FTC attack on Dr. Mercola nothing but an attempt to intimidate natural health proponents... Mainstream press parroting all Big Pharma's talking points

FTC attack on Dr. Mercola nothing but an attempt to intimidate natural health proponents... Mainstream press parroting all Big Pharma's talking points

Tuesday, April 19, 2016 by: J. D. Heyes

Tags: Dr. Mercola, FTC settlement, tanning beds

Dr. Mercola

(NaturalNews) The federal government has put another notch in its regulatory belt as it forced a renowned physician who dared to push alternatives to traditional medicine to end a portion of his healthcare business and pay millions in fines to customers. And, of course, the mainstream media is parroting all of the government's (and Big Pharma's) talking points right on cue.

As reported by the Chicago Tribune, Dr. Joseph Mercola was forced to settle a claim of false advertising with the Federal Trade Commission for selling tanning beds that were designed not to cause cancer.

Following the settlement, Mercola will have to reimburse customers of the tanning beds, which he sold for between $1,200 and $4,000, some $5.3 million, while also promising never again to sell them.

The Trib reported further:

Mercola, 61, uses his website and books to back a number of discredited, fringe medical causes on topics that include vaccinations and fluoridated water. He stars in web videos for his company, Mercola Health Resources, and wrote articles in which he claimed cold winters in the Midwest meant Chicagoans, in particular, would benefit from his tanning beds, which he said could "reverse your wrinkles" and "slash your risk of cancer."


No condescension there, right?

Not only the FTC not only accused him of false advertising, but regulators also claimed that he paid the non-profit Vitamin D Council.

Feds getting to decide what is, and is not, 'scientific fact'
"These types of false claims are especially troubling because of the serious health risks posed by indoor tanning," said Jessica Rich, director of the FTC's bureau of consumer protection, in a news release. "The fact is, indoor tanning is not safe because it increases the risk of skin cancer, including melanoma."

The Trib made sure to mention that Mercola has been targeted by federal regulators in the past, which, to the educated eye, prove his claims that the government – pressed by Big Pharma – has been on a witch hunt for him ever since he began making inroads into alternative health.

As for his "deal," if it is approved by a federal judge – and it likely will be – the Trib reported it "would also ban Mercola from making false claims about any other product he sells," meaning, of course, that the government continues to reserve for itself the right to decide which claims are real and which are "false," based in no small part on donors with ties to traditional medicine.

On his website, Mercola explained why the FTC action was politically motivated, and that his advocacy of the use of UV light to boost vitamin D levels is both healthy and safe.

"For those who believe my controversial advocacy is unsupported, there are many considerations, and loads of research, that should be carefully evaluated," he said, adding that he was notified by the FTC of their intent to investigate him shortly after a Surgeon General "call to action" targeting tanning beds was released in July 2014.

He also noted that before the FTC's actions and the Surgeon General's warning, the government classified tanning beds as Class 1 Medical Device, which are considered by the Food and Drug Administration "to be low risk and are therefore subject to the least regulatory controls."

'Pharma-backed hit piece'
"My point of contention with the FTC, the surgeon general, and the [American Academy of Dermatology] is that the lack of flexibility in their stance is not based on the available science," Mercola wrote. "I am part of the scientific community convinced by extensive evidence that limited and controlled UV exposure, ideally from the sun but also if need-be from the limited and controlled use of a sun bed, is crucial to a healthy life."

He also noted the government's version of UV "science" in this case is grossly outdated:

My nutritional views and advice regarding the benefits of vitamin D were distorted by the FTC as being equivalent to the promotion of tanning itself. But commercial sun beds actually fit into two separate categories: 1) Tanning, and 2) Nutrition.

The former addresses how you look, whereas the latter addresses optimization of health, reduction of chronic disease risk, and general well-being — without regard for the actual shade of your skin.

This is a paradigm shift in looking at UV lamp use; it needs to occur, and I predict it eventually will, but I was unfortunately too far ahead of the herd at the present time.


You can read his entire explanation and rebuttal here.

Our own editor and founder was anything but shocked over Mercola's presentation in the mainstream media.

"No one is surprised these days to find another mainstream media article filled with outright lies, maliciously attacking a proponent of vitamin D," Mike Adams, editor of Natural News, science lab director and author of Food Forensics, said. "This pharma-backed hit piece on Dr. Mercola is so obviously false and trumped up that no informed person really believes it. The Chicago Tribune only discredits itself in printing these blatant lies while withholding the truth about vitamin D from its readers."

Sources:

ChicagoTribune.com

Mercola.com

SurgeonGeneral.gov

Science.NaturalNews.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/053716_Dr_Mercola_FTC_settlement_tanning_beds.html#ixzz46NQ7EXZp