8
PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DON BONKER
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning. I enjoyed
watching CBS "60 Minutes" last night. They are to be commended for bringing this
matter to the attention of the public. I would also commend you, Mr. Chairman, for
calling these hearings.
It may be interesting for you to know that I first heard about DMSO some 15
years ago when I was employed as a staff person by then Senator Maureen Neu-
burger of Oregon. The senator was firmly convinced that DMSO was safe and had
important medicinal values. Judging from the "60 Minutes" piece, an increasing
number of Americans are coming to the same conclusion.
Mr. Chairman, 16 years is a long time for the public to wait. It seems to me that
the controversy surrounding DMSO should have been settled long before this. There
should be definitive answers instead of lingering questions. I want to learn today
why it has taken the Food and Drug Administration so long to give their approval
for the use of this drug as an analgesic, to promote healing in soft tissue injuries, to
ease the pain of arthritis and to help cure ulcers on the fingers that are common to
a unique disease, scleroderma.
We heard the Director of FDA's Bureau of Drugs tell Mike Wallace last night
that DMSO is a safe drug; that there are no serious side effects associated with its
use. Indeed, this is obvious or the FDA would not have approved its use in humans
for the bladder disease, interstitial cystitis. This leaves only the question of efficacy
and it is clear to me that there is overwhelming evidence indicating DMSO would
be helpful in those instances that I have mentioned and there is growing evidence
that it may be helpful in relieving spinal cord injuries and intracranial pressure.
I want to learn to what extent the FDA's failure to approve this drug for more
wider use in humans can be laid to the fact that it is not thought to be patentable
and does not have a major drug company as one of its sponsors.
The questions that will be raised in today's hearings have importance that goes
beyond DMSO. It appears we have a general drug lag in the United States which
has been brought about either by the law that we passed several years ago or by its
inappropriate implementation by the FDA. I mean to learn which is the case.
I look forward to hearing today's witnesses.
Thank you.
Mr. BONKER. I guess this is something of a unique issue for
Oregon because 16 years ago when I worked for a U.S. Senator
from Oregon, Dr. Jacob used to make his frequent trips back to
Washington, D.C. to promote this new, immediate, cool discovery
and Senator Neuburger at the time became quite an advocate for
the cause, as did others in the Oregon delegation.
So now it is 16 years later and Representative Duncan is still
here fighting the battle and Dr. Jacob is still making these trips. I
just wonder how much longer it is going to take before FDA listens
to reason.
I think the hearings today are appropriate. I have very high
regard for Bob Duncan and his testimony and also for Dr. Jacob
who has been struggling with this issue for so long. Hopefully,
some day the FDA will see the light and we can make available
this medication on a broader scale.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Bonker.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Chairman, I might say that while this product
I assume thus far has been made with trees that have been grown
in the State of Oregon, as Mr. Bonker has at least implicitly
recognized, we have no reason beyond parochial pride to believe
that the trees grown in the State of Washington would not likewise
be useful in producing this drug.
Mr. BONKER. I need to comment on that because my concern is
that we are shipping all our trees to Japan.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lloyd?
Mr. LLOYD. Again, I would like to welcome my colleague, Bob
Duncan, who has introduced some very fine legislation. I would
