Are the FDA, CDC, EPA corrupt?

I'm watching a movie called 'Burzynski', about the Doctor who found a cure for cancer, but was blocked by the FDA. I see too much of this happening, and think the the federal governments agencies are controled by corporations, and put profits ahead of the health of the tax payers.

http://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video;_ylt=A0...

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=ApA.byKFaP4nGp...

4 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Regulatory agencies like the FDA and EPA are not corrupt. While there may be specific individuals within them that are less than totally honest, on the whole they are staffed by honourable, hard working people dedicated to their role.

    I can speak more about the FDA (since I worked for 35 years for the Canadian equivalent organization and have had had contact with FDA staff over the years), and point out that the regulator cooperates with industry but always falls back on it's primary role to ensure only safe, effective, quality products are marketed.

    Rules and powers differ somewhat among agencies. In some cases (e.g. new pharmaceuticals) each product has to be approved before it can be sold. In others there are general standards (e.g. most foods, older pharmaceuticals) that must be met. In terms of approvals for new pharmaceuticals it is always necessary to balance expected benefit against risk. And the developer of the drug must demonstrate both to the satisfaction of highly qualified agency reviewers. Keep in mind that a drug may well "cure" an illness in some people, but if it seriously harms an unacceptable proportion of users the benefit/risk ratio may be unacceptable. This assessment does take into account the seriousness of the condition being treated and the seriousness, incidence and possibility of mitigation (e.g. the side effect only occurs in patients with certain characteristics ... in which case they can be screened out from those getting the drug) of the adverse effects.

    There is always the possibility of political influence being brought to the table, but this is rare since it isn't in anyone's interest to market an unsafe drug. Problems can't be hidden, and any such drug would be the subject of huge lawsuits. (As an aside, contrast this with the silliness of typical TV and movie plots where the evil drug company kills people to allow their flawed drug get marketed ... wouldn't happen.)

    I won't claim the regulatory agencies are uncorruptable (The BP oil spill last year proved that isn't always true), or that specific actions or decisions are always correct, but the chance that the FDA, CDC and EPA are corrupt is very low.

  • 9 years ago

    You're partially correct that corporate pharmaceutical companies are destroying the healthcare industry and strong arming doctors allowing patients to essentially medicate themselves. However, in Burzunski's case, his treatments are highly controversial and medical researchers have been unable to reproduce his results. The American Cancer Society has written him off as a hack and forbids anyone from using his products. No medical review or scientific research produce convincing evidence that the antineoplastons work effectively and they've been written off as nothing short of nonsense. That's why the FDA refuses to allow them. They're hardly corrupt.

  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    Right now with recent whistle blowers and murders that have taken place I'd say yes. BP Oil Spill had a bunch of whistleblowers killed publicly and the recent CDC whistleblower about vaccine dangers is with his lawyer in hiding ... The most has been done in Japan over Fukushima

  • 4 years ago

    i'm only going by utilising the seat of my pants here, yet i think of the EPA has way too lots potential, and as they say, potential corrupts. and that i agree that the two events are serving somebody different than the voters who positioned them in place of work.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.