They play fast and loose with things like "has been shown to" and they can point to a study or some such but it really just comes down to poor enforcement by the FDA. If you give them too much of a free hand they'll regulate the sale of willow bark tea to bring the cost up to what Asprin does or eliminate competition, if they don't enforce the rules already on the books then you end up with claims that willow bark tea will make you live to 300 and cure cancer.
There is no way to win with the FDA in bed with the pharma industry. Why do you think they are noting supplements and fish oil as exceptions? The pharma industry produces and sells them with huge profits. The things they want to regulate compete with their sales. Hell the prescription drugs being approved often don't beat placebo when retested a few years later.
If they advertise it as medicine it already does fall under regulation. The FDA is complaining about a problem created by their own lack of enforcement of existing regulations.
You need proof to restrict something, the default absent proof is that it is unrestricted and that proof needs to be of risks and harm greater than the things you aren't proposing restricting. For example, garlic has been shown to have some level of antibiotic and antiviral efficacy. Is there some risk if people take it rather than amoxicillin? Probably. But you can't really go saying they don't have that option and leave garlic unrestricted as a completely unregulated food additive, it would be nonsensical.
No, that is what you are doing here. You need proof to restrict something, the default absent proof is that it is unrestricted and that proof needs to be of risks and harm greater than the things you aren't proposing restricting. For example, garlic has been shown to have some level of antibiotic and antiviral efficacy. Is there some risk if people take it rather than amoxicillin? Probably. But you can't really go saying they don't have that option and leave garlic unrestricted as a completely unregulated food additive, it would be nonsensical.
Remember, the current regulations already disallow claiming garlic is going to save your infected foot. It's all about what is claimed and the FDA doesn't bother enforcing those regulations for the most part. If there is going to be regulation I would propose it should center around clear labeling and presentation as a proprietary blend. No more "miracle omega blaster supreme blend" and more selling commodity fish oil as exactly that and having to compete against other clearly labelled commodity competition. If you are selling garlic you have to label it as such and no "herbacillin." Crap like that.
There is nothing wrong with the existing policy. The problem is it isn't enforced. There is also a perception problem because of the myth that all things natural are safer and better than man made. Then there is reverse of that myth, that only the man made things work. Neither is true.
Ask any Olympic power lifter, there are definitely supplements that work and work so well they have to engage in efforts to restart their natural hormone cycles afterward just like steroids, hundreds of them, there are also thousands of fakes that do nothing and that is just one class of supplement.
The idea all herbal supplements are snake oil is as bogus as the claim that they are miracle cures. Try asking your doctor about drinking a cup of willow bark tea each morning with your high blood pressure and back aches. He'll tell you it works, suggest a baby Asprin instead, it could go either way since they are the same thing.
Any credible doctor will tell you some of these herbs do work but they usually have poor clinical support and in some cases the mechanism by which they work isn't known. In other cases there are over the counter or prescription drugs based on active components we've identified in these herbs, the herb doesn't magically stop working just because we make a pill and it likely remains cheaper than the pill.
There is nothing wrong with the existing policy. The problem is it isn't enforced. There is also a perception problem because of the myth that all things natural are safer and better than man made. Then there is reverse of that myth, that only the man made things work. Neither is true.
Ask any Olympic power lifter, there are definitely supplements that work and work so well they have to engage in efforts to restart their natural hormone cycles afterward just like steroids, hundreds of them, there are also thousands of fakes that do nothing and that is just one class of supplement.
I don't think any of the above should be outlawed or censored in any way but you've got to be kidding with this. Behind every fight, war, ambition, and dispute there is at least one fine pair of tits. If it weren't for competition to get laid we'd all be content masturbating in caves and eating whatever thing we killed that day raw.
"When you buy an iOS device you know this, and a lot of people delightfully take this trade-off so they are more comfortable that their app that they download isn't going to cause undue harm to their device, their information or their finance."
Which has nothing to do with gambling, porn, piracy, competition, and censorship in general. Verifying the apps are safe, stable, and virus free is a completely separate debate because it doesn't require blocking any of the aforementioned content. And Apple is more than happy to violate your confidence and allow malware/spyware with a company logo on it for your employer.
True and it might be fair to call them tobacco products since they usually include tobacco extracts. For the rest, the misleading conflation of e-cigs to tobacco should be a signal that people don't just want their cake and to vape it to. There really is a lobby going out of their way to create bogus negative information regarding e-cigs. It isn't just some crazy conspiracy theory.
"It's like saying that the problem with the KKK was not the white sheets and hoods. True, but the white sheets and hoods are now associated with violent racism. So they are a problem"
They are also associated with improvised ghost costumes. The problem is compiling an ever growing list of excuses to be offended regardless of intent. Associated with racism is not the same as racist, the later is something bad on the part of the racist the former is something bad on the part of others anytime the later isn't true. If an 80+ year old black man from the states is offended it is understandable but for the rest it is just drama for the sake of drama.
We can't really know but given how the guy had to be restrained by his wife from excitedly jumping into his moonwalk routine I'm actually inclined to believe him. How is that any different than someone going to a costume party as a viking with a horn helmet? If you have a Nordic background you can get all butt hurt about it but honestly it's you being an asshole for bringing on the heavy, not the guy in the bad costume.
The blackface thing seems silly. It really is no different than men dressed as women in the theater of old. The only negative tone is in the ignorant views of african americans during the time period black face was used, that has nothing to do with blackface itself.
It's just a battery. The issue isn't new to vapes and is common to just about any portable device with a battery depending on what battery chemistry they use.
In fairness nicotine and caffeine both carry other benefits which might outweigh any negatives. It is naive to assert there are no risks or benefits just as it is naive to assume the existence of risks means it is poor choice to make.
Caffeine and nicotine are both shown to improve cognitive function with nicotine improving focus and providing a calming effect (including in those who haven't been exposed before). That is a hell of a complimentary pair and the benefits of improved cognitive function and focus may well outweigh an increased risk of illness.
After all for these two intentional exposures there are hundreds of things you ingest and breath each day that aren't well studied at all. When you consider that the results of combining substances isn't predictable even the study we have done is of minimal use. Considering you expose yourself to dozens of carcinogens on a daily basis for little or no benefit what is one more with a known benefit?
Yeah, after I quit smoking I continued to go hang out with the smokers periodically. After all what are they going to do, punish me for taking the same breaks I did when I smoked?
"I guess the vape things are ok for quitting smoking....but really, once you get off the nicotine, they aren't nearly so much fun as real smoking that uses real fire, and other things like flicking ashes, etc...it kept your non-drinking hand busy."
Nah, it's definitely the draw, exhale, and keeping your non-drinking hand busy. Vaping does all of the above... except the last one if you don't chain vape but who doesn't chain vape? As an added bonus it doesn't taste like shit.
The fact that everybody including the tobacco lobby is trying to find negatives and they've been grasping at straws for the last several years tend to suggest it is more healthy. If nothing else it improves blood oxygen and provides an increase in lung capacity equivalent to stopping smoking.
The mechanism really isn't much different than devices used to deliver medicine for a number of classes of lung illness so I doubt it is innately evil. There might be some devils in the details, certain flavorings, certain materials used in manufacture, etc.
That said, you are right, it definitely is not tobacco use. Though the nicotine may have been extracted from tobacco and there are tobacco flavors that have actual tobacco extracts in them. I suppose you could call those tobacco products.
"You can have sex with a prostitute. Then if you kill her, you don't have to pay!"
Of course you don't have to pay if you kill her. Unless she has a pimp then you might need to kill him too but realistically I think he'd write it off. I mean clearly you are crazy, that bitch is dead anyway so she isn't going to be spreading word and hurting your rep, and it happens so rarely you just write it off as shrinkage.
The moral of the story? Prostitution should be legal so that sex workers enjoy the same legal protections as everyone else. The boys in blue are a giant heavily armed gang and you generally don't want them gunning for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, because those cancer people are totally going to live!
It's no different here in the US.
They play fast and loose with things like "has been shown to" and they can point to a study or some such but it really just comes down to poor enforcement by the FDA. If you give them too much of a free hand they'll regulate the sale of willow bark tea to bring the cost up to what Asprin does or eliminate competition, if they don't enforce the rules already on the books then you end up with claims that willow bark tea will make you live to 300 and cure cancer.
There is no way to win with the FDA in bed with the pharma industry. Why do you think they are noting supplements and fish oil as exceptions? The pharma industry produces and sells them with huge profits. The things they want to regulate compete with their sales. Hell the prescription drugs being approved often don't beat placebo when retested a few years later.
Whether the truth or not, it is valid opinion held in one form or another by most of the country. It is not a troll.
If they advertise it as medicine it already does fall under regulation. The FDA is complaining about a problem created by their own lack of enforcement of existing regulations.
Just because you disagree with the guy doesn't make him a troll. It is a valid opinion and everyone is entitled to have and express them.
Meta-moderators take notice. There is no -1 I don't like this opinion and there is a reason.
You need proof to restrict something, the default absent proof is that it is unrestricted and that proof needs to be of risks and harm greater than the things you aren't proposing restricting. For example, garlic has been shown to have some level of antibiotic and antiviral efficacy. Is there some risk if people take it rather than amoxicillin? Probably. But you can't really go saying they don't have that option and leave garlic unrestricted as a completely unregulated food additive, it would be nonsensical.
"Are we reversing the normal burden of proof?"
No, that is what you are doing here. You need proof to restrict something, the default absent proof is that it is unrestricted and that proof needs to be of risks and harm greater than the things you aren't proposing restricting. For example, garlic has been shown to have some level of antibiotic and antiviral efficacy. Is there some risk if people take it rather than amoxicillin? Probably. But you can't really go saying they don't have that option and leave garlic unrestricted as a completely unregulated food additive, it would be nonsensical.
Remember, the current regulations already disallow claiming garlic is going to save your infected foot. It's all about what is claimed and the FDA doesn't bother enforcing those regulations for the most part. If there is going to be regulation I would propose it should center around clear labeling and presentation as a proprietary blend. No more "miracle omega blaster supreme blend" and more selling commodity fish oil as exactly that and having to compete against other clearly labelled commodity competition. If you are selling garlic you have to label it as such and no "herbacillin." Crap like that.
There is nothing wrong with the existing policy. The problem is it isn't enforced. There is also a perception problem because of the myth that all things natural are safer and better than man made. Then there is reverse of that myth, that only the man made things work. Neither is true.
Ask any Olympic power lifter, there are definitely supplements that work and work so well they have to engage in efforts to restart their natural hormone cycles afterward just like steroids, hundreds of them, there are also thousands of fakes that do nothing and that is just one class of supplement.
The idea all herbal supplements are snake oil is as bogus as the claim that they are miracle cures. Try asking your doctor about drinking a cup of willow bark tea each morning with your high blood pressure and back aches. He'll tell you it works, suggest a baby Asprin instead, it could go either way since they are the same thing.
They can.
Any credible doctor will tell you some of these herbs do work but they usually have poor clinical support and in some cases the mechanism by which they work isn't known. In other cases there are over the counter or prescription drugs based on active components we've identified in these herbs, the herb doesn't magically stop working just because we make a pill and it likely remains cheaper than the pill.
There is nothing wrong with the existing policy. The problem is it isn't enforced. There is also a perception problem because of the myth that all things natural are safer and better than man made. Then there is reverse of that myth, that only the man made things work. Neither is true.
Ask any Olympic power lifter, there are definitely supplements that work and work so well they have to engage in efforts to restart their natural hormone cycles afterward just like steroids, hundreds of them, there are also thousands of fakes that do nothing and that is just one class of supplement.
Shush or they'll start adding mandatory filters.
"Tits and nipples never hurt anyone."
ROFLMFAO
I don't think any of the above should be outlawed or censored in any way but you've got to be kidding with this. Behind every fight, war, ambition, and dispute there is at least one fine pair of tits. If it weren't for competition to get laid we'd all be content masturbating in caves and eating whatever thing we killed that day raw.
It's porn and gambling, there is no crime here.
"When you buy an iOS device you know this, and a lot of people delightfully take this trade-off so they are more comfortable that their app that they download isn't going to cause undue harm to their device, their information or their finance."
Which has nothing to do with gambling, porn, piracy, competition, and censorship in general. Verifying the apps are safe, stable, and virus free is a completely separate debate because it doesn't require blocking any of the aforementioned content. And Apple is more than happy to violate your confidence and allow malware/spyware with a company logo on it for your employer.
True and it might be fair to call them tobacco products since they usually include tobacco extracts. For the rest, the misleading conflation of e-cigs to tobacco should be a signal that people don't just want their cake and to vape it to. There really is a lobby going out of their way to create bogus negative information regarding e-cigs. It isn't just some crazy conspiracy theory.
"It's like saying that the problem with the KKK was not the white sheets and hoods. True, but the white sheets and hoods are now associated with violent racism. So they are a problem"
They are also associated with improvised ghost costumes. The problem is compiling an ever growing list of excuses to be offended regardless of intent. Associated with racism is not the same as racist, the later is something bad on the part of the racist the former is something bad on the part of others anytime the later isn't true. If an 80+ year old black man from the states is offended it is understandable but for the rest it is just drama for the sake of drama.
We can't really know but given how the guy had to be restrained by his wife from excitedly jumping into his moonwalk routine I'm actually inclined to believe him. How is that any different than someone going to a costume party as a viking with a horn helmet? If you have a Nordic background you can get all butt hurt about it but honestly it's you being an asshole for bringing on the heavy, not the guy in the bad costume.
The blackface thing seems silly. It really is no different than men dressed as women in the theater of old. The only negative tone is in the ignorant views of african americans during the time period black face was used, that has nothing to do with blackface itself.
It's just a battery. The issue isn't new to vapes and is common to just about any portable device with a battery depending on what battery chemistry they use.
In fairness nicotine and caffeine both carry other benefits which might outweigh any negatives. It is naive to assert there are no risks or benefits just as it is naive to assume the existence of risks means it is poor choice to make.
Caffeine and nicotine are both shown to improve cognitive function with nicotine improving focus and providing a calming effect (including in those who haven't been exposed before). That is a hell of a complimentary pair and the benefits of improved cognitive function and focus may well outweigh an increased risk of illness.
After all for these two intentional exposures there are hundreds of things you ingest and breath each day that aren't well studied at all. When you consider that the results of combining substances isn't predictable even the study we have done is of minimal use. Considering you expose yourself to dozens of carcinogens on a daily basis for little or no benefit what is one more with a known benefit?
Yeah, after I quit smoking I continued to go hang out with the smokers periodically. After all what are they going to do, punish me for taking the same breaks I did when I smoked?
"I guess the vape things are ok for quitting smoking....but really, once you get off the nicotine, they aren't nearly so much fun as real smoking that uses real fire, and other things like flicking ashes, etc...it kept your non-drinking hand busy."
Nah, it's definitely the draw, exhale, and keeping your non-drinking hand busy. Vaping does all of the above... except the last one if you don't chain vape but who doesn't chain vape? As an added bonus it doesn't taste like shit.
The fact that everybody including the tobacco lobby is trying to find negatives and they've been grasping at straws for the last several years tend to suggest it is more healthy. If nothing else it improves blood oxygen and provides an increase in lung capacity equivalent to stopping smoking.
The mechanism really isn't much different than devices used to deliver medicine for a number of classes of lung illness so I doubt it is innately evil. There might be some devils in the details, certain flavorings, certain materials used in manufacture, etc.
That said, you are right, it definitely is not tobacco use. Though the nicotine may have been extracted from tobacco and there are tobacco flavors that have actual tobacco extracts in them. I suppose you could call those tobacco products.
Yeah that threw me off as well. Most violent games get automatically rated M for graphic violence.
Because his SO didn't play enough games to learn morals.
"You can have sex with a prostitute. Then if you kill her, you don't have to pay!"
Of course you don't have to pay if you kill her. Unless she has a pimp then you might need to kill him too but realistically I think he'd write it off. I mean clearly you are crazy, that bitch is dead anyway so she isn't going to be spreading word and hurting your rep, and it happens so rarely you just write it off as shrinkage.
The moral of the story? Prostitution should be legal so that sex workers enjoy the same legal protections as everyone else. The boys in blue are a giant heavily armed gang and you generally don't want them gunning for you.
Pot, meet kettle.