Response from my senator -Supp Safety Act

[StackedCop]

 

[StackedCop]

 

[Orangatang]

Here's the response from my senator...

Dear Oragatang:

Thank you for sharing your opposition to the Dietary Supplement Safety Act - which was introduced during the 111th Congress.

I agree with your view that consumers should have access to supplements and foods that are beneficial to their health. Approaching health care proactively, particularly through a nutritious diet, can go a long way in our nation’s fight against chronic disease.

While I believe it is critically important to appropriately regulate all human and animal medicines, including dietary supplements, we must be careful not to create needless and counterproductive obstacles preventing beneficial access to these products. I supported the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) and will fight any attempt to undermine the dietary supplement industry or interfere with a consumer’s right to obtain safe and effective supplements.

I will continue to monitor this important issue and will keep your views in mind should the Dietary Supplement Safety Act be reintroduced during the 112th Congress.

Thank you again for getting in touch with me.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown
United States Senator

 

[dsade]

Something needs to be done. So many companys make so many bogus claims and bogus products that may or may not work. I mean lot of the herbal stuff for us, how do we know if it works or not with out a peer review on the product you know.

Then don't buy it.

 

[dsade]

Here's the response from my senator...

Dear Oragatang:

Thank you for sharing your opposition to the Dietary Supplement Safety Act - which was introduced during the 111th Congress.

I agree with your view that consumers should have access to supplements and foods that are beneficial to their health. Approaching health care proactively, particularly through a nutritious diet, can go a long way in our nation’s fight against chronic disease.

While I believe it is critically important to appropriately regulate all human and animal medicines, including dietary supplements, we must be careful not to create needless and counterproductive obstacles preventing beneficial access to these products. I supported the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) and will fight any attempt to undermine the dietary supplement industry or interfere with a consumer’s right to obtain safe and effective supplements.

I will continue to monitor this important issue and will keep your views in mind should the Dietary Supplement Safety Act be reintroduced during the 112th Congress.

Thank you again for getting in touch with me.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown
United States Senator

My senator too....this ass voted for the Food Regulation act several weeks ago.

 

[fadi]

I don't understand what the problem is.

1. The gov wants supplement companies to register. Any reason supplement companies shouldn't register as supplement companies? without the usual conspiracy theories that go around the boards.

2. The government wants the list of ingredients to be stated correctly on the labels and to ensure the ingredients are safe. Any supplement company planning on hiding ingredients, or using unsafe ingredients?

3. Any new ingredient should be proven safe first. This will highly impact small companies, which constitute the majority of the supplement companies true. But herbs are not regulated the same as pharm and chemicals. So what is the problem? if you are going to come up with a new chemical, make sure it is safe.

4. If there are adverse health risks, they must be reported. duh. Any supplement company does that today? they will blame the user, the internet, the gov., everyone but their bottomline greed.

Supplement companies will never self regulate. Anyone seen a bottle of SD or M1T? take two every morning as nutritional supplement? do not use more than 4 to 8 weeks?

The problem is that everyone is so afraid the supplement companies will finaly not be able to come up with that magic pill that will solve their problem. We're perpetually waiting for that magic pill that every time a supplement company comes up with and promise 8 to 10lbs gain then move to the next one.

Let them be regulated. The gov is not saying they cannot sell. They are saying they must be held accountable if they do choose to sell.

The girl that cuts my hair must have a license to cut my hair, but the company that gives me health products to put inside my body should not?

 

[dsade]

I don't understand what the problem is.

1. The gov wants supplement companies to register. Any reason supplement companies shouldn't register as supplement companies? without the usual conspiracy theories that go around the boards.

2. The government wants the list of ingredients to be stated correctly on the labels and to ensure the ingredients are safe. Any supplement company planning on hiding ingredients, or using unsafe ingredients?

not listing ingredients is already illegal and covered by FTC regulations. Why do you want to make government/taxes bigger because one agency doesn't do their job?

3. Any new ingredient should be proven safe first. This will highly impact small companies, which constitute the majority of the supplement companies true. But herbs are not regulated the same as pharm and chemicals. So what is the problem? if you are going to come up with a new chemical, make sure it is safe.

Safe using whose criteria? Ephedra was used safely for thousands of year. A politician and corrupt agency twists facts around and outlaws the herb. How many thousands of people did Ephedra help to lose weight? How many companies and suppliers were put out of business by this sleazebag move? Are the current FDA standards sufficient (you know...the ones that cost a billion dollars per compound), since the number of drugs WITH FDA approval being pulled off market for being grossly unsafe is significant. What's the acceptable side effect rate? 1%? 0.1%?

4. If there are adverse health risks, they must be reported. duh. Any supplement company does that today? they will blame the user, the internet, the gov., everyone but their bottomline greed.

Part of GMP regulations...already law.
Supplement companies will never self regulate. Anyone seen a bottle of SD or M1T? take two every morning as nutritional supplement? do not use more than 4 to 8 weeks?

[/quote] What about them? 4-AD and 1-AD were VERY safe products...but while you have have your body surgically mutilated in the name of vanity, you are not allowed to take herbally/diet based hormone percursors? Why not?

The problem is that everyone is so afraid the supplement companies will finaly not be able to come up with that magic pill that will solve their problem. We're perpetually waiting for that magic pill that every time a supplement company comes up with and promise 8 to 10lbs gain then move to the next one.

Let them be regulated. The gov is not saying they cannot sell. They are saying they must be held accountable if they do choose to sell.

The girl that cuts my hair must have a license to cut my hair, but the company that gives me health products to put inside my body should not?

no...the problem is that there is ZERO criteria in place and that the government agents are not to be trusted. Look at the history of compounds they have tried to ban and/or limit dosage of. Oh...we suddenly don't like Yohimbine? BANNED. Oh, you have your next 10 years business plan and $100k in inventory...well SCREW YOU! Oh...Big Pharma is planning on releasing a Yohimbine-based drug? Again..SCREW YOU.

Government agencies exist for one purpose and one purpose only...to expand their own power.

 

[specmike]

I don't understand what the problem is.

1. The gov wants supplement companies to register. Any reason supplement companies shouldn't register as supplement companies? without the usual conspiracy theories that go around the boards.

2. The government wants the list of ingredients to be stated correctly on the labels and to ensure the ingredients are safe. Any supplement company planning on hiding ingredients, or using unsafe ingredients?

3. Any new ingredient should be proven safe first. This will highly impact small companies, which constitute the majority of the supplement companies true. But herbs are not regulated the same as pharm and chemicals. So what is the problem? if you are going to come up with a new chemical, make sure it is safe.

4. If there are adverse health risks, they must be reported. duh. Any supplement company does that today? they will blame the user, the internet, the gov., everyone but their bottomline greed.

Supplement companies will never self regulate. Anyone seen a bottle of SD or M1T? take two every morning as nutritional supplement? do not use more than 4 to 8 weeks?

The problem is that everyone is so afraid the supplement companies will finaly not be able to come up with that magic pill that will solve their problem. We're perpetually waiting for that magic pill that every time a supplement company comes up with and promise 8 to 10lbs gain then move to the next one.

Let them be regulated. The gov is not saying they cannot sell. They are saying they must be held accountable if they do choose to sell.

The girl that cuts my hair must have a license to cut my hair, but the company that gives me health products to put inside my body should not?

Google is your friend. The supplement industry IS regulated by the FDA already.

DSHEA of 1994

Dietary Supplements
FDA regulates dietary supplements under a different set of regulations than those covering "conventional" foods and drug products (prescription and Over-the-Counter). Under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), the dietary supplement manufacturer is responsible for ensuring that a dietary supplement is safe before it is marketed. FDA is responsible for taking action against any unsafe dietary supplement product after it reaches the market. Generally, manufacturers do not need to register their products with FDA nor get FDA approval before producing or selling dietary supplements.* Manufacturers must make sure that product label information is truthful and not misleading.

FDA's post-marketing responsibilities include monitoring safety, e.g. voluntary dietary supplement adverse event reporting, and product information, such as labeling, claims, package inserts, and accompanying literature. The Federal Trade Commission regulates dietary supplement advertising.

The issue is that this new act will give the FDA more direct control like what they have with current pharmaceuticals. People here at this forum and many like it, the supplement companies, and others are VERY concerned that this will lead to ignorant regulation of and abuse by the FDA. Look at the prohormone ban and the subsequent erosion of these products since the ban. It's clear that increased regulation by corrupt and inept government agency is NOT going to make this industry better. In fact, they will most likely royally fark it up. If the government is so damned concerned about regulating what needs regulation, they should not have been asleep at the wheel for the last 15-20 years on sub prime lending. But I digress.

Then, add in the legislators that are in bed with the pharmas. Every single supplement DSHEA compliant product that hurts or is percieved to hurt pharmaceutical sales can simply be banned at their whim.

This new legislations is NOT a good idea. This industry is already policed by the DEA and FDA. We already have laws to cover all of this. We don't need any more new ones. PERIOD.

 

[specmike]

What about them? 4-AD and 1-AD were VERY safe products...but while you have have your body surgically mutilated in the name of vanity, you are not allowed to take herbally/diet based hormone percursors? Why not?.........................

Government agencies exist for one purpose and one purpose only...to expand their own power.

Well said, you beat me to the punch.

While we're on the subject, how can a person voluntarily go to a doctor for gender change? Girls can take testosterone and other hormones, grow a beard and become Butch the butch. Guys can take estrogen, get boobs, and have their cack chopped off. But I can't use a few safe compounds to rehab from neck surgery my own way while adding muscle and reducing fat to make my wife all dreamy over me again?

Explain that to me.

 

[fadi]

Google is your friend. The supplement industry IS regulated by the FDA already.

DSHEA of 1994



The issue is that this new act will give the FDA more direct control like what they have with current pharmaceuticals. People here at this forum and many like it, the supplement companies, and others are VERY concerned that this will lead to ignorant regulation of and abuse by the FDA. Look at the prohormone ban and the subsequent erosion of these products since the ban. It's clear that increased regulation by corrupt and inept government agency is NOT going to make this industry better. In fact, they will most likely royally fark it up. If the government is so damned concerned about regulating what needs regulation, they should not have been asleep at the wheel for the last 15-20 years on sub prime lending. But I digress.

Then, add in the legislators that are in bed with the pharmas. Every single supplement DSHEA compliant product that hurts or is percieved to hurt pharmaceutical sales can simply be banned at their whim.

This new legislations is NOT a good idea. This industry is already policed by the DEA and FDA. We already have laws to cover all of this. We don't need any more new ones. PERIOD.

I read it and I don't see the same picture you are painting. Are you saying the FDA will force companies NOT to sell vitamins and herbs? they are going to outlaw them? or are you making that leap of judgement? because I am not reading that. Supplement companies will be able to use just about every product they have today unless it is unsafe. They can use caffeine, vitamins, herbs, etc. so no big deal.

If the company is going to import from china, then the company must be held responsible for the quality and purity of what is being imported.

prohormones are banned for a reason. Rather than comply with the rules, companies marketing steroids as "supplements" in violation of the law to make profit. To satisfy the very small minority, again to make profit, they are forcing the govenment to regulate the industry. If the industry self regulated, then we would not have that problem to begin with.

 

[dsade]

Well said, you beat me to the punch.

While we're on the subject, how can a person voluntarily go to a doctor for gender change? Girls can take testosterone and other hormones, grow a beard and become Butch the butch. Guys can take estrogen, get boobs, and have their cack chopped off. But I can't use a few safe compounds to rehab from neck surgery my own way while adding muscle and reducing fat to make my wife all dreamy over me again?

Explain that to me.

I just found out that my city has a "gender reassignment fund" set up. Seriously.

 

[specmike]

I just found out that my city has a "gender reassignment fund" set up. Seriously.

I'll bet you any amount of money that there will be some neglected, hungry, malnourished, unhealthy kids within 5 miles of the facility that houses that office. Just think of what that money could do for them. Get them into a Boys n Girls club or something similar, let someone feed them some healthy food, and show them the benefits of proper diet and exercise.

But, the money will be much better spent I'm sure.

 

[StackedCop]

More laws are not the answer... And that's coming for a cop!! I do not use PH but this goes waaaaay beyond hormones. This is a classic example of a gov't agency that doesn't do their job and what is THEIR {FDA} solution to THEIR laziness and lack of doing THEIR job? MORE LAWS! That ain't right man not in America!

It's also about money and profit...

 

[schizm]

my company is having our annual safety/health fair tomorrow morning...in which they bring in various vendors to set up booths in our lobby/cafe area and hand out literature n what not...among those attending will be someone from the FDA...I may print this thread off and slap em with it...repeatedly....:aargh:

 

[fadi]

not listing ingredients is already illegal and covered by FTC regulations. Why do you want to make government/taxes bigger because one agency doesn't do their job?

Since they are doing it already, what is the big deal to make sure it is done correctly? I don't trust joe the supplement maker as much as I trust NOW FOODs. Regulating them can help build that trust and help move the industry forward. How much more taxes are we having to pay for this?

Safe using whose criteria? Ephedra was used safely for thousands of year. A politician and corrupt agency twists facts around and outlaws the herb. How many thousands of people did Ephedra help to lose weight? How many companies and suppliers were put out of business by this sleazebag move? Are the current FDA standards sufficient (you know...the ones that cost a billion dollars per compound), since the number of drugs WITH FDA approval being pulled off market for being grossly unsafe is significant. What's the acceptable side effect rate? 1%? 0.1%?

Not the Ephedra argument. Let's not regulate anything because ephedra got banned.
Supplement companies rode the Ephedra bandwagon to death and shoved it down people's throught as the ultimate fat burner capitalizing on the fat nation problem. There was no regulation of proper dose, how often to be taken to be safe. Is it risky? the fact that people died, makes it risky. Was it because they are fat idiots? sure. Do they die from McD everyday? sure. But so what? it got banned, so did many other things.

What about them? 4-AD and 1-AD were VERY safe products...but while you have have your body surgically mutilated in the name of vanity, you are not allowed to take herbally/diet based hormone percursors? Why not?

4-AD and 1-AD were as safe as Vitamins? I'm sure 1-AD and 4-AD did not cause shutdown, gyno, or any other issues. Same with M1T. they are the safest supplements on the market. They were correctly marketed as "Supplements" to be taken daily.

no...the problem is that there is ZERO criteria in place and that the government agents are not to be trusted. Look at the history of compounds they have tried to ban and/or limit dosage of. Oh...we suddenly don't like Yohimbine? BANNED. Oh, you have your next 10 years business plan and $100k in inventory...well SCREW YOU! Oh...Big Pharma is planning on releasing a Yohimbine-based drug? Again..SCREW YOU.

Government agencies exist for one purpose and one purpose only...to expand their own power.

Sure the gov't banned supstances. because of idiots who abused them. So? how exactly not regulating the industry solves the problem? They will continue to ban substances and companies will comply. Registered or not. the issue is the other supplement companies that do not want to comply and want to test new stuff on us.

Is the argument is that now companies cannot sell prohormones? yes, they shouldn't according to the law. some will do it as underground type products.

 

[dsade]

Since they are doing it already, what is the big deal to make sure it is done correctly? I don't trust joe the supplement maker as much as I trust NOW FOODs. Regulating them can help build that trust and help move the industry forward. How much more taxes are we having to pay for this?



Not the Ephedra argument. Let's not regulate anything because ephedra got banned.
Supplement companies rode the Ephedra bandwagon to death and shoved it down people's throught as the ultimate fat burner capitalizing on the fat nation problem. There was no regulation of proper dose, how often to be taken to be safe. Is it risky? the fact that people died, makes it risky. Was it because they are fat idiots? sure. Do they die from McD everyday? sure. But so what? it got banned, so did many other things.



4-AD and 1-AD were as safe as Vitamins? I'm sure 1-AD and 4-AD did not cause shutdown, gyno, or any other issues. Same with M1T. they are the safest supplements on the market. They were correctly marketed as "Supplements" to be taken daily.



Sure the gov't banned supstances. because of idiots who abused them. So? how exactly not regulating the industry solves the problem? They will continue to ban substances and companies will comply. Registered or not. the issue is the other supplement companies that do not want to comply and want to test new stuff on us.

Is the argument is that now companies cannot sell prohormones? yes, they shouldn't according to the law. some will do it as underground type products.

You're trolling right?

Recheck your arguments, then try again.

 

[fadi]

You're trolling right?

Recheck your arguments, then try again.

That's your reply? trolling? my argument stands. Supplement companies hate the new law, which is understandable. I'm sure they did not cause it.

 

[dsade]

That's your reply? trolling? my argument stands. Supplement companies hate the new law, which is understandable. I'm sure they did not cause it.

You've ignored every counter-point and explanation offered, then offered some hyperbole (quote anyone who said 4-AD and 1-AD were just like vitamins. The fact remains they are found in nature/diet and DSHEA tells the gov't very clearly to **** off...but nope, banned anyway).

Supplement industry is already regulated. Dont want to chance herbs, etc? Don't buy them.

So...once again, since you conveniently decided to ignore it....whose criteria of safety will be used to determine if something is safe, and will it be as awesomely ineffective at the current FDA standards for prescription meds? Will it cost a billion dollars per product?

 

[specmike]

Anyone that believes that increased government regulation is going to make this industry better is fooling themselves.

Since they are doing it already, what is the big deal to make sure it is done correctly? I don't trust joe the supplement maker as much as I trust NOW FOODs. Regulating them can help build that trust and help move the industry forward. How much more taxes are we having to pay for this?

You DO trust the government to do something right and spend OUR money wisely?

As far as taxes, you can bet that the money needed simply to research, draft, and present this bill to congress will go rapidly into the 6 and then 7 figures range. Do you have any idea how our legislative branch works??? It's probably in the 6 figure range already.

Sure the gov't banned supstances. because of idiots who abused them. So? how exactly not regulating the industry solves the problem? They will continue to ban substances and companies will comply. Registered or not. the issue is the other supplement companies that do not want to comply and want to test new stuff on us.

What part of this do you not understand??? The industry IS regulated by multiple government agencies already! Adding more laws and responsibilities to the agencies will not make them do their jobs. This is simply a greedy power grab to empower corrupt politicians to further the needs of the businesses that oppose or compete with the supplement industry.

Also, to address the ephedra argument, weight loss was not the only benefit of using ephedra. I used it in SMALL sensible does when cycling and taking karate. That ban was stupid. If you drink enough water, it will kill you quickly.

For bonus points, WITHOUT using Google, name or make an accurate reference to 3 people that died as a direct result of using ephedra. And, do not include 380lb+ MN Vikings O-lineman Korey Stringer or that MLB baseball player....Phillies or Reds, I can't remember. RIP to both of them, no disrespect intended to them.

While you are at it, name 1 person EVER identified as dying from PHs etc covered by this new legislation or even the PH ban.

 

[specmike]

That's your reply? trolling? my argument stands. Supplement companies hate the new law, which is understandable. I'm sure they did not cause it.

You have presented ZERO facts in your replies to contradict anything that has been posted for you. Got any?

 

[fadi]

You've ignored every counter-point and explanation offered, then offered some hyperbole (quote anyone who said 4-AD and 1-AD were just like vitamins. The fact remains they are found in nature/diet and DSHEA tells the gov't very clearly to **** off...but nope, banned anyway).

Supplement industry is already regulated. Dont want to chance herbs, etc? Don't buy them.

So...once again, since you conveniently decided to ignore it....whose criteria of safety will be used to determine if something is safe, and will it be as awesomely ineffective at the current FDA standards for prescription meds? Will it cost a billion dollars per product?

My bad if I missed the argument you were making about 1-AD, 4-AD. Since they are derived from DSHEA, should the gov. be able to ban them? They think they could. Did the supplement company take them to court to defend it or did they choose to move to another compound that is not banned?

From safety standpoint, should they have been banned because they did harm and they were deceptively marketed as natural supplement to be taken daily per the label?

Lets take another example. M1T, SD, etc. Are they safe per the label instructions?

 

[dsade]

My bad if I missed the argument you were making about 1-AD, 4-AD. Since they are derived from DSHEA, should the gov. be able to ban them? They think they could. Did the supplement company take them to court to defend it or did they choose to move to another compound that is not banned?

From safety standpoint, should they have been banned because they did harm and they were deceptively marketed as natural supplement to be taken daily per the label?

Lets take another example. M1T, SD, etc. Are they safe per the label instructions?

No, the government should not be able to ban them. Yeah, supplement companies generally have million of dollars in cash just sitting around to fight this out against the bottomless pocketed government. However, there WAS a coalition of supplement companies that fought tooth and nail to have the ban in 2004 quashed. Panic, corruption (likely pharma companies seeing a threat to the HRT market) and ignorance prevailed, so it was passed anyway without explanation.

For your next point, shall we start by defining your word "safe"?

 

[specmike]

Lets take another example. M1T, SD, etc. Are they safe per the label instructions?

No. Instead, let's use your tactic of no facts and posting more distracting questions.

The better question is, will this bill make the agencies involved do their jobs? If these products are not safe, then they are already violating existing laws.

The new legislation is simply regurgitating things you are presenting in typical redundant government fashion. IF the govt wanted to make sure that SD was safe, then the FDA and perhaps even the DEA already have the legal authority to do that. The FTC can enforce the label and advertising claims.

Here is McCains speech introducing the bill:

Like many of you, I am looking forward to watching the Super Bowl this Sunday and the Winter Olympics later this month. However, a little over a year ago the NFL suspended six players, including two players from one of the teams competing this Sunday, for violating the league’s anti-doping policy. Several of the players were surprised that they tested positive for a banned substance because they used a dietary supplement they believed to be safe and legal.

It is for precisely this reason that today Senators Dorgan and I are proud to introduce the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. All Americans should know the exact ingredients of any dietary supplement they use and the FDA must have the tools necessary to ensure the safety of dietary supplements.

This legislation would require dietary supplement manufactures to register with the FDA and fully disclose the ingredients contained in the supplement. Surveys have found that a majority of dietary supplement users believe the FDA approves the safety of dietary supplements prior to market introduction. However, that is not the case. In fact, dietary supplement manufacturers’ advertised claims of safety and effectiveness are not reviewed or approved by the FDA.

If you'd take the time to read the DSHEA, you'd find that it covers what this new bill is proposing. It's Department of Redundancy Department work at its finest with the added caveat of far more enforcement POWER than they currently have. However, power does NOT translate to ability or initiative. In other words, the FDA et al are too inept and corrupt to do their jobs properly now. But, with the new legislation, they can just wave their magic wand when they get a call from (insert lobbyist here) in lieu of doing their job the right way.

 

[fadi]

Anyone that believes that increased government regulation is going to make this industry better is fooling themselves.

You DO trust the government to do something right and spend OUR money wisely?

As far as taxes, you can bet that the money needed simply to research, draft, and present this bill to congress will go rapidly into the 6 and then 7 figures range. Do you have any idea how our legislative branch works??? It's probably in the 6 figure range already.

I pay more tax a year than some earn a year, so I know how much tax is waisted. But to say the argument here is that the gov't should not try to regulate an industry because it causes more taxes? Why regulate pharm., doctors, lawyers, etc. because we end up paying more tax?

I was mainly saying there are better arguments to be made than talking about having to pay more tax. We the consumers spending more money on supplements that do not work than we do pay tax.

What part of this do you not understand??? The industry IS regulated by multiple government agencies already! Adding more laws and responsibilities to the agencies will not make them do their jobs. This is simply a greedy power grab to empower corrupt politicians to further the needs of the businesses that oppose or compete with the supplement industry.

Ok, so this is an extra layer of law that is already enforced? can you tell me exactly what the impact will be since the law is already being enforced?

Also, to address the ephedra argument, weight loss was not the only benefit of using ephedra. I used it in SMALL sensible does when cycling and taking karate. That ban was stupid. If you drink enough water, it will kill you quickly.

If you drink enough water? how much is "enough" water? Like I said, ephedra got banned because stupid people died. The fact remains that stupid people died, so the gov't reacted. Let's not regulate anything because ephedra got banned.

For bonus points, WITHOUT using Google, name or make an accurate reference to 3 people that died as a direct result of using ephedra. And, do not include 380lb+ MN Vikings O-lineman Korey Stringer or that MLB baseball player....Phillies or Reds, I can't remember. RIP to both of them, no disrespect intended to them.

So can I name 3 references without naming the high profile ones? Ok I give, I cannot name 3 references without googling it. It must have not happened then.

While you are at it, name 1 person EVER identified as dying from PHs etc covered by this new legislation or even the PH ban.

The gov't doesn't ban just in the case of death, I'm sure you are aware of that. The whole ban thing started because of McGwire at the time and kids rushing to buy prohormones thinking they can be better athletes. Stupid kids, sure. No argument there. In fact, stupid people should be encouraged to die.

The argument I am making is that the supplement industry is not self regulating. They cannot self regulate because the few that do opens the door for new wannabies that will find something to sell and end up with the same problem. M1T should not have been marketed as a supplement. Steroids should not be advertised in magazines like they do today.

If the law requires supplement companies to register and only deal with unharmful list of substances and be held accountable, as a consumer, why should we fight it? It means I will be able to trust the supplement companies since they are regulated.

 

[dsade]

If the law requires supplement companies to register and only deal with unharmful list of substances and be held accountable, as a consumer, why should we fight it? It means I will be able to trust the supplement companies since they are regulated.

You're showing yourself to be as ignorant as the government.

SO, for the THIRD time...show us your criteria of unharmful/safe. Since, with a working budget in the billions the FDA STILL allows deadly prescription meds through that hamr people at a MUCH higher rate than any supplement ever has, why they should have the authority, without specific guidelines, to "disapprove" anything they wish for any reason?

 

[specmike]

But to say the argument here is that the gov't should not try to regulate an industry because it causes more taxes? .

I am going to stop reading and replying to your posts until you can show that you have read and also understood the current DSHEA. It is pointless to present anything to you since you refuse to read.

THERE ARE A MINIMUM OF 3 AGENCIES REGULATING THIS INDUSTRY ALREADY!

If you simply have your mind made up and refuse to discuss this in an intelligent manner, man up and just say so.

To make it easy:

FDA regulates dietary supplements under a different set of regulations than those covering "conventional" foods and drug products (prescription and Over-the-Counter). Under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), the dietary supplement manufacturer is responsible for ensuring that a dietary supplement is safe before it is marketed. FDA is responsible for taking action against any unsafe dietary supplement product after it reaches the market. Generally, manufacturers do not need to register their products with FDA nor get FDA approval before producing or selling dietary supplements.* Manufacturers must make sure that product label information is truthful and not misleading.

FDA's post-marketing responsibilities include monitoring safety, e.g. voluntary dietary supplement adverse event reporting, and product information, such as labeling, claims, package inserts, and accompanying literature. The Federal Trade Commission regulates dietary supplement advertising.

You can read .... right?

EDIT:

Ok, so this is an extra layer of law that is already enforced? can you tell me exactly what the impact will be since the law is already being enforced?

I already did as have others in this thread. Again, you either refuse to read or cannot comprehend it.

 

[fadi]

No, the government should not be able to ban them. Yeah, supplement companies generally have million of dollars in cash just sitting around to fight this out against the bottomless pocketed government. However, there WAS a coalition of supplement companies that fought tooth and nail to have the ban in 2004 quashed. Panic, corruption (likely pharma companies seeing a threat to the HRT market) and ignorance prevailed, so it was passed anyway without explanation.

For your next point, shall we start by defining your word "safe"?

The argument being made in this thread is if they should regulate supplement companies though. Not if they should or should not ban substances. We are assuming if they regulate the companies, then they will ban more substances.

They are banning them without regulating the industry, so regulating it should not impact the banning practice. Again, it does mean it will be harder for companies to come up with designer steroids yes. But it can also lead to more trusted products/companies on the market.

You can define safety anyway you like. M1T is NOT safe in any definition. Yet it did hit the market. SD is not safe, yet you can still buy it.

I had no problem with the argument that supplement companies can come up with their own products till they started marketing them in magazines and online as supplements. I think the industry crossed the line there and I lost faith in the industry.

And for the record, I did support the coalition at the time. I also donated money for legal fees to one of the supplement companies (sponsor on this site) that was fighting a raid by the FDA after the ban and threatened the owner with jail time).

But to say the industry not to blame for this problem is not correct. If the regulation means the supplement companies will be held accountable for their label and safety of their product, then I am for it.
I have not read anything about giving them an authority they do not already have and practice to ban more substances. They can ban substances Today.

 

[fadi]

I am going to stop reading and replying to your posts until you can show that you have read and also understood the current DSHEA. It is pointless to present anything to you since you refuse to read.

THERE ARE A MINIMUM OF 3 AGENCIES REGULATING THIS INDUSTRY ALREADY!

If you simply have your mind made up and refuse to discuss this in an intelligent manner, man up and just say so.

To make it easy:



You can read .... right?

You know. I don't know how am I going to sleep tonight knowing you're not reading my threads

 

[fadi]

You're showing yourself to be as ignorant as the government.

SO, for the THIRD time...show us your criteria of unharmful/safe. Since, with a working budget in the billions the FDA STILL allows deadly prescription meds through that hamr people at a MUCH higher rate than any supplement ever has, why they should have the authority, without specific guidelines, to "disapprove" anything they wish for any reason?

You are right. I am ignorant. Why don't you educate me on what safety criteria the industry self impose when coming up with supplements not to warrant a gov't response? As far as prescription meds, they do have sides. But they are administered with med supervision

Start by explaining to me the safety of M1T and SD please.

 

[specmike]

You know. I don't know how am I going to sleep tonight knowing you're not reading my threads

In IGNORANT BLISS of course.

 

[dsade]

The argument being made in this thread is if they should regulate supplement companies though. Not if they should or should not ban substances. We are assuming if they regulate the companies, then they will ban more substances.

They are banning them without regulating the industry, so regulating it should not impact the banning practice. Again, it does mean it will be harder for companies to come up with designer steroids yes. But it can also lead to more trusted products/companies on the market.

You can define safety anyway you like. M1T is NOT safe in any definition. Yet it did hit the market. SD is not safe, yet you can still buy it.

I had no problem with the argument that supplement companies can come up with their own products till they started marketing them in magazines and online as supplements. I think the industry crossed the line there and I lost faith in the industry.

And for the record, I did support the coalition at the time. I also donated money for legal fees to one of the supplement companies (sponsor on this site) that was fighting a raid by the FDA after the ban and threatened the owner with jail time).

But to say the industry not to blame for this problem is not correct. If the regulation means the supplement companies will be held accountable for their label and safety of their product, then I am for it.
I have not read anything about giving them an authority they do not already have and practice to ban more substances. They can ban substances Today.

Your whole position seems to be obsessed with steroids. Putting aside the "they should not be illegal anyway" argument, there is MUCH more at stake. Look up the recent Pyradoxamine scandal, and the FDA's efforts to ban a natural compound so that a Pharma company could patent it.

The statement needs to be made...again....that this will not be tolerated.

 

[HereToStudy]

This thread has gone ****ing retarded. If you don't think something is safe then don't take it. Don't tell me what I am able to do with my health and what a company that is following dshea can sell me. Regulate yourself. Want to cry a river about m1t or sd? Don't buy them.

 

[BigBlackGuy]

There are gun dealers. There are tobacco and alcohol dealers. These things exist and are inherently harmful in the WRONG HANDS. Tobacco isn't going to kill the guy who smokes a cigar once in a while, and alcohol isn't going to ruin the life of someone who drink once in awhile. Guns are safer in the hands of those who know how to properly wield them.

Supplements are the same. They are sold and they are bought. Sometimes they are bought by the people who know how to use them and sometimes they are bought by the people who don't know how to use them. Just because some people don't understand the risks AND/OR ignore them doesn't mean the government should ban them.

 

[DGA3]

There are gun dealers. There are tobacco and alcohol dealers. These things exist and are inherently harmful in the WRONG HANDS. Tobacco isn't going to kill the guy who smokes a cigar once in a while, and alcohol isn't going to ruin the life of someone who drink once in awhile. Guns are safer in the hands of those who know how to properly wield them.

Supplements are the same. They are sold and they are bought. Sometimes they are bought by the people who know how to use them and sometimes they are bought by the people who don't know how to use them. Just because some people don't understand the risks AND/OR ignore them doesn't mean the government should ban them.

That's it, right there.

I agree 100%. :biggthumpup:

'Nuff said.