FDA Kills

#51
#51
nbakerld said:
This is what I don't get. Do we trust government? No. Do we trust monopolies? No. Why do we trust monopolistic government with the most important products (food, health care, education, etc.)? I don't know why it gives us warm fuzzies to know these bassackward, corrupt idiots approve of the product we are consuming.
Click to expand...

I trust the government to do a couple of things, like protecting us from a invasion by a foreign country and making sure the drug I put in me isnt rat poison backed by BS data
 
#53
#53
VolsNSkinsFan said:
I trust the government to do a couple of things, like protecting us from a invasion by a foreign country and making sure the drug I put in me isnt rat poison backed by BS data
Click to expand...

And you think somebody is going to sell you rat poison?
 
#55
#55
nbakerld said:
And you think somebody is going to sell you rat poison?
Click to expand...

As I cited earlier, a hundred years ago people bought "baby soothers" that contained large amounts of opiates. Go look at the struggle to start research on the harmful effects of cigarettes.
 
#57
#57
IPorange said:
I advocate protecting people from killing themselves, period.

You act like the FDA is holding back drugs for fun,

Not giving drugs has never killed anyone. The underlying cause of their condition has. You sound like utgibbs with healthcare, acting like all possible medications are owed to be available to you no matter the potential ramifications. If the FDA with-holding a substance to test it is the same as killing someone, you're making a big statement about murder on this planet.
Click to expand...

When did I ever act like that? I guarantee most everybody in the FDA has the best of intentions, but good intentions don't save lives. Efficiency does.

I don't care if you want to call it murder or not. We are prohibited from taking potentially lifesaving drugs. The bottom line is people are dying because of FDA policy in this supposed free country. 100,000 American deaths while waiting for beta blocker approval is 100,000 deaths, whether you want to call it murder or not is up to you.
 
#58
#58
And he's saying that getting rid of regulation on this sort of thing would do a large amount of damage and death in the opposite direction.
 
#59
#59
milohimself said:
As I cited earlier, a hundred years ago people bought "baby soothers" that contained large amounts of opiates. Go look at the struggle to start research on the harmful effects of cigarettes.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and we now live in the age of information and our modern day tort system is a deterrent for this type of outcome. The FDA's ability to ban drugs is outdated.

And the FDA still approves bad drugs. This is the message: "You have to wait 10 years for our seal of approval so if it's lifesaving you're ****ed. Oh yeah, after approval it still might take out 30,000 of you (Vioxx)."
 
#60
#60
nbakerld said:
When did I ever act like that? I guarantee most everybody in the FDA has the best of intentions, but good intentions don't save lives. Efficiency does.

I don't care if you want to call it murder or not. We are prohibited from taking potentially lifesaving drugs. The bottom line is people are dying because of FDA policy in this supposed free country. 100,000 American deaths while waiting for beta blocker approval is 100,000 deaths, whether you want to call it murder or not is up to you.
Click to expand...

beta blockers have been around since 1958 so I'm not sure where you're getting your 100 thousand deaths statistic from. My mom has been taking coreg for several years, it's relatively cheap and is damn effective.
 
#61
#61
nbakerld said:
And you think somebody is going to sell you rat poison?
Click to expand...

Yes I do.

if nobody is testing and proving that the drug does what it says its supposed to do, then yes, people will sell rat poison and call it a weight loss drug.

You can say that 100K died from the FDA not approving their drug, but that isnt what killed them. The FDA has probably saved millions of lives by preventing "Rat Poison" being sold as a cure
 
#62
#62
milohimself said:
And he's saying that getting rid of regulation on this sort of thing would do a large amount of damage and death in the opposite direction.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of economic research on this. It's a classic example of the economic principle: "the seen vs the unseen". There is little disagreement among economists that the FDA kills more than it saves.

Milton Friedman at the 4:15 mark

YouTube - Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 2 of 4)
 
#63
#63
IPorange said:
Because some desperate people would end up killing themselves well before whatever is ailing them does. I'm not sure consumers are in a position to make informed, rational choices when they're really looking for a magic bullet or miracle.
Click to expand...

So the government should protect us from ourselves? At the end of the day its on you to make decisions. If you want to wait for FDA approval go ahead and wait, if you want to try a new medicine you should have the freedom to do so.
 
#66
#66
nbakerld said:
Yeah, and we now live in the age of information and our modern day tort system is a deterrent for this type of outcome. The FDA's ability to ban drugs is outdated.

And the FDA still approves bad drugs. This is the message: "You have to wait 10 years for our seal of approval so if it's lifesaving you're ****ed. Oh yeah, after approval it still might take out 30,000 of you (Vioxx)."
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that the FDA is bloated and needs to be broken down for better efficiency. But the regulation for this stuff absolutely has to be in place. The "information age" isn't going to solve anything if people can still put whatever they want in a bottle and onto a label and put it on a shelf.

I haven't seen you disagree that the regulation needs to be in place, just that the FDA is too big and slow. Reform it and change it. It's like having some engine problems with your car, and your fix is strapping a brick to the accelerator and aiming it at a cliff. The thing was broken, sure, but you still need the damn car.
 
#68
#68
MG1968 said:
beta blockers have been around since 1958 so I'm not sure where you're getting your 100 thousand deaths statistic from. My mom has been taking coreg for several years, it's relatively cheap and is damn effective.
Click to expand...

My numbers were slightly off.

"Beta-blockers reduce the risks of secondary heart attacks and were widely used in Europe during the mid-'70s. The FDA imposed a moratorium on beta-blocker approvals in the U.S. because of the drug's carcinogenicity in animals. Finally, in 1981, FDA approved the first such drug, boasting that it might save up to 17,000 lives per year. That meant as many as 100,000 people might have died from secondary heart attacks waiting for FDA approval."

FDA has become our killer agency - journal-news.net | News, sports, jobs, community information for Martinsburg - The Journal
 
#69
#69
nbakerld said:
What benefit do they get out of killing customers?
Click to expand...

I could make up a fat-loss supplement loaded with bs tomorrow, put it on shelves in a week, and by the time anybody figures out what I've been selling is crap and potentially harmful, I've collected a tidy profit and am taking my straight cash (homey) to the bank and be on my way.

Sound far fetched? Meet Alex Goen.
 
#71
#71
nbakerld said:
Why rat poison? Why not a harmless placebo?

If they want your money they'll do what the supplement industry is doing (strangely they aren't killing their customers in droves).
Click to expand...

Okay, so instead they make a quick buck selling crap products and run with the money before their investors can come calling. Don't think this hasn't happened before.

And you might retort, that buyer beware goes for investors as well. You don't think investors have ever had the wool pulled over their eyes before in any given industry?

Fact is, every walk of life, every group and every industry has scumbags who can and do play everybody else. Not everybody goes by the honor system. If everybody did, we wouldn't need any regulatory bodies for anything. This is why we have rules.
 
#72
#72
milohimself said:
Okay, so instead they make a quick buck selling crap products and run with the money before their investors can come calling. Don't think this hasn't happened before.

And you might retort, that buyer beware goes for investors as well. You don't think investors have ever had the wool pulled over their eyes before in any given industry?

Fact is, every walk of life, every group and every industry has scumbags who can and do play everybody else. Not everybody goes by the honor system. If everybody did, we wouldn't need any regulatory bodies for anything. This is why we have rules.
Click to expand...

But you don't have to have a regulatory body to have rules. We would still have laws in place and allow the courts to sort it out. As has been pointed out dangerous drugs still hit the market, even with FDA approval, so why do we need them in the first place?
 
#73
#73
nbakerld said:
But you don't have to have a regulatory body to have rules. We would still have laws in place and allow the courts to sort it out. As has been pointed out dangerous drugs still hit the market, even with FDA approval, so why do we need them in the first place?
Click to expand...

Re-read the first two pages of this thread, and if you still havent figured it out, then I guess you are too dense to figure it out
 
#74
#74
therealUT said:
Cake mix, cookie dough, dough, etc. The funny part is, that eating raw eggs poses a much greater risk for food-borne pathogens than does flour and basically in any situation in which one would consume raw flour they would consume raw eggs.
Click to expand...

Hogwash.

Rocky ate raw eggs and took Apollo Creed to a decision.
 
#75
#75
If companies wouldn't sell bad drugs, where are the bad drugs the FDA has let slip through coming from?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top