F@ck The FDA!

irone93

irone93

Member
Pot, alcohol, an tobacco are legal but DMAA which actually does good things is banned. Can we start a political movement to limit the FDA's power? Maybe if they ban aspartame Trump will go after them (Diet Coke). This is why we can't have nice things!
 
irone93 said:
Pot, alcohol, an tobacco are legal but DMAA which actually does good things is banned. Can we start a political movement to limit the FDA's power? Maybe if they ban aspartame Trump will go after them (Diet Coke). This is why we can't have nice things!
Click to expand...

One of the main reasons is Cause they haven’t figured a way to make money of it.
 
Why’s this in the supplement section instead of general discussion? Or maybe in the “high school “ subsection? Do we have a kids section?
 
irone93 said:
Pot, alcohol, an tobacco are legal but DMAA which actually does good things is banned. Can we start a political movement to limit the FDA's power? Maybe if they ban aspartame Trump will go after them (Diet Coke). This is why we can't have nice things!
Click to expand...
What good thing does DMAA do?
 
Jiigzz said:
What good thing does DMAA do?
Click to expand...
Feels good lol.
What bad does it do?
Well besides DMAA d***
Which proves vascoconstriction
In my opinion it all has to do about freedom and the fact that the FDA doesn't follow the law set by DSHEA
(is that the acronym legit forgot the full name, only know bits of the law)
 
Jiigzz said:
What good thing does DMAA do?
Click to expand...

I find that it increases energy, mental focus, and stamina. With that said, I think it's probably addictive and can easily be abused. Like usual, kids and stupid people ruin it for the rest of us.
 
Jiigzz said:
What good thing does DMAA do?
Click to expand...

Yeah, you said it. We were all thinking it. You went and said it. :)

I will say though, in his defense, I don't see how anything is illegal when those other drugs he listed are legal....those drugs are responsible for far more cost to society than any others. And I don't have skin in the game, I don't use any of them ....
 
HIT4ME said:
Yeah, you said it. We were all thinking it. You went and said it. :)

I will say though, in his defense, I don't see how anything is illegal when those other drugs he listed are legal....those drugs are responsible for far more cost to society than any others. And I don't have skin in the game, I don't use any of them ....
Click to expand...
The problem with alcohol and tobacco is that they are so widely used, and so deeply ingrained in our culture that banning them would quite literally cause public upheaval.

Smoking is the only one I could ever get on board with banning because the odd drink doesn't change much. Abuse of it does.
But again if I abused DMAA I could also kill myself. If I quadrupled scooped a DMAA based pre and told you everyone, most people would say things like, "You're an idiot", or "this is why we can't have nice things" Etc. Whereas when I drink, my friends actually encourage me to have more. Well maybe not mine, but a lot of people's friends do.

Completely different stigma
 
Jiigzz said:
The problem with alcohol and tobacco is that they are so widely used, and so deeply ingrained in our culture that banning them would quite literally cause public upheaval.

Smoking is the only one I could ever get on board with banning because the odd drink doesn't change much. Abuse of it does.
But again if I abused DMAA I could also kill myself. If I quadrupled scooped a DMAA based pre and told you everyone, most people would say things like, "You're an idiot", or "this is why we can't have nice things" Etc. Whereas when I drink, my friends actually encourage me to have more. Well maybe not mine, but a lot of people's friends do.

Completely different stigma
Click to expand...

The odd cigarette or cigar doesn't change much either. I don't know if I follow your logic...
 
Jiigzz said:
The problem with alcohol and tobacco is that they are so widely used, and so deeply ingrained in our culture that banning them would quite literally cause public upheaval.

Smoking is the only one I could ever get on board with banning because the odd drink doesn't change much. Abuse of it does.
But again if I abused DMAA I could also kill myself. If I quadrupled scooped a DMAA based pre and told you everyone, most people would say things like, "You're an idiot", or "this is why we can't have nice things" Etc. Whereas when I drink, my friends actually encourage me to have more. Well maybe not mine, but a lot of people's friends do.

Completely different stigma
Click to expand...


100% agree. But that's also kind of the point. Our basis for making drugs illegal is completely irrational/illogical. It has nothing to do with protecting people or safety or health, etc. - it has more to do with people's perceptions.
 
210LBS said:
The odd cigarette or cigar doesn't change much either. I don't know if I follow your logic...
Click to expand...

The odd hit of crack cocaine or heroine won't do much to a lot of people either.
 
HIT4ME said:
The odd hit of crack cocaine or heroine won't do much to a lot of people either.
Click to expand...

Well heroin and crack are not regulated, so one hit can certainly do significant damage. Also, those drugs have a far stronger impact on people's ability to function and contribute to society, whereas tobacco is far more minimal.
 
210LBS said:
The odd cigarette or cigar doesn't change much either. I don't know if I follow your logic...
Click to expand...

Yeah, it does. There are numerous studies that assess the effect of a SINGLE cigarette:

Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed

But this is not my argument. IMO DMAA is safe at reasonable dosages (We have USPLabs to thank for that evidence) but I wouldn't necessarily say it is 'good'. It provides stimulation, but little else.
 
Jiigzz said:
Yeah, it does. There are numerous studies that assess the effect of a SINGLE cigarette:

Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed

Then there is the 'pack-year' which assesses the response to people who smoke a single cigarette per day over a long period (low consumption, long duration) vs someone who smokes the same amount in a short period (high consumption, short period). In fact it is WORSE for your health if you have a single cigarette each day for a year, than to consume an equal amount of smokes over a shorter period of time.

Smoking is far worse than drinking in every respect.
Click to expand...

The fact that you claim "smoking is far worse than drinking in every respect" is simply laughable and I do not believe you even believe that. Alcohol takes a lot of innocent lives, makes people unable to function in society, ruins families, causes immediate poisoning deaths etc. It's a ridiculous statement.
 
210LBS said:
The fact that you claim "smoking is far worse than drinking in every respect" is simply laughable and I do not believe you even believe that. Alcohol takes a lot of innocent lives, makes people unable to function in society, ruins families, causes immediate poisoning deaths etc. It's a ridiculous statement.
Click to expand...

I rephrased myself, but you ninja quoted me.

I meant to refer solely to deaths, whereby a significantly larger proportion of all preventable deaths are directly attributed to smoking. Almost 500,000 last year including 41,000 people who died from second hand smoke, died as a result of smoking.

But again, you've misunderstood (or i've misrepresented) the actual point I was making. It was that, in moderation, drinking and DMAA use have far less health implications than smoking does. So it does perplex me as to why tobacco is legal yet DMAA isn't (well, not really as there are lobbyists for tobacco). Alcohol is harmful, but in EXCESS is where most of the issues come from. But you could say the same for a LOT of things in excess. Do you ban things simply because people exceed the recommend intake or use things other than directed? If so, you'd end up with nearly everything banned.

The point is that drinking to excess is encouraged and the excess leads to alcohol related harm.

Does that make sense?
 
Jiigzz said:
I rephrased myself, but you ninja quoted me.

I meant to refer solely to deaths, whereby a significantly larger proportion of all preventable deaths are directly attributed to smoking. Almost 500,000 last year including 41,000 people who died from second hand smoke, died as a result of smoking.

But again, you've misunderstood (or i've misrepresented) the actual point I was making. It was that, in moderation, drinking and DMAA use have far less health implications than smoking does. So it does perplex me as to why tobacco is legal yet DMAA isn't (well, not really as there are lobbyists for tobacco). Alcohol is harmful, but in EXCESS is where most of the issues come from. But you could say the same for a LOT of things in excess. Do you ban things simply because people exceed the recommend intake or use things other than directed? If so, you'd end up with nearly everything banned.

The point is that drinking to excess is encouraged and the excess leads to alcohol related harm.

Does that make sense?
Click to expand...

These are addictive substances we are talking about, so we have to factor in addiction, and the fact is, alcohol addiction causes far more pain on society than tobacco addiction. If someone abuses tobacco then they hurt themselves - big deal, who really cares? When someone abuses alcohol that's when domestic violence, drunk driving, rape, etc start coming into play.

To your point - yes, moderate tobacco is worse than moderate alcohol to the consumer. But as far as both substances effects on overall society? Well, I'd say a society without alcohol is probably much safer to the general population than tobacco. Just my opinion though.

But it still raises the question - how do we determine what to ban? Ban with an emphasis on what's bad for the consumer, or ban with an emphasis on what's bad for society? I realize my opinion may not be popular with you or others on this board, but this is how I feel.
 
210LBS said:
These are addictive substances we are talking about, so we have to factor in addiction, and the fact is, alcohol addiction causes far more pain on society than tobacco addiction. If someone abuses tobacco then they hurt themselves - big deal, who really cares? When someone abuses alcohol that's when domestic violence, drunk driving, rape, etc start coming into play.

To your point - yes, moderate tobacco is worse than moderate alcohol to the consumer. But as far as both substances effects on overall society? Well, I'd say a society without alcohol is probably much safer to the general population than tobacco. Just my opinion though.

But it still raises the question - how do we determine what to ban? Ban with an emphasis on what's bad for the consumer, or ban with an emphasis on what's bad for society? I realize my opinion may not be popular with you or others on this board, but this is how I feel.
Click to expand...

You do realise that tobacco kills 41,000 people per year from second hand smoke, right? Read that again till it sinks in. So no, it's not just a case of "they hurt themselves". A single smoker can affect the lives of dozens of people in their vicinity.

Ban alcohol, organised crime increases. Don't repeat the same mistakes of prohibition ;)

DMAA isn't in the same league as alcohol and tobacco, and the main concerns are more than it isn't yet considered compliant under DSHEA. It currently would need an NDI filed for compliance.

Debatable? Sure. But that is the Govts. current position. Hi Tech tried to fight this of course, and kudos, but that is whyyou can't really compare DMAA to either smoking or Alcohol.
 
Jiigzz said:
You do realise that tobacco kills 41,000 people per year from second hand smoke, right? Read that again till it sinks in. So no, it's not just a case of "they hurt themselves". A single smoker can affect the lives of dozens of people in their vicinity.

Ban alcohol, organised crime increases. Don't repeat the same mistakes of prohibition ;)

DMAA isn't in the same league as alcohol and tobacco, and the main concerns are more than it isn't yet considered compliant under DSHEA. It currently would need an NDI filed for compliance.

Debatable? Sure. But that is the Govts. current position. Hi Tech tried to fight this of course, and kudos, but that is whyyou can't really compare DMAA to either smoking or Alcohol.
Click to expand...

The "second hand smoke" stats are very.... unreliable. The way they are conducted do not necessarily show causation. The same goes for some of the smoking deaths - they don't show clear causation on all of those deaths. But that's a whole other debate and we have tons of laws to prevent or at least significantly minimize second hand smoke today.

As for organized crime? If you want to go by that logic then legalize pot, heroin, cocaine, etc if that is your main focus.

I am not for banning tobacco or alcohol by the way. And I am for legalizing marijuana.
 
210LBS said:
The "second hand smoke" stats are very.... unreliable. The way they are conducted do not necessarily show causation. The same goes for some of the smoking deaths - they don't show clear causation on all of those deaths. But that's a whole other debate and we have tons of laws to prevent or at least significantly minimize second hand smoke today.

As for organized crime? If you want to go by that logic then legalize pot, heroin, cocaine, etc if that is your main focus.

I am not for banning tobacco or alcohol by the way. And I am for legalizing marijuana.
Click to expand...

This has gone so far beyond the point I was making, I don't even know any more LOL

Here's the last thing i'l' say: the logic you applied to smoking needs to also be applied to drinking, People are rarely killed by alcohol itself. Die in a car accident? Cause of death: Traumatic brain injury. Can you prove to me that alcohol caused someone to crash? Or would have they crashed anyway? Can you prove it either way?

That is the path of logic you are taking.
 
Jiigzz said:
This has gone so far beyond the point I was making, I don't even know any more LOL

Here's the last thing i'l' say: the logic you applied to smoking needs to also be applied to drinking, People are rarely killed by alcohol itself. Die in a car accident? Cause of death: Traumatic brain injury. Can you prove to me that alcohol caused someone to crash? Or would have they crashed anyway? Can you prove it either way?

That is the path of logic you are taking.
Click to expand...

It's the same logic that is applied for smoking though. Do we know for a fact how many people die from smoking or second hand smoke? No, not really. But assumptions are made that if you have a heart attack and you're a smoker then smoking killed you or was a contributing factor. If you're not a smoker and get lung cancer and have been exposed to secondhand smoke then we assume that must have caused or contributed to it.

We apply that to alcohol. Does alcohol cause rape? Well 2/3 of date rape involve alcohol, so we make the assumption that it can cause or is a contributing factor to it. The same goes for driving. Alcohol poisoning means it can directly kill you. Choking on your vomit after a night of drinking? Asphyxiation. But like everything else, we apply that alcohol caused or what a contributing factor to it.

Point is, there are a lot of different ways to look at things and different ways to interpret the data out there.
 
Don't do drugs, they're bad. Mmmmmkay?
 
Jiigzz said:
Yeah, it does. There are numerous studies that assess the effect of a SINGLE cigarette:

Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed

But this is not my argument. IMO DMAA is safe at reasonable dosages (We have USPLabs to thank for that evidence) but I wouldn't necessarily say it is 'good'. It provides stimulation, but little else.
Click to expand...

Thank you. The comment made no sense. Its the same with vaping. People think it is the greatest thing, but there have not been enough studies done yet.
 
Jiigzz said:
The problem with alcohol and tobacco is that they are so widely used, and so deeply ingrained in our culture that banning them would quite literally cause public upheaval.

Smoking is the only one I could ever get on board with banning because the odd drink doesn't change much. Abuse of it does.
But again if I abused DMAA I could also kill myself. If I quadrupled scooped a DMAA based pre and told you everyone, most people would say things like, "You're an idiot", or "this is why we can't have nice things" Etc. Whereas when I drink, my friends actually encourage me to have more. Well maybe not mine, but a lot of people's friends do.

Completely different stigma
Click to expand...

Nough said this is exactly why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top