The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (SPECIAL ACCESS) KGB Political Debate Central When money unchecked influence...

How? First, we stop pretending that markets will somehow take care of everything on their own.

especially in response to govt idiocy.

dietary habits are ultimately an individual choice that can really only be solved at the individual levels by individuals.

Let me simplify ... for overwhelming majority alternative is not possible.

The Food and Drug Administration can’t protect you. It didn’t protect Sonette Marras, a 48-year-old mother of seven who died in Hawaii last month. It didn’t protect Michael Lee Sparling, a 22-year-old Army private who died at Fort Bliss two years ago. Nor can it protect the more than 2,000 Americans a year who will die or suffer illness after taking over-the-counter dietary supplements.
Don’t expect the FDA to protect you now. The laws it enforces protect the $30 billion-a-year industry that makes and sells the supplements, not the 53 percent of Americans who take them.
Not quite medicines, not quite food, dietary supplements fall into a regulatory black hole. A big black hole. And one of the most glaring examples of what can go wrong occurred in Dallas, where a company continued to manufacture dietary supplements with an illegal ingredient, DMAA, one year after this laboratory-made stimulant was deemed unsafe.
The story begins in 1994, when Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, introduced a federal law, the Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act, that opened the door for supplements to be sold without safety testing.
This means that the pills, powders and potions on sale across the nation are deemed safe — until someone gets sick. “We don’t approve these products for safety or efficacy prior to going to market,” says Dr. Daniel Fabricant, director of the Division of Dietary Supplement Programs at the FDA. “They’re not like drugs. The way the law is, firms don’t have to register their products, so dietary supplements come on to the market freely.”
It’s a huge market. In 2009, 55,000 supplements were on sale in the U.S., according to the Government Accountability Office. That’s up from 4,000 in 1994, a nearly 1,300 percent increase.
When a supplement is suspected to have caused deaths or illnesses, it’s up to the FDA to prove that the supplement is unsafe. “The burden is on us,” says Fabricant. “Proving that something caused harm directly is very challenging.”

You think people, in general, are stupid

Lets take a business that is largely unregulated and look at how the "Market" performs in the best interest of the people. Let's take the supplement business for instance. They can make crazy claims that much of the population believes due to market based disinformation. There is little regulation here, and it is a great example of why we need government over-site.

Half of people out there are below average intelligence. By definition. You can't run society based on "top 1% will be fine", not in financial, not in intellectual, not in any other sense.

Interesting. Its an unregulated market with no oversight, and yet you were able to figure out that the claims are bogus. Kinda gives the lie to your claim that people can't figure out the truth...

What about the 53% of Americans that didn't figure it out? In your world they are fucked.

The question is how far do you go with regards to taking responsibility for other people. A question you need to ask, is are you saving people from some outside force - or are you saving them from themselves. Without answering that question, you cannot begin to start contemplating just solutions, because justice looks different in each scenario.

Half of people out there are below average intelligence. By definition. You can't run society based on "top 1% will be fine", not in financial, not in intellectual, not in any other sense.

I don't think this should extend to government informing people.

In this specific case, if McD caught muddying waters - they should be made an example of. McD should be free to sell deep fried turds, people should be free to eat these turds, but NOBODY should be free to pretend deep fried turds are anything but deep fried turds.

WE AGREE!!!!!!!!!!

Now we just have to figure out how to make that happen without the rule nazis doing things like Bloomberg in New York telling folks they can't have large sodas

I think, Smoking and Tobacco industry, is a good example. Unless you are a minor, you can freely buy and consume. Still, at this point everyone is aware it is harmful, and this "everyone" was achieved via government-sponsored education and mandatory packaging regulation.

Maybe if McD packaging had to include picture of obese people in hospitals people would take health warning more seriously?

Tobacco industry had doctors peddle "health benefits" of smoking. How was it stopped? a) Research showing otherwise b) Gov't threatening to revoke MD licenses for ignoring this research.

As I said, no sport can function without referees and regulations. I would consider the same thing for all markets. You should be held to a standard of truth, where as what you say and claim, you will ultimately be held accountable.

The idea that you can have a free unregulated market is as preposterous as the thought of the NFL with no rules or referees.

What is not a just or proper function of society or govt is to persecute someone who makes or serves a perfectly good hamburger, simply because they may have created one more of an always-infinite number of avenues by which the willfully ignorant or simply uncaring individual may abuse themselves.

You can smoke a pack every day for the rest of your life and be healthy.

When you say put the obese people in the hospitals on ads do you mean...

What is not a just or proper function of society or govt is to persecute someone who makes or serves a perfectly good hamburger

Tiny minority could, most of us would get cancer.



I mean to simplify message as much as possible. You eat McD and you will end just like this fat dude with amputated legs due to diabetes complications.

Here we go again, keep changing what I say to suit your argument.

And the hospital comment......have you been in a hospital lately???? Half the staff are over weight. Kinda hard for them to preach diet when they look like the patients.

The fact that you say if you eat McD you will become diabetic also proves you are ignorant.

No, I was demonstrating structural flaws of your argument in a way that should make them obvious.

I could have simply called your argument an "appeal to possibility", but I doubt you would have bothered to look up what it means.


Hasty generalization, followed by denying the antecedent.



I am not saying that "if you eat [once] at McD you will become diabetic", just like I would not be saying that "if you smoke one cigaret you will get lung cancer".

My argument would be structured following way: If you regularly eat at McD you are more likely to be obese, as one example of poor dietary choice correlates with a pattern of poor dietary choices. Obese people are more likely to develop diabetes. Therefore, diabetes and McD patronage correlate.

Do you know why our society worships tall, fit people?

Once again a horrible attempt of an argument.

How about you try and form an argument that is not copy and paste for once.