[quote]PublickStews wrote:
More chicken little from T-Nation. This is never going to happen and I love the falsified stories about “200 a bottle for vitamin E in Europe” I lived there for half of 2006 and could find every vitamin/supplement in the grocery store. It’s just made up.[/quote]
Which is precisely why I went and read the text of the legislation itself. IMO, it’s imposing a burden on business for a somewhat dubious benefit.
Shucks, I guess the findings of fish oil got the pharms all scared and running to their lobbies.
Land of the free. Who said money can’t buy love? lol
If anyone cares to help fight anti-supplement bills in the future, check out the following website:
http://www.saveoursupplements.org/
I signed up and now get the occasional email telling me about the newest nasty bills being slammed against supplements.
With just a few clicks you can bug all of your congress reps with articulate, pre-written emails. It’s all quick, easy, and it helps.
[quote]PublickStews wrote:
More chicken little from T-Nation. This is never going to happen and I love the falsified stories about “200 a bottle for vitamin E in Europe” I lived there for half of 2006 and could find every vitamin/supplement in the grocery store. It’s just made up.[/quote]
[quote]DePingus wrote:
If anyone cares to help fight anti-supplement bills in the future, check out the following website:
http://www.saveoursupplements.org/
I signed up and now get the occasional email telling me about the newest nasty bills being slammed against supplements.
With just a few clicks you can bug all of your congress reps with articulate, pre-written emails. It’s all quick, easy, and it helps.
[/quote]
If your rep in congress is a mindless idiot that can only repeat party doctrine and can’t think for him(her)self, then it is pointless. Yes we threw him out…
Will we still be the greatest country in the world with our choices, liberties, freedoms and rights taken away? Fuck no we won’t.
The government of the USA was designed for the people of the USA. The government was designed to serve the population, not rule the population. Does by the people, for the people mean anything to you? It does to me.
[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
To live in the greatest country in the world?
Fuck yes I will.[/quote]
[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
Will we still be the greatest country in the world with our choices, liberties, freedoms and rights taken away? Fuck no we won’t.
The government of the USA was designed for the people of the USA. The government was designed to serve the population, not rule the population. Does by the people, for the people mean anything to you? It does to me.
eengrms76 wrote:
To live in the greatest country in the world?
Fuck yes I will.
[/quote]
Do you honestly believe it’s that slippery of a slope? Seriously? I mean it’s fine to be concerned about losing 1/10th of 1% of our rights, but what you are talking about will take hundreds of years.
If you want to exaggerate the facts to make a point fine, but there has to come a time when common sense steps in.
You really believe it is that small of an issue? Lets use gun control for example.
Upon founding of America, any citizen was allowed to own and carry any firearm of his choosing.
Then laws were passed they may not carry weapons in certain places.
Then laws were passed that they may not have certain weapons.
Then laws were passed banning more weapons and locations.
Then concealed laws were passed.
Then automatics were banned.
Then handguns were banned in certain localities.
Now in the capitol of the land of the free, the only people allowed to own a weapon are active duty law enforcement or the government. And of course the criminals.
This country was designed so that the government would never have more power than the individual citizen.
This is only one case in point.
I have lost significantly more than 1% of my freedoms paid for by the lives of my ancestors.
I leave you with a quote, by a very wise American man.
“He who trades freedom for security deserves neither”
Benjamin Franklin
[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
Do you honestly believe it’s that slippery of a slope? Seriously? I mean it’s fine to be concerned about losing 1/10th of 1% of our rights, but what you are talking about will take hundreds of years.
If you want to exaggerate the facts to make a point fine, but there has to come a time when common sense steps in.[/quote]
[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
Now in the capitol of the land of the free, the only people allowed to own a weapon are active duty law enforcement or the government. And of course the criminals.[/quote]
Maybe DC is different, but where I live many people still own guns (including myself) and have concealed permits. The only thing around here you can’t have are automatics (and I’m sure some other types that I’m not even aware of).
So yes Gun Control was a decent example of what we’re talking about, but still one that evolved over many years and involves personal safety. I can’t think of many other examples of products I can’t have, that I would even want. To say you can’t have an automatic weapon is one thing, actually wanting one for any sort of purpose is another. And if you really wanted one, I’m sure you could find one. Being illegal to own doesn’t mean shit unless you are going to use it for illegal purposes. Meaning they don’t randomly search homes for guns on a daily basis.
Sorry if I’m not more sympathetic, but I actually believe in gun control and wish is was much more strict. And I’m a gun owner.
You and Mike seem to feel you have a right to enter into someone elses private business and tell them how to run it.
I am sorry, but you and your family do not have a right to eat at my restaurant. If you fear second hand smoke, stay at home on your own private property.
ComradeLaw seems to be afraid of freedom and it’s attendent responsibilities. Its much easier to let the government run your life. After all the government is pure and benevolent and always has your best interests at heart.
How about Patrick Henry’s
“Is life so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?”
Or Thomas Jefferson’s
“I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.”
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Forcing corporations to report is EXACTLY what the government SHOULD be doing, as opposed to banning supplements whenever there is an ill-informed public outcry. Reporting allows the market to more effectively deal with those who sell crap.[/quote]
The government should help fund research to demonstrate what supplements actually work in addition to collecting info on supplements that may be harmful.
[quote]uberswank wrote:
Actually smoking was a really bad example for the topic of this thread, because it does affect others.
You and Mike seem to feel you have a right to enter into someone elses private business and tell them how to run it.
I am sorry, but you and your family do not have a right to eat at my restaurant. If you fear second hand smoke, stay at home on your own private property. [/quote]
If a private business serves the public- it’s no longer a private business. I could give a shit what you do in your own home. Hell it would be great if you smoked twenty packs a day. The world would contain one less asshole then.
When it comes to my family- I do care about exposing them to second hand smoke. You obviously only care about yourself.
This is patently false, comrade. I’ll repeat it again: you don’t have a right to conduct business with anyone you choose to. That’s forced association and it’s communist.
[quote]uberswank wrote:
you don’t have a right to conduct business with anyone you choose to.[/quote]
This statement doesn’t make any sense. Did you mean to say that you have the right [i]not[/i] to do business with anyone you choose.
Either way- if a private business exists that serves the general public (i.e. you don’t need a membership to get in) then they should have to follow all of the rules that general public businesses have. Are you saying that McDonald’s shouldn’t have to ban smoking either? Technically by your definition they are a private business.
Just so I can get a frame of reference here, is there any place you feel that it would be ok to ban smoking? I mean do you go as far as to say it’s ok to let your children’s day-care provider or pre-school teacher smoke in the classroom?
[quote]uberswank wrote:
This is patently false, comrade. I’ll repeat it again: you don’t have a right to conduct business with anyone you choose to. That’s forced association and it’s communist. [/quote]
These posts are hilarious. Keep them coming!
Just thought of an addendum for all you trusting folks who don’t think the FDA would work to favor big pharma over supplements…
The more widespread and successful a supplement is (i.e. more users) the more likely it will be involved in incident reports, whether truly related or not.
This is the perfect vehicle to identify supplements that compete with drugs as dangerous! Of course, it’s widely used, and look at all the incidents, we’d better take this off the market, and put it in the hands of pharma.
Do you honestly think it isn’t in the financial interests of big pharma to lobby in this direction whenever a supplement starts to undercut drug sales?
It’s not a conspiracy or anything else, it’s called financial incentive… which is a very strong motivational tool.
this is somewhat alarming. the medical industry in general is worth tons of money and apparantly has an army of lobbyists.in recent years, herbal medicine has grown in popularity and many are turning to herbs for certain issues rather than their doctors and expensive medicines offered through prescription.
i would be interested to see statistics in medicinal profit losses during the last few years as herbal popularity grew. i would bet that the medical field will continue to push for supplement regulation so they can take over, or at least even the playing field again. if you can get ambien for $100 a bottle, why buy valerian root for $100 a bottle?
it would be interesting to see if the insurance industries chime in on this as well. the more they can insure the more they earn too.
we have the patriot act, legislature to make supplements available only through prescription, a proposed american union and a european union whose economic and political ties to ours strengthens all time, and who has already banned sups except through a doctors orders. i wonder if gyms will eventually be banned in our emerging police state.
[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
uberswank wrote:
you don’t have a right to conduct business with anyone you choose to.
This statement doesn’t make any sense. Did you mean to say that you have the right [i]not[/i] to do business with anyone you choose.
[/quote]
Both statements are correct. My statement meant that you don’t have a right to eat in my restaurant. Your statement means that you do have a right not to eat in my restaurant if you don’t like the fact that smoking is taking place. It also means I can choose not to do business with you if you insist on telling me how to run my business. Anything else is forced association.
Yes. It is Mcdonalds choice to allow or disallow smoking - not yours nor the governments. Just because Mcdonalds opens it’s doors to you does it mean that you have an inherent right to be there. Because you do not have a right to be there, you also do not have a right to dictate the terms on which mcdonalds must cater to you.
Also, the private membership clubs were started to avoid government intrusion on private property, using the same arguments you have, which in reality it had no right to do to begin with.
[quote]
Just so I can get a frame of reference here, is there any place you feel that it would be ok to ban smoking? I mean do you go as far as to say it’s ok to let your children’s day-care provider or pre-school teacher smoke in the classroom?[/quote]
Government property and your property are the only two places that one can ban smoking. And yes I will go so far as to say it is ok for day-care providers to smoke. The responsibility falls upon you as a parent to not place your kids in that daycare. Most parents wouldn’t want this, so said daycare will soon go out of business. This is how free and voluntary association deals with these types of problems rather than ceding the government more power because of the sheer laziness of parents in raising their children as they see fit.
And before you ask, if your neighbor is smoking and it is coming on to your property, then you have a right to ask him to desist.