Posted on 05/03/2010 11:01:50 AM PDT by Windflier
I suppose that you could call the US military a gov't bureaucracy, but for the sake of this argument, it's clear that you're blurring the lines between agencies of the federal government that have a front line presence who perform valuable and much needed services for the public, and those federal agencies that are almost entirely bureaucratic in nature.
It's also clear to anyone reading here that the intent of my statements was aimed at the latter, and not the former. It's you who feel the need to split hairs here and create a debate that goes outside of the clear intent of my post.
The point is, and remains so, that most federal agencies are bloated, inefficient, wasteful, operate in an extra-constitutional manner, and return little of value to the American taxpayers.
There has been so much posted and discussed about the failures of our government institutions and agencies on this website, that it's probably redundant for me to even bring it up. It's a fact.
You want to defend the FDA, go right ahead, but I doubt you'll find many who agree with your sunny assessment of that agency in this community.
Oh, please. Do I need to copy and paste what you said again? Just admit that your blanket statement was wrong and move on. Trying to qualify your statement after the fact isn't going to fly
It's also clear to anyone reading here that the intent of my statements was aimed at the latter, and not the former
It may have been clear to you but you said what you said, and it was wrong - obviously.
It's you who feel the need to split hairs here and create a debate that goes outside of the clear intent of my post.
Quite frankly, I really don't have any idea what the intent of your post was other than to bash government agencies you shouldn't have been bashing. It appears you agree with the tripe in this article and the ridiculous information and conclusions within. It's clear you cannot look at this topic objectively, since you haven't read the bill or taken the time to understand its implications, so why shouldn't the intent of your post be questioned?
that most federal agencies are bloated, inefficient, wasteful, operate in an extra-constitutional manner, and return little of value to the American taxpayers.
Hey, now I agree with you. Amazing the common ground you can find when you don't engage in absolutes and broad generalizations.
You want to defend the FDA, go right ahead, but I doubt you'll find many who agree with your sunny assessment of that agency in this community.
Then they're as ignorant as you are. I spent a lot of years working through the bureaucratic jungle that is the FDA so I have a good handle on the good and bad they offer. Having studied some history, especially the development of food and drug safety over the life of our country, I can say to you without hesitation that what exists today is far better than what existed before the FDA and the USDA, even if many people can't or refuse to accept it. I can easily defend my my position with facts and have done so many times on this forum. Is this another invitation?
Is the day you get free fertilizer, or feed for the hogs.
If that's so, then it would be of greater benefit to everyone reading here if you simply pointed out the facts as you know them, and make some attempt to set the record straight, instead of insisting that you're right, and I'm wrong.
It's pretty apparent that you want to tangle with me for the sport of it. You're belittling every well-reasoned statement I've made, and now you're belittling me. That's alright, except I'm not in the mood to dance just for the hell of it.
I put up this post as a public service. If someone (like you) looks at it, and thinks that it contains some misinformation, I suggest they methodically, and intelligently debunk what they consider to be false data.
Attacking the messenger won't win you any points or convince anyone that you've got a superior take on the subject.
You posted an article filled with fear and hyperbole and then made a broad statement that wasn't true. I merely pointed that out. Your statements are anything but well reasoned. The fact that you continue to have to qualify them is proof enough. I'm not belittling you. Calling you ignorant of this bill and its implications is self evident. There's no need to be so defensive.
This article is not a public service; it's just the opposite. No well reasoned person believes the fedgov is going to deny them the ability to buy vitamins at the local Kroger or will make using Ginko Biloba a felony. No rational human thinks that the fedgov is going to place all food production under the control of the UN who will then outlaw personal gardens, local farms and organic producers. No clear thinking person argues that this bill will make it illegal to pick apples from a tree on your property and take them to grandma's to make pie on Thanksgiving. Who really believes you'll be arrested if you grow strawberries and make your own jam? That's crazy talk. But here it is on FR and you're defending it.
This is from your article:
Seems pretty harmless and necessary to me. Yet, this is getting you all fired up. Why? Less than 3% of the food imported into this country is inspected today. With so much product coming from China and Mexico these days, don't you think there needs to be better systems put in place? There was no procedure in place to recall ephedra when it became known that it was making people sick. Because of that, many more people became sick and some died. This bill addresses that problem.
A rational person would look at this and come to a different conclusion than you and many others have. Again, I'm just pointing that out. Consider it a public service. That's just the kind of guy I am.
No, I don't. I actually agree wholeheartedly with the stated mission of the FDA, but I also know that they're guilty of allowing some very nasty drugs and food additives on the market. They're also guilty of putting the makers of beneficial health products out of business. I'm personally aware of one such instance.
Like all bureaucratic federal behemoths, the FDA is guilty of abuse of power.
Calling you ignorant of this bill and its implications is self evident. There's no need to be so defensive.
Why, of course. I should refrain from protesting when I'm being called an idiot and a liar in public because that's just unreasonable. Sorry, but I reserve the right to return fire, or defend myself.
No well reasoned person believes the fedgov is going to deny them the ability to buy vitamins at the local Kroger or will make using Ginko Biloba a felony.
Get informed, friend. Bills have been introduced in Congress several times to do that very thing. Here's the latest attempt to take your access to nutritional products away from you:
"(NaturalNews) Of all the sneaky tactics practiced in Washington D.C., this recent action by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is one of the most insidious.
While no one was looking, he injected amendment language into the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173) that would expand the powers of the FTC (not the FDA, but the FTC) to terrorize nutritional supplement companies by greatly expanding the power of the FTC to make its own laws that target dietary supplement companies.
First, John McCain introduced a bill that would severely damage the vitamin industry.
S. 3002, the Dietary Supplement Safety Act (DSSA)
Thanks to you, the bill was killed!
Then, its key provisions were inserted into the Food Safety bill.
Your Vitamins Are Still In Danger
But then, again thanks to you, these provisions were pulled.
Now, the Alliance for Natural Health tells us these provisions might become law in the worst possible way.
Unless you act, the financial "reform" bill could give new powers to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), including the power to regulate food supplements -- perhaps regulate supplements right out of existence."
Anti-Supplement Measure Slips into "Reform" Bill Passed by the House
the Amish are looking better and better to me.
maybe i should go Amish and get a farm up here in Vermont
The Amish are all about their faith in God and the primacy of the Gospels.
However there are a few things that the Amish are about that non-believers can take away, their commitmet to their group, their belief that they are responsible for the members of the group and that they self-insure as a group by providing on site help and collecting monies in emergencies.
They also are not afraid to die. For they see this life as a prequel to their real life which is with God. So the Amish are not typically using ICU services on their older people to extend life.
This is contrary (again) to what you stated earlier.
but I also know that they're guilty of allowing some very nasty drugs and food additives on the market
What nasty food additives, specifically?
The public is demanding silver bullets from the pharmaceutical industry to help in the fight against numerous maladies affecting millions of people. If the FDA plays it slow, they catch hell for denying sick people these "wonder drugs." If they rush products through the approval process, and the drug ends up causing reactions that result in injury or death -- that did not show up in the trials -- then the FDA also catches hell. It's a no-win situation. Creating sophisticated compounds to fight complicated diseases ain't easy. What happens in clinical trials involving a thousand people can be very different from what happens when the drug is approved and reaches millions of people. Anyone with a basic grasp of physiology will understand this. Most people don't and end up railing like you have here.
They're also guilty of putting the makers of beneficial health products out of business.
For example? Which instance? If any complementary or alternative supplement had ever been shown to be effective in treating or curing a disease it would fall under the category of real medicine and would be regulated by the FDA.
You should spend some time at ConsumerLab.com since they are now looking at many of these supplements and what they are finding should scare you. Far too many of these products don’t even contain what the label claims. They have also found toxic contaminants in many of the products they tested. The manufacturers of these products have allowed for high levels of lead and mercury, fungal toxins, arsenic, and even dead insects to be present in their products. Thanks to the DSHEA these products are classified as food products and are essentially unregulated by the FDA. The industry has done a lousy job of managing itself and brought the specter of additional oversight on themselves.
Like all bureaucratic federal behemoths, the FDA is guilty of abuse of power.
Ok. Even so, it's still better than what existed before.
Why, of course. I should refrain from protesting when I'm being called an idiot and a liar in public because that's just unreasonable
Oh, please. You haven't read the legislation which is why you buy into the loony tunes being offered by the lunatics quoted in your article. That makes you ignorant. You're offering opinion as fact when you know little, if anything, about the bill. Looking at your sources, it is obvious why you are so misinformed. Maybe you could cut and paste the parts of the bill that prove the UN is going to control food manufacturing, that all gardens will be outlawed, that people transporting apples to grannies house will be arrested and that all small farmers and organic producers will be driven out of business. I'd also be interested in the portions of the bill that prove all supplements will be removed from store shelves and that you will now need a prescription to purchase your Flinstone vitamins -- from Big Pharma.
You folks have vivid imaginations.
Sorry, but I reserve the right to return fire, or defend myself.
To do so effectively, you're gonna need some bullets.
Bills have been introduced in Congress several times to do that very thing. Here's the latest attempt to take your access to nutritional products away from you:
More wild eyed fantasy from the fever swamp. If you could cut and paste the relative portions of the bill that prove this claim, you would. Why haven't you?
"(NaturalNews) Of all the sneaky tactics practiced in Washington D.C., this recent action by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is one of the most insidious.
The people at Natural News and Waxman are both idiots. At least they have that in common. Why anyone gives either any credibility is beyond me.
While no one was looking, he injected amendment language into the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173) that would expand the powers of the FTC (not the FDA, but the FTC) to terrorize nutritional supplement companies by greatly expanding the power of the FTC to make its own laws that target dietary supplement companies.
I don't agree with this and really don't understand why they want to entrust the FTC. Even so, using the term "terrorize" is nothing but hyperbole. The bill does nothing of the sort. You ought to read it sometime.
First, John McCain introduced a bill that would severely damage the vitamin industry.
No, it would only damage those producers who make claims they can't support and don't make the product in a safe manner with ingredients that match what's printed on the label. Asking manufacturers to prove that the ingredients are true, and the product does what they claim it does, is considered reasonable by reasonable people.
Dietary supplement manufacturers or suppliers do not have to present any premarketing safety or efficacy data to the FDA. Manufacturers supposedly will have such data to present, but are not compelled to do so before they sell their products.
If there is any question about the safety of a supplement once it is available to consumers, it is currently the responsibility of the FDA to show that the product isn't safe when used as intended. This requirement is nearly impossible to uphold since supplement makers are not required to report the results of any post-marketing studies or observations. That means the FDA must rely on voluntary reports of adverse health events. This is why so many people died from ephedra while the FDA knew there were serious health concerns with the product. This new bill will give the FDA power to act. Iirc, almost 100 people died as a result of using ephedra, yet your sources were condemning the FDA for their efforts to remove if from the market. Nice.
Many supplements are complex compounds that can interact in dangerous ways with prescription and OTC medicines. They can also cause side effects even when taken alone. If anyone is truly interested in this issue they can read the excellent article linked below.
Start calling Orrin Hatch’s office & keep asking him & his staff what they are thinking!!! Hatch is a Mormon- & they have their own FARMS which provide food. This is a direct attack on individual gardners & church farms.
The day someone from the government shows up and tells me I can’t grow my own food in my own yard is the day I raise the Black Flag and start slitting throats.”
AMEN.
I have had an American flag upside down in the window of my car since Nov 9, 2008.
My Mormon friend in Utah called Hatch’s office-—& the person there said this info “is all wrong & that Hatch has been scrambling to clarify it all”. He said “this bill is aimed at the food which is grown OUTSIDE of the USA..
I don’t believe this for one minute.
Hatch could get a press conference at the drop of a hat & get his comments out into the airwaves. HE HAS NOT DONE THIS. I think there is some serious LYING going on here.
I smell a big rat in all of this.
I think they are trying to keep us from surviving when the SHTF and they will try to starve us out. Since they have decreed that we are all obese- we might hold out longer than they think.
Get busy now & buy heirloom seeds. The ones at your local store are hybrids- and won’t reproduce.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.