Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Even while the FDA is approving faulty and dangerous drugs and medical devices by the thousands, it continues what can only be described as a harassment campaign against those who want to rely on wholesome foods, dietary supplements, and lifestyle changes to achieve natural good health.
Here are just a few recent examples:
□ FDA employees recently protested in a letter to Congress that they have been forced to approve medical devices against their better judgment. The letter stated that FDA managers “ordered, intimidated and coerced FDA experts to modify their scientific reviews, conclusions and recommendations in violation of the law.” The devices that FDA regulates impact more than 500 million adult and pediatric procedures performed every year in the U.S.
□ The FDA’s current efforts to reinterpret and thus amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act threaten continued access to dietary supplements. If the FDA got its way, a food constituent studied for medical use (and published) could thereafter not be used as a new supplement. To illustrate how this might work, one company's fish oil is now an approved drug, and by this definition any new supplement with fish oil added might be prohibited. AAHF provided formal comments in response to the FDA’s deliberation process and explained why current law prohibits the FDA from adopting these anti-supplement regulations.
The FDA approves toxic chemicals for use in baby formula, baby bottles, and prescription drugs.
□ The FDA stated that no amount of melamine was safe in infant formula. Then melamine was found in formula at levels below 1 ppm. Suddenly the agency reversed itself and stated that melamine was safe provided that (coincidentally) there was no more than 1ppm. Was there a new study or other science to justify this claim? No. It appears to have been made up out of thin air in order to protect commercial interests. Melamine is a toxic chemical that has been linked to kidney damage and children are especially vulnerable.
□ The FDA recently declared Bisphenol – a (BPA) exposure to be safe for infants, even though Canada has banned the chemical from baby bottles. Thirty-six scientific advisers on an independent government panel concluded that the draft decision of the FDA on BPA used “unacceptable criteria for selecting data and depend(ed) heavily upon a key paper that is fatally flawed.” These experts concluded that the FDA chose industry-funded research studies and appeared to ignore hundreds of studies that have been funded by NIH (National Institute for Health) and its counterpart in other countries. BPA is linked to cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and liver enzyme abnormalities. In addition to being used in baby bottles, it is also used in water bottles, canned goods, dental fillings, children’s teeth sealants, and orthodontic sealants.
□ The FDA has approved the use of phthalates in prescription drugs and over-the-counter medications despite the fact that Congress banned phthalates in toys and other children’s products. Widely used as plasticizers, phthalates have been linked to abnormal reproductive organs, sperm damage, and reduced testosterone in animal tests as well as some human studies.
The epidemics currently plaguing this country-- cancer, obesity, diabetes, asthma and allergies, and many other debilitating disorders-- are linked to manmade products and processes that the FDA has approved and promoted. These failures have resulted in the sickest generation in the history of this country. The agency seems to have lost sight of its mandate to protect the public and has instead come to see itself as the guardian of corporate interests. It is time to end the many conflicts of interest linking the FDA to the pharmaceutical and chemical industries, conflicts of interest that betray the public and harm so many American consumers. It is time to reform the FDA!
Spread the word. Together, we can make a difference. We can turn the FDA around and help restore our national health. Please sign AAHF’s petition to reform the FDA at www.reformFDA.org.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
For Immediate Release:
U.S. Contact: Gretchen DuBeau,
International Contact: Dr Robert Verkerk,
November 25, 2008
FDA’S LATEST THREAT TO DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS DEFIES THE DIETARY SUPPLEMENT HEALTH AND EDUCATION ACT ACCORDING TO TWO LEADING HEALTH FREEDOM GROUPS
Today, the American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF) and its international affiliate, the Alliance for Natural Health (ANH), jointly submitted comments to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in response to its request for comments from industry and consumers to help them interpret recent changes to Section 912 of the Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA). The submission was accompanied by comments from 700 concerned citizens and practitioners exasperated over the latest threat to supplements from the FDA. The FDA’s unprecedented, controversial, and ambiguous changes to Section 912, specifically the addition of Section 301 (ll), may mean that all food products, including dietary supplements, could be barred from being marketed if they have been the subject of published clinical studies. AAHF and ANH point out that this provision is so far-reaching that a very large number of commonly consumed foods could be impacted by the new regulation and hence barred from interstate trade.
“If the FDA determines that Section 301 applies to dietary supplements, this would strangle innovation. It would create a ‘Catch 22’ situation in which supplement producers who undertake scientific research on new supplements will find that their very research will lead to a ban on the proposed supplement. This is totally senseless. This is too senseless even for the FDA,” said Gretchen DuBeau, AAHF Executive Director.
At the crux of the issue is whether the new Section 301 applies to dietary supplements, which are already covered by Section 201 (ff) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). This means that Section 301 is in direct conflict with Section 201 of the FDCA that already governs dietary supplements through the Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act (DSHEA). DuBeau added:
“This conflict—which is supported by influential case law— gives Section 301 of the FDAAA no legal basis. Congressional language has already made clear and unambiguous that the FDAAA, currently under consideration, shall not affect the regulation of supplements under DSHEA.”
Section 201 currently also prevents the marketing of dietary supplements which have been subject to published clinical studies—but only when they have also been the subject of a Investigational New Drug (IND) application.
Dr Robert Verkerk, executive and scientific director of the ANH emphasized:
“Unlike Section 201 of the FDCA, the proposed new Section 301 of the FDA Amendments Act doesn’t just limit the ban to supplements that have been subject to drug applications, it applies a ban to some of the best researched and most useful supplements and ingredients on the market today. This is clearly nonsensical and if enforced, would represent one of the most severe restrictions seen in any country at any time.”
“There will be no shortage of big corporations that will exploit this situation to their benefit unless the scope of Section 301 is both clarified and narrowed”, commented Gretchen DuBeau, “one such company is already trying to use it to ban the natural zero-caloric sweetener stevia, given that stevia has been subject to scientific research and has been a thorn in the side of the sugar and artificial sweetener giants for years.”
Since the FDA’s call for comments issued on July 28, 2008, the AAHF sent an alert to its members, including professional, integrative medicine organizations, apprising them of the threat posed by the FDAAA’s Section 912. More than 700 concerned doctors and citizens emailed comments to AAHF, which accompanied the AAHF’s joint submission with ANH. Among the prestigious groups opposing the FDA’s erroneous interpretation are the International College of Integrative Medicine (ICIM), the American College for Advancement in Medicine (ACAM), The American Holistic Medical Association (AHMA), the Certification Board for Nutrition Specialists (CBNS), and the American College of Nutrition (ACN).
Friday, November 21, 2008
Dr Robert Verkerk,
November 18, 2008
FAULTY STUDY TARGETS VITAMINS C AND E
Finding of No Cardiovascular Protection Was Predictable
Today, the American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF) and its international affiliate, the Alliance for Natural Health (ANH), have together sharply criticized defective and misleading research published earlier this month in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The research triggered headlines around the world suggesting that neither vitamin E nor vitamin C supplements protect against cardiovascular disease in older men.
The study by Howard Sesso and colleagues from Harvard, entitled the “Physicians’ Health Study II”, included over 14,600 male physicians over a ten year period, used the least potent form of vitamin E and incorrect dosages of both vitamins C and E , according to an analysis conducted by ANH experts, Dr Steve Hickey, Dr. Damien Downing, and Dr. Robert Verkerk.
The ANH analysis, “Designed to Fail: A Trial Without Meaning”, criticized the Sesso et al. study for using synthetic dl-alpha-tocopherol, which is less effective than the natural and more complete forms of vitamin E and is thus more likely to not reveal any benefit. Additionally, the vitamin E dose in the study (400 IU every other day) is far below the dose taken by many who supplement making the findings irrelevant to older supplement consumers who are aware of extensive research and clinical evidence on higher dose vitamin therapy.
The JAMA paper included a 500 mg daily dosage of vitamin C, which is only half of a typical one-gram tablet of the type popular with supplement users. Evidence suggests that dynamic flow levels of vitamin C, which may prevent heart disease, begin at daily intakes above about 3g per day, best delivered in divided doses.
Additional complaints about the JAMA study include the use of an unidentified placebo, which may have included beneficial nutrients such as magnesium, failure to control diet for synergistic nutrient interactions that may have skewed test results, and the relevance, or otherwise, of applying these findings among physicians (the study group) to all men across the population.
“Considering that the methodologies were significantly biased against finding a positive result from vitamins C and E as determined from both available research and clinical evidence, one has to ask who stands to benefit from these findings? How, for example, would the pharmaceutical industry be impacted from diminished sales of their vitamins if people, under the belief that vitamins provided no benefit in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disease, instead chose pricey prescription drugs,” asked Gretchen DuBeau, AAHF Executive Director.
Dr Damien Downing, ANH Medical Director, President of the British Society of Ecological Medicine and Editor-in-Chief of the peer reviewed journal, the Journal of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine, on reading the Sesso et al. paper independently responded, saying it was “an intervention designed to fail”!
ANH Scientific & Executive Director, Dr Robert Verkerk added, “With three of the world’s largest drug companies, namely BASF, Wyeth and DSM—formerly Roche—supplying the low dose synthetic vitamins for the study, it’s perhaps not surprising that the outcome is made to look bad for vitamins. A trial like this costs a huge amount of money and is a waste of much needed research funds. Why don’t they ask the people who work with nutrients on a daily basis—integrative medicine doctors—what nutrient forms, combinations and dosages are most likely to work?”
The ANH analysis, “Designed to Fail: A Trial Without Meaning”, is available at: http://www.anhcampaign.org/files/081117_Sesso_PHSII_ANHrebuttal.pdf.
NOTES TO THE EDITOR
About the American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF)
The American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF) is a 501©4 nonprofit organization serving as the politically active voice at federal and state levels to protect Americans’ rights to access integrative medicine and dietary supplements. AAHF protects the right of the consumer to choose and the practitioner to practice by lobbying Congress and state legislature and crafting legislation; acting as a government watchdog and filing comments on proposed rulings; educating the public, press, and decision-makers on integrative medicine; initiating legal activities and joining and forming significant coalitions.
About the Alliance for Natural Health (ANH)
The Alliance for Natural Health (ANH) is an international, non-governmental organisation, based in the UK. It was founded in 2002, and works on behalf of consumers, medical doctors, complementary health practitioners and health-product suppliers worldwide, to protect and promote natural healthcare, using the principles of good science and good law.
The ANH’s overriding goal is to help develop appropriate legal and scientific frameworks for the development of sustainable approaches to healthcare. As in the fields of energy and agriculture, sustainable healthcare invariably requires use of natural products which are inherently compatible with human biochemistry and physiology. Within this setting, consumers and health professionals should be able to make informed choices about a wide range of health options, and in particular those that relate to diet, lifestyle, traditional medicinal and non-drug-based or natural therapies, so that they may experience their benefits to the full while avoiding unnecessary risks.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
New Jersey Legislators Consider Restrictive Legislation to Limit Nutritional Advice
Contact: Gretchen DuBeau, 800-230-2762
For Immediate Release: September 24, 2008
Today, the American Association for Health Freedom (AAFH) urged New Jersey legislators to vote against Assembly Bill A2933/Senate Bill S1941, the Dietician/Nutrition Licensing Act currently under consideration by New Jersey State Senators and Members of the Assembly.
The companion bills would prevent any practitioner other than a dietitian registered by the American Dietetics Association from teaching, consulting, or advising about health, nutrition, supplements, diet, food, or food materials.
The vote, scheduled for early October in both the Senate and the General Assembly, would give unprecedented authority to registered dieticians. Traditional experts on healthcare, including Ph.D. nutritionists from Rutgers University's prestigious Department of Nutritional Sciences, would be barred from offering nutritional advice in New Jersey.
“Nutritionists and doctors holding the American College of Nutrition's CBNS certificate have a Master's degree at a minimum, usually a Ph.D., yet are excluded by this bill. In comparison, most dieticians registered by the American Dietetics Association, the sponsor of this bill, do not hold advanced degrees. Their training is mostly in food management and only partly in nutrition. This makes no sense,” said American Association for Health Freedom’s Executive Director, Gretchen DuBeau.
AAHF highlighted research from Harvard's Department of Nutrition published in the October 2001 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine which documented that 90% of all type II diabetes can be eliminated by avoiding bad fats and eating good fats, eating lots of fruits and vegetables and modest amounts of whole grains, supplementing wisely, and exercising daily.
“It is vital with a record 78% of our nation’s healthcare dollars going to the treatment of chronic disease that other qualified practitioners be allowed to offer nutritional counseling. Chronic conditions are directly related to lifestyle choices, and nutritional counseling is a critical part of patient care by any practitioner,” added DuBeau.
If you would like more information, please contact
Gretchen DuBeau at 1-800-230-2762.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
A new report from Center for Public Integrity (CPI) shows what we’re up against on Capitol Hill. In 2007, industries and special interests spent $17 million for every day Congress was in session (the drug industry spent the most of all).
The CPI analysis of federal lobbying data details that pharmaceutical industry spent $168 million in their lobbying efforts in 2007.
The spending represents a 32 percent jump over 2006. Driven in part by a busy legislative calendar dominated by issues critical to the industry, the effort raised the amount spent by drug interests on federal lobbying in the past decade to more than $1 billion.
The trade association for pharmaceutical manufacturers (Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America) was the largest spender at $22.7 million. Biomedical firm Amgen ($16.2 million) and pharmaceutical company Pfizer ($13.8 million) rounded out the top 3. Other big spenders last year included Roche Holding AG ($9 million), Sanofi-Aventis ($8.4 million), GlaxoSmithKline ($8.2 million), Johnson & Johnson Inc. ($7.7 million) and the trade group Biotechnology Industry Organization ($7.2 million).
In 1992, the pharmaceutical industry employed 675 lobbyists, now there are currently 1,274 registered lobbyists in Washington D.C. lobbying for Big Pharma.
Too often, the health freedom community finds itself up against Big Pharma and though we’re out spent in lobbying, advertising, and in other resources; we’re not outnumbered! Your involvement is crucial to us truly achieving health freedom. Each time you take action on an alert, share our news and alerts with friends and family, or financially support AAHF, you are promoting health freedom.
Click here for the full CPI article.
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
A drug company petitioned the FDA to ban a B vitamin in order to protect its own drug product?
Or that the second largest drug company in the world is using the FDA’s citizen petition process in order to try to prevent any dietary supplement product from making weight loss claims. The company wants weight loss claims to be re-classified as disease claims!
If you’ve been reading our efforts to stop Wyeth from working with the FDA to ban bio-identical estriol, then you’re probably not surprised that the FDA is being used to try to ban natural products.
But did you also know that you can help keep natural, safe products on the market by simply writing Congress and the FDA and telling them you’re supportive of Vitamin B6 and that you don’t want the FDA restricting free speech?Act now!
It is important that as many messages as possible be sent to the FDA opposing these petitions. Since the FDA has made it more difficult for citizens to contact them, we will be personally hand-delivering the messages. It is also important that members of Congress hear from their constituents on this important issue as well. In order to send the message to the FDA and your congressional representatives, click here. Don’t forget to personalize your letter.
Medicure Pharma’s attempt to ban the natural, bioactive form of vitamin B6
On November 30, 2007, Medicure Pharma submitted a citizen’s petition to the FDA asserting that that all dietary supplements containing pyridoxal 5’-phosphate (“P5P supplements”) should be banned. Despite the fact that P5P most important, bioactive, natural form of vitamin B6, Medicure wants to see the product banned from sale by the US dietary supplement industry because its marketing of P5P-containing supplements undermines the company’s incentive to continue developing its drug product (MC-1).
Dr. Robert Verkerk, Executive Director of our affiliate, the Alliance for Natural Health says, “This is an astonishing development that shows just how easily pharma companies are willing to show their hand. Well I’m sorry, natural got there first! You can’t just decide to have a natural form of a product banned because it interferes with your drug patents. We’ve found two patents secured by Medicure for P5P to be used in cases of heart disease. It seems they’ve come to the same realization as millions around the world—vitamins and other natural products can be used to help protect you from chronic diseases, including heart disease.”
A recent, large scale Japanese study, for instance, published in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition (2008 Feb;27(1): 127-36), concluded "Dietary intake of vitamin B6 was associated with a reduced risk of coronary heart disease among middle-aged non-multivitamin supplement users. Dietary folate and vitamin B12 were also suggested to be protective factors for coronary heart disease."Glaxosmithkline’s attempt to shut down competition from the natural products industry in the weight loss field
On April 17, 2008, the world’s second largest drug company, GSK, along with the American Dietetic Association and the Obesity Society—both regarded by many as fronts for some drug companies — petitioned the FDA to try to prevent any dietary supplement product from making weight loss claims. The company wants weight loss claims to be re-classified as disease claims, therefore making them the sole domain of treatments with licensed pharmaceuticals. GSK’s Alli product directly competes with the wide range of dietary supplements that help support weight loss—and Alli has become the third top-selling obesity drug less than a year after its launch, despite serious side effects.
Commenting on the GSK petition, Verkerk added, “Obesity control is a growth area for Big Food which contributes so greatly to the problem. GSK —which works in cahoots with Big Food—now wants a slice of the action and it wants to eliminate the main source of competition—the natural products industry. Consumers must engage with these petitions and have their say. The time for sitting on the sidelines is over.”These Latest FDA Petitions Follow the Recent Ban on Bio-Identical Estriol
Wyeth pharmaceuticals petitioned the FDA to ban bio-identical estriol, even though bio-identical estriol is a critical ingredient in bio-identical hormone therapies, and no adverse event had ever been associated with its use. AAHF, along with our congressional allies, are currently attempting to reverse this ban. (Read more about this attack and our efforts.) Please do not let these new petitions to the FDA succeed.
Take action today!
Monday, June 23, 2008
We’re pleased to announce that the Senate has now introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 88 – a companion resolution to H. Con. Res. 342. Slightly different than the House resolution, the Senate resolution adds the language “unless the FDA holds a public comment period on the issue and can document evidence of adverse events and other safety issues to justify such policy.” Additionally there are now about 30 cosponsors of the House resolution, many which were added last week in response to the efforts above.
We ran the ad “ Shame on you, Wyeth” on June 3 in Roll Call, the most widely read daily paper on Capitol Hill and hand delivered letters to all 435 House of Representative’s offices on that same day. We ran another Roll Call ad, “ Shame on you, Wyeth, Part Two” on June 17 in support of the just introduced Senate companion resolution and then hand delivered letters to each of the 100 Senate offices. (Read more about our efforts.)
Help us build on this momentum and TAKE ACTION by contacting your representatives today.
Don’t forget to tell your friends and ask them to write to Congress!
Sunday, May 11, 2008
What's great is that you use GoodSearch just as you would any search engine. Again, it's powered by Yahoo!, so you get proven, high-quality results.
If you allow cookies, after the first time, each time you return to the home page, Health Freedom Foundation will appear as your designated charity. There is even a button you can click to see the number of searches and the amount raised.
Add GoodSearch to your bookmarks or make it your homepage to make it easier to use. Also, spread the word to your family and friends to help generate more contributions. GoodSearch estimates each search will raise $0.01 for your designated charity. 100 supporters searching twice a day could generate $730 a year, 1000 supporters - $7,300, and 10,000 supporters searching twice a day could generate $73,000!
With your help, GoodSearch can generate donations, at no cost to you that will help with pressing health freedom issues.
Last year, search engines generated close to $6 billion in revenue from advertisers. With GoodSearch part of this advertising revenue will now be directed to The Health Freedom Foundation.
We hope that not only will you use GoodSearch as your main search engine from here on out, but will also pass this message on to your friends and family. The more people who use this, the more money will go to The Health Freedom Foundation.
We appreciate you checking out GoodSearch and using it as your Internet search tool. Remember, every search you make will raise money for health freedom.
Health Freedom Foundation and American Association for Health Freedom4620 Lee Highway, Suite 210Arlington, VA 222071.800.230.2762Fax: 703.294.6380http://www.healthfreedom.net/
Monday, April 28, 2008
(PRWEB) April 25, 2008 -- According to the American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF), integrative medicine practitioners' licenses are typically more vulnerable than their colleagues for two main reasons: their modality of practice and procedures methods are often viewed as not being science based, and they often are solo practitioners that have fewer resources to counteract aggressive state medical boards and their investigators.
Through phone calls and requests for help that AAHF receives each year, they believe that a majority of investigations of integrative medicine practitioners occur not because of patient harm or patient complaint but because a disgruntled employee, competitor, insurance company, or someone who doesn't believe in integrative medicine complained to the state medical board.
"We receive numerous requests for help each year because state medical boards are over-zealously pursuing integrative medical doctors," Brenna Hill, the AAHF Executive Director said. "Unfortunately by the time they call us they've already signed their rights away. At that point there's not much we can do to help." Often these charges may make the practitioner a felon.
Inspired by their numerous members who have gone through exhausting state medical board investigations and legal battles to retain their licenses, AAHF has published A Practitioner's Guide to Protecting Your License and Your Practice from Medical Board and Government Action. The well-respected law firm, Augustine, Kern and Levens, Ltd, wrote the Practitioner's Guide. AAHF hopes that this guide will help practitioners think ahead and create a plan.
"It is always a good policy to plan ahead," Hill said, "The decisions you make at the beginning of a state medical board investigation could mean the difference between saving or losing your license and your freedom to practice the type of medicine you believe is most beneficial to your patients."
Although the Practitioner's Guide does not provide legal advice and is not tailored to any specific situation, it will provide physicians with general guidelines and information in dealing with medical boards. The guide includes best practices to help a practitioner institute an office policy and plan if there's a knock on the door and how to respond to investigators as well as what to do if presented with a subpoena and how to handle a settlement offer. AAHF is providing the guide free to their Professional members.
AAHF is a non-profit association based in the Washington DC area that promotes health freedom legislation in all 50 states and in Congress. As the politically active voice at the federal and state level for integrative medicine, AAHF is involved in crafting, monitoring, and supporting legislation that allows the right of the consumer to choose and the practitioner to practice. For more information, please visit www.healthfreedom.net.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
These biased articles are based on the latest Cochrane review which more or less copies the JAMA paper from February 2007.
Unfortunately, bad science and misleading media stories are confusing consumers. As dietary supplements become more popular and threaten the bottom line of traditional medicine and Big Pharma, we see more and more studies and articles that try to convince the public that dietary supplements are useless, unregulated, or even deadly.
Often these studies are superficial and if you scratch the surface you can see the bad science and inaccurate reporting. AAHF’s international affiliate, Alliance for Natural Health details some of the reasons why this latest round of headlines are based on bad science.
The article highlights are below describing why it's bad science:
1. This isn’t new.
2. This isn’t research.
3. This isn’t meaningful.
4. This applies only to synthetic forms of vitamins (as produced by the pharmaceutical industry).
5. Natural vitamins and minerals are lifesavers.
6. Over the top on synthetics!
7. Two bites at the cherry.
To read the full article, click here. Don’t forget to join the American Association for Health Freedom to support our lobbying efforts at the federal and state level or make a tax-deductible donation to the Health Freedom Foundation to help support education and international efforts.
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
On January 9, 2008, the FDA essentially BANNED estriol (which is used in 80% of bio-identical hormones). They stated that estriol is an unapproved drug and unless they have a valid investigational new drug application, pharmacy operators may not compound drugs containing estriol. The same day at a press conference, the FDA admitted that they knew of no serious adverse events reported in conjuncture with estriol (even though doctors and hospitals are required to report ALL adverse events.
On Thursday (April 3), we’re meeting with members of Congress to discuss this issue and others related to health freedom. We’ll be sure to tell you how the meetings went!
If you’re a practitioner, a patient, or someone who wants the FDA to stop practicing medicine, please continue to read.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Read the timeline and Draw Your Own Conclusion – is the FDA doing Wyeth’s bidding?
Contact Congress and the President of the US and let them know that you want the FDA to stop attacking bio-identical hormones.
Personalize your letter. Tell your story, edit to reflect your points of interest (this is VERY important, please take the extra time!)
Spread the word! We need the loudest voice possible – let your friends and family know of this threat, send an email. Tell people to visit www.healthfreedom.net. Download, print, and distribute our flyer ( click here) and if you don’t have a printer, let us know how many you need.
Join AAHF so we can continue to make a difference on this and other important issues.
Make a tax-deductible donation to the Health Freedom Foundation so we can continue educational efforts and pursue opportunities to block the FDA’s assault on bio-identical hormones.
American Association for Health Freedom/Health Freedom Foundation
4620 Lee Highway, Suite 210
Arlington, VA 22207