Like a fish needs a bicycle

A few weeks ago I told you about an unusual and potentially dangerous legislation underway in Europe. Last March, the European Parliament passed the “European Union Directive on Dietary Supplements,” which classifies vitamins as medical drugs rather than food supplements. Many supplements and vitamins will no longer be available over the counter, and the ones that are will be available only in very small doses. The Directive grants a transition period of three years for vitamin supplements already on the market. Then, in 2005, every EU country will be required to implement this unacceptably severe and restrictive regulation.

Obviously the major drug companies are hard at work in the European Union, doing their best to establish a new world order for the regulation of vitamins and supplements – all to their continued great profits. I haven’t seen any new developments regarding the Directive, but since it was announced, I have been paying much closer attention to what’s going on Europe. And just this past week I came across two deeply divergent views of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) that speak volumes about how people are widening their view about health treatment, while some governing bodies would like to regulate unrestricted treatments.
A rising tide, lifting all boats

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has steadily increased over the past decade, and those who use it report greater satisfaction with their treatment than patients who continue to use mainstream medical therapies exclusively. That’s the conclusion of Adrian Furnham, Professor of Psychology at University College London, writing in the May, 2002, issue of The Psychologist, the official monthly publication of the British Psychological Society.

In his article, Professor Furnham addresses the rise in the popularity of CAM across Europe while noting a similar rise in the U.S., where a 1998 study showed that almost half the entire population paid at least one visit to a CAM practitioner that year. Furnham points to six primary reasons why people worldwide are choosing alternate therapies:

to increase their options of affordable health care
to seek cures with fewer side effects and less pain
to have longer, more in-depth consultations with practitioners
to find treatments focused on wellness, not illness
to explore holistic approaches to their health treatments
to find a “last hope” for chronic and severe cases

Professor Furnham notes that, as with the U.S. and Europe, the use of alternative therapies is on the rise in Britain where 500 million was spent on CAM products in 2000. That’s a lot of fish and chips! It’s no wonder that the drug companies feel threatened to the point of blatantly flexing their influence with the European Parliament in hopes of curbing the rise of treatments that threaten their bottom line.
Offering the bicycle to the fish

Meanwhile, a statement from the World Health Organization (WHO) takes a much different view of CAM

The United Nations established WHO in 1948 (the U.S. is one of 161 member states). Since then, it has made important strides in checking the spread of polio, leprosy, cholera, malaria and tuberculosis. So WHO has done good things over the years from its home base in Geneva, Switzerland. But after reading some of its just-released “WHO Traditional Medicine Strategy 2002-2005,” I believe they should stick to managing the spread of disease as opposed to regulating the means of treating it.

In its report, WHO says that “Many developed countries are now seeing that complementary or alternative medicine issues concerning safety and quality, licensing of providers and standards of training, and priorities for research, can best be tackled within a national policy framework.”

In other words: trust your lawmakers – they’ll take care of you. Ah yes. Just like the European Union is taking care of millions of its members’ citizens, attempting to severely restrict their access to vitamins and supplements within a pan-national policy framework. No thanks. You can keep your “national policy framework.” Alternative therapies are coming along just fine without them. CAM might benefit from expanded funds for testing and research studies – which is part of what WHO is proposing – but not at the expense of widespread regulation.

When WHO announced its Traditional Medicine Strategy last week, it issued a warning that popular alternative medicines are often “misused” and may “harm patients.” They went on to point out that the “incorrect use” of alternative therapies has caused deaths in wealthy countries where more and more patients rely on them.

You could also argue that the incorrect use of kitchen knives, water skis, and even plastic bags have all caused deaths in wealthy countries! Not to mention the use of AMA-sanctioned medical procedures and FDA-approved drugs. The key phrase here is “incorrect use.”
Misuse and harm

Here’s a good example of “incorrect use” in a wealthy country – but it’s not about alternative therapies: in a 1999 report, the Institute of Medicine estimated that as many as 98,000 Americans die every year because of medical errors.

And now an example of “correct use” – again, not with alternative therapies: a recent article in the Journal of the American Medical Association stated that approximately 106,000 deaths occur each year in U.S. hospitals because of adverse reactions to prescription drugs which were used as directed. And let me stress, those are the deaths in actual hospitals. That number doesn’t include people who died at home from adverse reactions.

So WHO could do everyone a service by first addressing the incorrect use of accepted mainstream therapies that have caused far more widespread death and adverse reactions in these wealthy countries than CAM therapies ever have or ever will.

Are there mistakes and fatalities associated with alternate therapies, supplements, and herbal remedies? There are. And although they are few and far between, it’s important to remember that many of the compounds and herbs used in CAM treatments are very powerful natural medicines. They have risks, side effects and concerns that can even mimic those of prescription drugs. Nevertheless, they are safer than prescription drugs, and one reason might be the CAM users themselves. In the Psychologist article, Professor Furnham noted that people who seek out CAM treatments are generally more health conscious than non-users, and believe that by making sound lifestyle choices they can influence their own state of health.
You can help

If anything here is certain, it’s this: the heated debate about complementary and alternative medicines is far from over.

That’s why I’ll keep watching and monitoring the deplorable situation with the European Union Directive. And of course I’ll keep you posted. In the meantime, if you believe the availability of natural supplements and vitamins should not be controlled by the international pharmaceutical industry, you can sign a petition and voice your support in the fight to have the Directive dismissed or substantially changed. You can read and add your name to the petition at vitamins-for-all.com. Keep in mind that the U.S. and the EU engage in a two-way trade of goods and services that approach $600 billion a year. With an economic tie this deep, any European law that gives the global pharmaceutical industry sweeping power over the heath choices of millions, will have global effects.

At HSI we believe that everyone has a right to freely choose their method of health treatment. That’s one issue that, to our mind, is not open to discussion.

To Your Good Health,

Jenny Thompson
Health Sciences Institute

Sources:
British Psychological Society, 3bps.org.uk
World Health Organization, who.int
“Writing on the wall” e-Alert, 4/29/02