love of liberty that has inspired great Americans to sacrifice all to secure its blessings can be translated into political action in our day, we may yet see a restoration of the republic and a rekindling of liberty’s sacred fire.”
http://healthbooksnavigator.blogspot.com/2008/10/review-rise-of-tyranny-how-federal.html
Jonathan Emord, a Constitutional lawyer specializing in food and drug laws, was the guest on Coast to Coast Radio on Wednesday, December 15, 2010. Emord, the author of “The Rise of Tyranny”, is the only author to have beaten the FDA in court 7 times and was on the show to discuss FDA censorship and how it affects our health.
When asked if he thought the FDA was doing its job, Emord answered that the FDA scientists were certainly doing their job to the best of their abilities. However, the FDA Commissioners who are politically appointed are largely beholden to the drug companies.
In “The Rise of Tyranny” Emord explains how the FDA has knowingly approved unsafe drugs because the agency is basically a captive of the drug companies. He went on to use the FDA's approval of Avandia as an example.
According to Emord:
- On April 2, 1999, the FDA medical reviewer, Dr. Robert Mizman objected to the FDA's approval of Avandia. He had identified several serious long-term side effects that related to the heart. However, FDA commissioners rejected his criticisms and approved Avandia with no reference to the potential heart risks involved. Mizman was told by his supervisors, “We have to maintain good relations with the drug companies because they are our customers.”
- In February of 2006, Dr. Rosemary Johanne Ling strongly objected to the FDA issuing its approval with no warning about heart risks. Congresswoman Diane Watson testified that she had been prescribed the drug by her physician and then developed a heart murmur. The FDA again ignored the recommendation.
- In May of 2007, medical analysis showed that Avandia increased the incidence of heart attack by 46%.
- In August of 2007, the FDA reversed itself and put a Black Box warning about heart risks on the Avandia packaging.
- In February of 2010, the FDA Associate Director of Drug Safety, David Graham, recommended Avandia be taken off the market stating that it was responsible for an additional 500 heart attacks and 300 more cases of heart failure than its leading competitor.
- In June of 2010, Graham published an article citing the results of a study he conducted on over 227,000 patients, comparing Avandia to Actose. He concluded that Avandia was associated with the increased risk of stroke, heart failure, acute myocardial infarction and even death.
- In July of 2010, after coming under fire from Congress as well as Graham, the FDA convened a panel to review Avandia.
- On September 23, 2010 the FDA refused to remove Avandia from the market but they did restrict its marketing.
- There were 83,000 heart attacks linked to Avandia from 1999 to 2007.
Emord explained that before any new drug even begins the FDA approval process, the manufacturers determine the positive attributes of the drug, as well as the negative side effects. Then, when the drug is passed to the FDA scientists for testing, each scientist is only given one aspect of the drug to test, and it's usually one that will have a positive result. The scientists never see the complete drug or the whole picture, thus, most of their reports are positive.
After the FDA approves a drug, it's then marketed to physicians, using the individual positive findings but omitting information about negative side effects or at the very least, minimizing them.
According to Emord, it's illegal for a physician to prescribe natural remedies such as dietary supplements, herbs, etc. because anything prescribed as medication must have FDA approval. In an article discussing FDA censorship at Alex Jones' website, PrisonPlanet.com, cites the example of Diamond Foods, a distributor of walnuts. When Diamond Foods posted research on its website describing the health benefits of walnuts, the FDA ordered them to remove it, stating that Diamond Foods was claiming that walnuts were a drug and they didn't have FDA approval to make that claim.
Emord states that the culpability lies with the executives of the drug companies who know exactly how long it will take – sometimes up to 10 years – before the adverse effects of a drug are noticed. By that time, the companies have made their profit and the drug then becomes a loss leader.
Emord also states that the FDA protects the drug companies by making it nearly impossible for anyone but one of the major manufacturers to get a drug approved. According to Emord, if a small company were to find a drug that completely cured cancer they'd never be able to afford the $1.6 billion necessary to get the drug through the FDA approval process.
According to Emord, in 75% to 80% of the drugs on the market the benefits far outweigh the risks. But the other 20% to 25% are extremely risky, resulting in over 290,000 deaths each year from people who use these drugs exactly as their physicians prescribe.
Emord states that one of the reasons it's so easy for the FDA to maintain their charade is because drugs are prescribed to sick people and, unfortunately, sick people often die, regardless of what type of drugs they're taking. So it can be years before a connection is made between the drug and any negative side effects. Has someone you know or loved suffered adverse side effects from taking prescription medication? Have you had better results with natural, nutritious remedies than you have with costly prescription drugs? Join our discussion at "Have you suffered adverse effects from prescription medication?"
Continue reading on Examiner.com
FDA censorship: The Rise of Tyranny - National Coast to Coast Radio | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/coast-to-coast-radio-in-national/fda-censorship-the-rise-of-tyranny#ixzz1ewDYXWgA