Author Topic: The Government is here to help you... (Read 3600 times)

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #15 on:** December 30, 2003, 03:32:08 PM »

Oh thank you Big Brother FDA for telling me what to put in my body. I mean without the FDA, how did people ever flourish all over the earth?

Mini D · « **Reply #16 on:** December 30, 2003, 03:38:43 PM »

It's not like they banned ribs.

Maybe a few people could come up with a really good number for how many fatalities it should take for the FDA to make something illegal. Or exactly what merrits their attention. Right now, the usual "too much government" types are simply reacting because that's what they were trained to do. I find that funny.

MiniD

Dago · « **Reply #17 on:** December 30, 2003, 03:43:46 PM »

Quote

I mean without the FDA, how did people ever flourish all over the earth?

Today, the average lifespan in the USA is nine years (76) greater than the average for the rest of the world(67). Darned that evil FDA for contributing to this pesky attempt to safeguard health!

Quote

Right now, the usual "too much government" types are simply reacting because that's what they were trained to do.

Well said Mini D.

dago

myelo · « **Reply #18 on:** December 30, 2003, 03:48:08 PM »

The scientific evidence that ephedra is killing and permanently injuring people is overwhelming and conclusive. The only reason this drug is on the market in the first place is because of a legal loophole that allows it to be classified as a supplement.

If the manufacturers want to sell ephedra, then they should have to show that it’s relatively safe and effective, just like any other drug.

miko2d · « **Reply #19 on:** December 30, 2003, 03:51:54 PM »

Munkii: Does the government not possess the ability to do anything we allow them to do? By allowing them to ban this drug, have we not given them the consent to do it to other supplement's?

Posess the ability - yes, based on brute force. Legitimately - no.

Can you give the government such a consent even if you wanted to - no.

You see, the legitimate government derives all of it's powers from it's citizents. The people delegate some of their legitimate powers to the government. (I said legitimate because certainly a thief or a murderer cannot delegate his power to steal or murder to the government and make it legal for government to do so.) With me so far? Good.

Can a prospective citizen delegate a power that he does npot posess to the government? That would be quite a trick. The answer is no. You cannot legitimately delegate a power to the government that you do not legitimetely posess yourself.

So imagine a bunch of free persons in a government-less state-less society considering forming a government.

In such a society you would not have any legitimate power to ban me from consuming ephedra or doing anything else on my property or to my body as long as my actions do not harm your property or person - just like neither you not our government have legitimate power to ban anything to Canadians or Mexicans or any other people not citizens of the same state as you.

So if you did not have such powers before the government was formed, you surely could not delegate them to the government.

miko

miko2d · « **Reply #20 on:** December 30, 2003, 03:57:13 PM »

Dago: Today, the average lifespan in the USA is nine years (76) greater than the average for the rest of the world(67). Darned that evil FDA for contributing to this pesky attempt to safeguard health!

As usually you confuse "despite off" with "because off" - with no basis whatsoever. What was teh life expectancy doing before FDA was formed?

What do you think are the major contributors towards greater life expectancy besides the protection from modern drugs that could be harmfull.

Do you think that before both FDA and modern drug production process were created - say a 100-150 years ago, the life expectancy was maximal?

After all, if there were no new drugs produced for decades, there would have been no benefit from FDA even if it existed.

miko

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #21 on:** December 30, 2003, 04:00:57 PM »

Independent thought is actually mind control. It's just an illiusion, a product of training. Obey, conform, consume, and multiply.

Maniac · « **Reply #22 on:** December 30, 2003, 04:06:30 PM »

Why dont they ban alcohole?

Dago · « **Reply #23 on:** December 30, 2003, 04:32:45 PM »

Quote

er all, if there were no new drugs produced for decades, there would have been no benefit from FDA even if it existed. [

My first impression of this statement : Foolish rhetoric. Drugs will be invented, they will be tested and evaluated, if deemed effective and safe, they will be approved and sold on the market. Failing either of these conditions, they won't be marketed, and personally, I prefer it that way. Any drug developed by a company that is safe and effective that were blocked from reaching the market would quickly come to the medias attention because the drug company would make darned sure of it.

Quote

you confuse "despite off" with "because off"

Seems to me you mistake implied contribution with an either/ or situation.

Quote

Do you think that before both FDA and modern drug production process were created - say a 100-150 years ago, the life expectancy was maximal?

Obviously not, and I think you are trying to help prove my point, but the fact is life expectancy will never reach a point that can be definitively declared maximal. There will not be an absolute in an area of so many variables.

Quote

What do you think are the major contributors towards greater life expectancy besides the protection from modern drugs that could be harmfull.

Better health care and awareness of risk factors added to knowledge of preventive health maintenance. Improving drugs spurred on by constant R&D. Better controls of workplace dangers and toxic exposures.

What do you think are the major contributors?

Quote

modern drugs that could be harmfull

A "modern drug" that could be harmful? The development or use of such a drug would seem contrary to the goal, though exceptions ARE noted and excepted when results indicate risk factor is outweighed by final results, (i.e. chemotherapy). It just must be proven that the dangers in selling/using a drug will not in the long run prove more harmful than not using the drug. This is an accepted practice today. (sky is not falling, sky is not falling).

dago

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #24 on:** December 30, 2003, 04:33:11 PM »

Just give them a few years.

AKIron · « **Reply #25 on:** December 30, 2003, 04:33:52 PM »

We'll stick with this government 'till we've had enough, then we'll make a new one.

Munkii · « **Reply #26 on:** December 30, 2003, 04:41:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maniac
Why dont they ban alcohole?

They tried once, and saw the largest crime spike, specifically violent crimes, in US history.

Dago · « **Reply #27 on:** December 30, 2003, 06:29:32 PM »

Why dont they ban tobacco? Over 400,000 deaths per year in the USA are directly caused by tobacco.
Thats over 1000 deaths per day.

Why not? MONEY.

dago

miko2d · « **Reply #28 on:** December 30, 2003, 07:47:02 PM »

Dago: My first impression of this statement : Foolish rhetoric. Drugs will be invented

Because you misquote my statement and attribute to it a wrong meaning.
You said that FDA prolonges our lives by banning harmfull medicines.
So according to you, before there were any medicines worth that name, our life expectancy should have been the greatest.

Sure - the drugs would be invented, the FDA would be able to stop some of them from doing harm but those that slip through would still reduce our life-expectancy compared to the old times.

Because in your post you certainly crdited only FDA - not the drugs themselves, developed by the private companies, not the development of sewage systems separating our ***** from water, not the window screens keeping moskitoes away, not the plentifull food supply - just the FDA. Sulphamides, penicilin, inoculation, pasterisation, basic hyegine like washing hands, running water, refrigeration, airconditioning - those had nothing to do with any government agency and contributed to the life longevity greatly.

FDA did help prevent some dangerous drugs - and there is all reasons to believe that private enerprise would have provided as good a protection.
FDA also prevented usefull drugs from being produced or significantly delayed they use - causing tens of thousands unnecessary deaths.
Insisting that you now the answer whether the total contribution was positive is just ignorant arrogance on your part.

Dago: Over 400,000 deaths per year in the USA are directly caused by tobacco. Why not? MONEY

BS. Caused by people to themselves using tobacco. If the big companies went out of business, people would smoke black market crap.
If course it's money - not the money they make but the money we are willing to pay - and no destruction of businesses will change the fact that we have and want to spend that money on things you do not approve.

The [busybodies] like yourself do not understand that people do not want to be protected and will find ways around the protections - like they do with drugs, did with alcohol, porn, prostitution, gambling, etc.

Banishment of ephedra is just a feel-good measure for idiots. People will use unregulated black market ephedra with profits collected by criminals instead of legitimate companies, switch to even more dangerous stuff, etc. Nobody will become "good" by governmental decree.

miko

Dago · « **Reply #29 on:** December 30, 2003, 08:06:20 PM »

Miko, now you are just blathering like an idiot. Try to maintain a little focus and not run off topic so fast in an attempt to obscure.

When the question was "why not ban alcohol?", I countered with tobacco. If you want to consider something the government should ban, if they should ban anything at all, they should go after tobacco first.

Sometime we need to consider the greater public good, but money is the one thing that can get in the way. This is how our government works. Dont like it, move to Canada. We sure didnt beg you to move hear and suggest you ***** about everything.

Geez, your getting tiring, *****ing and *****ing and *****ing.

You cant even hold a decent discussion and stay on topic.

dago