I'll pass over your being OK that if stupid people make the wrong buying decisions, they die. That's every person's right though. If they want you to be their savior then let them ask for your help. Why do you feel that you have the right to force it on them? Even if they do want your help, what right do you have to force it on the rest of us that emphatically don't want your help? Dr. Mary Ruwart's personal website is frustratingly short of material... You might want to check it again. Her book is listed there as available for download. Here's the relevant chapter: http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/chap6.htmlHere's the the bibliography page: http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/references.htmlIf you have other references that contradict hers, please link them. It won't do to just say "she's biased and there are thousands of other researchers that take a different view". Show me. |
|
|
|
I actually half-agree with the implications of your post. I think that in the modern age the FDA's most important role is not punishing fraud and dangerous practices (the fines they issue, when they issue them, are usually trivial compared to the company's profits) but in revealing such practices so that they can be confronted with civil suits, bad publicity, and marketplace shunning. The information is disseminated rapidly and widely through private channels, and people pay attention to it, after the initial disclosure. I don't think that this information would be efficiently disclosed in the absence of government action, though.
For a modern example look at the nutritional supplements market, where the FDA has very limited regulatory authority. Independent academic testing has revealed wide quality variance between brands and even different batches of the same brand's product in the case of (e.g.) probiotic supplements. Nutritional supplements are also often promoted with scientifically dubious claims of pharmaceutical-like action that would not pass muster if they were regulated as pharmaceuticals. Private for-profit agencies are not providing the transparency and verification that the government has eschewed in this largely unregulated area. Quackery also doesn't seem to be effectively punished by marketplace discrimination. I am all for consenting and informed adults taking any sort of risk they like, but I won't defend the right of sellers to peddle nonsense and the right of buyers to be fooled by it. Is there fraud taking place? If so, why aren't these companies being sued out of business? Fraud is and should be illegal. If there is no fraud taking place then what exactly are you complaining about? It's your responsibility to learn about a product before you buy it. Also, vitamins aren't prescribed by a doctor. Comparing how doctors recommend medication vs. the average joe shopping at GNC doesn't really work. A few people being irresponsible is not an excuse to deny the rest of us our personal freedoms. That's the argument from principle. If that doesn't convince you then here's the argument from consequences. http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2009/03/25/mary-ruwart-deadly-secrets-behind-soaring-pharmaceutical-prices/Watch the video in that link. The doctor estimates that 4.7 million people have died from delays by the FDA of drugs that were eventually declared safe. She estimates that another 4 to 16 million people were killed by not being allowed access to drugs that are safe but couldn't be jumped through the FDA's hoops. How many lives has the FDA saved? She says about 7,000 and even says that if that number is off by a factor of 100 that 700,000 people is still a lot less than 4.7 million people if you only count the delays. Some people will die either way. The way you're proposing makes drugs cost more, makes healthcare have to be rationed sparingly and kills even more people. |
|
|
|
You don't have the right to stop people organising society, even if its only to make sure they have access to Coca-Cola.
You can organize how ever you want. Just don't force me to be part of it. Why don't I have the right not to be forced into some organization? At root what you are proposing is an authoritarian society where people can't regulate for the improvement of their lives. Fighting for my freedom to do everything except injure other people or their property is proposing an authoritarian society? How do you go from "maximizing personal freedom" to the exact opposite? |
|
|
|
It doesn't matter what I did in the past.
You can think so, but you can't force others too... That's a single sentence taken out of context. The point is, you can't call me a hypocrite unless you can show that my previous policy was never to insult people that insulted me first. You catch me from this moment on, you'll have made a point. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin2cash - thats an implementation issue in your country. Here in the UK things work fine.
Evidence? Show me some numbers or I'll have to assume that western medicine is pretty much similar. |
|
|
|
Actually if their behaviour affects other people, its perfectly OK to interfere. Everything "affects" everyone else. If I buy BTC for a really high price, it raises the price for other people that want to buy BTC. Do we outlaw that too? No, of course not. All that matters is that your rights aren't violated. You have the right not to have you or your property touched without permission unless in self-defense. You don't have the right to brand names. Sorry. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the link. The relevant part in the video is at 57:06 where the doctor speaking states that the pharmaceutical companies didn't need the patent system before FDA regulations. What mattered was being first-to-market because even when there was a second-to-market, the first-to-market still kept 80% to 90% of the customers. It was only because of the FDA regulations, which made the costs so high to develop new drugs, that the patent system became so important. In other words, get rid of the FDA at the same time you get rid of patents and we will have safe drugs, cheaper and faster. I think this is the nail in the coffin for intellectual property. Thanks again. The FDA regulations are there for a reason. Bad drugs kill people. If your idea is to allow unregulated drug sales is implemented, some people will die for no good reason. Watch the video in that link. The doctor estimates that 4.7 million people have died from delays by the FDA of drugs that were eventually declared safe. She estimates that another 4 to 16 million people were killed by not being allowed access to drugs that are safe but couldn't be jumped through the FDA's hoops. How many lives has the FDA saved? She says about 7,000 and even says that if that number is off by a factor of 100 that 700,000 people is still a lot less than 4.7 million people if you only count the delays. Some people will die either way. The way you're proposing makes drugs cost more, makes healthcare have to be rationed more sparingly and kills people. That's even ignoring the fact that government intervention in voluntary human interactions is immoral. All around, your way of doing things is bad. |
|
|
|
Or a system that allows you the freedom to sell bad food, causes people to die and forces the rest of the community to take their kids into care. People already die. Your ideal system is broken and has no mechanism to punish people for these deaths. It's business as usual so why would you expect it to get better? Now we have food safety done, we are still left with patents and trademarks. Your proposal is that instead of relying on the free market supported by patent law to produce Blackberries, Ford, Intel, medical research and other such good things, we should rely on charity. Competition, not charity. If you have your way, my standard of living will fall. Why bother? No, it won't. You should bother because it's immoral to interfere between two consent adults, no matter what they want to do. |
|
|
|
Guys who run small business need to learn how to stay out of politics, lest they like to lose customers. You lost me, Bro. I'm quittin yer operation.
I'm not anti-abortion either, just sick of self righteous people using my money for their screwed up political views. I understand but I'd rather you know exactly who you are dealing with. I'm a libertarian and pro-choice. It's better you find out now rather than later. I'm not running this service to get rich. That's why I don't charge transaction fees for trades. I'm running it so that people that want to deal only in cash can do so. If you value my silence more than my service, so be it. You aren't upsetting me. Thanks for the business anyways. |
|
|
|
And thus, the research stops unless there is a patent system. As pointed out here, that's false. |
|
|
|
Lots of average people still get phished for credit cards on the Internet every day. All they lose is a few nights sleep. But if the same people make the same level of mistakes with food, their kids will die. And without a food safety regulator, that will happen a lot. Then they are unfit to be parents and their remaining kids should be taken away from them. You seem to object people having the right to trade a small freedom, namely the right to sell food in any old way they choose, with a big freedom, namely the right to eat safely anywhere. Why? Its a good trade. Unless you explicitly want to sell unsafe food, you lose nothing. You can trade whatever you want. I object to you trading my freedom. It's not up to you to decide who I should trust. Personally, I'd rather trust my safety to free market businesses that have to compete with each other rather than a single bloated agency with a CYA-mentality that's allowed to stagnate. |
|
|
|
It's almost as unfunny as Ron Paul's views on abortion. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the link. The relevant part in the video is at 57:06 where the doctor speaking states that the pharmaceutical companies didn't need the patent system before FDA regulations. What mattered was being first-to-market because even when there was a second-to-market, the first-to-market still kept 80% to 90% of the customers. It was only because of the FDA regulations, which made the costs so high to develop new drugs, that the patent system became so important. In other words, get rid of the FDA at the same time you get rid of patents and we will have safe drugs, cheaper and faster. I think this is the nail in the coffin for intellectual property. Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Supposedly we all have alien souls trapped in our bodies and that's why we have crime and depression and sickness and all that crap. That's because Cthulhu killed them all. |
|
|
|
Everything is wrong with it, I will not associate with theists or deists of any kind good sir.
You will die in the first wave. |
|
|
|
Pastafarianism has been invaded by theists who want to believe that pastafar is a real god and not an ironic one.
What's wrong with that? I believe Cthulhu is real. I worship him. I look forward to his return. |
|
|
|
I'm just going to second clicking on the link jgraham provided. It's good for some definite lulz as moron2cash's (oops, there I go again) hypocricy is exposed.
No offense, but I'm starting to get the feeling you are desperate for attention. It doesn't matter what I did in the past. This is my policy moving forward. If anyone catches me insulting someone from this point on they'll have a valid claim to hypocrisy. I tried going toe-to-toe with the insults but it's gotten old. I'm trying something new. If anyone doesn't like it or understand it, too bad. Things change. |
|
|
|
Will the atheist pool be open to agnostics as well?  I'm not sure. |
|
|
|
|
I worship Cthulhu. Can I still join?
|
|
|
|
I sent an email to sales@bitcoin2cash.com 21 hours ago, requesting that my account be restored on the new server. No reply yet... Check your email. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
