Allaxys Communications --- Transponder V --- Allaxys Forum 1

Pages: [1]

Author Topic: FDA will reexamine its homeopathic product regulation  (Read 1976 times)

ama

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1276
FDA will reexamine its homeopathic product regulation
« on: March 30, 2015, 11:07:21 AM »

[*QUOTE*]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Health Digest #15-13
March 29, 2015

Consumer Health Digest is a free weekly e-mail newsletter edited by Stephen Barrett, M.D., with help from William M. London, Ed.D. It summarizes scientific reports; legislative developments; enforcement actions; news reports; Web site evaluations; recommended and nonrecommended books; and other information relevant to consumer protection and consumer decision-making. If you enjoy this newsletter, please recommend it to your friends.

###
FDA will reexamine its homeopathic product regulation

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has scheduled a public hearing to discuss the homeopathic marketplace and the regulation of homeopathic products. The 1938 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act permits all substances included in the Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States to be marketed as drugs, but the FDA has not held homeopathic products to the same standards as other drugs. The FDA is seeking participants for the hearing and written comments from all interested parties. The hearing is scheduled for April 20 and 21 from 9 AM to 4 PM at the FDA's White Oak Campus in Silver Spring, Maryland. Registration is free and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Registration to attend or provide oral testimony must be done by April 13th. Comments can also be submitted online. The hearing will be viewable on the Internet, and a transcript will eventually be available. The Federal Register
http://www.homeowatch.org/reg/fda_hearing_2015/announcement.pdf
has complete details.

Note: The March 15th issue of Consumer Health Digest contained the wrong link to the Australian Government’s National Health and Research Council's 40-page information paper titled Evidence on the effectiveness of homeopathy for treating health conditions
http://www.homeowatch.org/research/nhmrc_2015.pdf
The report is relevant to the FDA proceedings because it concludes, essentially, that homeopathic treatment is worthless.

###
Another “biological" dentist in trouble

Washington's Dental Quality Assurance Commission (DQAC) has charged Runar D. Johnson, D.D.S. with unprofessional conduct related to his credentials, his infection control procedures, and his care of three patients. The DQAC's statement of charges
http://www.casewatch.org/board/dent/johnson/charges_2014.shtml
alleges that he

(a) represented himself as naturopath although he is not licensed as a naturopathic physician in the state of Washington,
(b) administered tests and treatments that are outside the appropriate scope of dentistry,
(c) failed to keep adequate records, and
(d) did not meet infection control standards.

Johnson's Web site
http://www.drrunarjohnson.com/
states that he "offers an alternative to traditional dentistry" and that he recently "graduated from The School of Integrative Biologic Dental Medicine as a Board Certified Naturopathic Physician." (This school is not accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education.)

Johnson has also lectured at "biological dentistry"
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/holisticdent.html
conferences. In 2001, Johnson signed an agreed order
http://www.casewatch.org/board/dent/johnson/order_2001.pdf
under which he was reprimanded and fined $10,000 for failing to cooperate with a board investigation of his orthodontic treatment of a patient. He was also ordered to take additional training, pass a jurisprudence examination, and have his current and future orthodontic cases reviewed by an orthodontic consultant.

The order notes that he had
(a)  failed to submit requested documents,
(b) tried to intimidate the patient into withdrawing the complaint,
(c) failed to create and maintain appropriate records,
(d) failed to perform necessary procedures, and
(e) failed to refer the patient to an orthodontist when the patient’s condition had worsened.

###
Gonzalez cancer claims examined

Retired surgeon Peter J. Moran and a colleague have reviewed One Man Alone: An Investigation of Nutrition, Cancer, and William Donald Kelley, in which the book's author, Nicholas Gonzalez, M.D., evaluates Kelley's "metabolic" treatment of 50 patients. Gonzalez, who has provided similar treatment since 1987, typically prescribes coffee enemas, dietary strategies, and up to 150 pills a day for his patients. The review notes that to provide credible evidence of a possible cure, cases should demonstrate three things:

There should be a firm diagnosis of an invasive cancer of a type that has predictable behavior. This usually requires biopsy evidence, but some diagnoses can be reliably based on imaging and/or laboratory tests.
All signs of cancer disappear with the use of the treatment being assessed, with that treatment alone, and within a time frame consistent with a causal relationship.
The patient stays cancer-free long enough to conclude that a cure has occurred or the tumor is unlikely to recur.
Moran's review
http://www.cancertreatmentwatch.org/reports/gonzalez/book.shtml
states that none of Gonzalez's cases satisfied these criteria. At least 41 had been treated with surgery, radiation, and/or chemotherapy that could have been responsible for the length of their survival. The rest lacked biopsy evidence and/or had cancers that typically have long survival times. Gonzalez also claims that the famous cancer researcher Dr. Robert Good regarded his work favorably. However, letters from Dr. Good indicate that this was not true
http://www.cancertreatmentwatch.org/reports/gonzalez/good/overview.shtml

###

Continuing request for help from Dr. Barrett

In June 2010, Doctor's Data, Inc. sued Dr. Barrett because it didn't like what he wrote about them on Quackwatch and in this newsletter. The events leading up to the suit are described at
http://www.quackwatch.org/14Legal/dd_suit.html
In November, 2011, about half of the allegations were dismissed, but discovery was permitted for more than a year. The rest of the suit is ripe for dismissal (the court is now considering another motion to dismiss), but the proceedings have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Even small donations, if sent by enough subscribers to this newsletter, will be very helpful. Contributions to reduce the cost can be made by mail or through
http://www.quackwatch.org/00AboutQuackwatch/donations.html
###

Other issues of the Digest are accessible through
http://www.ncahf.org/digest15/index.html
To help prevent the newsletter from being filtered out as spam, please add
bounces-chd@lists.quackwatch.org
to your address book or other "whitelist." To unsubscribe, log into your chd account or send a blank message to
chd-unsubscribe@lists.quackwatch.org
This must be sent from the address you used to subscribe. To subscribe from a new address, send a blank message to
chd-subscribe@lists.quackwatch.org

=================================

Stephen Barrett, M.D.
Consumer Advocate
Chatham Crossing, Suite 107/208
11312 U.S. 15 501 North
Chapel Hill, NC 27517

Telephone: (919) 533-6009

http://www.quackwatch.org  (health fraud and quackery)
[...]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[*/QUOTE*]
Logged
Kinderklinik Gelsenkirchen verstößt gegen die Leitlinien

Der Skandal in Gelsenkirchen
Hamer-Anhänger in der Kinderklinik
http://www.klinikskandal.com

http://www.reimbibel.de/GBV-Kinderklinik-Gelsenkirchen.htm
http://www.kinderklinik-gelsenkirchen-kritik.de

ama

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1276
Re: FDA will reexamine its homeopathic product regulation
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2015, 02:10:01 PM »


The Federal Register
http://www.homeowatch.org/reg/fda_hearing_2015/announcement.pdf

[*QUOTE*]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
 16327

 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
  HUMAN SERVICES
   Food and Drug Administration
  21 CFR Part 15
 [Docket No. FDA–2015–N–0540]
 Homeopathic Product Regulation:
 Evaluating the Food and Drug
 Administration’s Regulatory
 Framework After a Quarter-Century;
 Public Hearing
  AGENCY:
 Food and Drug Administration,
  HHS.
  ACTION:
 Notice public hearing; request
 of for comments.
  SUMMARY:
 The Food and Drug
  Administration (FDA) is announcing a
  public hearing to obtain information
  and comments from stakeholders about
  the current use of human drug and
 biological products labeled as
 homeopathic, as well as the Agency’s
 regulatory framework for such products.
 These products include prescription
 drugs and biological products labeled as
homeopathic and over-the-counter
 (OTC) drugs labeled as homeopathic.
 FDA is seeking participants for the
 public hearing and written comments
from all interested parties, including,
but not limited to, consumers, patients,
caregivers, health care professionals,
patient groups, and industry. FDA is
 seeking input on a number of specific
 questions, but is interested in any other
 pertinent information participants
 would like to share.
 DATES: The public hearing will be held
 on April 20 and 21, 2015, from 9 a.m.
 to 4 p.m. The meeting may be extended
 or may end early depending on the level
of public participation. Register to
 attend or provide oral testimony at the
  hearing by April 13, 2015. See
  Registration and Request to Provide Oral
  Testimony for information on how to
  register or make an oral presentation at
  the hearing. Written or electronic
  comments will be accepted until June
 22, 2015.

  ADDRESSES: public hearing will be
 Theheld at FDA’s White Oak Campus,
 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31,
rm. 1503A, Silver Spring, MD, 20993–
  0002. Participants must enter through
  Building 1 and undergo security
  screening. For parking and security
  information, please refer to
http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm

  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
  Lesley DeRenzo, Center for Drug
 

 Evaluation and Research, Food and
 Drug Administration, 10903 New
 Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD
 20903–0002, 240–402–4612, FAX: 301–
847–8747, Lesley.derenzo@fda.hhs.gov;
 or Cynthia Ng, Center for Drug
 Evaluation and Research, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD
 20903–0002, 301–796–7512, FAX: 301–
 847–8747, cynthia.ng.@fda.hhs.gov.
 Registration and Request to Provide
 Oral Testimony: The public hearing is
 free and seating will be on a first-come,
 first-served basis. If you wish to attend
 or make an oral presentation, see section
 III (Attendance and/or Participation in
 the Public Hearing) for information on
 how to register and the deadline for
 registration. If you cannot attend in
 person, information about how you can
 access a live Webcast will be located at
 https://collaboration.fda.gov/hprapril2015/

 Comments and Transcripts: You may
 submit either electronic comments
regarding this document to
http://www.regulations.gov or written
comments to the Division of Dockets
 Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug
 Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.
 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. You should
annotate and organize your comments to
identify the specific questions or topic
to which they refer. It is only necessary
to send one set of comments. Please
identify your comments with the docket
number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
will be posted to the docket at
http://www.regulations.gov

 Transcripts of the hearing will be
 available for review at the Division of
 Dockets Management and at
http://www.regulations.gov
approximately 45
 days after the hearing. You may submit
 a request to obtain a hard copy or CD–
 ROM transcript. Send your request to
 the Division of Freedom of Information
 (ELEM–1029), Office of Management
 Programs, Food and Drug
Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr.,
 Element Bldg., Rockville, MD 20857.
 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
 FDA is
 evaluating its current enforcement
 policies for drug products labeled as
 homeopathic from scientific, risk, and
 process perspectives. The Agency is
 now soliciting opinions about whether
 and how to adjust the current
 enforcement policies to reflect changes
 in the homeopathic product
 marketplace over the last approximately
 25 years.
P1.SGM
 27MRP1


16328
 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules

I. Background
 A. Homeopathic Products and the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
 The definition of a ‘‘drug’’ under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
 (FD&C Act) includes: (1) Articles
 recognized in the official United States
 Pharmacopoeia (USP), official
 Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the
 United States (HPUS); (2) articles
 intended for use in the diagnosis, cure,
 mitigation, treatment, or prevention of
 disease in man or other animals; and (3)
 articles (other than food) intended to
 affect the structure or any function of
 the body of man or other animals. See
 section 201(g)(1)(A) to (C) of the FD&C
 Act (21 U.S.C. 321(g)(1)(A) to(C)).
 Accordingly, an article that meets this
 definition of a ‘‘drug’’ is subject to
 regulation under the FD&C Act,
 regardless of whether it is labeled as
 homeopathic. An article that also meets
 the definition of a ‘‘biological product’’
 (as defined in section 351(i) of the
 Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) (42
 U.S.C 262(i))) is subject to regulation
 under both the FD&C Act and the PHS
 Act.
 The FD&C Act recognizes the HPUS,
 along with the USP, as an official
 compendium. See section 201(j) of the
 FD&C Act. The HPUS is produced by a
 non-governmental organization known
 as the Homeopathic Pharmacop*ia
 Convention of the United States
 (HPCUS) and has been in continuous
 publication since 1897 (Ref. 1). The
 HPCUS determines which ingredients,
 including permissible potency levels,
 are officially monographed homeopathic
 ingredients. To date, there are over 1200
 officially monographed ingredients in
 the HPUS. Since 2004, the HPCUS has
 added over 500 new ingredient
 monographs. The standards set forth in
 the HPUS and the USP affect the
 naming, quality, and labeling of drug
 products. See e.g., sections 501(b) and
 502(g) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 351(b)
 and 352(g)).
 Nothing in the FD&C Act exempts
 drugs labeled as homeopathic from any
 of the requirements related to approval,
 adulteration, and misbranding,
 including labeling requirements. If a
 drug labeled as homeopathic is a new
 drug under the FD&C Act, it is subject
  to the same premarket approval
  requirements and the same standards for
  safety and efficacy as all new drugs. A
  new drug is defined, in part, as any drug
  that is not generally recognized, among
  experts qualified by scientific training
  and experience to evaluate the safety
  and effectiveness of drugs, as safe and
  effective for use under the condition
  prescribed, recommended, or suggested
 

 in the labeling thereof. See section
 201(p) of the FD&C Act).
  B. Homeopathic Drugs and the OTC
Drug Review
  In 1972, FDA initiated rulemaking
 procedures (the OTC Drug Review) to
  determine which OTC drugs are
  generally recognized among qualified
  experts as safe and effective and not
  misbranded under prescribed,
  recommended, or suggested conditions
  of use. See ‘‘Procedures for
  Classification of Over-the-Counter
  Drugs’’ (37 FR 9464, May 11, 1972).
  FDA deferred review of drugs labeled as
  homeopathic due to the uniqueness of
  homeopathic medicine and stated that
  FDA would review them as a separate
  category at a later time (37 FR 9464 at
  9466). To date, FDA has not reviewed
  this class of products for safety and
  efficacy. Accordingly, there are
  currently no FDA monographs for drug
  products labeled as homeopathic.
  C. FDA’s Compliance Policy Guide
  Since 1988, prescription and
  nonprescription drug products labeled
  as homeopathic have been
  manufactured and distributed without
  FDA approval under the enforcement
  policies set forth in FDA’s Compliance
  Policy Guide (CPG) 400.400 entitled
  ‘‘Conditions Under Which Homeopathic
 Drugs May be Marketed’’ (see 53 FR
 21728, June 9, 1988). The CPG defines
 a homeopathic drug as any drug labeled
 as being homeopathic which is listed in
 the HPUS, an addendum to it, or its
 supplements. The CPG includes
 conditions specific to ingredients,
  labeling, prescription status, and current
  good manufacturing practice. The CPG
  can be found at
http://www.fda.gov/iceci/compliancemanuals/compliancepolicyguidancemanual/ucm074360.htm

  D. Growth in the Sale of Drugs Labeled
 as ‘‘Homeopathic’’
  The homeopathic drug industry has
  continued on an upward growth
 trajectory since FDA issued its CPG in
 1988, especially with respect to OTC
 drug products labeled as homeopathic.
 The CPG noted that, at the time of
  original publication in 1988, the
  homeopathic drug market was a
  multimillion dollar industry in the
  United States. In 2007, the National
  Health Interview Survey, conducted by
  the Centers for Disease Control and
  Prevention’s National Center for Health
  Statistics, estimated that adults spent
  about $2.9 billion on the purchase of
  homeopathic medicine (Ref. 2). Many
  drugs labeled as homeopathic are sold
  OTC in major retail stores and are often
 

 marketed as natural, safe, and effective
 alternatives to other prescription and
nonprescription products.
 E. Safety of Drug Products Labeled as
Homeopathic
 Drugs products labeled as
 homeopathic can contain a wide range
 of substances, including ingredients
 derived from plants, healthy or diseased
 animal or human sources, minerals, and
 chemicals (either as active or inactive
 ingredients). As with ingredients in
 other drug and biological products,
 homeopathic ingredients, even if highly
 diluted, can cause side effects, drug
 interactions, and allergic or other
 adverse reactions. Negative health
 effects from drug products labeled as
 homeopathic have been reported
 through the FDA’s Adverse Event
 Reporting System and the National
 Poison Data System (NPDS), which is
 maintained by the American
 Association of Poison Control Centers
 and tracks human poison exposure
 cases. Data in the NPDS pertaining to
 homeopathic drug products is tracked
 under the category ‘‘Homeopathic
 Agents.’’ The 2012 American
 Association of Poison Control Center
 Annual Report indicated that there were
 10,311 reported poison exposure cases
 related to ‘‘Homeopathic Agents,’’ with
8,788 of those reported cases attributed
to children 5 years of age and younger
(Ref. 3). Of the 10,311 reported cases,
697 required treatment in a health care
facility (Id.).
II. Scope of the Public Hearing
 FDA is seeking broad public input on
 the current enforcement policies related
 to drug products labeled as
 homeopathic in an effort to better
 promote and protect the public health.
 FDA has developed a list of questions to
 facilitate a more productive discussion
 at the public hearing. This list is not
 intended to be exclusive, and FDA
 encourages comments on other matters
 related to the development and
regulation of drug and biological
products labeled as homeopathic. Issues
that are of specific interest to the
Agency include the following:
 • What are consumer and health care
 provider attitudes towards human drug
 and biological products labeled as
 homeopathic?
 • What data sources can be identified
 or shared with FDA so that the Agency
 can better assess the risks and benefits
 of drug and biological products labeled
 as homeopathic?
 • Are the current enforcement
 policies under the CPG appropriate to
 protect and promote public health in
 light of the tremendous growth in the


Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
 16329

homeopathic drug market? Are there
 alternatives to the current enforcement
 policies of the CPG that would inform
 FDA’s regulatory oversight of drugs
 labeled as homeopathic? If so, please
 explain.
 • Are there areas of the current CPG
 that could benefit from additional
 clarity? If so, please explain.
 • Is there information regarding the
 regulation of homeopathic products in
 other countries that could inform FDA’s
 thinking in this area?
 • A large majority of human drug
 products labeled as homeopathic are
 marketed as OTC drugs. These products
 are available for a wide variety of
 indications, and many of these
 indications have never been considered
 for OTC use under a formal regulatory
 process. What would be an appropriate
 regulatory process for evaluating such
 indications for OTC use?
 • Given the wide range of indications
 on drug products labeled as
 homeopathic and available OTC, what
 processes do companies currently use to
 evaluate whether such products,
 including their indications for use, are
 appropriate for marketing as an OTC
 drug?
 • Do consumers and health care
 providers have adequate information to
 make informed decisions about drug
 products labeled as homeopathic? If not,
 what information, including, for
 example, information in labeling, would
 allow consumers and health care
 providers to be better informed about
 products labeled as homeopathic?
 III. Attendance and/or Participation in
the Public Hearing
 The public hearing is free and seating
 will be on a first-come, first-served
 basis. If you wish to make an oral
 presentation during the hearing, you
 must register by submitting either an
 electronic or a written request by 5 p.m.
 on April 13, 2015, to Lesley DeRenzo or
 Cynthia Ng (see FOR FURTHER
 INFORMATION CONTACT). Submit
 electronic requests to
 CDERHOMEOPATHICPRODUCT@
 fda.hhs.gov. You must provide your
 name, title, business affiliation (if
 applicable), address, telephone and fax
 numbers, email address, and type of
 organization you represent (e.g.,
  industry, consumer organization, etc.).
  You also should submit a brief summary
   of the presentation, including the
   discussion topic(s) that will be
  addressed and the approximate time
  requested for your presentation. FDA
  encourages individuals and
  organizations with common interests to
  coordinate and give a joint, consolidated
  presentation. Registrants will receive
 

 confirmation once they have been
  accepted to attend the meeting. FDA
  may limit both the number of
  participants from individual
  organizations and the total number of
  attendees based on space limitations.
  Registered presenters should check in
 before the hearing.
 Participants should submit a copy of
  each presentation to Lesley DeRenzo or
  Cynthia Ng (see FOR FURTHER
  INFORMATION CONTACT) no later than 5
  p.m. on April 13, 2015. We will file the
  hearing schedule, indicating the order
  and time allotted for each presenter,
  with the Division of Dockets
  Management (see COMMENTS AND
  TRANSCRIPTS). FDA will post an
  agenda of the public hearing and other
  background material at least 3 days
  before the public hearing, along with
  additional information, at:
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm132703.htm
(select this hearing
  from the events list).
  We will mail, email, or telephone the
  schedule to each participant before the
  hearing. In anticipation of the hearing
  presentations moving ahead of
  schedule, participants are encouraged to
 arrive early to ensure their designated
 order of presentation. Participants who
 are not present when called risk
  forfeiting their scheduled time.
  If you need special accommodations
  due to a disability, contact Lesley
  DeRenzo or Cynthia Ng (see FOR
  FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7
  days in advance of the hearing.
  IV. Notice of Hearing Under 21 CFR
 Part 15
  The Commissioner of Food and Drugs
 is announcing that the public hearing
 will be held in accordance with part 15
 (21 CFR part 15). A presiding officer,
 who will be accompanied by FDA
 senior management from the Office of
  the Commissioner and the relevant
  centers, will conduct the hearing.
 Under § 15.30(f), the hearing is
 informal and the rules of evidence do
  not apply. Only the presiding officer
  and panel members may question any
 person during or at the conclusion of
 each presentation (§ 15.30(e)). Public
 hearings under part 15 are subject to
 FDA’s policy and procedures for
 electronic coverage of FDA’s
  media public administrative proceedings (21
  CFR part 10, subpart C) (§ 10.203(a)).
  Under § 10.205, representatives of the
  electronic media may be permitted,
 subject to certain limitations, to
  videotape, film, or otherwise record
  FDA’s public administrative
  proceedings, including presentations by
  participants. The hearing will be
  transcribed as stipulated in § 15.30(b).
 

 To the extent that the conditions for the
 hearing as described in this document
 conflict with any provisions set out in
 part 15, this notice acts as a waiver of
 those provisions as specified in
 § 15.30(h).

V. References
 The following references have been
 placed on display in the Division of
 Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES)
 and may be seen by interested persons
 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
 through Friday, and are available
 electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov
(FDA has verified
 all the Web site addresses in this
 reference section, but we are not
 responsible for any subsequent changes
 to the Web sites after this document
 publishes in the Federal Register.)

1. The Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the
United States (HPUS), ‘‘What is the
 HPUS?’’, available at
http://www.hpus.com/what-is-the-hpus.php
 (last visited Dec. 23, 2014).
 2. Nahin, R. L., P. M. Barnes, B. J. Stussman,
 and B. Bloom, ‘‘Costs of Complementary
 and Alternative Medicine (CAM) and
Frequency of Visits to CAM
Practitioners: United States, 2007.’’
National Health Statistics Reports; no
18. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for
 Health Statistics, 2009.
 3. James B. Mowry, et al., ‘‘2012 Annual
 Report of the American Association of
 Poison Control Centers’ National Poison
 Data System (NPDS): 30th Annual
 Report,’’ 51 Clinical Toxicology, 949,
 1188 (2013).
 Dated: March 20, 2015.
 Leslie Kux,
 Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–07018 Filed 3–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[*/QUOTE*]



Logged
Kinderklinik Gelsenkirchen verstößt gegen die Leitlinien

Der Skandal in Gelsenkirchen
Hamer-Anhänger in der Kinderklinik
http://www.klinikskandal.com

http://www.reimbibel.de/GBV-Kinderklinik-Gelsenkirchen.htm
http://www.kinderklinik-gelsenkirchen-kritik.de
Pages: [1]