I noticed a possible inconsistency in your post, and I was wondering if you could clarify it for me. You write:
Normally, new additions to the food supply should be tested for safety before allowed to enter the marketplace. Since Michael Taylor just happened to be running the FDA at that time, he let it pass without requiring the typical testing.
However, you also berate the FDA for taking too long to approve certain drugs. Couldn't you argue that they are just being overly cautious?
Also, how is the FDA keeping other countries from doing research on drugs?
Hey, thanks for your comment. Good questions too. To be honest, I wrote this years ago. Where did I say the FDA takes too long to approve drugs? I skimmed it a few times and didn't see it. Maybe in the video? I"m not sure sorry.
I don't know as much about how other countries operate. But the FDA only has jurisdiction here in the US. However, the pharmaceutical companies are worldwide. Other countries do allow some natural things to be used as treatment for diseases. In that way some countries are more advanced than us. So if you're out of the country you can say "xyz herb" can be used to treat cancer (if in fact it is used for that there) but it's illegal to say the same thing here, in the land of the free.
For example, a lot of the medicinal mushrooms are used in conjunction with chemo and radiation in some other countries. It mitigates a lot of the harmful effects and even makes the treatment work better. But we don't do that here. So doctors can't do it, recommend it, and that's even if they know about it, which most don't. They only know what they're taught in school and are required by law to follow procedure or risk getting their license taken away.