A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Kids Health
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cruisin' for a bruisin'



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 27th 05, 04:38 AM
Twittering One
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"We have billions of invisible aliens in our bodies...and by the way,
counseling doesn't work." (But 'auditing' does...)

Sounds like a sensible worldview to me!

Mark, MD

Simple facts.

  #12  
Old June 27th 05, 05:18 AM
george of the jungle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 26 Jun 2005 20:35:32 -0700, "
wrote:

"We have billions of invisible aliens in our bodies...and by the way,
counseling doesn't work." (But 'auditing' does...)

Sounds like a sensible worldview to me!

Mark, MD


Get out your E-Meter!

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/200...se/index2.html
About 75 million years ago, a nefarious intergalactic warlord called
Xenu rounded up the inhabitants of numerous planets, killed them, and
brought them to Earth, then set off a chain reaction of cataclysmic
volcanoes (the volcano pictured on the "Dianetics" cover was Hubbard's
favorite symbol for the notion of breakthrough and
self-actualization), which dispersed their thetans into the
atmosphere. These thetans now fester inside the bodies of all humans.
They are to be located in specific body parts and summoned out.

_g
  #13  
Old June 28th 05, 09:19 PM
Sumbuny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...
"We have billions of invisible aliens in our bodies...and by the way,
counseling doesn't work." (But 'auditing' does...)

Sounds like a sensible worldview to me!

Mark, MD


nodding...I also like the idea that vitamins (which are chemical pills to
ingest) are OK, but "drugs" (which are chemical pills we ingest) are
not...are not vitamin pills "drugs"?


Buny


  #14  
Old June 29th 05, 03:09 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Sumbuny wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
"We have billions of invisible aliens in our bodies...and by the way,
counseling doesn't work." (But 'auditing' does...)

Sounds like a sensible worldview to me!

Mark, MD


nodding...I also like the idea that vitamins (which are chemical pills to
ingest) are OK, but "drugs" (which are chemical pills we ingest) are
not...are not vitamin pills "drugs"?


Buny


Evidently the vitamins are okay provided you have washed out all the
thetans.

Mark, MD

  #15  
Old June 29th 05, 03:24 PM
PeterB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Sumbuny wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
"We have billions of invisible aliens in our bodies...and by the way,
counseling doesn't work." (But 'auditing' does...)

Sounds like a sensible worldview to me!

Mark, MD


nodding...I also like the idea that vitamins (which are chemical pills to
ingest) are OK, but "drugs" (which are chemical pills we ingest) are
not...are not vitamin pills "drugs"?


How do you define a nutrient as a drug without defining food as a drug?
Take powdered garlic, for instance. If I put finely ground garlic
into guacamole from a shaker, it's a food. But what if I open a
capsule containing the same garlic powder and pour it over my food
directly, is it still a food, or a drug? What about lycopene out of a
tomato? Is that a food, or a drug? If I grow tomatos on my porch, am
I handling a controlled substance? The only logical answer to this is
that we can't make constituents of food controlled substances without
throwing people into prison for growing fruit on their porches. What's
the criteria, then? I'll let you tell me. It's so obvious you'll feel
silly if I have to tell you.

PeterB

  #16  
Old June 29th 05, 04:21 PM
p fogg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

How do you define a nutrient as a drug without defining food as a drug?


Claim that it will cure a specific adverse medical condition, and then
bottle it and try to sell it. Then you're subject to the Dietary Supplement
Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994.

Take powdered garlic, for instance. If I put finely ground garlic
into guacamole from a shaker, it's a food. But what if I open a
capsule containing the same garlic powder and pour it over my food
directly, is it still a food, or a drug?


It's a dietary supplement if it's sold the way you describe it. The FDA
regulates dietary supplements as foods.
The FDA does not care what you do with it after you get it home. It becomes
a drug only if you make specific medical claims about it.

What about lycopene out of a
tomato? Is that a food, or a drug?


The tomato is a food. The lycopene is a chemical constituent of the food.
If you extract the lycopene in some form and bottle it for sale, it's a
dietary supplement. If you bottle it for sale and make claims on the label
that it will treat or cure a disease, it's a drug.

If I grow tomatos on my porch, am
I handling a controlled substance? The only logical answer to this is
that we can't make constituents of food controlled substances without
throwing people into prison for growing fruit on their porches.


The FDA's stated mission in this arena is to protect the public from
unproven or fraudulent claims made by manufacturers of supplements, not that
they have been doing a great job at anything lately.

What's
the criteria, then? I'll let you tell me. It's so obvious you'll feel
silly if I have to tell you.

PeterB


Oh, I feel so silly

Here's more on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutritional_supplement


  #17  
Old June 29th 05, 06:09 PM
PeterB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



p fogg wrote:
"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

How do you define a nutrient as a drug without defining food as a drug?


Claim that it will cure a specific adverse medical condition, and then
bottle it and try to sell it. Then you're subject to the Dietary Supplement
Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994.


Or to the FTC if there is no scientific basis for your claim. Either
way, the vast majority of supplement makers have no interest in making
such claims, for a number reasons. The question now becomes: who is
behind the effort to have nutrients reclassified as drugs? If you
said, "the pharmaceutical companies," you'd be right again.

Here's a general debate question: if information in the public domain
is not subject to government control and regulation, how is it legal to
control and regulate access to naturally-occuring nutrients, gases,
water, or food? Whose patents, intellectual property, or other rights
are infringed upon if I package these things and sell them?

Take powdered garlic, for instance. If I put finely ground garlic
into guacamole from a shaker, it's a food. But what if I open a
capsule containing the same garlic powder and pour it over my food
directly, is it still a food, or a drug?


It's a dietary supplement if it's sold the way you describe it. The FDA
regulates dietary supplements as foods.
The FDA does not care what you do with it after you get it home. It becomes
a drug only if you make specific medical claims about it.


Very good. And again, what is the rational behind CODEX if foods are
distinguishable from drugs?

What about lycopene out of a
tomato? Is that a food, or a drug?


The tomato is a food. The lycopene is a chemical constituent of the food.
If you extract the lycopene in some form and bottle it for sale, it's a
dietary supplement. If you bottle it for sale and make claims on the label
that it will treat or cure a disease, it's a drug.


That's a correct statement within the existing legal context. Another
question: by what legal precept can a constituent of food be classified
as a drug WITHOUT such claims as to treatment or cure of disease?

If I grow tomatos on my porch, am
I handling a controlled substance? The only logical answer to this is
that we can't make constituents of food controlled substances without
throwing people into prison for growing fruit on their porches.


The FDA's stated mission in this arena is to protect the public from
unproven or fraudulent claims made by manufacturers of supplements, not that
they have been doing a great job at anything lately.

What's
the criteria, then? I'll let you tell me. It's so obvious you'll feel
silly if I have to tell you.


Oh, I feel so silly


You stated it already. It's the nature of the health claim. If a
dietary supplement maker doesn't claim the product cures or treats
disease, it isn't a drug. Still, a bureacratic scheme is unfolding to
contravene this principle and reclassify nutrients as drugs in an
admission that beneficial effects of nutrients in disease treatment is
the case regardless of such claims. Now we get back to the question of
the gov't's control and regulation of that which already exists in the
public domain. It is apparently now the law in Germany that one cannot
legally grow his own aloe vera plant because of its medicinal uses.
Are tomatoes next?

PeterB

  #18  
Old June 29th 05, 08:05 PM
Sumbuny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...


Sumbuny wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
"We have billions of invisible aliens in our bodies...and by the way,
counseling doesn't work." (But 'auditing' does...)

Sounds like a sensible worldview to me!

Mark, MD


nodding...I also like the idea that vitamins (which are chemical pills
to
ingest) are OK, but "drugs" (which are chemical pills we ingest) are
not...are not vitamin pills "drugs"?


How do you define a nutrient as a drug without defining food as a drug?
Take powdered garlic, for instance. If I put finely ground garlic
into guacamole from a shaker, it's a food. But what if I open a
capsule containing the same garlic powder and pour it over my food
directly, is it still a food, or a drug? What about lycopene out of a
tomato? Is that a food, or a drug? If I grow tomatos on my porch, am
I handling a controlled substance? The only logical answer to this is
that we can't make constituents of food controlled substances without
throwing people into prison for growing fruit on their porches. What's
the criteria, then? I'll let you tell me. It's so obvious you'll feel
silly if I have to tell you.



IIRC, many of the things we call "drugs" have come from things that go along
with our food sources...

Not all drugs are controlled substances, and "all natural" does not mean
"all safe"...

Buny


  #19  
Old June 29th 05, 08:57 PM
Mark Probert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

PeterB wrote:

p fogg wrote:

"PeterB" wrote in message
groups.com...


How do you define a nutrient as a drug without defining food as a drug?


Claim that it will cure a specific adverse medical condition, and then
bottle it and try to sell it. Then you're subject to the Dietary Supplement
Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994.



Or to the FTC if there is no scientific basis for your claim. Either
way, the vast majority of supplement makers have no interest in making
such claims, for a number reasons.


I wish that were true. Based on reviewing the FTC and FDA websites on a
weekly basis for over ten years, I have seen hundreds, if not thousands,
of supplement makers make medical claims as a matter of course. Some of
the manufacturers are wise enough to request authorization to make the
claims, and others are told through enforcement actions, that they are
making impermissible medical claims.

Of course, this does not address those supplement manufacturers who
choose to make the nebulous claims like "supports the immune system".

The question now becomes: who is
behind the effort to have nutrients reclassified as drugs? If you
said, "the pharmaceutical companies," you'd be right again.


The FDA for one as they take the political heat for not protecting the
public.

As for others, the only clear answer is that Congress has tried to
tighten up loopholes in DSHEA like not mandating that supplement
manufacturers must forward all adverse event reports to the FDA. Without
such a systematic reporting requirement, there is no way for the FDA to
monitor these products for patterns of problems.

Here's a general debate question: if information in the public domain
is not subject to government control and regulation, how is it legal to
control and regulate access to naturally-occuring nutrients, gases,
water, or food? Whose patents, intellectual property, or other rights
are infringed upon if I package these things and sell them?


It is legal to regulate simply because they move through interstate
commerce, and the Constitution of the United States gives Congress broad
authority for regulating commerce.

Take powdered garlic, for instance. If I put finely ground garlic
into guacamole from a shaker, it's a food. But what if I open a
capsule containing the same garlic powder and pour it over my food
directly, is it still a food, or a drug?


It's a dietary supplement if it's sold the way you describe it. The FDA
regulates dietary supplements as foods.
The FDA does not care what you do with it after you get it home. It becomes
a drug only if you make specific medical claims about it.


Very good. And again, what is the rational behind CODEX if foods are
distinguishable from drugs?


CODEX does not apply to the US.

What about lycopene out of a
tomato? Is that a food, or a drug?


The tomato is a food. The lycopene is a chemical constituent of the food.
If you extract the lycopene in some form and bottle it for sale, it's a
dietary supplement. If you bottle it for sale and make claims on the label
that it will treat or cure a disease, it's a drug.


That's a correct statement within the existing legal context. Another
question: by what legal precept can a constituent of food be classified
as a drug WITHOUT such claims as to treatment or cure of disease?


I believe that it can if the chemical has a medicinal effect.

If I grow tomatos on my porch, am
I handling a controlled substance? The only logical answer to this is
that we can't make constituents of food controlled substances without
throwing people into prison for growing fruit on their porches.


The FDA's stated mission in this arena is to protect the public from
unproven or fraudulent claims made by manufacturers of supplements, not that
they have been doing a great job at anything lately.


What's
the criteria, then? I'll let you tell me. It's so obvious you'll feel
silly if I have to tell you.



Oh, I feel so silly



You stated it already. It's the nature of the health claim. If a
dietary supplement maker doesn't claim the product cures or treats
disease, it isn't a drug. Still, a bureacratic scheme is unfolding to
contravene this principle and reclassify nutrients as drugs in an
admission that beneficial effects of nutrients in disease treatment is
the case regardless of such claims. Now we get back to the question of
the gov't's control and regulation of that which already exists in the
public domain. It is apparently now the law in Germany that one cannot
legally grow his own aloe vera plant because of its medicinal uses.


There are strange laws in all countries. That does not mean that they
will be exported to the US. The supplement industry is a very powerful
lobby and they have a powerful US Senator in their pocket.

Are tomatoes next?


Better not be. You gotta see mine....

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Greegor Cruisin' Again? or Parents storm Chic. HS protesting no security, violence Kane General 0 February 12th 04 05:36 AM
Greegor Cruisin' Again? or Parents storm Chic. HS protesting no security, violence Kane Solutions 0 February 12th 04 05:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.