The FDA's report on antibiotics used in food animals asks pharmaceutical companies to voluntarily to reduce the sales of their antibiotic products sold for use in animal feed. If the success of FDA's approach strikes you as unlikely, you're not alone.
For as welcome as the new food safety programs are, the FDA is still plagued with problems. It moves at a glacial pace in the face of pressing health hazards, like its three-decade-long refusal to act on its own findings that the use of antibiotics in livestock feed threatens human health.
Fifteen people have died in an outbreak of meningitis contracted from contaminated spinal steroid injections. The numbers are growing, and so is awareness of a little-known corner of the pharmaceutical industry, compounding pharmacies, which is responsible for the tragedy.
In July 2012, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finally banned the use of BPA in baby bottles and children's drinking cups. Good news, to be sure, but why must we wait to have this likely carcinogen eliminated from our dietary supply entirely?
At stake is whether medical devices that are put in your body, cardiac stents, heart valves, knee and hip implants, among others, will be subject to safety tests in humans before they are approved by the FDA.
The dangers of an increasingly globalized supply chain for food and drugs are already visible. With imports and scandals rising, and government funding decreasing, the FDA will have to focus their limited resources to protect public health.
Imagine there is a food additive that slowly poisons you and can even kill you. Now imagine you have no way of knowing whether it is in your foods. Three million American celiacs and I find myself in this situation.