Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category

Public Statements

FDA Food Safety Modernization Act--Motion To Proceed--Continued

Floor Speech

By:
Date:
Location: Washington, DC

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I have sought recognition to speak in favor of my amendment No. 4693 to the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act S.510 to permit emergency scheduling of designer anabolic steroids.

Anabolic steroids--masquerading as body building dietary supplements--are sold to millions of Americans in shopping malls and over the Internet even though these products put at grave risk the health and safety of Americans who use them. The harm from these steroid-tainted supplements is real. In its July 28, 2009, public health advisory, the FDA described the health risk of these types of products to include serious liver injury, stroke, kidney failure and pulmonary embolism. The FDA also warned:

[A]anabolic steroids may cause other serious long-term adverse health consequences in men, women, and children. These include shrinkage of the testes and male infertility, masculinization of women, breast enlargement in males, short stature in children, adverse effects on blood lipid levels, and increased risk of heart attack and stroke.

New anabolic steroids--often called designer steroids--are coming on the market every day, and FDA and DEA are unable to keep pace and effectively stop these products from reaching consumers.

At the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs hearing I chaired on September 29, 2009, representatives from FDA and DEA, as well as the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, testified that there is a cat and mouse game going on between unscrupulous supplement makers and law enforcement--with the bad actors engineering more and more new anabolic steroids by taking the known chemical formulas of anabolic steroids listed as controlled substances in schedule III and then changing the chemical composition just slightly, perhaps by a molecule or two. These products are rapidly put on the market--in stores and over the Internet--without testing and proving the safety and efficacy of these new products. There is no prenotification to, or premarket approval by, Federal agencies occurring here. These bad actors are able to sell and make millions in profits from their designer steroids because while it takes them only weeks to design a new steroid by tweaking a formula for a banned anabolic steroid, it takes literally years for DEA to have the new anabolic steroid classified as a controlled substance so DEA can police it.

The FDA witness at the hearing, Mike Levy, Director of the Division of New Drugs and Labeling Compliance, acknowledged that this is a ``challenging area'' for FDA. He testified that for FDA it is ``difficult to find the violative products and difficult to act on these problems.'' The DEA witness, Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator for DEA, was even blunter. When I questioned him at the hearing, Mr. Rannazzisi admitted that ``at the present time I don't think we are being effective at controlling these drugs.'' He described the process as ``extremely frustrating'' because ``by the time we get something to the point where it will be administratively scheduled [as a controlled substance], there's two to three [new] substances out there.''

The failure of enforcement is caused by the complexity of the regulations, statutes and science. Either the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, which provides jurisdiction for FDA, or the Controlled Substances Act, which provides jurisdiction for DEA, or both, can be applicable depending on the ingredients of the substance. Under a 1994 amendment to the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, called the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, DSHEA, dietary supplements, unlike new drug applications, are not closely scrutinized and do not require premarket approval by the FDA before the products can be sold. Premarket notification for dietary supplements is required only if the product contains new dietary ingredients, meaning products that were not on the U.S. market before DSHEA passed in 1994.

If the FDA determines that a dietary supplement is a steroid, it has several enforcement measures available to use. FDA may treat the product as an unapproved new drug or as an adulterated dietary supplement under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. Misdemeanor violations of the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act may apply, unless there is evidence of intent to defraud or mislead, a requirement for a felony charge. However, given the large number of dietary supplement products on the market, it is far beyond the manpower of the FDA to inspect every product to find, and take action against, those that violate the law--as the FDA itself has acknowledged.

The better enforcement route is a criminal prosecution under the Controlled Substances Act. However, the process to classify a new anabolic steroid as a controlled substance under schedule III is difficult, costly and time consuming, requiring years to complete. Current law requires that to classify a substance as an anabolic steroid, DEA must demonstrate that the substance is both chemically and pharmacologically related to testosterone. The chemical analysis is the more straightforward procedure, as it requires the agency to conduct an analysis to determine the chemical structure of the new substance to see if it is related to testosterone. The pharmacological analysis, which must be outsourced, is more costly, difficult, and can take years to complete. It requires both in vitro and in vivo analyses--the latter is an animal study. DEA must then perform a comprehensive review of existing peer-reviewed literature.

Even after DEA has completed the multiyear scientific evaluation process, the agency must embark on a lengthy regulatory review and public-comment process, which typically delays by another year or two the time it takes to bring a newly emerged anabolic steroid under control. As part of this latter process, DEA must conduct interagency reviews, which means sending the studies and reports to the Department of Justice, DOJ, the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, and the Department of Health and Human Services, HHS--provide public notification of the proposed rule, allow for a period of public comment, review and comment on all public comments, write a final rule explaining why the agency agreed or did not agree with the public comments, send the final rule and agency comments back to DOJ, OMB and HHS, and then publish the final rule, all in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act. To date, under these cumbersome procedures, DEA has only been able to classify three new anabolic steroids as controlled substances and that process--completed only after the September 29, 2010, Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing--took more than 5 years to finish.

It is clear that the current complex and cumbersome regulatory system has failed to protect consumers from underground chemists who easily and rapidly produce designer anabolic steroids by slightly changing the chemical composition of the anabolic steroids already included on schedule III as controlled substances. The story of Jareem Gunter, a young college athlete who testified at the hearing, illustrates the system's failure. To improve his athletic performance 4 years ago, Jareem purchased in a nutrition store a dietary supplement called Superdrol, a product he researched extensively on the Internet and believed was safe. Unfortunately it was not. Superdrol contained an anabolic steroid which to this day is still not included in the list of controlled substances. After using Superdrol for just several weeks, Jareem came close to dying because this product--which he thought would make him stronger and healthier--seriously and permanently injured his liver. He spent 4 weeks in the hospital and has never been able to return to complete his college education.

To close the loopholes in the present laws that allow the creation and easy distribution of deadly new anabolic steroids masquerading as dietary supplements, I filed amendment No. 4693 to the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act S.510 to permit emergency scheduling of designer anabolic steroids. The amendment simplifies the definition of anabolic steroid to more effectively target designer anabolic steroids, and permits the Attorney General to issue faster temporary and permanent orders adding recently emerged anabolic steroids to the list of anabolic steroids in schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act.

Under the amendment, if a substance is not listed in schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act but has a chemical structure substantially similar to one of the already listed and banned anabolic steroids, the new substance will be considered to be an anabolic steroid if it was intended to affect the structure or function of the body like the banned anabolic steroids do. In other words, DEA will not have to perform the complex and time consuming pharmacological analysis to determine how the substance will affect the structure and function of the body, as long as the agency can demonstrate that the new steroid was created or manufactured for the purpose of promoting muscle growth or causing the same pharmacological effects as testosterone.

Utilizing the same criteria, the amendment permits the Attorney General to issue a permanent order adding such substances to the list of anabolic steroids in schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act.

The amendment also includes new criminal and civil penalties for falsely labeling substances that are actually anabolic steroids. The penalties arise where a supplement maker fails to truthfully indicate on the label--using internationally accepted and understandable terminology--that the product contains an anabolic steroid. These penalties are intended to be substantial enough to take away the financial incentive of unscrupulous manufacturers, distributors, and retailers who might otherwise be willing to package these products in a way that hides the true contents from law enforcement and consumers.

Finally, the amendment adds to schedule III 33 new anabolic steroids that have emerged in the marketplace in the 6 years since Congress passed the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004. It also instructs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review and revise the Federal sentencing guidelines to ensure that where an anabolic steroid product is illegally manufactured or distributed, and that product is in a tablet, capsule, liquid or other form that makes it difficult to determine the actual amount of anabolic steroid in the product, the sentence will be based on the total weight of the product.

Amendment No. 4693 simplifies and expedites the process for scheduling anabolic steroids as controlled substances. By making this simple procedural change, we can protect the health and lives of countless Americans and provide an effective enforcement mechanism to hold accountable those individuals and their companies which purposefully exploit the current regulatory system for their selfish gain. I urge my colleagues to pass amendment No. 4693 to the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act S. 510.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source:
Skip to top
Back to top