Is the FDA really out to take away our health freedom?
April 23, 2007
As human beings, we seem to love to have enemies who we can blame for all of our ills. If we can just rid ourselves of the enemy, whether it is cancer, a political party, an ethnic group, a religion, a person, everything will be better. We want to see things in black and white terms, as all good or all bad. It makes us feel some sense of control and safety. We can align ourselves with the good guys and make war on the bad guys. It is very hard to live in the “grey area” that is clearly there if we take the time to really look at all the angles of any particular phenomena or issue. No one person, no one thing, is all good or all bad.
In the past week I’ve received dozens of emails from friends and colleagues identifying the FDA as the enemy who is threatening our health freedom — freedom of access to alternative therapies and products of our choosing. The email contains a message from Rima E. Laibow, MD stating that: “The FDA is using legal maneuvering to end your access to natural health products… and natural health therapies of all sorts.” She states that this is being done through the FDA’s Guidance for Industry on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Products and Their Regulation by the Food and Drug Administration. She asks that you take action through her website using the following link: http://tinyurl.com/2u7ghc. There you can sign a message to the FDA.
I wonder how many people visited her Natural Solution Foundation’s website and signed their name to the message without reading the message and without ever reading the FDA document to which the message refers. How many were willing to take the word of the Natural Solutions Foundation at face value without ever investigating the issue themselves?
I am a passionate advocate of health freedom (freedom of access to products and therapies of our choice, whether they be conventional or alternative). I have reservations about the FDA making decisions about the usefulness and safety of many alternative therapies, and I don’t have much trust that a medication is safe because the FDA has approved it. At the same time, I don’t think the FDA is out to deprive us of all access to alternative therapies. Therefore I read the Guidance myself. (You can read the Guidance itself at this link: http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/06d-0480-gld0001.pdf.)
I couldn’t find justification for many of the Natural Solution Foundation’s statements in the FDA document. For example, they state that “their (the FDA) ploy is to declare the therapies are “Medicine” so any non-physician who uses them will be practicing medicine without a license.” I don’t see anything like that in the Guidance. People have jumped to all sorts of conclusions about the what the Guidance is saying and what the implications of it are that I simply can’t see there.
The other day a friend expressed her upset about what the FDA is supposedly doing — “no one will be able to do Reiki if they aren’t a doctor”. As complicated as the FDA Guidance is, it’s quite clear to me that it does not mean that. There is specific reference to bodywork practitioners who manipulate the bodies of their clients without use of equipment not being subject to the FDA’s jurisdiction. If bodywork is exempt, certainly Reiki, in which the practitioner doesn’t even manipulate the body, would be exempt. Having not read the Guidance herself, my friend had jumped to conclusions based on a message in an email containing someone else’s interpretation of the Guidance.
The point of my post is not to try to analyze the FDA Guidance or Laibow’s position. To do justice to that I’d have to do a lot of reading and study. What I want to focus on is my concern that the same bipartisanship that we see in national politics is being reflected in the realm of health politics. There’s a tendency in many of us (including myself) to want either alternative or conventional medicine to be all right or all wrong. This kind of thinking doesn’t allow us to work together to find the best solutions. These issues are very complex and not subject to simplistic solutions.
There is also a tendency to rely on the opinion of experts and authorities. What’s interesting is that even those of us who feel we’re liberated because we don’t follow the advice of a doctor blindly, are still willing to follow the advice of an alternative “expert”. We find a new authority and don’t even recognize that we are still not thinking for ourselves. The willingness to look into the complexities of an issue and form ones own opinions, as well as the willingness to live in the “grey area” where there are no simple solutions, isn’t easy. But I feel we need to develop this willingness to really progress.
On emotional healing — moods vs. emotions
April 13, 2007
An essential key to emotional healing, or any healing, is the ability to experience our emotions fully. Seems like that should be simple, but it’s not. We’re incredibly complex beings whose past conditioning often makes the experience of emotions complicated. From the point of view of energy medicine, emotions are a form of energy and energy needs to flow freely for health. When emotional energy is moving unobstructed, an emotion will be felt with clarity and intensity and will be short-lived.
What happens when the emotions cannot be experienced in this way? My sense is that not only would the obstructed energy impact the body, but we would also experience it subjectively in the form of “moods”. For example, I feel that depression can sometimes be accounted for by the inability to feel sadness and grief fully. The energy that would have been felt as sadness accumulates when it is repressed and is then experienced as depression. In this model, sadness would be a primary human emotion and depression would be a mood.
I first began to think in terms of moods and emotions when I attended a workshop several years ago with a physician who studied with David Berenson, MD. Berenson trained as a psychiatrist and family therapist and has spent many years developing what he calls the “Map of Emotions”. He distinguishes between true human feelings and moods which are thoughts permeated with feeling. The Map of Emotions details which emotions are the foundation for which moods and names the various moods and emotions we experience in great detail. The essence of the workshop was that healing requires that we be able to experience the pure emotion all the way through in order to allow the moods to be resolved. We worked with a simple process in pairs to allow this to happen.
I haven’t been able to find anything in writing about Berenson’s work and certainly don’t feel I can represent his thinking. The distinction between moods and emotions, however, has stuck with me.
It can be very useful to learn to distinguish emotions and moods in ourselves. The mood can be resolved by locating the raw emotion within it. If moods are “thoughts permeated with feeling”, we can disentangle the feeling from the thought by bringing our awareness to the feeling. Simply experiencing the feeling all the way allows it to move through and the mood can be resolved.
Moods extend in time and they color our perceptions and evaluation of things. Mental involvement with the emotion keeps the energy from being released. The key to a healthy emotional life is the ability to allow the emotions to be experienced freely. To do this, we need to let the mind take a back seat and trust the natural flow of life as it expresses itself in emotion.
(I’ve created a guided meditation on my Meditation Oasis podcast called “Emotional Ease” which is designed to help the emotions to flow freely. You can hear it at iTunes or by following this link.)