The latest news from Washington is both tasty and satisfying: Food and Drug Administration Commissioner David Kessler has agreed with his scientific advisory panel and approved Olestra, the first noncaloric fat replacer, for limited use. Within months we will be able to buy a variety of delectable zero-fat snacks a real-life case of getting something for (almost) nothing.

Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, president and founder of the American Council on Science and Health, was recently selected to receive the 1996 Ethics Award from the American Institute of Chemists (AIC).

The overriding goal of federal policies governing the use of chemicals in agriculture and food processing is-and should be-consumer safety. One would hope that food safety regulation would be driven by the best scientific and medical knowledge. But instead, much of the American food supply is held hostage to the misguided absolutism of what is known as the Delaney clause, a nearly 40-year-old, 55-word quirk in the law. It reads, in its entirety:

Melatonin is the latest in a long series of "alternative" medicine "miracles." It has been described as useful for treating or preventing jet lag, insomnia, immune disorders, cancer and the degenerative effects of aging and for the enhancement of sexual function. A supposed benefit of this product is that it is "natural" in the sense that humans normally produce it in their bodies. Thus, people who avoid over-the-counter sleep aids can presumably relax about taking melatonin.

Chlorine, one of the 20 or so elements found in abundance in all living things, is under attack. Environmentalists have tried to condemn many man-made chlorine products as hazardous and have called for the government to ban them. However, chlorine is not only a constituent of man-made products but also is found in abundance in nature in the same formulations. It could no more easily be banned than sunlight or aflatoxin, a natural carcinogen produced by mold.

The "War on Drugs" has never been a carefully planned public health protection initiative. Government officials did not enact current drug prohibition laws and enforcement policies because of any dispassionate, comprehensive review of drug hazards. Rather, hysterical fear-mongering has always been the real basis for the "War on Drugs."

People afflicted with chronic, painful and/or terminal diseases are understandably eager to take all possible steps to alleviate their symptoms, cure their conditions or prevent recurrences. This anxiety makes them susceptible to the lure of so-called "alternative" or unconventional therapies that may not be effective or safe. One item in the health-food industry's array of unproved cancer/AIDS/arthritis remedies is shark cartilage.

Proposals for drug legalization are rooted in the belief that drug prohibition does not work. Legalization advocates point out that the prohibition of alcohol failed in the United States two generations ago. They argue that the use of illicit drugs is widespread despite prohibition and that the high costs and negative consequences of that prohibition ranging from costs for police and prisons to the loss of privacy caused by drug testing in many settings, notably the workplace are unreasonably high prices to pay for an ineffective policy.

This report was originally written by Alan C. Fisher, Dr.P.H., and Wendy Worth, Ph.D. It was revised by Debra A. Mayer, M.P.H., a Research Associate in Epidemiology at the American Council on Science and Health.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -