Topic: The free market speaks! FDA-AVOIDED Dustberries! (Read 10241 times)

Other interesting info:
It is also noted that this is used in
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/BudgetReports/UCM243370.pdf
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05inrate.pdf

So that's (on average) $48.13 per income taxpayer per year. Actually, that does not sound like a bad deal for this service. And there are probably more taxpayers now so it is an overestimate.

This is just a quick estimation. I realize the government has other sources of revenue that US citizens all pay for indirectly. I am also not taking into account all the money that is spent in meeting FDA standards, which are probably the strictest in the world (at least for drugs, ever since thalidomide). You eventually pay this in the form of higher drug cost, as well as money going to medicare, medicaid, social security, etc. I haven't bothered to add this up but it is most likely much higher than that $48.13 per year. Maybe someone else would like to.

If you have enough money and/or clout you can get out of:

1) paying taxes (see Scientology)
2) FDA bans (see Tobacco Products)

So, how much better is the FDA, really, than a private "certification firm" without teeth? I couldn't easily find a primary source for what percentage of drugs, etc need to be eventually recalled even after FDA approval (as a kind of measure of effectiveness). But that info would also be useful to this analysis.

I don't have an opinion on this yet. I am just trying to frame the discussion so that it becomes more possible for rational decisions to be made rather than endlessly arguing back and forth.

There is something pretty close to a real life case of this.

A homeopathic cold/allergy drug that was being sold outside the purview of the FDA for over 20 years (although the FDA advised against its use).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zicam

When the company got sued for making people lose their sense of smell, investors sued the company for not doing the science right and being transparent with the results (and thus losing the investors money). It went all the way to the supreme court (January 2011) where they argued about "what if satanists started liking a drug and it became associated with the devil, could the company get sued for that" and other crazy stuff (barking lunatics, etc) about what constitutes "reliable information":

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/09-1156.pdf

No, read the thread. <3

I didn't read the thread...so let me know if this has been covered.

Has anyone with access to a geiger counter (not that expensive) tested these berries? Over time wouldn't a trusted group of experts come into being that people would pay to make recommendations equivalent to the FDA. People selling foods, etc would get inspected and certified by this group. Is a there reason to think this would a be more or less corrupt system than the FDA?

Then he would just take a picture with a dust filter installed. I doubt he would buy and install any more since there is no one to ensure that he continues to do so.

What what hidden agendas? WTF? If you are worried, just ask the dustberries guy to put a dust filter in between the rigs and berries. Problem solved

*shrug*

I can't know what I don't know. I do know that if someone says 'STOP DON'T WALK ANY FURTHER!' I'll probably ask why and they'll probably explain. If they refuse the explain, I would obviously press on and do some investigation of my own. I don't think there is any lack of explanation why foods are regulated for safety. This is not to say that I agree with all regulations, but the people involved can't all be evil and in it for 'hidden agendas'. It's statistically improbable.

Since you're a "life scientist" that's pretty much what I expected you to say.

As a life scientist I can't comprehend someone learning about berries with a 'hidden agenda'.

They do when they only "find out" if the berry causes cancer because they have a hidden agenda. I mean really, if you spend your whole life trying to find out if a berry causes cancer obviously you're going to want to "find out" it does, amirite guys?

Now if you let the free market handle it, you get the absolute best-quality, cheapest possible cancer-berries (thanks to zero government inefficiency) and then someone else will sell you the cure to that pesky cancer. It's a win-win for everyone.

America is pretty much scattered, uneducated and helpless. The whole world is. That doesn't mean that the scientists who spend their entire life finding out if a berry can cause cancer or not don't deserve to be listened to.

Let me get this straight.  You don't think America is scatterd, uneducated and helpless?

I agree with allten on this one. We should crush those evil regulating bodies that keep us from contracting diseases from random foods and stop people from poisoningour milk, meat, produce etc. We deserve the choice to be scattered, uneducated and helpless individuals when there are countless educated and passionate individuals working in that field trying to keep people safe and healthy.

Don't you love it when idiots try to say things like that?  It's almost as dumb as saying "cops are bad".

What is a "health moral hazard"?

But it isn't the consumers giving up their freedom, so why would they care about getting extra safety at the cost of some regulating industry existing?

why so much support for the FDA?
Do a google search for "FDA Hidden agenda"
As with all research, it takes time to sort between fact, opinion, and fictions, but if you really think
the current FDA cares about public health.... you've been deceived.

The whole point of the U.S. constitution was to limit and distribute power in government because when it is
consolidated and increased it is always abused. Who regulates all these bureaucratic regulating agencies?
When they screw up or have alternate agendas rarely anyone puts them into check.
Let the free market do it.

FDA just creates health moral hazard - people stop taking their food health choices into their own hands 'cuz government has their back. what a joke!

Those who would change freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security and always end up losing both.

Yeah, now we know what we do with our computers when mining Bitcoins isn't profitable enough. We use them as some kind of perpetuum mobile to solve the world's energy problem. Renewable energy from computers FTW!

1. Acquire steal computer
2. Bring computer to Chernobyl Fukushima
3.
4. Infinite Dust
5. Infinite Radiation
6.
7. Infinite Profit

The Bitcoin network is regulation without force. We all voluntarily agreed to the rules. We could each make our own version of Bitcoin but we don't, not because we're afraid of having physical force used on us but because we don't want to be isolated using our version that few to no other people use. Regulation can and does work using only market forces.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.624509

Sorry for the troll.

I didn't say that (does it already cause hallucinations?), but please enlighten me and tell me where inside your computer you find >radioactive< material.