In the past decade, several major fish-treating studies have shown that fish therapy is safe and effective.
In a 2016 study, the Cochrane Collaboration, a research arm of the World Health Organization, reported that fish-treatment was safe for up to 18 months in both fish species that were given the therapy and those that were not.
That study was funded by the US Department of Agriculture, but it did not include data on fish species, and the study was published in the journal Animal Health.
In the first two decades after the FDA approved fish therapy in 2000, it has been studied extensively by both researchers and doctors.
The Fish and Aquatic Health Research Institute, a non-profit, is the largest independent research center in the world devoted to fish-therapy.
Dr. Kevin Gorman, who is the institute’s president, says that, based on the studies that have been published since 2000, there is a 95 percent success rate for fish therapy.
“That means it is safe for about 90 percent of the patients,” Gorman said.
“But we have to look at the data.”
Gorman has long been a vocal critic of the FDA’s approval of fish therapy and has repeatedly called for changes in how the agency manages its research.
In his first year as president, Gorman called for a moratorium on all new fish-treated trials, and he recently issued a statement that said the FDA is not taking its research seriously and that “the fish-T trial program is riddled with fraud and mismanagement.”
In 2015, Gormans office was the site of a public hearing where he and other scientists voiced concerns about the Fish and Marine Health Agency, the agency that oversees the Fish, Wildlife, and Aquaculture Agency (FWA).
In that meeting, Gomerans staff asked the agency to stop funding any new fish therapy trials, including those sponsored by private firms.
The FDA has not done so, but the Fish Safety Advisory Committee (FSAC), which includes representatives from the FWA and the FDA, recently met and recommended that the agency stop all new trials of fish-based therapies, including fish-oil treatment.
The FSCA is chaired by former FDA commissioner and longtime FDA advocate Mary Ellen O’Toole.
The FSAC is currently considering whether to issue a final report on the efficacy and safety of fish oil therapy, according to Gorman.
“We’re getting a lot of information from the research community and the public that there is something to fish therapy,” Gormers office director of communications, Mike Boudreau, told Next Big News.
“It’s important that the FDA take that into account.”
Gomer, who spent 30 years as a research scientist at the University of Florida, says he has had more than 300 conversations with scientists and medical professionals about fish therapy, and that many are not taking the FDA seriously.
In 2016, the FSFAC voted to require the FDA to conduct studies on fish-derived therapy in order to get a better handle on whether the therapy is as effective as it claims.
In response, Gomers office issued a press release calling for the FSCAs “public consultation process” on whether fish oil should be included in fish therapy protocols.
A year later, the FSAC did not follow up with Gomer on the issue, instead recommending that the FSA conduct a “comprehensive review” of the effectiveness of fish oils.
The public consultation process also came up short of Gomer’s goal.
“The public was not consulted,” Gomer said.
According to Gomer and his staff, the public consultation was conducted with the knowledge that the scientific literature was incomplete and that the research was incomplete.
Gomer says the FDA failed to do a full public review of the data, and in the meantime, “fish oil was being promoted as a treatment for fish allergy.
That is not true.”
Gorms office was also criticized for not doing a full assessment of the efficacy of fish treatment on fish, a task that the FSAA has since completed.
In its review, the FDA found that fish oil is not a treatment, but rather a “selective” treatment that does not require a clinical trial.
The review also found that “there is no conclusive evidence that fish oils can be used as a therapy for fish allergies.”
The FSACA said it is taking up the issue of fish and oil therapy with the FDA and is waiting for the agency’s final decision.
In an email to Next Big Next, Gopher’s office said it was “confident” that the fish and olfactory receptor study would be included.
“There is a strong likelihood that the Fish oil trial will be included,” it wrote.
“As of now, we have not received any formal request from the Fish Oil trial for a formal public consultation.”
Boudres said that while the FSACA has requested the FDA provide a full review of fish, the company has not yet made that