U.S. Food and Drug Administration Faces Legal Challenge Over Blocked Nutrient Health Claims

The ANH-USA petition, developed over several years, draws on research and public guidance from U.S. federal bodies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). ANH-USA argues that the FDA’s rejection breaches both the First Amendment and the FDA Modernization Act of 1997, the latter of which specifically allows nutrient claims based on authoritative statements from government bodies.

As correctly identified by ANH-USA, the FDA’s stance not only prevents American consumers from accessing scientifically supported nutritional information, it reinforces an outdated healthcare system promoting pharmaceutical treatments rather than disease prevention. The ANH-USA legal counsel, Jonathan Emord, points out that many of the disputed claims are already recognized in U.S. federal publications. Examples include links between various nutrients and reduced risks of conditions such as heart disease, inflammation, and cancer. Emord therefore accuses the FDA of censoring science that the U.S. government’s own scientists have already acknowledged.

Ultimately, the FDA’s suppression of nutritional science has to be seen in context as part of a far larger, global, picture. Across the world, governments and their regulatory agencies now realize that the growing popularity of natural health therapies threatens the existence of the US$1.77 trillion a year drug industry. As such, in recent decades, restrictive natural health legislation in Europe and other regions has been passed with the deliberate intention of neutralizing this threat.

To read how the ultimate goal of the pro-pharma lobby is the global enforcement of maximum nutrient levels in supplements that closely resemble the miniscule so-called ‘Recommended Daily Allowances’ (RDAs), see this article on our website.