Lack of appropriate DNA in supplements

[JPV]

It puzzles me that we criticize medications for having side effects or turn out to be potentially dangerous, yet when it comes to Big Supplement, we lower the bar for these same expectations.

Maybe because far more people die from complications after taking prescription drugs than from supplements. As I mentioned earlier, the medical industry is now the 3rd leading cause of death in the United States. The industry is completely driven by profit with patient wellbeing a secondary concern. Do we really want to put this same corrupt industry in charge of overseeing the manufacturing and distribution of supplements...

Chris Kresser - Medical care is 3rd leading cause of death in U.S.

The popular perception that the U.S. has the highest quality of medical care in the world has been proven entirely false by several public heath studies and reports over the past few years.

The prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association published a study by Dr. Barbara Starfield, a medical doctor with a Master’s degree in Public Health, in 2000 which revealed the extremely poor performance of the United States health care system when compared to other industrialized countries (Japan, Sweden, Canada, France, Australia, Spain, Finland, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Belgium and Germany).

In fact, the U.S. is ranked last or near last in several significant health care indicators:

• 13th (last) for low-birth-weight percentages
• 13th for neonatal mortality and infant mortality overall
• 11th for postneonatal mortality
• 13th for years of potential life lost (excluding external causes)
• 12th for life expectancy at 1 year for males, 11th for females
• 12th for life expectancy at 15 years for males, 10th for females

The most shocking revelation of her report is that iatrogentic damage (defined as a state of ill health or adverse effect resulting from medical treatment) is the third leading cause of death in the U.S., after heart disease and cancer.

Let me pause while you take that in.

For me, it's not about curbing freedom of choice, making supplements prescription only but has everything to do with quality control.

How exactly will making supplements only available by prescription insure a certain level of quality? Doctors have no control over the manufacturing process. They just write the prescription. All we need to insure the quality of supplements is for the FDA to do the job that it was designed to do, which it obviously isn't doing properly...

Quad City Times - Counterfeit drugs dangerous, even in U.S.

While fake drugs are more common in the developing world, they've taken a toll in this country and represent a persistent threat to patients here.

The Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, has issued warnings about substandard — and illegal — imported versions of the tumor-fighting drug Avastin three times in the past year, most recently shipments of a Turkish version of the drug. In 2008, there were at least 149 deaths and many more severe allergic reactions due to a tainted blood thinner imported from China. Other times, officials have seized drugs that included ingredients banned in the United States. for safety reasons.

 

[IreneF]

DNA and other molecules are broken down by enzymes and various mechanisms that may occur in food and supplement processing. There is info here for example. All molecules can be broken down. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to extract minerals and produce our own essential molecules.

I agree about unlisted allergens. I always try to avoid gluten, for example.

Restriction enzymes are used as part of the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) process, which multiplies copies of DNA segments. Sequencing is not dependent upon whole DNA molecules. Digestive enzymes occur in animal guts, not in typical food or supplement processing.

 

[IreneF]

This thread is getting off-topic. The initial post was about the mislabeling of herbal supplements.

 

[adreno]

This thread is getting off-topic. The initial post was about the mislabeling of herbal supplements.

I don't see anything particularly off topic. Care to elaborate?

 

[MeSci]

Restriction enzymes are used as part of the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) process, which multiplies copies of DNA segments. Sequencing is not dependent upon whole DNA molecules. Digestive enzymes occur in animal guts, not in typical food or supplement processing.

Plants themselves contain enzymes. Once a plant is harvested, molecules start to degrade, depending on environmental conditions.

I believe DNA is relatively resistant to such degradation, but I still want to hear some solid facts on the issue. Hopefully they will be forthcoming in time.

 

[MeSci]

I've been having a brief look at the people involved in this report. I didn't know what an Attorney General was, and see that he is a political appointee rather than the head of an independent judiciary. I had difficulty finding much at all on the scientist who did the research except a very-sketchy page at his university. The people singing the praises of the report were a professor of pharmacological sciences and a senior nutritionist at a non-profit consumer advocacy group.

I expect that there is more info out there but I don't have time to look.

I'd like to see a peer-reviewed journal paper which clearly summarises the methods, cites sources for their efficacy, outlines possible weaknesses in the methodology and analysis and declares any conflicting interests.

 

[WillowJ]

Our filler ingredient can make a cow sick, but you should be fine...
http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/detail.asp?weed=46

 

[chipmunk1]

For me, it's not about curbing freedom of choice, making supplements prescription only but has everything to do with quality control.

Aspirin is not safe to take because it is not rx? Many medications are not rx. why should all supplements be?

from the article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/21/us/politics/21hatch.html?_r=0

Just in the last two years, 2,292 serious illnesses, including 33 that were fatal, were reported by consumers of supposedly harmless nutritional supplements, federal records show.

to put that into perspective:

 

[WillowJ]

I'd like to see a peer-reviewed journal paper which clearly summarises the methods, cites sources for their efficacy, outlines possible weaknesses in the methodology and analysis and declares any conflicting interests.

That's fair. There are always lots of things that can go wrong in an experiment.

From a plant testing site, it appears that plant DNA samples are susceptible to heat and moisture. Some supplements contain dessicant, but not all do.
http://fpms.ucdavis.edu/IDTesting.html

 

[JPV]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/21/us/politics/21hatch.html?_r=0

Just in the last two years, 2,292 serious illnesses, including 33 that were fatal, were reported by consumers of supposedly harmless nutritional supplements, federal records show.

Here's something else to keep in perspective...

Los Angeles Times - Drug deaths now outnumber traffic fatalities in U.S., data show

Drugs exceeded motor vehicle accidents as a cause of death in 2009, killing at least 37,485 people nationwide, according to preliminary data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

While most major causes of preventable death are declining, drugs are an exception. The death toll has doubled in the last decade, now claiming a life every 14 minutes. By contrast, traffic accidents have been dropping for decades because of huge investments in auto safety.

 

[JPV]

I don't see anything particularly off topic. Care to elaborate?

I'm assuming that the real problem is that some of us are not being cooperative with the pro Big Pharma bias that some people seem to be pushing on this forum.

 

[adreno]

It is of course a big problem if the contents of supps don't match the label, or contain dangerous ingredients. Such businesses should be stopped. However, the media mantra that pharmaceuticals are safe and supplements unsafe seems not founded in logic. There is a grey area between supps and pharms, as many are actually available as both Rx and OTC (examples are Q10, carnitine, SJW, etc). This also differs from country to country.

In general though, I dislike the idea of governments regulating everything that has the potential to be the least bit dangerous. If following this line of argument, I must ask why alcohol, cigarettes and weapons are available to the public? How about transfats, food additives and untested chemicals in cosmetics and household products? Why are these things not more heavily regulated? Lastly, many OTC drugs (like NSAIDs for example) are actually quite harmful:

Not widely appreciated, however, is that NSAIDs use also results in death. Few studies have estimated mortality resulting from GI complications of NSAIDs. Among the available reports, estimates attributable to NSAIDs have widely varied from 3,200 to higher than 16,500 deaths per yr in the United States.

http://www.nature.com/ajg/journal/v100/n8/full/ajg2005305a.html

Compare the above estimates of deaths from NSAID use alone, and compare this to 33 deaths from supplements. Please.

 

[JPV]

In general though, I dislike the idea of governments regulating everything that has the potential to be the least bit dangerous. If following this line of argument, I must ask why alcohol, cigarettes and weapons are available to the public? How about transfats, food additives and untested chemicals in cosmetics and household products? Why are these things not more heavily regulated?

Publicly safety is just an excuse to facilitate enacting legislation. The government could care less about our safety. Their main concern is making their corporate donors wealthier.

 

[boohealth]

Google "barcode of life" and do some research on the technique. It's accurate. DNA barcoding has identified 200,000 species already. In fact, they have discovered new species (ie wasps they thought were one species, turn out to be separate species and parasitize different caterpillars.) Applying it to herbs/plants is easy enough. The story is accurate.

I wouldn't expect them to contain enzymes. I'm talking about processes that may be involved during manufacture. Others that can break down DNA include heat and pH extremes.

I am just trying to get the scientific facts behind the analytical methods and whether they were completely sound. It's important to question scientific claims. This does not mean that one is saying that they are false. Hopefully there will be responses to this report to to answer these necessary questions.

 

[MeSci]

Google "barcode of life" and do some research on the technique. It's accurate. DNA barcoding has identified 200,000 species already. In fact, they have discovered new species (ie wasps they thought were one species, turn out to be separate species and parasitize different caterpillars.) Applying it to herbs/plants is easy enough. The story is accurate.

I don't use Google. I use a charity search engine.

I am very well aware that DNA identifies species. I studied genetics for my Bachelor's degree.

What I am trying to find out relates to the survival of DNA into supplements.

 

[boohealth]

I don't use Google. I use a charity search engine.

I am very well aware that DNA identifies species. I studied genetics for my Bachelor's degree.

What I am trying to find out relates to the survival of DNA into supplements.

@MeSci -- Why wouldn't DNA "survive" in saw palmetto, echinacea, allium(actually ALL the allium supplements had allium. One saw palmetto supplement had saw palmetto, the rest none at all), etc. Not one echinacea supplement had echinacea. They are just plants/herbs. Just dried and ground--

Of course the DNA survives..

Google has become slang for "search". Most people use google, but you can use whatever search engine you choose, to research what is currently happening with BOL (barcode of life)

 

[barbc56]

In general though, I dislike the idea of governments regulating everything that has the potential to be the least bit dangerous

Don't want to take this off topic again but i am not saying this. It's the issue that what's on the label is what you are actually getting. If you aren't, then that's a dangerous situation. This would apply to any product and not exclusive to supplements. Edit. Wrote this to clarify my reasoning for regulation which is a bit different than @adreno's take.

I think @MeSci is asking if the testing is valid?

Barb

 

[adreno]

Don't want to take this off topic again but i am not saying this. It's the issue that what's on the label is what you are actually getting. If you aren't, then that's a dangerous situation. This would apply to any product and not exclusive to supplements.

Actually, you did advocate for more regulation. This is a quote you posted:

Nutritional science is very complex. If these substances are effective, they are acting as drugs and should be regulated as such. Given the clear potential for harm, and even death, from these unregulated supplements, and the lack of ethics in the absence of strong prohibitions, it is time for better laws. But meanwhile, let the buyers beware.

And you posted:

Companies who make supplements, do not have to report adverse events. They do not have to show that their product might have side effects. At least pharmaceutical medications go through a fairly rigorous process and are studied before marketed, which gives a bit more assurance when it comes to future problems.

The above has nothing to do with the label fitting the contents. And as I said earlier, high quality (pharmaceutical grade) supplements are available, if you are only worried about contents.

 

[barbc56]

Yes, I am a very strong advocate for supplements being regulated.

I think some of us confused the two threads and started talking about the pros and cons of supplements in general. But I reread the opening post and it looks like this thread was much more specific. Whether the results of the testing showing inconsistencies were valid.

I think.

So what I was saying is that I'm not sure opinions about supplements being regulated, dangerous, whatever are relavant to that topic.

Barb

 

[Sherlock]

I don't use Google.