SJR101 and S1017 grants authority to an unelected federal alphabet soup bureaucracy over drug policy in the state. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
At least one Republican Senator, Christy Zito (Hammett), spoke against the measure. Zito said that the legislature can’t legislate temperance and morality but said she is personally against using recreational drugs.
Zito went on to say,
I just think that as we approach this, we need to be careful that we honor the choice of the individual, that we are careful not to combine policy with [the] constitution.
Senator Christy Zito
Sen. C. Scott Grow (R-Eagle) the bill’s sponsor said the measure was necessary to protect Idaho’s families. Grow listed off a number of reasons he is bringing the proposal forward.
This proposes an amendment to the Idaho Constitution prohibiting the production, manufacture, transportation, sale, delivery, dispensing, distribution, possession, or use of certain psychoactive drugs.
Grow listed as one of the reasons,
This amendment will allow Idahoans to choose for themselves whether they want to live in a drug-free state, free from drug culture, or not.
Senator C. Scott Grow
Grow continued with seven total reasons and said that burdens and risks to law enforcement. Grow addressed a number of questions in his opening statement, including saying that having the FDA listed in the amendment is not a concern.
Grow also said that CBD oil would not be illegal under SJR 101 citing several attorneys he had spoken to. (read more here: Idaho Dispatch )
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Keep in mind that this is a constitutional amendment so the legislature is voting whether or not to add this to the ballot for voters.
What they don’t tell you is that the explanation of the issue on the ballot is essentially a commercial for the way they want you to vote. You would think that the information on the ballot would weigh out the pros and cons in such a way that the people, (with a pencil in hand) could make an educated vote, but it doesn’t.
This is how we got stuck with Medicaid expansion that ID cannot afford. Why would we change our Constitution to say psychoactive drugs are never allowed in ID unless the FDA says so?
Shouldn’t Idahoans have the opportunity to consider what is best for our great state?
What this amendment says is if the FDA says they want to have a “documented clinical investigation” using psychoactive drugs (Page 2 lines 9 & 10) on Idahoans, that’s ok.
But, if someone fighting cancer needs to use it medicinally that’s not ok?!? If passed, the amendment would effectively and permanently close the door for marijuana legalization via citizen’s ballot initiative.
Absolute waste of time, money, and resources. We should be focusing on keeping this state free instead of fueling the pockets of big pharma and changing the constitution to make something “more” illegal than it already is. You are punishing veterans and others who need medical marijuana and any other medications in the future to combat continuing pain.
Facebook Comment against SJR101
We need to keep the federal government from dictating what is good for Idahoans! Let’s keep Idaho sovereign.
Another federal supremacy bill. This bill mirrors the FDA controlled substances scheduling and rescheduling decisions for 2020 including placing synthetic cannabinoids in schedule 1 while placing opiates in schedule 2. Idahoans should be making decisions for ID. Period.
***The 10th Amendment to the US Constitution says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Let’s remind our senators of the 10th amendment and tell them to vote NO on S1017.
Senate email list https://hfi.designbyparrish.com/2021-senate-email-list/. ***This bill will likely be heard on the Senate floor tomorrow.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the United States. Conventional therapies cause widespread systemic toxicity and lead to serious side effects that prohibit their long term use. Additionally, in many circumstances, tumor resistance and recurrence is commonly observed.
The use of cytotoxic chemotherapy drugs to destroy cancer cells remains the standard treatment for patients with metastatic cancer. Cytotoxic drugs inhibit cell division and in this way cause cancer cells to die. The efficacy of these treatments is limited, with recurrence common.
Therefore, there is an urgent need to identify suitable anticancer therapies that are highly precise with minimal side effects. Curcumin is a natural polyphenol molecule derived from the Curcuma longa plant which exhibits anticancer, chemo-preventive, chemo- and radio-sensitization properties. Curcumin’s widespread availability, safety, low cost, and multiple cancer-fighting functions justify its development as a drug for cancer treatment.
Curcumin has been shown to have numerous cytotoxic effects on cancer stem cells (CSCs) yet curcumin has little toxicity against normal stem cells (NSCs).
In order to overcome common major obstacles in conventional cancer therapeutics, scientists are searching for effective treatments within alternative medicine, complementary medicine, and supplements. The National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health (USA) recognizes complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) as prevention/treatment options (http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/cam).
Natural herbal compounds or daily food ingredients are widely studied to learn their specific roles in anticancer activities [2, 3]. Unlike first-line cancer therapeutic drugs, herbal and natural compounds are capable of targeting cancer(s) via several pathways and are, therefore, more valuable and reliable in producing superior therapeutic effects in a disease condition (multiple pathogenic factors) [4, 6].
It is believed that herbal medicine brings new hope for cancer prevention due to the safety of herbs and lack of discernible toxicity to normal cells. This alternative approach has been used to treat a wide spectrum of cancers.
December 2019, the FDA is on track to reject fully 95% of the 300+ nominated natural ingredients used by patients as compounded medications, despite a long history of safe use and patient need including curcumin.
With this pressing need to find alternative less toxic and more effective anticancer therapies, what could the FDA’s reasoning be to eliminate access to curcumin for individuals with cancer?
Comments from the public to the FDA closed the beginning of December. However, You can still make your voice heard.
This upcoming decision to be made by the FDA this January could take away public access to natural substances that have been providing healing to a significant number of people, specifically those dealing with cancer and other chronic illnesses. UPDATED WITH VIDEO FROM DR. KARLFELDT & Miste Karlfeldt, Executive Director of HFI
Dr. Michael Karlfeldt and Dr. Paul Anderson discuss what we can do to protect our access to things that are saving people’s lives. Dr. Anderson has been testifying and attending hearings at the FDA, where the fate of a large number of natural medicines have been under review for several years. December 4 is the last opportunity for public comment.
“In reality, what it comes down to is everything will automatically be illegal to compound, except whatever tiny fraction of substances of the already small group deemed worthy by the FDA.”
TAKE ACTION! The fate of a large number of natural medicines is under review by the FDA. COMMENT TODAY TO PROTECT YOUR ACCESS TO NATURAL SUBSTANCES that have been used for 100’s if not 1000’s of years. Comment Period Closes December 4th.
The impact on those with Cancer seeking treatment
Dr. Karlfeldt: Medically, there are a minimal amount of options for those with Cancer. If the medical community had solved Cancer it wouldn’t be any need for any other therapy. But currently, Cancer is one of the leading causes of death. One of the four people is going to die from Cancer. One natural substance that has been used effectively against cancer when all other treatment has failed is curcumin. It’s one of 240 substances on the list to become prohibited to use by compounding pharmacies.
How Did This All Come About?
Dr. Anderson: The process started the FDA asked for the natural health community that uses these things and the pharmacies that make them nominate substances. This is because the FDA didn’t know what was being made. It seemed pretty innocuous back then. So the community nominated about 300 substances, many of them natural substances or compounds that are either nutrients or herbs or parts of herbs or even mineral and vitamins, amino acids that are in our body already.
Of the 300 the FDA looked at them and basically chose 80 of the 300 to have hearing on to determine their scientific validity. The FDA then determined that everything else, about 240 substances, had no merit. They did not have a scientific review hearing.
These substances included things such as Alfalfa, Aloe, Ginkgo, Green Tea, Nettle leaf and 235 other natural substances that will not get a review hearing. The regulatory agency refuses to hear about the benefits of these natural substances. The FDA says they should be illegal to the compound.
The Fate of Curcumin (and the other 240 natural substances)If the FDA process is enacted as a federal rule, these substances will automatically become illegal to compound, without even having had a hearing. Comments close on December 4. Take a moment to comment.
Dr. Karlfeldt: A natural substance like curcumin is giving an option for people over other therapies that have failed and now FDA is wanting to take that substance away from public access. Dr. Anderson: Curcumin. I think it’s a good example because almost everybody’s heard of curcumin at this point.
Used widely worldwide, there is something like 50,000 scientific papers about curcumin as medicine and many of them address cancer or inflammatory diseases etc. The FDA is posed to remove public access to the natural substance.
What substances are affected?
This is abbreviated list comes from the interview with Dr. Anderson with Journal of Restorative Medicine
Lactobacillus acidophilus, alfalfa, anise seed, certain types of copper, certain types of magnesium, a lot of minerals, a number of herbal substances that might be used in a compounded sense, and a whole host of things nominated by pharmacists that aren’t used as medicine but are used as binders or excipients (such as powdered milk) and would become illegal according to this list for a pharmacy to use.
This action by the FDA would not affect your supplements supplier where you buy an oral pill. It would affect every other form that could be made by a legal pharmacy.
Isn’t the FDA protecting us from these unproven agents?
Dr. Anderson: So the process is really in my mind very unfair, and I’ve been a part of the process since the beginning. So that people know I’m speaking from primary experience. I helped write some of the testimony initially for all these substances. And then I’ve gone back to testify to the FDA over the last four years.
So it’s really frustrating. As a clinician, it doesn’t make logical sense that pharmacy licensed by the state board of pharmacy and regulated through FDA rules and USP rules would seem to be the safest place to get something made it, so I needed something specific.
And what date they would not be able to have it will be illegal for that pharmacy to help you. You would think that if you had really good science and you had an excellent argument, you could prevail and win. But that is not the case.
I’ve been at the hearing, and what happens it’s basically if the FDA does not want to a substance ( regardless of the science) to be available for compounding, then it won’t pass the hearing.
The FDA board has its mind made up prior to the hearings and do not change regardless of what science and evidence are presented.
The FDA can (and does) refuse to acknowledge the evidence and ignore the published science in order to stick with their decision to deny the use of a natural substance.
Isn’t it a matter of science?
Dr. Anderson: It is surprising and less you’re in the business of looking up research about nutrients and herbs and how much resources and references are available in any other natural things like licorice extract it’s been around forever with studies from all over the world. However, the way the FDA hearings are set up, if these substances do not have some very clear medical indication for which they are the only treatments, the FDA essentially tells the committee that they should not approve it.
The end goal is regulating the use of natural substances out of existence.
Is this about taking away competition from the drug side?
Dr. Anderson: The FDA tribunal said at the hearings, numerous times that they trusted the pharmaceutical companies more than they trusted the natural health community. A pharmaceutical company can’t make money on any natural substance.
Let’s talk again about curcumin. It is a natural substance the pharmaceutical industry can’t patent. So it has to be altered into a chemical – then it becomes more dangerous, more regulated but more profitable.
Dr. Anderson: There is a perfect example LIPOCURC. At the same time, we were working with the NHS integrative cancer research, a pharmaceutical company was running trials on an altered form of curcumin. We were using intervenous curcumin with an FDA registered pharmacy infusing it, without changing the molecule. A pharmaceutical company changed the curcumin molecularly so they could patent it. When we received a safety paper from their trials, we saw that they had issues at high doses. With the natural substances, we used the pathologist remarked that the blood looked better after the IV. The pharmaceutical version caused damage to the blood.
No pharmaceutical company is going to make or sell a natural substance because it can’t be patented and profited from, even if it benefits the patients.
What Can I Do?
Comment immediately Your comments may not slow down the process initially, but will give the lawyers ammunition as they appeal the FDA decision.
If you are a practitioner. Comment. If you are a patient using one of the 300 substances. Comment. Even if you don’t use a listed product now – Comment.
Dr. Paul Anderson, N.M.D., is a naturopathic medical doctor and Medical Director and Founder of the Anderson Medical Group. His facility Advanced Medical Therapies is the first of its kind in the U.S., offering therapies in multiple modalities based on his over two decades of research and patient care.
Dr. Michael Karlfeldt, ND, Ph.D, is a Board Certified Naturopath (CTN® ) with expertise in IV Therapy, Applied Psycho Neurobiology, Oxidative Medicine, Naturopathic Oncology, Neural Therapy, Sports Performance, Energy Medicine, Natural Medicine, Nutritional Therapies, Aromatherapy, Auriculotherapy, Reflexology, Autonomic Response Testing (ART) and Anti-Aging Medicine. The Karlfeldt Center is a comprehensive health treatment center that provides proven natural healthcare solutions for all ages and conditions.
Today, your body is dealing with more than 10,000 food additive chemicals, all of which are allowed to be added (directly or indirectly) to food. And that’s only the chemicals allowed to be in your food! Many of these chemicals have not been proven safe for children and in fact a significant loophole in our processed food system: Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) allows food companies to get a free pass to use whatever chemical additives they want in our food with little to no oversight.
Shockingly, due to the way new additives are reviewed the FDA simply cannot guarantee the safety of most ingredients, which we now know can affect our health at nanoparticle doses – much lower than was previously expected – and the FDA does not have authority to obtain data on or reassess the safety of chemicals already on the market. Additionally, conflicts of interest with industry, prevent adequate and accurate safety data from ever being acquired or seeing the light of day.
American Academy of Pediatrics issued the guidelines in a statement and scientific-technical report on Monday,. The group joins other medical and advocacy groups that have expressed concern about the growing body of scientific evidence indicating that certain chemicals that enter foods may interfere with the body’s natural hormones in ways that may affect long-term growth and development.
Food Additives in your food, on your food, leeching into your food.
This term, food additives, is the whole set of artificial colorings, flavorings, and chemicals added to food during processing, which are known as “direct food additives”, but there’s also a whole category of “indirect food additives” we tend to forget about: think adhesives, dyes, coatings, paper, paperboard, plastic, and other polymers, which are introduced to foods during the manufacturing process and through food packaging. Some food additives of concern are bisphenols phthalates, PFCs, food colors, nitrates, and nitrites – but there are obviously a lot more.
AAP called out these chemicals of increasing concern:
bisphenols, which are used in the lining of metal cans to prevent corrosion45;
phthalates, which are esters of diphthalic acid that are often used in adhesives, lubricants, and plasticizers during the manufacturing process17;
nonpersistent pesticides, which have been addressed in a previous policy statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics and, thus, will not be discussed in this statement46;
perfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFCs), which are used in grease-proof paper and packaging47; and
perchlorate, an antistatic agent used for plastic packaging in contact with dry foods with surfaces that do not contain free fat or oil and also present as a degradation product of bleach used to clean food manufacturing equipment.48
Additional compounds of concern discussed in the accompanying technical report include artificial food colors, nitrates, and nitrites.
This issue is of great importance and concern for chemicals approved decades ago on the basis of limited and sometimes antiquated testing methods. For instance, some compounds, such as styrene and eugenol methyl ether, remain approved for use as flavoring agents, although they have been subsequently classified as reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens by the US National Toxicology Program.67 -AAP
Groups Sue FDA to Protect Food Safety Seek to Ensure Food Additives Are Found Safe Before Being Marketed to American Consumers
Chemical and food manufacturers often seek to add chemicals to processed food, typically to enhance flavor, add nutrients, or prevent spoilage. Chemicals also often leach into foods from processing equipment and packaging. While Congress has required that FDA itself determine that chemical additives are safe before they can be used in food, the FDA rule allows manufacturers to decide for and by themselves—in secret—what can be added to processed foods. The groups assert this rule is unconstitutional and illegal. READ MORE https://cspinet.org/news/groups-sue-fda-protect-food-safety-20170522
How are Food Additives Affecting Children?
According to a recent paper by the American Academy of Pediatrics, common food additives (in concentrations most of us deal with in daily life) are linked with: endocrine disruption, insulin resistance, reduced immune response, thyroid hormone alterations, and neonatal hypothyroidism. Here’s what we know: the health dangers of food additives are especially high during pregnancy, infancy, early childhood, and even through the teenage years when the lungs, endocrine, and nervous systems are still developing.
Children are naturally more vulnerable to the effects of food additives because of their surface area-to-body weight ratio and immature detoxification abilities. The potential for endocrine system disruption from food additives and chemical exposure is bigger in children than for us grown ups, and carries a risk of permanent and lifelong imbalances.
No wonder we’ve seen such a spike in health concerns in children and women over the three decades during the time our volume of our exposure has also escalated. I certainly see it reflected in my medical practice: children suffering from anxiety, depression, obesity, autoimmune diseases, early puberty, and so much more, all of which was mostly unheard of only a few decades ago!
Watch this important interview with Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatric environmental medicine pioneer.
What Can I Do Today to Protect My Kids?
Here’s what you can do starting right now to avoid food additives to support your children’s health. The encouraging news is that previous studies have shown that these changes can make a difference in children’s blood levels of environmental toxins in as little as three days.
1. Eat Healthy
This first tip might seem like a no-brainer, but what do we really mean when we say “Eat Healthy?” In the context of food additives and their effects on children, it means prioritizing fresh or frozen fruits and veggies, and choosing local and organic as much as possible to avoid contaminants, or at least avoiding all processed animal products (meat, dairy). The Environmental Working Group Clean 15and Dirty Dozen is an easy chart for making choices when it comes to organic vs. conventional produce.
Encourage hand-washing before handling foods and/or drinks, and wash all fruits and vegetables that cannot be peeled.
Keep in mind, good nutrition boosts your child’s immunity and supports natural detoxification.
Avoid processed meats, which are heavy in nitrates and nitrites, as well as canned foods (metal cans are lined with bisphenols to prevent corrosion… except then you’re left with contaminated food).
2. Invest in better food storage containers
Some lifestyle habits can help reduce exposure to food additives and other harmful chemicals involved with food preparation and handling. Mostly, it all comes down to avoiding plastic as best you can. Most plastic containers leach endocrine-disrupting chemicals into your food and beverages. Replace plastic containers with stainless steel or glass alternatives as much as possible. The same goes for plastic water bottles – I personally use Mason jars or Kleen Canteen bottles which are practically unbreakable (I’ve had the same one for over a decade and have dropped it onto concrete several times!). They make kids drinking bottles with sippy spouts in fun colors!
If you do use plastic containers and bottles, follow these simple steps to minimize their health risk: don’t use them to heat foods or liquids in the microwave, and wash them by hands rather than in the dishwasher.
Finally, check out the recycling codes on your plastic containers before you purchase food items, to find the plastic type, and avoid plastics with recycling codes 3 (phthalates), 6 (styrene), and 7 (bisphenols) unless plastics are labeled as “biobased” or “greenware,” indicating that they are made from corn and do not contain bisphenols.
It would be naive to think that the FDA endeavors to protect the public’s health as its primary focus. Indeed, that would be a conflict of interest, as it serves its master, the pharmaceutical industry. Has the Food and Drug Administration engineered a shortage of intravenous vitamin C as part of an overall attack on natural and non-toxic approaches to healing that compete with prescription drugs? An analysis by Natural Blaze would suggest that the answer is yes.
Natural Blaze claims that a critical shortage of IV bags in general followed an FDA ban on the mass production of intravenous vitamin C. The FDA limited the availability of IV-C and the pharmaceutical industry halted production of injectable vitamins and minerals, after a 60 minute story about the miraculous recovery of a swine flu patient on life support. Because of the shortage of IV-C, doctors called upon compounding pharmacies to produce it. But the FDA began to limit compounding pharmacies after injectable steroids produced by the New England Compounding Center were contaminated with a fungus that caused a deadly outbreak of meningitis. Here is an example of an entire industry being punished for the dubious practices of one compounding pharmacy.
Try and follow this convoluted story: Doctors began to source NECC for its more expensive product because cheaper generic versions were in short supply. But it was the FDA’s increased inspection of drug factories that disrupted the supply chain in the first place. So the meningitis deaths were in part caused by the onerous actions of the FDA.
Natural Blaze reports, “… without anyone noticing, and by many indirect means of banning production of the bags or shutting down those doing the production of the bags and the injectable vitamins and minerals, access to IV solutions for innumerable treatments for diseases, have gone into critical shortage.”
Vitamin C and the Big C
Could the shortage of IV-C be part of an effort to limit alternative cancer therapies?
DrWhitaker.com states, “… vitamin C is a potent antioxidant that has the power to boost immune function, increase resistance to infection, and protect against a wide range of diseases. But there’s an entirely different and largely unknown role of vitamin C, and that is its ability—when administered in very high doses by intravenous (IV) infusions—to kill cancer cells. … Best of all—and unlike virtually all conventional chemotherapy drugs that destroy cancer cells—it is selectively toxic. No matter how high the concentration, vitamin C does not harm healthy cells.”
Dr. Whitaker continues:
“The only way to get blood levels of vitamin C to the concentrations required to kill cancer cells is to administer it intravenously. … For example, 10 g of IV vitamin C raises blood levels 25 times higher than the same dose taken orally, and this increases up to 70-fold as doses get larger.”
Choose health, choose life
When the human body is challenged by pathogens or needs to heal from injuries or surgery, its requirement for vitamin C increases considerably. If hospitals routinely administered intravenous ascorbic acid, a proven and inexpensive treatment, patient outcomes would improve. When one weighs the risk of infection from deadly superbugs in hospitals today, IV vitamin C as a preventative safeguard makes all the more sense.
To learn how to secure IV-C in advance of a hospital stay for yourself or a family member, check out this very useful advice at DoctorYourself.com. You will learn how to deal with objections from physicians and hospital administrators regarding this “alt-health” remedy. It will require some moxie, but doing so may save a life.
Supporters of Obamacare believe that access to affordable healthcare is the most important consideration. But of even greater concern should be the ability to choose your own treatment modality, such as IV-C. In other words, medical freedom of choice trumps universal access. Many of us involved in the health freedom movement are outraged by the disregard for our natural rights by unelected federal bureaucracies such as the FDA. We hope for a day when a critical mass of aware citizens will hold their elected officials accountable to overturn toxic policies that favor Big Pharma’s obscene profits over our health and well-being. And that day is long overdue.
If passed, the amendment would effectively and permanently close the door for marijuana legalization via citizen’s ballot initiative.
Senate email list https://hfi.designbyparrish.com/2021-senate-email-list/. ***This bill will likely be heard on the Senate floor tomorrow. 
https://legislature.idaho.gov/ses…/2021/legislation/S1017
