I did QA microbiology for a pharma company as my first job out of undergrad. We had to test surfaces and air on production lines every time they ran since it was done in a sterile environment. We'd then have to test a random sample of the product itself for every lot of drug that was made. Even before it reached the production line, we had to test the room and equipment that made the drug up and take random water samples from all over the plant. And we constantly had FDA inspections, both planned and unannounced.
I can imagine but never would have thought of all that. People don't realize what goes on behind the scenes. I mean, I use a lot of bulk powders for my supplements and just weighing things out properly is a hassle. I can't imagine all the extra work I'd go through doing it as a business. But I'm glad people are better at it than I am!
People have the ultimately responsibility of what they put in their bodies. Sure companies should ideally produce safe and effective products but many sups have a range of safety where there is some inherited risk. With sups without human studies they are of course more risky but they are selling it to those who want it. If a company makes a 300 mg caf pill vs a common 200 mg because some people want or only response to higher doses are they being unsafe or catering to those who want and respond to it? Both but that's where you decide if it's for you.
I lost count of how many alfalfa, lettuce, meat recalls there have been many have died from bacteria poisoning. Tons of drug companies have had recalls but we still use their products. I feel sups is viewed differently by most as shadier but it really is case by to case to me anyway.
The opioid crisis sucks I'm with you on that and we need better safer options. Drug companies are working on it but it's going to be awhile. Kratom, CBD, tianeptine are all available now and are arguably safer options. I always have rather options even with potential safety issues than have no option. I'm not with the antivax groups but I will says conventional medicine is not always the most effective or best choice in every case. We need other options and sups help fill that void. Now let's hope they don't get over regulated to the point most of the brands here are gone in a few years or 2-5x the cost. I don't think anyone wants that.
See, I can agree with most of what you are saying - to a degree. I feel like our arguments and beliefs aren't 180 degrees from each other, but maybe 30 or 40 degrees from each other. We're going in the same direction. It's a matter of where the line is drawn and figuring out how to draw it.
I'm all for options, even if it isn't generally accepted in medicine - sometimes things work and we just don't know they work yet.
But on the same hand, I REALLY think it goes too far a lot of times with people making these outlandish claims that get repeated and people think they are true, and there is no basis in science at all - or worse, some science that is misinterpreted and blown out of proportion so it seems factual (look at this reference!) but is way off. I mean, look at all the apple cider vinegar people out there. I'll be the first to say there may be some science pointing to SOME effects from acetic acid. But will it cure half the stuff that they say it will as effectively as they say it will? No way. And it can be risky because even though the side effects of this may be relatively safe, the fact someone starts relying on it thinking it will do things it won't could have an impact on the care they receive. No different than someone using opioids for chronic pain - the evidence wasn't there, but it was often repeated as fact and even doctors believed it. It isn't just about being smart or dumb, and often the smartest people can find ways to justify stupid things in their heads that less intelligent people wouldn't.
And I'm all for people being able to fight for their own lives - but you are focused on one resource and I am maybe focused on another. You are focused on the availability of the hard materials. I am focused on the availability of the knowledge - if something were proven, it would be more widely used.
I also think our standard of proof can be a little low. Often, it takes quite a bit to prove something. Gravity had to be tested quite a bit before it became a law. It took Stephen Hawking to get certain ideas about black holes accepted by the physics community. It takes a lot of work.
As is often the case in these debates, it seems like there is probably more agreement than disagreement, but the details/approach are what create the debate.