[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 107 (Friday, August 5, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 5, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                    ACCESS TO MEDICAL TREATMENT ACT

                                 ______


                        HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR.

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, August 5, 1994

  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, during the coming weeks the health reform 
debate will move on to the House floor and we will be faced with 
decisions that will have resounding consequences for all Americans. In 
this historic process we cannot lose sight of who we came here to 
serve--the people.
  What I have heard loud and clear from my constituents is that they 
want freedom of choice in health care. Mr. Speaker, whatever reform we 
enact, must guarantee all Americans the freedom to choose not only 
their doctor but also the form of treatment they want to pursue. 
Hundreds of my constituents have written to me, stopped me on the 
street, or spoken to me at town meetings about their desire to seek 
alternative health treatments.
  Many of my constituents seek chiropractic care or see a nutritional 
specialist and no reform that we enact should infringe on their right 
to pursue this type of care. That is why I have cosponsored the Access 
to Medical Treatment Act (H.R. 4696). The bill gives individuals the 
right to obtain alternative treatments that have not been approved by 
the FDA from licensed professionals, such as medical doctors, 
chiropractors, osteopaths, or naturopaths. Currently, many 
practitioners who recommend or perform unapproved, non-harmful 
therapies may face the loss of their licenses or worse.
  H.R. 4696 is not intended to strip the FDA of its authority to 
regulate the safety and efficacy of most drugs in the country. The 
bill's purpose is to allow increased opportunities for the trial of 
alternative, non-FDA approved treatments that may generate effective 
new approaches to treating illness, and to increase access to 
alternative, nonharmful therapies.
  The FDA would remain solely responsible for maintaining the safety 
and efficacy of drugs, and the bill would require full disclosure to 
patients of the contents and possible side effects of treatments. Also, 
the strict claims section of the bill mandates that patients are 
notified that the drug or treatment has not been proven safe or 
efficacious by the Federal Government. The medical treatment also must 
have no evidence of causing an adverse impact on an individual's 
health. If a treatment is found to be harmful, it must be reported to 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services and it cannot be used again.
  Many in the traditional medical community and in the FDA have been 
slow to recognize the beneficial effects of some alternative 
treatments, such as acupuncture, naturopathy, or nutrition therapy. 
Some have even gone as far as too characterize anything nontraditional 
as ``quackery.'' I firmly believe that especially in cases where 
traditional medicine has shown to be ineffective, patients should have 
access to alternative treatments.
  As our country becomes more health conscious and more individuals 
take an active role preserving their good health, we cannot afford to 
deny people access to safe and effective health care. Mr. Speaker, I 
fully support this legislation and hope we do not take a step backward 
when it comes to using legitimate treatments that have existed for 
thousands of years.

                          ____________________