[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 18 (Wednesday, February 27, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E218]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              HEALTH INFORMATION INDEPENDENCE ACT OF 2002

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, February 27, 2002

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Health Information 
Independence Act of 2002. This act takes a major step toward restoring 
the right of consumers to purchase the dietary supplements of their 
choice and receive accurate information about the health benefits of 
foods and dietary supplements. The Health Information Independence Act 
repeals the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) authority to approve 
health claims of foods and dietary supplements. Instead, that authority 
is vested in an independent review board. The board is comprised of 
independent scientific experts randomly chosen by the FDA. However, 
anyone who is, or has ever been, on the FDA's payroll is disqualified 
from serving on the commission. The FDA is forbidden from exercising 
any influence over the review board. If the board recommends approval 
of a health claim then the FDA must approve the claim.
  The board also must consider whether any claims can be rendered non-
misleading by adopting a disclaimer before rejecting a claim out of 
hand. For example, if the board finds that the scientific evidence does 
not conclusively support a claim, but the claim could be rendered non-
misleading if accompanied with a disclaimer then the board must approve 
the claim provided the claim is always accompanied by an appropriate 
disclaimer. The disclaimer would be a simple statement to the effect 
that ``scientific studies on these claims are inconclusive'' and/or 
``these claims are not approved by the FDA.'' Thus, the bill tilts the 
balance of federal law in favor of allowing consumers access to 
information regarding the health benefits of foods and dietary 
supplements, which is proper in a free society.
  The procedures established by the Health Information Independence Act 
are a fair and balanced way to ensure consumers have access to truthful 
information about dietary supplements. Over the past decade, the 
American people have made it clear they do not want the federal 
government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements, yet 
the FDA continues to engage in heavy-handed attempts to restrict access 
to dietary supplements.
  In 1994, Congess responded to the American people's desire for 
greater access to information about the benefits of dietary supplements 
by passing the Dietary Supplements and Health and Education Act of 1994 
(DSHEA), which liberalized rules regarding the regulation of dietary 
supplements. Congressional offices received a record number of comments 
in favor of DSHEA.
  Despite DSHEA, FDA officials continued to attempt to enforce 
regulations aimed at keeping the American public in the dark about the 
benefits of dietary supplements. Finally, in the case of Pearson v. 
Shalala, 154 F.3d 650 (DC Cir. 1999), reh'g denied en banc, 172 F.3d 72 
(DC Cir. 1999), the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit 
Court reaffirmed consumers' First Amendment right to learn about 
dietary supplements without unnecessary interference from the FDA. The 
Pearson court anticipated my legislation by suggesting the FDA adopt 
disclaimers in order to render some health claims non-misleading.
  In the more than two years since the Pearson decision, members of 
Congress have had to continually intervene with the FDA to ensure it 
followed the court order. The FDA continues to deny consumers access to 
truthful health information. Clearly, the FDA is determined to continue 
to (as the Pearson court pointed out) act as though liberalizing 
regulations regarding health claims is the equivalent of ``asking 
consumers to buy something while hypnotized and therefore they are 
bound to be misled.'' Therefore, if Congress is serious about 
respecting the First Amendment rights of the people, we must remove FDA 
authority to censor non-misleading health claims, and those claims 
which can be rendered non-misleading by the simple device of adopting a 
disclaimer, by passing my Health Information Independence Act.
  In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to help establish an objective 
process that respects consumers' First Amendment rights to non-
misleading information regarding the health benefits of foods and 
dietary supplements by cosponsoring the Health Information Independence 
Act.

                          ____________________