lol@Willy Nilly Massive [fail] ver 2.0

5/14/2009 10:39:02 PM

^^
I don't disagree that the FDA has done at least some good. I understand its role.
However, having only one source of this role is inherently corruptible, and therefore should be replaced with multiple independent and private sources... or at the very least a public-private.

The creation of many private groups competing over providing the quickest and most accurate information would produce many times the jobs created by the FDA, even with its inflated budget. And you can't even begin to argue that a single government-run entity would help to improve the overall quality of drug products better than would be helped by private entities that were competing openly and freely.

Quote :

"I'm not quite sure you actually understand what the FDA does. Have you ever read the Code of Federal regulations that the FDA operates under?"

No. I understand exactly what it does -- and more importantly, what it doesn't do.

Quote :

"Anyways, that last sentence in that quote doesn't actually mean anything besides tossing around buzzwords in an attempt to look intelligent"

You're only saying that because I used the word "paradigm". The statement actually does mean something, and I stand by it.

[Edited on May 15, 2009 at 2:39 AM. Reason : ]

5/15/2009 2:37:01 AM

Quote :

"It is not hard to pick up a book and learn for yourself the facts of a situation. As I said earlier, there could be many private companies similar to the UL that provide information regarding the safety, healthiness, or medicament value of a consumable substance. It is the responsibility of people to decide which source of information to trust, and to decide whether or not to consume anything. Now, they only have one source -- one giant, fascist, and corrupt source. "

Yes, this was working very well before 1906.

5/15/2009 2:56:26 AM

What do you mean?

5/15/2009 3:13:29 AM

I mean stuff like The Jungle, tainted antitoxins, and snake oil peddlers. There's a reason the FDA came into existence to begin with.

5/15/2009 8:35:57 AM

i kinda agree with the FDA on this one... i've seen those commercials a bunch and thought "why should i believe that"

i dont think i've NOT seen them marketed as a medicine for about 2 years

5/15/2009 10:09:12 AM

haha gg Sweden

5/15/2009 10:12:03 AM

^^ Agreed. And honestly they wouldn't have to do much to meet FDA requirements. Say something like:

Quote :

"Cheerios may help to reduce cholesterol if included in a balanced diet** **This statement has not been evaluated by the FDA. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease."

Bam! You've met FDA requirements for making a medical claim on a non-medical product.

5/15/2009 10:16:14 AM

Quote :

"the FDA is merely a fascist wing of the government designed to further the intellectual property paradigm for our rich-stay-rich corporatist oligopoly"

fascist - 1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality

intellectual property - property (as an idea, invention, or process) that derives from the work of the mind or intellect ; also : an application, right, or registration relating to this

paradigm - 1: example, pattern ; especially : an outstandingly clear or typical example or archetype2: an example of a conjugation or declension showing a word in all its inflectional forms3: a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated ; broadly : a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind

corporatism - : the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction

oligopoly - a market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market

Quote :

"the FDA is merely a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader wing of the government designed to further the property (as an idea, invention, or process) that derives from the work of the mind or intellect philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated for our rich-stay-rich corporations serving as organs of political representation market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market"

In other words, you don't know what the hell you're saying. That becomes even more obvious when you follow this statement with:

Quote :

"they only consider drugs in the intellectual property paradigm to count as medicine. The FDA is one of the worst entities ever. It clearly needs to be replaced with many private entities that compete over providing the most accurate information."

So what you're saying is that the FDA, which you say is contributing to a rich-stay-rich "corporatist oligopoly" should be replaced by private entities, even though the FDA is already benefiting corporatist entities? My mind is blown.

[Edited on May 15, 2009 at 10:57 AM. Reason : .]

5/15/2009 10:54:26 AM

pwnt.



[Edited on May 15, 2009 at 11:02 AM. Reason : .]

5/15/2009 11:01:26 AM

Quote :

"In other words, you don't know what the hell you're saying."

What's your fucking problem?
If you don't know what my statement is saying, that's fine, but who do you think you're fooling with the old "quote the dictionary" trick?* ...Fucking weak, dude.

*[edit: apparently you at least fooled bumpintahoe....]

Quote :

"So what you're saying is that the FDA, which you say is contributing to a rich-stay-rich "corporatist oligopoly" should be replaced by private entities, even though the FDA is already benefiting corporatist entities?"

BECAUSE CLEARLY ALL PRIVATE ENTITIES ARE DOOMED TO BEING A PART OF THE CORPORATIST OLIGOPOLY.

Quote :

"My mind is blown"

That's either because you're a partisan jerk that's not even trying to understand the issue, or you're just a fucking troll. Perhaps some of both.

Quote :

"pwnt."

[Edited on May 15, 2009 at 11:09 AM. Reason : ]

5/15/2009 11:08:04 AM

Quote :

"The creation of many private groups competing over providing the quickest and most accurate information would produce many times the jobs created by the FDA, even with its inflated budget. And you can't even begin to argue that a single government-run entity would help to improve the overall quality of drug products better than would be helped by private entities that were competing openly and freely."

Thats not actually correct. It isn't a matter of just information management, its about quality management. My actual job is quality management of active pharmaceutical ingredients, amino acids in particular. The goal of the FDA isn't simply to ensure correct information, but to ensure that every product produced meets certain criteria for safety, identity, integrity, quality, and strength.

As an engineer, I know that is a lot easier to day dream about creating systems that work better. Actual implementation of thoughts is a completely different animal. Thoughts don't mean shit if they can't translate into results.

And I can argue that a single government entity improves quality more than private entities. One simple reason; the FDA can shut down companies. Companies are scared shitless of the FDA, and pour billions of dollars into ensuring they meet FDA standards. Its not just about information hoarding. It is about ensuring that every single batch we make is good stuff. Companies already compete to try to bring the highest quality materials to market. That is why some of my companies customers refuse to use Chinese raw materials. I'll say again, I really don't believe you know what you're talking about. You have a birds eye view. If you are going to attempt to fix a system, you have to know the system. Philosophically attacking a system just isn't going to cut it.

5/15/2009 4:25:48 PM

Snap!

5/15/2009 9:19:54 PM