X-Message-Number: 452 Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 19:47:45 PDT From: Subject: Re: The Attack of the Killer FDA So the FDA is attacking our right to self preservation. Very well, let's deal with the problem rationally. The central question is, "Why?" What's the real motive here? What do they get out of this? Are they sincere in believing that they merely act to protect the public good, or are they simply attempting to justify the existence of their institution (and thus their jobs/carreers)? Or is something else involved? Who benefits? My first approximation would be that it's mostly a matter of self justification, although I'm sure that many of the individuals involved may also have some measure of sincere belief that what they do serves the public good as well. If so, then it will be rather difficult to convince such people both that they do not serve the public good AND that they are wrong to attempt to advance their own positions at our expense. Either one of those things would be a tough sell all by itself. If the FDA cannot be persuaded to cease and desist by direct confrontation, then indirect means must be investigated. Likely candidates are Congress, higher levels in the Executive branch--and last but not least, the courts. The root of the problem is the meme-complex that motivates governmental regulation in general and regulation of healthcare in particular. The de facto presence of such regulation since before most adults were born leads many to assume that an FDA is just as necesary as the local Police Department. People want someone to be responsible when something goes wrong--someone other than themselves. They need reassurance that foods and medicines have been properly blessed by the appropriate priest/beauraucrat. In addition to discrediting the FDA as an idea, we should also try discrediting the FDA's position with respect to life extension in general and vitamin/mineral supplementation in particular. The good news is that the scientific facts are on our side (in fact, this is probably our strongest point strategically). The bad news is that it can be notoriously difficult to convert this type of advantage into satisfactory results. Facts, especially scientific ones, are simply to conveniently ignored. Emotion sells, facts bore. Just ask the nuclear power industry or the evolutionary biologists. So our strongest strategic advantage is also our weakest point tactically. Facts are best used in courtrooms. For the general public, we should emphasize the human/emotional aspects of our story. The big bad guvmint is beating up on us poor defenseless citizens who just want the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of health. Freedom of choice. Right to "privacy" with respect to the maintenance of our own bodies. Oh, and by the way, the scientific experts state the FDA beauraucrats are attempting to outlaw perfectly safe and **effective** natural substances. Motherhood and apple pie. We may be able to arrange or inspire favorable press coverage, which may help indirectly. (We should be pursuing this as a long-term goal anyway.) If the FDA does take the actions threatened, we need to be prepared to exploit and amplify whatever negative PR for the FDA--and whatever positive PR for us--such dictatorial, undemocratic, unconstitutional and unjustified actions would naturally engender. The Life Extension Foundation and Life Extension International should consider a preemptive suit in advance of any FDA action. Also, an attempt should be made to internationalize the problem--perhaps there are those in the Soviet Union (for instance) who would enjoy a chance to champion a "human rights" issue where the U.S. Government is the culprit! A study of the tactics and strategies of groups that have been effective in analogous situations--such as the Church Of Scientology--would be in order. However, I think that illegalities should be avoided. Most importantly, we need to ORGANIZE our efforts. That means a new organizational entity whose charter and raison d'etre is political activism in support of the goals of life extensionists. Such an organziation must be separate from fundamentally business-oriented groups such as Life Extension International or even (especially) the various cryonics organizations. Another avenue would be relocating the affected activities and persons to another country where the regulatory climate is less hostile. --alan Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=452