Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 48

Thread: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

  1. #31
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    I disagree, because it is completely impossible for consumers to make intelligent decisions about powerful medications on their own. Without extensive clinical trials how can drug companies know what the side effects of, say, psychoactive drugs are before releasing them to consumers, to say nothing at all of what consumers would know.
    I'm not in favor of doing away with extensive trials...but neither am I in favor of the government banning the treatment entirely and/or holding the manufacturer liable before it's FDA-certified. There are hundreds of thousands of people who would be willing to try an experimental treatment to save their lives, but the FDA usually won't let them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders
    Buy at your own risk is simply not a workable system when dealing with drugs that interact in an immensely complex fashion with the way that your body and mind operate.
    The current system doesn't make much sense. The FDA demands extensive testing for drugs, denying them to hundreds of thousands of people in the meantime...then finally they certify that they're safe to use. And if it later turns out that they were wrong and there ARE nasty side effects, the government holds the MANUFACTURER responsible even though the government itself certified they were safe to use.

    If all drugs were "use at your own risk," the people who wanted to use experimental treatments could do so. And those who preferred to not take any chances could wait for independent certification of the drugs' safety.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders
    And that's only mentioning risks from drugs - determining their efficacy through the free market is what led to snake oil literally being sold as medicine. Without strong regulations how is a consumer to know the risk, and how are they to know the efficacy beyond what corporations' marketing departments say?
    Like I said, if the manufacturers are making patently false claims for their products, then they should absolutely be prosecuted for fraud. And in this case, there WOULD be a legitimate reason to sue them, even if drugs were "use at your own risk."

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders
    Hell, how are doctors supposed to know unless medication is required to undergo rigorous control studies prior to approval. The FDA exists because precisely the system you described does not work. Companies would shove whatever crap they can pick up on the cheap into a bottle and sell it as a panacea, and how are consumers to tell the difference?
    Just because the FDA wouldn't exist doesn't mean that there would be no independent testing of the products. Doctors and consumers alike could get their information from these agencies. If a doctor didn't feel comfortable prescribing a medicine or if a patient didn't feel comfortable using a medicine, due to a lack of clinical tests, they would not be under any obligation to do so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders
    I think that private oversight would be much more likely to go the way of finance ratings agencies. The pharmaceutical industry is already to close to the government for the consumer's good, and if they were directly paying the people charged with overseeing them I don't see anything positive coming from that situation.
    The Better Business Bureau is funded by businesses as well, but it values its credibility as an independent watchdog group. If it lost its credibility in the public's eyes, then businesses would have no reason to seek the BBB's approval and would stop giving them money.

    Same reasoning here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders
    And where would that agency get its money? I see two possibilities. It could be publicly funded, in which case it would be the FDA, or its certifications could be payed for by the companies wishing to get their drugs certified, in which case you end up with the medical equivalent of AAA rated CDS's, which would have as disastrous effects on public health as the econopocalypse did on the economy.
    The difference is that people aren't dying due to endless delays because the government tightly regulates the finance industry.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders
    I can't imagine how they would have less influence over a private agency if they were said agency's sole customers. Even if they did, I don't see any benefit in moving drug oversight to the private realm.
    How about the fact that people are not able to use promising treatments, even if both the patient and the doctor want to try it, because the government says it hasn't yet been proven to be safe. The FDA doesn't even consider the danger of *not* being able to use treatments.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  2. #32
    Norville Rogers
    Kernel Sanders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm not in favor of doing away with extensive trials...but neither am I in favor of the government banning the treatment entirely and/or holding the manufacturer liable before it's FDA-certified. There are hundreds of thousands of people who would be willing to try an experimental treatment to save their lives, but the FDA usually won't let them.
    Where is the incentive to carry out expensive clinical trials if they are not required for approval?

    The current system doesn't make much sense. The FDA demands extensive testing for drugs, denying them to hundreds of thousands of people in the meantime...then finally they certify that they're safe to use. And if it later turns out that they were wrong and there ARE nasty side effects, the government holds the MANUFACTURER responsible even though the government itself certified they were safe to use.
    Indeed, the FDA is in need of serious reform. Federal oversight is still the best solution, though.

    If all drugs were "use at your own risk," the people who wanted to use experimental treatments could do so. And those who preferred to not take any chances could wait for independent certification of the drugs' safety.
    Certification that is payed for by the drug companies. I think a reasonable compromise would be to allow people to take experimental drugs after minimal testing (though not no testing) and require something similar to current procedures for general approval.

    Like I said, if the manufacturers are making patently false claims for their products, then they should absolutely be prosecuted for fraud. And in this case, there WOULD be a legitimate reason to sue them, even if drugs were "use at your own risk."
    Fraudulent claims would be much less of a problem as misleading claims, which current false advertising legislation does a pretty poor job of regulating. With people's health on the line this is an unacceptable solution

    Just because the FDA wouldn't exist doesn't mean that there would be no independent testing of the products. Doctors and consumers alike could get their information from these agencies. If a doctor didn't feel comfortable prescribing a medicine or if a patient didn't feel comfortable using a medicine, due to a lack of clinical tests, they would not be under any obligation to do so.
    And where does the money for independent testing come from?

    The Better Business Bureau is funded by businesses as well, but it values its credibility as an independent watchdog group. If it lost its credibility in the public's eyes, then businesses would have no reason to seek the BBB's approval and would stop giving them money.

    Same reasoning here.
    The BBB is able to remain neutral mainly because it deals with a massive spectrum of the economy and that most of the companies it rates are not contributors. One of the more common complaints of the BBB is that it does not act neutrally to its supporters. This problem would be amplified if every drug that some agency rated came from companies on whom it is financially dependent.

    The difference is that people aren't dying due to endless delays because the government tightly regulates the finance industry.
    Under our current system twice as many people already die from adverse reactions to prescription drugs as do from motor vehicle accidents - and those numbers are likely an underestimation. If regulations were loosened to such an extreme degree I cannot fathom that it would save lives overall.

    How about the fact that people are not able to use promising treatments, even if both the patient and the doctor want to try it, because the government says it hasn't yet been proven to be safe. The FDA doesn't even consider the danger of *not* being able to use treatments.
    Do you have any statistics on the number of deaths from treatments that are delayed by the FDA? I have a very hard time believing that it causes twice as many deaths as motor vehicle accidents, as approved, well regulated medications already do

  3. #33
    dangerously addictive
    americanwoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    17,412

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    I have always wanted to taste that but it's banned here
    Damn you're missing out. Lucky Charms are great. Can you get it shipped there? I'll send you a bowl.
    I call my own shots, largely based on an accumulation of data, and everyone knows it.
    _____________________________________________

  4. #34
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    I have always wanted to taste that but it's banned here
    Lucky Charms are banned. The world has gone to pot.

  5. #35
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    I have always wanted to taste that but it's banned here
    Typical European mindset, always after America's lucky charms!

  6. #36
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by americanwoman View Post
    Damn you're missing out. Lucky Charms are great. Can you get it shipped there? I'll send you a bowl.
    I've heard they taste great and i have a serious sweet tooth
    I would love you forever if you sent me some!


  7. #37
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Lucky Charms are banned. The world has gone to pot.
    Yeah, I can't find it anywhere.
    I suppose i can understand the thinking behind it. Dentist would cost alot if everyone ate it


  8. #38
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    Yeah, I can't find it anywhere.
    I suppose i can understand the thinking behind it. Dentist would cost alot if everyone ate it
    They have dentist in Britain?

    Lucky Charms were my fav when I was a kiddo.

  9. #39
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    They have dentist in Britain?

    Lucky Charms were my fav when I was a kiddo.
    LOL, my teeth are perfect and white thank you very much

    I used to have Coco Pops


    Had alot of chocolate in it, used to love it. I still do infact


  10. #40
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: Popular cereal is a drug, US food watchdog says

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    A list of drugs, folks:

    Wellbutrin
    Viagara
    Xanax
    Thorazine
    Cheerios.......

    Wait!!!! Cheerios? The cereal? Yup. According to the FDA, Cheerios is a drug because Cheerios markets the cereal as a healthy choice that helps reduce cholesterol. Therefore it must be regulated.
    Then I suppose Special-K cereal is now a dieretic since it promotes weight loss? Give me a break! How absord can government regulators get?

    Wait...don't answer that...

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •