Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - [Livingontheland] US Court Rules in Favour of Free Speech on Health Claims

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [Livingontheland] US Court Rules in Favour of Free Speech on Health Claims
  • Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 14:10:16 -0600


US Court Rules in Favour of Free Speech on Health Claims
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_20953.cfm
* Will this precedent influence European policy on health claims for
foods and food supplements?
Alliance for Natural Health, May 31, 2010

DORKING, UK: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lost its bid to
overturn a health claim for selenium-containing dietary supplements last
Thursday in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle ruled unconstitutional the FDA's
censorship of selenium dietary supplement claims relating to the reduction of
cancer risk. Jonathan Emord of Emord & Associates on behalf of the plaintiffs
in the case (including lead plaintiff Alliance for Natural Health USA
(ANH-USA); Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw; and the Coalition to End FDA and FTC
Censorship). The verdict, unless reversed on appeal, protects the First
Amendment right of dietary supplement manufacturers to provide "qualified
health claims" which accurately communicate the state of science concerning
dietary supplements. This is a remarkable seventh victory over the FDA by the
Emord firm (six of which invalidated FDA health claim censorship).

The lawsuit was initiated last summer in response to the FDA's 19th June 2009
decision to suppress selenium/cancer-risk reduction claims. Ten of the claims
(all appealed by the plaintiffs) were held unconstitutionally censored. The
plaintiffs expressed their belief that this violated their right to
communicate truthful health information to the public. The judge found that
the FDA had denied claims despite credible evidence supporting them and had
thereby infringed on free speech.

Prior to this ruling the FDA required near conclusive scientific evidence for
any nutrient claim. The judge ruled that so long as the claim is an accurate
reflection of the state of science, the First Amendment protects it.




  • [Livingontheland] US Court Rules in Favour of Free Speech on Health Claims, Tradingpost, 06/03/2010

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page