Banquo said:
...There is so much quack science (just read through this thread), fraud, and even danger involved with some of these supplements that's it is surprising that this fails. More consumer protection and enforcement would be nice but prohibition would be too much, imo.
Thank you for having the common sense to agree/admit that prohibition would be too much. As for quack science, I'm quite sure that one could find a great deal of "quackery" within the world of
approved conventional, pharmaceutically based medical treatment, too. I believe that the term should be expanded from it's Stephen Barrett-ish definition, to include
continued government approval despite known risks. I know it's a bit trite to reference the Vioxx scandal, but need we/they so harshly criticize a supplement which may be gently effective and very safe, or perhaps take more time to work if used in conjunction with a treatment plan that involves the patient as an individual person, when they knowingly approve a dangerous drug, allowing at least 27,785 heart attacks and deaths (perhaps more, this is a 2004 figure I believe)?
If that isn't quackery, I don't know what is. (Before anyone pulls out a report of some herb not doing what was claimed it would, you know what I mean. I'm simply attempting to expand people's idea of what junk science truly is - when it involves putting people's lives at risk, knowingly, for profit).
Need I also remind you that certain studies on, vitamins for example, were subtly tampered with, using synthetic substitutes, which in some cases
can cause disorder and disease in the body. It's kind of like that old "all saturated fat is bad for you"
"study" from maybe some 50 or 60 years ago if I recall - basically, the vegetable oil industry, wanted more of the pie of cash, published a study stating that coconut oil was linked to heart disease, etc. - the things which too many people have blindly attributed to healthy fat. Of course what they didn't disclose at that time was that the "evil coconut oil" they studied
had been hydrogenated - and we all (I hope) know that chemically altering dietary fats is a great way to promote disease.
glitterbizkit, I know it all sounds utterly ridiculous! That's because "they" ARE utterly ridiculous. They are profit-minded bigboy bullies who are scared because "nerdy little alternative health" is suddenly outwitting them, and so they try to tagteam him, away from the prying eyes of...the guidance councilor, the teachers, the principle, parents, and other kids (congress, the natural health industry, practitioners, patients, etc., to fill out this fun little analogy). Woe befall those who wallow in the apathy brought on by the fact that it sounds crazy enough to be a conspiracy theory.
dbailey11, thanks very much for signing. Yours is one more voice demanding the liberty to live healthily which we deserve to have intact, not trampled by the nonsensical actions of a greedy corporate entity. You see correctly.
lacey k, thank you for posting that link and your support, you're on the money. Everyone should visit it, and the others I posted to get a grasp of the lunacy that this and Codex Alimentarius disgustingly embraces. I've had skepticism in my life before.
And don't get me wrong. People are taking action against it all the time...this is kind of like some David and Goliath shit, no?
----------------------
R.ticle One