04-03-2012, 07:35
You are looking at the FDA case wrong. At the moment the FDA needs to prove a product is harmful for it to be banned. But after this they could have already sold tens of thousands and the damage could have been done. Also they can change the product at a cellular level and claim it is a totally different product and put it back on the shelves again. It happens a lot.
The best example of this being pro-hormones for men. Where ban wave after ban wave was released only for them to change it and re-release it.
In my opinion it is good. The supplement industry is not regulated at all and the supplement companies can make a claim that their products do anything. The FDA needs to prove them wrong to get them to change their statements. This is why there are so many bogus supplements that do nothing at all.
You are against vaccines? So then you want us to live in a world where 1800 century diseases still plague the world?
Be glad there is some control via permits. If not then what is stop your neighbour from growing drugs in their backyard? Or maybe a nice big tree that drops all of its leaves in your yard and gutters.
The best example of this being pro-hormones for men. Where ban wave after ban wave was released only for them to change it and re-release it.
In my opinion it is good. The supplement industry is not regulated at all and the supplement companies can make a claim that their products do anything. The FDA needs to prove them wrong to get them to change their statements. This is why there are so many bogus supplements that do nothing at all.
You are against vaccines? So then you want us to live in a world where 1800 century diseases still plague the world?
Be glad there is some control via permits. If not then what is stop your neighbour from growing drugs in their backyard? Or maybe a nice big tree that drops all of its leaves in your yard and gutters.