>> i'm richelle carey. here are the latest headlines from al jazeera. the g-20 is underway in st. petersburg, russia. meeting has been watched closely to gauge the state of u.s. russia relations. on the agenda of the two day meeting is the global economy but much of the summit is expected to be centered around the possible strike at syria. meanwhile in the u.s. the senate intelligence committee is holding a closed door meeting, several scheduled in washington. also walmart employees are planning a strike they're set to protest in 15 cities across the country. the workers want walmart to increase wages to a minimum of

$25,000 a year and also to rehire several employees who were fired for striking in the past. and firefighters are finally getting california's rim fire under control. the wildfire has been building for three weeks in an around yosemite national park. charred 237,000 acres in northern california. at this point the fire is estimated to be about 80% contained. i'm richelle carey. for the latest headlines you can always go to aljazeera.com. stay tuned for consider this, do keep it here. >> blockbuster details on the benghazi attack.

a new book last the untold story. we'll have the authors of under fire, moments away. an consider who knew what, when? also gunts rights advocates are trying to use state lawless to combat federal gun control laws. do they have a legal leg to stand on and could their defiance spread across the country. plus millions take dietary supplements, a wild west of self regulation, could new restrictions though do more harm than good. hello i'm antonio mora. welcome to consider this. we begin with benghazi an explosive new book and a scathing new report inspired by that disaster. on december 11th, 2012, dozens of heavily armed militants attacked. trapped in the burning mission building where they died of

smoke inhalation despite the heroic efforts of a small diplomatic security team that fought valiantly to save them. hours later, glen daugherty and sean williams were killed. as we reported last night al jazeera's investigative team, obtained oreport that blamed the benghazi tragedy on state department officials criticizing them for a failure, a decision granting security exemptions for benghazi and approving benghazi as a temporary diplomatic post at all. the report included blurred lines of authority, a serious lack of accountability, no risk management model for high threat

posts, no on site intelligence analysts at high risk posts and many vulnerable low risk posts. for more on benghazi to the state department's failures to the heroism of the team that fought to save the diplomats, i'm joined by the author of the book under fire, the untold story of the attack at benghazi. fred harris, the global private intelligence agency, he is a former diplomatic security agent and samuel katz, an expert on security issues. fred, you both describe in this book, you create this incredible atmosphere of this lawless city, it's a den of thieves and spice. were -- spies where all sorts of danger were present, where the british and consular office were almost assassinated by

rmps, the u.s. mission had a bomb on one of its walls, there were all sorts of things that were screaming out danger. why was the state department still there and why was ambassador christopher stevens there that particular day? >> the mystery of why ambassador stevens traveled otripoli to benghazi was to open up an outdoor event for a local community. the decision to move ambassador stevens to benghazi we really don't know the details surrounding that. for example as chief of mission, the u.s. ambassador is the president's rep to that country. and in essence that's where the buck stops. he is the commander in chief of all official americans in country. >> but with all the danger that they new was there in benghazi why was that mission even still open? >> well, that's the thousand

pound gorilla that there's a lot of questions that still haven't been answered. there's a term that we used of agents in the business of threat fatigue. after so many days of looking at threat after threat, whether it be from the cia or the state department or an intercept threat you get used to living and working in that kind of environment. it's like the frog in the boiling pot. >> but again this mission wasn't very well secured. there is sam a very long and tragic history of events of americans at diplomatic situations, the 1979 teheran takings, bombings at our embassies in nairobi and jar el assat, and tunis and all on september 11th. given how often this has

happened over the years and how many commissions have been put out there to study and how many recommendations have occurred how could this happen again? >> in the book we speak to a former agent who is a young agent on temporary assignment in beirut cabled back to washington during the civil war there saying that our people are being shot at, the embassy is being shelled, we have to pull out. and the cable that he received back from washington was you're in lebanon for a higher purpose and a few days later the ambassador and his political officer were kidnapped and assassinated by terrorists. this has been going on for years and given that embassies are high profile, high value targets the odds are that it will continue going on for years. the game here is a chess match. both sides, the terrorists and those involved in counterterrorism try to engage each other and match each other's moves and figure out and guess where the next strike will come.

in benghazi for example it was a relatively low tech strike, armed men with rpgs and ak 47s, material that's available in the markets in benghazi and ultimately they used fire as the most destructive force. >> part of the problem was there were only five fairly young diplomatic security agents to cover a fairly substantial compound there. very hard to imagine such a dangerous city a security force so small could really make that much of a difference. >> well in essence there were three agents assigned to benghazi and two were assigned to ambassador stevens protective detail. there were five altogether. one has to look at the history of the diplomatic security service. a very small agency that doesn't get quite a lot of press and exposure. and because of that they've always -- one of their characteristics is they've always done very much with very little. they've done what they can with what they have. >> we want to talk more about

them in a moment. but when i saw the report that al jazeera obtained last night and the recommendations in that report there was flog in there that you guys hadn't brought up in the book. i mean they had a blue ribbon committee studying this for months and the recommendations were very clearly in your book. you're talking about the report is saying that the state department should put these best practices in place including establishing an undersecretary for diplomatic security, the people you were just talk become sam to develop a real accountability, to develop a department wide and security training and agree to waive security standards only after mitigating any security threats. i guess that's the issue with what was happening in benghazi. you guys talk about it, the report talks about it in these same terms, calling it an expeditionary diplomatic outpost, is that what the decision is to create a

diplomatic mission out of nowhere, there's only so much security you can do? good that's the real mission. i was hired after the beirut embassy bombings. inside the organization we were known as inman security . dmierl inman created the standards -- admiral inman, signing off on authorization for official americans to work in these buildings but they were at substandard facilities and that's to meet the needs of the expeditionary diploma

diplomacy that the administration has opened up to. >> are they so important to open up those kinds of facilities when you're balancing the safety and the lives of all these diplomats? >> well the new world order is marching at a pace much faster than the typical standard operating procedure in washington can catch up to it. so new nations or new governments are coming into place as a result of the arab spring. new nations are being formed in eask in africa, and sometimes for that higher purpose that i mentioned earlier it is important that there be a u.s. presence and sometimes that presence requires that there be a temporary facility. that you're kind of trying to catch up with the curve while trying to maintain standards that in certain parts of the world at certain times and rushing into it are very difficult to maintain. >> and part of the problem of benghazi you simply couldn't

trust anybody on the ground. the libbians, the police force, the -- the libyans were just not around to help. >> that's one of the issues people don't understand in this environment. that it is the host nation's responsibility first and foremost by the vienna convention to provide adequate security for all diplomats in country. in essence it was the libyan government's responsibility to protect the official americans in benghazi. the challenge becomes per your point there is no ability to train quickly enough a loyal force in order to protect your perimeter. how does the state department my old organization work around that? we put our special agents on the perimeter looking for bad guys, looking for presphaings activities to be the -- presurveillance activities. >> some of the bad guys in this case play well have been some of

the people we thought were supposed to help us. >> right. and that's just the nature of the business in this line of work you're dealing at times in hostile environments where you're dealing with foreign service national staff, that for the most part is extraordinarily loyal to the americans that they've been assisting for many, many years. but occasionally you get the bat apples in the group that you move into the volatile areas and have jihad dist scope. and in most cases you go to the foreign police and you say what do you know about this person? and there is nobody to go to that has any intelligence or information to help you. >> and diplomats also fight struggle, give a little push back, because the whole point of these diplomatic mission says to be open to the people in the country they're going to?

so if they are a fortress with no access, their application is curtailed. >> he was one of those diplomats that didn't believe in sending e-mails and cables out. he loved to press the flesh. he loved being in libya and he was well beloved by the libyan people because he was a flag bearer for the united states of america. but with that old style of diplomacy in this day and age comes high threat. >> a lot of danger and we want to talk about that danger and what happened that night. fred and sam are going to stay with us as we go inside the benghazi consulate in the day of the attack. it is a harrow ing time, what was known in the united states, that will also surprise you.

this is the 900-page d

>> we're just a few days away from the anniversary of one of the worst attacks on a u.s. diplomatic post is in history, the coordinated strike in benghazi, and the attack on a nearby cia post. with me are fred burton and samuel katz, under fire, the untold story of the attack on benghazi. there was a broader context, the arab spring had been going on for a year and there were all sorts of riots going on on that

september 11th day, at embassies in other parts of the middle east in some cases motivated by this infamous film that ridiculed the prophet mohammed. clearly, benghazi was not the right place to be on that day and once the attack began it became very clear to the ambassador what was happening and they called for help. >> yes, they did. the agents new immediately that this was -- knew immediately that this was a terrorist attack, when this was first made. they hit the duck and cover alarm, indicating that everybody should seek cover. that the embassy was under a terrorist attack. message texts and phone calls were played to the u.s. embassy in tripoli. letting them know that benghazi was under terrorist attack.

to the diplomat security command post that the compound was under attack. >> cables were sent. so is there any doubt in your mind that the people who received those cables in washington understood that this was a terrorist attack? >> i'm sure they understood it was a terrorist attack but the analogy i like to use is a baseball term, that feet slows down the game. the response is never immediate as much as we might think it is necessary. >> it doesn't happen like in the books and movies. >> it is not an episode of 24. and that is one of the things that needs to be understood. that there was a response. a military response was not feasible in the time frame that the attack trpped and the transs over. >> i want to ask more about that in a moment. your response was that people who received this information must have understood it was a terrorist attack and not a spontaneous demonstration?

>> you have to understand that the demonstrations in cairo were massive violent there were fires set around the u.s. embassy, there were similar demonstrations around tunisia. there were these sorts of attacks. when news came of an attack in benghazi very little detail, very little information relayed that there were x number of gunmen. >> they got confused that this was going on in the middle east. >> people are shocked that there could be confusion in government. >> when ambassador stevens called out for help, all this played out in washington afterward, the notorious comment by the u.n. ambassador that caused so much controversy. >> our current assessment is that what happened in benghazi

was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo, almost a copy-cat of the demonstrations against our facility in cairo which were prompted of course by the video. what we think then transpired in benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consul at as this was -- consulate as this was unfolding and it escalated into a much more violent episode . >> since then it becomes fairly clear that she was not responsible, that's the information she got. can you understand how it got to that point, how she got the faulty information, that so many knew it was a terrorist attack? >> john lecarre, says a desk is

a dangerous place to watch the world. that is what happens inside the beltway and specifically inside washington. most people have this understanding inappropriately that cabinet level officials individuals at the rank of susan rice or even the president is sitting around making these tactical decisions. the system is not geared to that level. the system is geared for the agents like i was to tactically deal with the problem, make notifications and at a very low level usually at the office directly level you have decisions that are made. so in essence, whenever you get the bosses involved in these kinds of issues that have snowballed up to these kinds of events there are going to be these kinds of problems. >> do you think there was deliberately obfuscation in washington or some serious incompetent i

i i incompetence? >> the security issues that needed to be addressed and were addressed in the report that al jazeera released yesterday. >> we'll leave that discussion for another time but let's go back to what happened in the mission that day. there was true heroism on the part of diplomatic personnel who fried to save ambassador stevens and tried to get him out of there at great risk to themselves. >> in law enforcement it is often said when a police officer needs backup he could call swat and they could be minutes away or a pliel away. for many of the diplomatic security agents that are in hot spots around the world, assistance is an aircraft carrier that's 6,000 miles away, as a result the agents learn to live by their wits, to survive, to maximize their surroundings and to buy time. the whole embassy philosophy of

security is all these doors and windows that are blast resistant that buy time, so they can wait until help comes. these five young agents, they were relatively young waged a cat and mouse game. it was a decision that they had to maim. either they engage the terrorists or they try to save the lives of the ambassador and foreign service officer. and once the attack subsided initially and they had the time to go in and look for the ambassador the agents risked their lives, some suffered horrific smoke inhalation in search of the ambassador. >> and there were military assets that weren't that far away but the reality is, there was no way they could scrambleical request enough or was there some resistance from washington especially when it came to a team in spain that could have gotten there in a few hours to help the members at the cia an ex? >> that was a team that stood up

to get there but again you get back on to and i've been on these callouts before. nothing moves quickly in this kind of environment. you have the issue of sovereignty. you have optics of the united states invading the country. you have the issue of country clearance which i can tell you is a bureaucratic mess when you have to formulaly request clearance. >> the only group was cia officers that were based in tipoli at the embassy they got there and they got into an unbelievable firefight. >> the notion that there was no response is incorrect. once the word got otripoli, the cia, as well as contractors and jsock officers, they suited up they grabbed their gear and they made plans and arrangements and coordinated their trip to benghazi. benghazi being lawless and

chaotic they were held up at the airport for almost four hours but they were the only good guys in that country that could be summoned. >> and by some accounts they killed 50 militants and injured 100 others and two of them then of course died hours later on the roof of the annex, when they were hit by mortars. tiez rhone and herman. hermella, lets go to you. >> why were the agents at the consulate the night the ambassador was killed? >> that's a mystery, a question we need help with congress to call cia personnel up for testimony. so far there's only been one cia officer testify behind closed doors that was actually in benghazi. >> and they were at the annex,

they were not at the mission with the ambassador. >> that's correct, but they did respond to the cia athen to the actual villa to help with the rescue. that is one of the points that is nothing more than speculation. it is my assessment having worked in this environment and looked at a lot of terrorist attacks like this, this is a cia base, this is what the cia does, they are engaged in human source meetings, they have security officers that watch the case officers' backs during those meetings. that's the grs crew. they're multitasking. they're training in emergency medical gear and equipment and first aid. they're looking for man-pads and some of the surface to air missiles that had been lost when the gadhafi regime fell. >> you described after nate oaf and the americans intervened to get rid of gadhafi. looking into the future what do you think about syria, it's a similar situation.

do you think chaos will ensue if americans intervene there? >> chaos is already going on in syria. one of the things to consider concerning any intervention in syria is there will probably be retaliation somewhere by hezbollah or iranian revolutionary elements, and both hezbollah and the iranian military guard have a long and bloody history regarding attacks against u.s. dploaments dploats diplomats. >> and american's diplomats and interests inside the most dangerous and volatile locations in the world. do you see the dedication, the courage, the commitment of these diplomatic security officers as the true legacy of benghazi? >> i do. and i think it was a very honorable move on the part of

the department and the administration to water the agencies -- agents that were involved there for their courage and their heroism. they did it very quietly but the agents are going to have to live with it for the rest of the lives. >> and secretary has gone to visit one of the members who were severely wounded. thank you for coming tonight. >> thank you for having us. coming up, states trying to overturn federal laws and will that's all i have an real money.

victoria azarenko

>> the gun control battle keeps heating up as several states are balking at any push for tougher gun laws. and in colorado voters will next week go to the polls on deciding to rawlt lawmakers who voted for stricter gun control. and other states particularly missouri are trying for nullification. it could even mean a missouri federal agent cost problem cuted for trying to enforce federal gun laws. joining me to discuss this is

former montana governor brian schweitzer. governor, thank for being with us. >> glad to be on. >> you managed to be reelected and probably would have been reelected again if there had not been term limits. what do you think about the efforts of missouri and other states to make federal gun limits unenforceable in the states? >> what we said in montana and we went first and many are modeling their laws after us, if you make the gun in montana and it stays in montana then federal gun laws ought not to apply. this has been an ebb and flow for 200 years all back to the federalist papers there has been

discussion about the overreach of the federal government, the congress laws applies to this and not that. we are a nation of laws. our law has been challenged. we lost at the 9th circuit and it will go to the u.s. supreme court. if they say to us montana had overreached then we will not be able to enforce our law in montana. simple as that. >> they used the law to shoot it down, pardon the pun. but compared to what other states are intending to do with this nullification, if montana's law was stricken down by the ninth court of appeals what chance do these other laws have? >> probably a snowball's chance in hell. you can't tell to a state legislature you can't try, you can't pass a bill, you can't say to the governor you shall not pass a bill, you can challenge it in courts. that's what we've gone for hundreds of years.

that's what a country of checks and balances does. >> what missouri plans to do, penalizing agents, not letting their agents cooperate with federal agents, the balance between state power and federal power that seems to go a little bit too far, does it not? >> well, listen, when you get law enforcement that are pointing guns at one another we certainly have gone too far. you know i'm not going to criticize the missouri legislature for what they pass or what they don't pass and i guess it all depends on how they enforce it and what moves forward. even in montana people said this is nullification and on that basis we are sai seditionists, we are not going to see seed from thsecede from theunion. we will challenge federal law in the courts or they will challenge state laws in the courts.

that's the way it's done. >> back in 2011 you said some of the nullification laws being proposed in montana because there were a whole bunch of them were antiamerican. >> well in fact we had bills that wanted us to secede from the union. we had a bill that said that the county sheriff is the sprem law enforcement in the land. in other words any county sheriff in montana, any of the 56 county sheriffs in montana could look at a law or ruling of the supreme court and said, no not in sanders county so that was a little silly so we vetoed that. >> we have got two dozen states that have condoned million marijuana, all in de-- condoned medical marijuana that said it was a schedule 1 dangerous drug, you also have at least 23 states considering bills that nullify obamacare. what do you make of that

movement in general? >> well, even in moofnt -- even in montana i signed a bill that said we wouldn't enforce the mandate under obamacare because i don't believe that the federal government has the right to force a private citizen to reach into their pocket and hand money to a private insurance company. had we had a public option so that citizen could either choose to sign up for a single payor system with the government or they could opt out and buy private insurance i think that would be completely legal. i actually signed a bill and people could call that nullification as well that we are not going to enforce the insurance mandate until there is a public option. >> you're not sounding much like a democrat. there seems to be adouble standard where conservatives think these nullification laws are just fine but democrats don't. and then you've got the marijuana side where you've got

democrats who kind of love the state nullification laws which would allow for marijuana sort of legalization in some way or another. bunt then oppose gun control, you know, legislation or nullification. >> oh now wait, wait, hold on there, cowboy. in montana we passed a medical marijuana bill. we had a circular sent by attorney general holder in the early years that said you states that have medical marijuana we recognize that you will be regulating by state law. and then a couple of months later, a bunch of federal thugs locked up people in the legitimate business of medical marijuana. we get caught in the middle. we hear all the time from washington, d.c, you states are the laboratories of democracy. then as soon as we put something in a

petrie dish they hit it with a hammer. let us experiment. we are 50 separate states all combined in a federal government. >> what about what i just asked though? about that dichotomy where some people oppose nullification on one side and don't on the other depending where they are politically. it just seems like if nullification is going to be valid under any circumstances you have to have some sort of consistency. >> hell, if you take hypocrites out of politics there ain't nobody left. just understand that. so the right gets their panties if a wad over guns and the left gets their panties in a wad over marijuana. just expect that. if you grow broccoli in montana, sell it to a montanan and they eat that broccoli in montana, the u.s. department of agriculture and the u.s.

epa and department of agriculture has nothing to do with it. >> that's taking on a whole different complexion in colorado. it's suffered through the columbine tragedy, and supporting a stricter gun control law, here is a slew of ads that are popping up in that recall campaign. >> john morris and angela heron out of touch. called it a sickness from our souls. >> a sickness of our souls doesn't come easy. >> what's coming on from colorado does it make any -- >> shocking that east and west coast breasts, that the nra and mayor bloomberg and their money are clark in colorado and use

ising it as a -- using it as a proxy battle. 40 states in this country when you have a u.s. senate race 90% of the money comes from east and west coast and every one of these states are used as a are proxy battle. get ready it will be used again. >> who's paying the strings? we've got billionaires michael bloomberg, eli broad, the nra has put in big money to support the recall. here is more of what colorado residents will be treated to in wake of the recall. >> john morris, toxic. he would rather do the admitting of east coast liberals like new york city mayor michael bloomberg. >> again demonizing the nra play in colorado or

did the coloradons decide this on their own? >> coloradoans will decide this on their own. i actually have a bachelor's degree from colorado state university. colorado is the most urban state in the nation. there's more in the city than any other nation, you wouldn't think that about colorado but that's true. it's usually about urban versus rural, the culture we have in a place like montana, we have more guns per capita in the state of the union, yet have the lowest crime rate? we don't point our guns to each other. in places that are more urban that's where we get the problems. >> we have a question from aa viewer. let's go to hermella. >> a viewer on twitter wants to

know what's the number 1 issue that's most important to you, gun control obamacare or medical marijuana? >> i think health care of those three health care is the most important issue and i don't believe that obamacare got it completely right. it was somewhat of a sellout to the insurance companies. it was a total sellout to the pharmaceutical companies. it did some good things, it's made some steps forward, it's going to be a better health care institute in this country. we pay more for health care than any other industrialized country and we are rated something like 27th in the outcome. we can do better and we most certainly will in the future. >> we will see what happens with these nullification laws and the recall in colorado next week. former governor brian schweitzer we thank you. still ahead, the casting of 50 shades of

grey. and later, you may think twice before taking another dietary supplement. the pills are a lot less my name is jonathan betz. i'm from dallas, texas, and i'm an anchor for al jazeera america. >>my name is ranjani chakraborty, i'm from houston, texas. >>i'm kim bondy. >>nicole deford. >>and i'm from new orleans. >>san francisco, california. when i was a little kid, i just really loved the news. >>news was always important in my family. >>i knew as a kid that was exactly what i wanted to do. >>i learned to read by reading the newspaper with my great-grandfather every morning. >>and i love being able to tell other people stories. >>this is it, i want to be a part of this. >>this is what really drove me to al jazeera america.

>> on tonight's data dive, the box office of criticized casting. charlie hunnam and dakota johnson were just cast in the steamy best seller 50 shaits of shades of grey. hunnam start in the songs of anarchy. johnson had smaller rolls.

fans are furious and turned to the internet demanding replacement. more than 30,000 people have already signed a petition that math collier and alexis grill take their place. not happening here the recent slam selection of ben affleck as the caipped crusader in superman versus batman. many maligned box office choices have turned into gold. fans hear ited when michael keaton was signed as batman. mike nichols was maligned for dustin hoffman in the graduate. seven oscar nominations, a win for nichols.

the move to bypass nicholson and tbeaty was slammed too but al pacino helped the god father gross more than a billion in today's dollars. movie execs were queasy about ironman but we know how well it took off. so fret not el james readers, these casting choices could be 50 shades of green as in cash. up next the battle over what you put in your body. millions of americans take dietary supplements but regulations are hard to come by. we'll tell you why the government's fight to help you

>> consider this, does the term dietary supplement evoke elements of health and wellness to you? that's not necessarily the case. as a result of a 1994 law the fda is not regulating this $28 billion industry that covers the dietary supplements which half of americans use every day is regulated by its very own manufacturers. some members of congress would

like to change that policy. senator richard durbin of illinois reintroduced his dietary supplement packaging act in may. >> most people assume that supplements on the shelves in stores have been tested. most people think like drugs that are prescribed, these supplements are tested for safety and effectiveness. that's not true. the fda, the food and drug administration needs to know more about these products. >> here to discuss the pros and cons of dietary supplement regulation from cincinnati, ohio, we are joined by john entine and from washington, d.c. we're joined by darryl rogers, the campaign and communicates he director at the alliance for natural health. thank you very much for being with us, these diedary supplements include vitamins, minerals, herbal remedies,

sexual enhancement and body building. darryl these things come in pill jars bottles capsules, most people who take these every day think of them as drugs. why doesn't the fda treat them that way? >> they are simply not drugs. the fda regulates dietary supplements and the ftc regulates, the manufacturing sales and distribution of dietary supplements. the fda uses dozens of laws and regulations to regulate these products but the most important point to make here is they are not drugs. they are naturally occurring products. they are naturally occurring substances in nature and fda regulates them similar to food substances. because over decades almost a century's worth of regulation of dietary supplements fda has found that and congress have found that the best regulatory structure for them is to regulate them similar to foods. >> john, you think that the fda should be more involved that

most people don't see these as foods, most people see them as medicines? >> what the gentleman said is absolutely wrong. up until the early '90s they were regulated as food. exempting them from serious regulation. he talks about regulation but the reality is that the adverse effects of these products, the potential reality that when you take a supplement, it interacts with your body, it causes health contraindications, people have died from supplements. we know right now that the evidence is overwhelming the last 20 years is that supplements range from benign at best worthless to actually harmful. there have been dozens of studies that show that supplements can kill you. the idea that they are regulated is not true. there are regulations involving certain aspects of them. this gentleman's pr flak for

certain organizations, went to court to try to block the good manufacturing practice regulations that the fda did put in place a few years ago but they were rejected by the court. so any suggestion there is real comprehensive regulation of the known risks that we have with supplements is just not true. >> well darryl to john's point the head of the dietary program said 70% of the u.s. supplement companies have violated their regulations over the last five years and there's been a series of problems. here's a list of them. unclean manufacturing equipment dietary supplements contaminated with prescription drugs pesticides or steroids, the fda has received reports of strokes, pulmonary embolism and death from tainted supplements. >> there are serious issues with any large industry, vitamins and dietary supplements half of all americans take vitamins and dietary supplements.

we are looking at over 160 million of people, tens of billions of dietary supplements schooled every single year. and the fda's own numbers show there are 1500 adverse events reported to the fda with dietary supplements. if billions of dietary supplements are schooled every year we would see more problems. the fda's former boss told congress in testimony, that fda has all the tools that they need to properly regulate this industry and no one last more skin in this game than our organization. we represent consumers. i take vitamins and dietary supplements, family friends and colleagues we want the best advertised produced and marketed supplements that can be had. and the numbers just simply do not show that they are incredibly dangerous. they have a fantastic safety profile. they really do.

>> john, to the point, the rate of reported incidents from dietary supplements does seem pretty low from 2008 through 2011 the fda received 6307 reports of health problems for dietary supplements, in 2008 alone there were 525,000 prorts of problems with -- is problems with fda approved drugs. so in that context john, is it really that big of a deal? >> yeah, let's put it in a couple of different ways to look at that. first of all the reported incidents are only times when people are absolutely sure that a problem was caused by a dietary supplement but most people don't know. when they come down with an illness or reaction the last thing they might believe is that a dietary supplement caused this. because a dietary supplement is worthless or harmful.

is if one person dies of listeria because of a problem that's front page news, and this is quite scary in my mind. but look what we know for a fact is that th alphabet vitamins are made in china, we know that they are not regulated, we know that good manufacturing practices are not being followed by the bulk of the industry, the clip early on where the senator said modeled vitamins, they actually cause, cancer, cause problems. we know that many of these vitamin supplements that they cause drug interactions, there's no requirement at all for a manufacturer that knows that their supplement causes a drug interaction. >> right. >> to put this on the label, this has to be changed. >> and

dietary supplement manufacturers have no duty to warn, we know that ginko biloba ask interfere conditioned ginseng can react, and st. john's wort can interfere, there are a lot of scary stories about contaminated dietary supplements. why is it not you know, why shouldn't there be more regulation? why shouldn't there be more information? because most of the companies don't provide that kind of information on their products. >> sure. well first off, the dietary supplement industry is already regulated. as much as john wants to say they're not i can show you the rules and regulations and the inspections and everything that fda does do. >> but let me stop you there. as john mentioned many of these are produced in china in

factories that are not supervised by the fda and they come into the united states and aren't tested. >> fda first off fda and the board of security are designated to test and assure that the products coming into the united states, not just vitamin and dietary supplements but food products as well meet good practices, current good manufacturing practices to ensure their purity. fda inspections happen yearly sometimes every two years, but your point of they have an entire section of food and other substances beverages that interact with pharmaceutical drugs. and you know what the number one schooled product that actually interacts with pharmaceutical drugs other than alcohol is grapefruit juice. and as soon as grapefruit juice has the same level or has required the same label that

dietary supplements do as far as interaction with pharmaceutical drugs there is no reason to pick on one product in the marketplace but consumers have decided they want access to these, practitioners want to recommend them to individuals and people use them to find and achieve and maintain optimal health. >> john i've got literal 15 seconds. last word for you. >> at some point we have to believe in science or believe in magic. this gentleman and the supplement industry believes that vitamins are great positions that can cure all kinds of problems. we know they 23rd create problems. there was no restrictions that would be imposed on the availability of these products we say label it -- >> i got to cut you off here. the show may be over, the conversation continues on our

>> i'm richelle carey. our top story on al jazeera, syria's war. president obama is growthed by president vladimir putin. behind closed doors it will members of congress discuss military action against syria. egypt survives an assassination attempt as a bomb explodes outside cairo. cities across the country call for better working conditions and higher wages for walmart workers.