Drug monopolies and 15,000-percent price increases

He dared to heal without them

(NaturalNews) In recent days, the Federal Trade Commission claimed another alternative medicine victim , as it fined Dr. Joseph Mercola, M.D., more than $5 million because he dared to sell a health treatment solution to the public that did not rely on the government's tainted and compromised medical approval.As reported by the, the FTC took issue with Mercola's sale of a UV device – a– he said was a safe alternative to traditional tanning beds. Backed by reams of research, Mercola explained in a column on his Mercola.com site why he had decided to settle with the FTC rather than fighting it out in court to prove that Americans are vitamin D-deficient, and that UV rays from a sunbed or the sun itself, in moderation, are actually beneficial.The medical industry and the government, however, have clung to the claim that all UV-light beds are the same, and that all cause cancer , something Mercola continues to refute. Nearly every vitamin D expert agrees the best source of vitamin D is the sun. Another source can be careful and limited use of UV lights," he wrote."UV light is essential but not always available based on your latitude and time of year. Studies published at the National Institute of Health (NIH) has shown artificial UV lights promote vitamin D production and deliver other health benefits, including improved cardiovascular health and a reduced risk of 16 different types of cancer, including breast cancer," he continued.The government was having none of that, however, and in a situation where Uncle Sam's venomous, shortsighted and predatory agencies make all the rules, well, there isn't much chance of winning.But, of course, when it comes to monopolizing medicine and healthcare in general, there is no bigger culprit than the federal government itself, which helps explain why its agencies get away with things no private citizen or company can even dream of.Asreported recently, even former Big Pharma executives are well aware of the drug monopolies that are routinely created by the Food and Drug Administration , the sole agency in charge of approving drugs, medical procedures and other health treatments."If you're the first company to get approved in a certain area and competitors can't get on the market, the FDA is now establishing monopolies. And that's certainly not their mandate," the then-outgoing chief executive officer of pharmaceutical giant Wyeth, Bob Essner, said in April 2008.He noted that the FDA was "establishing monopolies" by requiring that any new drug had to outperform similar drugs currently on the market.He also suggested that the FDA may have overstepped the bounds of its founding, legal mandate, which is only to determine whether drugs put before it are safe and effective, not better than existing products."It could well be legally challenged," said Essner. "Although that may not be a formal standard, it does appear to be a growing practice."Other Big Pharma officials agreed, including Dan Vasella, chief executive officer of Novartis."The discussion on what this [drug] brings over and above what's on the market is a question that's being asked," he said. "The FDA doesn't seem to trust the physicians any more." In 2011 , we reported that the FDA had granted a monopoly over a preterm labor drug – and then the drug's price was increased by 15,000 percent.The FDA "arbitrarily decided to grant exclusive approval to KV Pharmaceutical to produce the one-and-only FDA-approved premature birth prevention drug -- which is really just a modified, patented version of the common hormone progesterone -- administered to women with a high risk of preterm delivery," we reported. "So what used to cost women as little as $10 to buy from their local compounding pharmacy will now cost $1,500, thanks to the FDA."Read more examples of the FDA's drug monopolization here . Collectively, these examples help explain why the FTC and FDA came down so hard on Dr. Mercola – because he dared to treat and heal without them.