Available Now:
Victory Over the FDA

he Food and Drug Administration would have us believe that they are our protectors and that it is their mandate to prevent the mercenary world of business from taking advantage of us. With this assumption, the FDA has asserted that the Bill of Rights - specifically, the First Amendment (the right to free speech) - of the United States Constitution does not apply to commerce. Thus, the entire healthcare industry is at their mercy and is assumed guilty until proven innocent for expressing any conclusions not explicitly endorsed or permitted by the FDA.

Now, with the availability of The Pearson v. Shalala and Bulwark of Liberty Awards videotape, you can learn the truth about the suppression of biomedical information in the United States, and how a small but exceedingly brave group of individuals is successfully challenging the information tyranny of the FDA.

Life extension scientists Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw, along with alternative physician Dr. Julian Whitaker and constitutional lawyer Jonathan Emord, fervently disagree with the FDA's belief that the First Amendment is void where prohibited by its edicts. It is the indomitable conviction of Pearson, Shaw, et al. that the FDA must obey the supreme law of the land. They are saying, "We aren't going to take this anymore!"

While there are many who speak out against bureaucratic tyranny, few are courageous enough to take action - and actions speak louder than words. This is especially true when the actions are a reasoned and impassioned response to the prohibition of free speech about life-saving health information. Then, actions can roar like a rocket at liftoff.

Although the regulators at the FDA do not believe that advertising is protected by the First Amendment, this was not the belief of the Founding Fathers - many of whom were involved in some kind of commerce - nor is it the belief of Pearson, Shaw, Whitaker, Emord, and a band of others (including us at Life Enhancement Products) who support their efforts to take this matter all the way to the United States Supreme Court. We believe that commercial speech is as deserving of constitutional protection as noncommercial speech, regardless of whether or not it is "truthful and not misleading."*

*In today’s political climate, being "truthful and not misleading" is considered to make something more worthy of protection under the First Amendment. Yet the Founding Fathers had no such qualification in mind and are undoubtedly spinning in their graves over the political need to justify free speech.

The Pearson v. Shalala and Bulwark of Liberty Awards videotape opens with a rousing rendition of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" by gospel singer Alma Randolph, setting the stage for the "rockets' red glare" - the political fireworks that are to follow. The one-hour-and-twelve-minute video (VHS format) celebrates the victory of a small group of patriotic Americans who stood up against the FDA Goliath for the cause of free speech and the right to air important biomedical ideas - and won!

In their acceptance speech, Durk and Sandy - who initiated the lawsuit that is bringing the giant regulatory agency to its knees - declare that the stakes are far greater than anyone had imagined. When you tally, says Durk, the lives that have been needlessly lost since their lawsuit began - 10,000 lives taken by neural tube defects (preventable with the use of folic acid), 350,000 lives lost due to homocysteinemia (preventable with the use of vitamins B6 and B12 and folic acid), and 1,000,0000 lives lost due to coronary heart disease (preventable with the use of omega-3 fatty acids in fish oils) - the total number is staggering.

Indeed, this number is greater than that of all the Americans who died in the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Gulf War combined. When you realize that these preventable losses are attributable to the FDA - which has refused to allow the dissemination of life-saving information by commercial interests - it is plausible to consider that the FDA is the existential equivalent of our wartime enemies.

More than anything, the video is a documentary about a group of heroic individuals who hold as their goal the promotion of ideas that could liberate us from premature death and provide us with a new lease on life. While the FDA does not yet comprehend the magnitude of the lawsuits against them, they are beginning to feel the heat. On July 16, 2001, Jonathan Emord, on behalf of the Pearson/Shaw litigants, filed suit against the FDA and three agency officials over whether certain anticancer claims for antioxidant vitamins may be presented on product labeling.

The three top officials of the FDA named in the action are being sued personally. They must worry about the extent of their liability and whether their ability to make a living may be threatened if they continue to impede the free-speech rights of individuals in the healthcare industry.

As you will see, the outcome is not inevitable, and winning will require our dedicated effort and our moral and financial support. So when you purchase your copy of The Pearson v. Shalala and Bulwark of Liberty Awards videotape about the activities of modern-day patriots walking in the footsteps of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Patrick Henry, you will be contributing to their legal expenses.

All proceeds will go to the Pearson & Shaw Litigation Fund, to fuel continued constitutional challenges to the excesses of regulatory agencies that threaten free speech and the dissemination of life-saving knowledge that is so crucial to achieving health, longevity, and prosperity in the twenty-first century.

Featured Product

FREE Subscription

  • You're just getting started! We have published thousands of scientific health articles. Stay updated and maintain your health.

    It's free to your e-mail inbox and you can unsubscribe at any time.
    Loading Indicator