Critics want supplement risks reported to FDA, correction

And they ignore the deaths and disabilities caused by
properly prescribed statin drugs. (but there's big money to
the pharmaceuticals for this...)

<[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
net.com...

Quoted message said:

Url before was incomplete:

tinyurl.com23yh4Open ↗

Yes I say it because it is so. If trade harmonization is to
be the case, which it is not in this instance, it will be
so regardless of the current or amended law. I once saw a
industry "talking points" list they suggested be brought up
when this issue was discussed, the red herring/strawman
about practices in other countries was among them, as were
others one sees here often. Even as you outline below, each
country is now doing it's own thing. Those products can be
sold here, if we refused then the trade agreements might
kick in as a restraint of trade issue, but this is not and
your fears are misplaced, the fda is not the eu or any
other country.

Quoted message said:

You say the actions of EU and EU national governments
aren't relavant? Nonsense, haven't you every heard of trade
harmonization? I used specific examples of what big
government does when it regulates nutrients. It justs says
"NO" or at least that is its primary inpulse. Try to buy
l-carnitine in Canada, you can't ....not without a
prescription. Nor can you in Australia, not isolate amino
acids. The Australian government is currently trying to
force these regulation down the throat of New Zealand. Try
to buy anything beyond a 100% of the French RDI and you
won't be able to in France. Why becauses they have
regulations like what you want. This is not strawman or red
herring, these are the way the real world works. You are
just plugging your ears and closing your eyes and repeating
your mantra.

You need to be renamed Mooshe.
.....................William A. Noyes

<[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
net.com...

Quoted message said:

They are also seriously under funded in this specific
area also by those supporting the supplement biz. If you
are concerned, write your gov reps for increased funding
and activity in that area. The rest of the rant is a red
herring held aloft and waved about by a strawman. The
current push is to get the companies to report side
effects and dangerous incidents reported to them and in
serious cases to ask the company to provide safty
demonstration research.

Quoted message said:

The FDA currently has the authority to test and recall
products that don't contain what they say. They don't.
If we go to a French model you would not be able to get
a supplement beyond a 100 percent of RDI, AI, etc. You
won't be a to get an amino acid supplement without a
physicians say so. You won't be able to get inositol,
gamma tocopherol, vitamin K, CoQ-10, or lipoic acid if
they don't make the list (at least

over

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the counter and perhaps not at all) . And on the
European Union list most of these didn't make it if I
recall correctly. And at least in France, the government
will pay for prescriptions so when..........in the
American model one largely get to pay out of

pocket.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mark de Toad wants 100% proof on everything. In science,
that hardly

every

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

happens and when it does it is just a strong sales job
by a big drug corporation;-(

William A. Noyes