supplements bill SB 722 is weak

I decided to have a look at SB 722. I see the poster who put the original
message here is a busy beaver on newsgroups. Here is a supplements biz
web site and their take on the bill:

http://www.metagenics.com/company/po...background.asp

I chose this one on purpose so not to be accused of bias. Even with the supplements biz spin, it is
clear the bill address the problems supplementss have had, as reported in the newws. It asks the biz
to report serious events from taking a supplements, to keep and make available if asked by the FD
adverse effects reported but not serious, serious is summerized on the web page and are just common
sense. If a serious event happens the FDA may ask a supplements biz to show the stuff is safe. The
bill will have a closer look at stuff containing stimulants, also defined, these products are those
most heard of in news accounts of injury and deaths. Now to hear the biz, you wouldn't be able to
get vit c anymore and supplementss would be banned, poppy ****. The level of regulation is not even
up to the level of what an aspirin at the drugstore requires. Come on, give us a break, the biz now
has an almost free hand and wants to continue it's free open selling suckers, ah I really meant
marketing, products which have been shown to often not contain what is on the label, has no way to
know if it works, and doesn't even permit even the weak provisions in the bill to say something
about being safe. The current law makes the suckers the lab rats, ifenough people are injured or die
the FDA can then take action.