NASEM report on cBHT is tainted, analysis shows

Published April 19, 2021

Briefing this Tuesday on PCF’s bombshell report

A tainted process. Built-in bias. Faulty conclusions based on selective research. That’s what a professional analysis found in an FDA-commissioned report on compounded hormones.

That report came from the National Academy of Science Engineering and Medicine (NASEM), paid for by taxpayers. It was supposed to be objective and impartial.

Instead an independent third-party analysis by the non-partisan Berkeley Research Group found a laundry list of obvious flaws in NASEM’s process and recommendations, making the report so thoroughly compromised it is useless in any discussion of compounded hormone therapy.

From reliance on a small fraction of the available studies, to “experts” with a demonstrated history of anti-compounding bias, to ignoring input from the clinicians most familiar with the subject, the NASEM report used outdated references, non-standard definitions, and a limited, cherry-picked selection of clinical data.

But perhaps most surprisingly for a medical study, it ignored the critical and well-documented body of patient-outcome data. The result is a study rife with bias.

This Tuesday, the Pharmacy Compounding Foundation will host a briefing on the Berkeley analysis of that NASEM report — and will detail the scope of the factual issues, as well as that inappropriate FDA interference.

Please join us — the briefing is free and open to all.

Tuesday, April 20
3:00pm EDT via Zoom
Please click here to register.