I sometimes feel as if I’ve become callous to U.S. Food and Drug Administration outrages. The agency approves drugs later discovered to have life-threatening side effects, it approves fancy medical devices similarly found to have serious problems and, as we all know, it’s waging a no-holds-barred war on raw milk.

As accustomed as I am to its ongoing outrages, I’ve found it difficult to stop thinking about one particular action, first announced in February, and reported on last week by the New York Times. It has approved use of a statin, a cholesterol-lowering drug, for use on people who don’t necessarily have high cholesterol, but rather have high readings of a protein that measures inflammation, known at the C-Reactive Protein (CRP), plus a risk factor like high blood pressure or low readings of “good” cholesterol (HDL).

The FDA decision is really a continuation of a trend to lower the thresholds for prescribing drugs to otherwise healthy people—it’s done the same thing with blood pressure medications. According to the NY Times, the effect could be to create more than six million new customers for Crestor, the statin made by AstraZeneca. You might call it “gaming” the system on behalf of the drug companies by using routine medical test results to enlarge their markets. Enough to make a marketing professional salivate—with government regulators promoting your product, who needs advertising?

What’s especially upsetting about this latest decision is that the FDA’s announcement about the statin decision doesn’t even mention the word “food,” not to mention other words like nutritional supplements, exercise, yoga, meditation.

Of course, getting rid of sugars and processed foods, and increasing consumption of fish oils and other sources of good fats, can help in raising HDL levels (as can exercise); yoga and meditation can help reduce blood pressure. Such steps reduce inflammation as well.

Yet the FDA doesn’t even acknowledge such natural approaches, let alone recommend them. After getting myself ever more worked up about this FDA sleight-of-hand, I came to discover that lots of other people are similarly upset. I went back to the original New York Times article and discovered that nearly 500 people have posted comments and, from what I can see, most wonder about the same issues: What about the roles of diet and exercise and other natural techniques in lowering blood pressure, increasing HDL, and reducing inflammation?

Many of these letters also describe problems the writers have had with statins—muscle pain, liver inflammation, and so on. Oh wait, I keep forgetting, these are anecdotal. They don’t count.

Maybe for that reason, the FDA didn’t mention side effects, although statins are well known for creating muscle and liver problems. Plus, the NY Times article even mentions a statistically increased risk for diabetes.

And all this assumes that lowering risk of heart disease is the be-all and end-all. That may not be a valid assumption, but it certainly would be a valid assumption that the FDA sees drugs as the be-all and end-all in improving health.

***

It was more than two years ago that the New York Department of Agriculture and Markets obtained an administrative search warrant to gain entrance to aMeadowsweet Dairy in New York, which runs  limited liability company that provides raw dairy products to more than 100 shareholders. Now that two court decisions have given Ag & Markets authority to regulate the LLC, it would seem that the matter of the search warrant is moot, and indeed, a state court last month ruled against Meadowsweet and its argument that the search warrant was improperly used.

But when the Ag & Markets lawyer told a state judge last month that the agency sees the 2007 search warrant as still valid, that apparently caught the judge’s Bill of Rights radar, and he asked for new arguments on the warrant.

So the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund has prepared a new brief, essentially arguing that search warrants are only valid under New York law for ten days, after which the agency holding the warrant must seek a new one. In other words, search warrants can’t be “continuing” in nature, nor can they be validated by the agency that wants to make the search. A hearing is scheduled for April 23. If the judge were to throw out the search warrant, presumably it could call into question at least some of the state’s evidence against the Meadowsweet LLC. Stay tuned.

***

Given all the recent discussion about illness outbreaks in the Midwest among Weston A. Price Foundation members, it’s nice to see Kim Hartke, who is the public relations person for the foundation, with a detailed blog posting on how to cope with food-borne illness. It’s written by Sarah Pope, a WAPF chapter leader, who’s endured a number of bouts of food-borne illness. She suggests probiotic drinks to head off or recover from illness, and also suggests holding off on raw milk in such instances.

***

It’s getting late, but there’s still time to register for the Second Annual International Raw Milk Symposium, being held in Madison, WI, on Saturday. The theme: “Claiming Consumer Rights”. I’ll be there and am very much looking forward to meeting researchers, dairy farmers, and consumers alike.