Ron Paul On The Record

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
1381

[quote]jeffdirect wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
jeffdirect wrote:

And how many thousands New Yorkers will die a slow and painful death because they believed what EPA’s spokeswoman said about the air being safe to breathe ?

All the ones that don’t die a quick death. Much like everyone else.

Should the EPA have told them not to breathe?

They should have told the truth.
But prople like you hate the word.
You’re just another hater of the basic rights of the people, as being protected by the institutions they sustain .

[/quote]

And what exactly is “the truth”?

I mean seriously, do people have to be told not to breathe smoke?

The EPA could not issue sweeping guidelines because the situation was in constant transition. The immediate area was evacuated. Those further out were allowed to stay if they chose. If they experienced respiratory distress they were free to leave.

Seems like you want a big brother government that will force people out of their homes based on scant data and fear.

1382

So, because i want the institutions to do what they are set up to do, i’m in favor of big governement ?

More nonsense from mr hater of America.

1384

[quote]jeffdirect wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:Seems like you want a big brother government that will force people out of their homes based on scant data and fear.

So, because i want the institutions to do what they are set up to do, i’m in favor of big governement ?

More nonsense from mr hater of America.

[/quote]

I wasn’t aware the EPA was set up to force people out of their homes based on a lack of strong evidence of a hazard.

1385

Wow, I thought we might get an intelligent discussion going about the important issue of freedom of health and nutrition, since it hits so close to home here at T-Nation. But, I guess name-calling and griping is just too much fun.

Enjoy your bitch fest, gentlemen. And again I wonder why I even bother posting on the Politics forum. I’m going to head over to Supplements and Nutrition, because I usually don’t feel stupider for having read the posts there.

1386

[quote]swordthrower wrote:
Wow, I thought we might get an intelligent discussion going about the important issue of freedom of health and nutrition, since it hits so close to home here at T-Nation. But, I guess name-calling and griping is just too much fun.

Enjoy your bitch fest, gentlemen. And again I wonder why I even bother posting on the Politics forum. I’m going to head over to Supplements and Nutrition, because I usually don’t feel stupider for having read the posts there.[/quote]

Funny stuff. What do you think about freedom of health and nutrition?

Do you think truth in advertising and labeling have a place in the supplememnt industry?

1387

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Do you think truth in advertising and labeling have a place in the supplememnt industry?[/quote]

Truth has nothing to do with the issue. That is just a red-herring that is thrown out there to distract the real issues – freedom. The only thing that should be required is for products to contain exactly what is on the product labels. Any other claims are understood as advertising. If a product was labeled, “New and Improved” how do we judge that as “truth”? It means nothing it is a mere distraction.

1388

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Do you think truth in advertising and labeling have a place in the supplememnt industry?

Truth has nothing to do with the issue. That is just a red-herring that is thrown out there to distract the real issues – freedom. The only thing that should be required is for products to contain exactly what is on the product labels. Any other claims are understood as advertising. If a product was labeled, “New and Improved” how do we judge that as “truth”? It means nothing it is a mere distraction.[/quote]

Truth has everything to do with it. If a company claims a product increases testosterone production or each scoop contains 40 grams of protein it damn well better do so.

I do not like “buyer beware” when it comes to this stuff. Do you?

1389

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Truth has everything to do with it. If a company claims a product increases testosterone production or each scoop contains 40 grams of protein it damn well better do so.

I do not like “buyer beware” when it comes to this stuff. Do you?[/quote]
This is impossible to test as it is dependent on individual biology. There is no way a company can make any claim like this with 100% certainty. Caveat emptor.

1390

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Truth has everything to do with it. If a company claims a product increases testosterone production or each scoop contains 40 grams of protein it damn well better do so.

I do not like “buyer beware” when it comes to this stuff. Do you?
This is impossible to test as it is dependent on individual biology. There is no way a company can make any claim like this with 100% certainty. Caveat emptor.
[/quote]

So does the FDA have any role at all or should it go away?

Should anyone be able to sell anything, make claims that are not proven by scientific evidence and mislabel what they sell as long as someone is fool enough to buy it?

1391

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
So does the FDA have any role at all or should it go away?

Should anyone be able to sell anything, make claims that are not proven by scientific evidence and mislabel what they sell as long as someone is fool enough to buy it?[/quote]

I do not like the idea of a monopoly in any facet of my life – gov’t monopolies doubly so. The FDA is an imperfect agency just like any single entity that does not rely on competition. There is no way to eliminate real inefficiencies within the system because they receive no signals from the market in the form of profit and loss. They do not suffer the consequences of bad decision making.

It is my belief that the FDA could be replaced by various private associations in the free-market – just like with any other unregulated sector; for example, there are multiple private associations that license fitness specialists. If I hire someone with a certification to help me get stronger and they don’t come through for me there is a feed-back mechanism in the form of profit and loss that will fill those gaps.

There are multiple private consumer advocacy groups that fill the roll of government monopolies that we deal with on a daily basis why does medicine get treated any differently than junk food or electronics?

Realistically, all health related questions should go to a doctor. He or she is always in a better situation to judge the health of his customers than a centrally located gov’t agency is – and again a doctor is in the position to receive feedback from his actions.

What recourse do consumers have when the government makes a mistake?

1392

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
…

What recourse do consumers have when the government makes a mistake?[/quote]

Elect a new government.

What recourse do we have when someone sells us rat poison and tells us it will lower our blood pressure?

I understand what you are saying but private industry is even more corruptible than government when it is its own watchdog.

What is to stop company A from buying the watchdog organization?

1393

Just one more reason the shut down the FDA.

1394

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
…

What recourse do consumers have when the government makes a mistake?

Elect a new government.

What recourse do we have when someone sells us rat poison and tells us it will lower our blood pressure?

I understand what you are saying but private industry is even more corruptible than government when it is its own watchdog.

What is to stop company A from buying the watchdog organization?[/quote]

How does an election at a later date help now? Do you think just changing the organization internally fixes the inherent dangers of monolithic decision making?

Businesses, when not protected by the government, cannot remain solvent when they harm their customers – they will be punished when their customers shop elsewhere. Businesses have nothing to gain from harming their customers. In every instance, the warning about faulty Chinese products (toothpaste and toys) were found by private agencies (in South America) – not a regulatory agency.

Choice is always preferable to no choice. Just like I don’t trust a single source for my news information I don’t trust a single agency to protect me. In fact, it is counter-intuitive to do so.

In the event there were a gap in knowledge created by a lack of information there will eventually be a means to fill that gap so long as there is a real demand for the information and there is free entry into the market. Regulation bars entry into the market and consumers suffer from it.

However, this does not change the fact that people still have an obligation to act morally and still should be held accountable for their actions.

1395

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
…

What recourse do consumers have when the government makes a mistake?

Elect a new government.

What recourse do we have when someone sells us rat poison and tells us it will lower our blood pressure?

I understand what you are saying but private industry is even more corruptible than government when it is its own watchdog.

What is to stop company A from buying the watchdog organization?

How does an election at a later date help now? Do you think just changing the organization internally fixes the inherent dangers of monolithic decision making?

Businesses, when not protected by the government, cannot remain solvent when they harm their customers – they will be punished when their customers shop elsewhere. Businesses have nothing to gain from harming their customers. In every instance, the warning about faulty Chinese products (toothpaste and toys) were found by private agencies (in South America) – not a regulatory agency.

Choice is always preferable to no choice. Just like I don’t trust a single source for my news information I don’t trust a single agency to protect me. In fact, it is counter-intuitive to do so.

In the event there were a gap in knowledge created by a lack of information there will eventually be a means to fill that gap so long as there is a real demand for the information and there is free entry into the market. Regulation bars entry into the market and consumers suffer from it.

However, this does not change the fact that people still have an obligation to act morally and still should be held accountable for their actions.[/quote]

Ever hear the terms “get rich quick” and “fly by night”?

The supplement industry is already loaded with bullshitters. It doesn’t need any more.

We need intelligent regulation. Not heavy handed fear based tactics or a buyer beware marketplace.

We need to fix our institutions, not destroy them. I keep looking for evidence that Ron Paul wants to fix them. I don’t find that evidence.

1396

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Just one more reason the shut down the FDA.

The Day the FDA Took a Cure Away - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com [/quote]

If I read that correctly it seems a supplement company was mislabeling their product by including pharma grade medicine and not telling anyone.

All of the ingredients are still available for anyone else that wants to do it. They just have to label it correctly.

My guess is they wanted to show success in the test group by including active ingredients that really work and then sell the cheaper ingredients to the general public.

Why would you want to shut down the FDA? Because they stopped these people from fraud?

1397

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
We need to fix our institutions, not destroy them. I keep looking for evidence that Ron Paul wants to fix them. I don’t find that evidence. [/quote]

You are correct. Your health is your business. The government has no business in it. Buyer beware…just as it has always been all along. Government only provides an illusion of protection.

This is the conclusion of the article I posted earlier:

"What can be concluded from the saga of PC-SPES? Who was responsible for spiking the dietary supplement? Why did drug molecules need to be added when PC-SPES appeared to work well without them? Why was the product recalled, actually taken out of the hands of patients with advanced prostate cancer, when it was by all reports working better than existing drugs and had similar side effect profiles?

.
.
.

“For comparison, regulated pharmaceutical drugs cause over 100,000 needless deaths annually from side effects caused by their proper use drugs and Public Citizen warns there are 181 unsafe or ineffective prescription drugs on the market. The Vioxx scandal only served to reveal that the FDA approves relatively unsafe drugs that increase mortality rates. The flawed regulatory model should not be used for dietary supplements.”

1398

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
…
This is the conclusion of the article I posted earlier:

"What can be concluded from the saga of PC-SPES? Who was responsible for spiking the dietary supplement? Why did drug molecules need to be added when PC-SPES appeared to work well without them? Why was the product recalled, actually taken out of the hands of patients with advanced prostate cancer, when it was by all reports working better than existing drugs and had similar side effect profiles?

.[/quote]

Because the manufacturer was likely committing fraud as per my previous post.

[quote]
.
.

“For comparison, regulated pharmaceutical drugs cause over 100,000 needless deaths annually from side effects caused by their proper use drugs and Public Citizen warns there are 181 unsafe or ineffective prescription drugs on the market. The Vioxx scandal only served to reveal that the FDA approves relatively unsafe drugs that increase mortality rates. The flawed regulatory model should not be used for dietary supplements.”[/quote]

So if we lose the FDA we will be seeing more people die because of bad drugs and supplements.

The FDA needs to be fixed, not destroyed.

1399

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
So if we lose the FDA we will be seeing more people die because of bad drugs and supplements.

The FDA needs to be fixed, not destroyed.[/quote]

There is no way to fix the FDA because it will still suffer from a lack of competition. Monopolies are destined to bloat from inefficiency – not to mention the corruption of too much power.

1400

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
So if we lose the FDA we will be seeing more people die because of bad drugs and supplements.

The FDA needs to be fixed, not destroyed.

There is no way to fix the FDA because it will still suffer from a lack of competition. Monopolies are destined to bloat from inefficiency – not to mention the corruption of too much power.[/quote]

There is no way we can trust private industry to self regulate in critical life and death areas.