Sue and Ban Atkins, not Supplements

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Steve Bayt, Feb 19, 2004.

  1. Steve Bayt

    Steve Bayt Guest

    STEVE BAYT

    (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)

    While Illinois Senator Durbin and his SB 722 would create an unfathomable health crisis in America,
    there already is one. And the FDA, FTC, and FCC should never have allowed The Atkins Diet to even
    be marketed.

    Quite frankly, it is horrible that The United States Senate is proposing to regulate out of business
    the most beneficial industry in America- that of nutritional supplements. Yet, Durbin etc have done
    nothing to outlaw the Atkins Diet. The phenomenal dangers of The Atkins Diet can be found at
    www.safediets.org and www.atkinsdietalert.org

    There are many other health problems associated with Atkins which I will try to figure out how to
    interpret in non-jargon.

    They pretty much describe what I was going to rant about this week. What is perhaps more
    unacceptable than Durbin trying to outlaw supplements yet doing nothing to end The Atkins Diet, is
    that the media ever accepted a single ad or commercial for what can only be described as a
    nutritional death diet.

    Just like Randy Shilts was the most vocal warner (person who warns?) about AIDS (1981-10/3/85). I am
    pretty much the only warner about S.B.
    722.

    This article offers a solution to stop The Atkins Diet, which apparently neither the media nor
    government want to do.

    The solution to stop SB 722 is complicated involving politics and public opinion and the number of
    votes each senator would lose. The solution to Atkins is fairly simple-litigation.

    Anyone who has suffered the surreal amount of medical problems inevitable with Atkins should sue, to
    a very large amount, Atkins. The regulations that Cigarette manufacturers face now are the result of
    people's civil litigation. Quite frankly, preaching a low carb, high protein diet with extreme
    nutritional deficiencies and nearly no fiber would have maybe worse medical hazards than cigarettes.

    McDonald's and their high fat, high protein diet has been successfully sued at the trial phase, but
    has been able to get stays of execution pending appeal. And McDonald's does not claim to be a
    medical program.

    Atkins is being marketed as a medical way of losing weight, founded by a Doctor being prescribed by
    Atkins doctors and health practioners. Although I am not a lawyer, I have taken some legal courses.
    Atkins is dispensing diet and medical advice which has a higher legal standard of liability then
    McDonald's which was just selling an unhealthy product.

    A few multi-million dollar lawsuits and Atkins is out of business. And of course, the bazillion
    people who have died on Atkins could sue for compensatory damages and punitive damages for the suits
    would be negligence.

    In fact, the only nutrition that an Atkins dieter could get would be from Nutritional supplements-
    which of course Senator Durbin wants to make illegal.

    McDonald's has the money to appeal litigation until Plaintiff's die, Atkins dosen't have that
    luxury. People who have suffered from this disaster diet can do much more than file a complaint with
    the Atkins Diet Alert site, or contact the FDA to end Atkins.

    They could consult a lawyer, or be pro se if they are lawyers, and file a lawsuit. For it's quite
    terrifying to think of an America where the media runs ads for Atkins while health foods are being
    pulled off the shelf.

    So, to those bazillion former Atkins people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills,
    call a local lawyer and get your money back that a diet program preached by quacks have manifested.

    Unfortunately, you can't sue any media outlet for running ads, because of what we call The First
    Amendment. A newspaper can run an ad preaching well, I don't want to give any ideas and they
    couldn't be sued by anyone harmed. But, Atkins can and should.

    If Atkins isn't regulated out of business, maybe it can be litigated.
     
    Tags:


  2. "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > STEVE BAYT
    >
    > (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
    >
    > While Illinois Senator Durbin and his SB 722 would create an unfathomable health crisis in
    > America, there already is one. And the FDA, FTC, and FCC should never have allowed The Atkins Diet
    > to even be marketed.

    SB722 posits no threat whatsoever to America's health.

    The FDA, FTC, and FCC have no juridiction over the publication of the Atkins Diet which is, after
    all, free speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

    >
    >
    > Quite frankly, it is horrible that The United States Senate is proposing to regulate out of
    > business the most beneficial industry in America- that of nutritional supplements. Yet, Durbin etc
    > have done nothing to outlaw the Atkins Diet. The phenomenal dangers of The Atkins Diet can be
    > found at www.safediets.org and www.atkinsdietalert.org

    SB722 will not regulate nutritional supplements out of business.

    >
    > There are many other health problems associated with Atkins which I will try to figure out how to
    > interpret in non-jargon.
    >
    > They pretty much describe what I was going to rant about this week. What is perhaps more
    > unacceptable than Durbin trying to outlaw supplements yet doing nothing to end The Atkins Diet, is
    > that the media ever accepted a single ad or commercial for what can only be described as a
    > nutritional death diet.

    Senator Durbin and SB722 are not "trying to outlaw supplements."

    >
    > Just like Randy Shilts was the most vocal warner (person who warns?) about AIDS (1981-10/3/85). I
    > am pretty much the only warner about S.B.
    > 722.

    Perhaps you whould read the bill.

    >
    > This article offers a solution to stop The Atkins Diet, which apparently neither the media nor
    > government want to do.

    The Atkins Diet is not a product, it is a book, which is protected free speech.

    >
    > The solution to stop SB 722 is complicated involving politics and public opinion and the number of
    > votes each senator would lose. The solution to Atkins is fairly simple-litigation.
    >
    > Anyone who has suffered the surreal amount of medical problems inevitable with Atkins should sue,
    > to a very large amount, Atkins. The regulations that Cigarette manufacturers face now are the
    > result of people's civil litigation. Quite frankly, preaching a low carb, high protein diet with
    > extreme nutritional deficiencies and nearly no fiber would have maybe worse medical hazards than
    > cigarettes.

    Cigarettes are drug delivery devices. The Atkins Diet is a book.

    >
    > McDonald's and their high fat, high protein diet has been successfully sued at the trial phase,
    > but has been able to get stays of execution pending appeal. And McDonald's does not claim to be a
    > medical program.
    >
    > Atkins is being marketed as a medical way of losing weight, founded by a Doctor being prescribed
    > by Atkins doctors and health practioners. Although I am not a lawyer, I have taken some legal
    > courses. Atkins is dispensing diet and medical advice which has a higher legal standard of
    > liability then McDonald's which was just selling an unhealthy product.

    The only Atkins product "being marketed" is a book. Free speech, remember?

    >
    >
    >
    > A few multi-million dollar lawsuits and Atkins is out of business. And of course, the bazillion
    > people who have died on Atkins could sue for compensatory damages and punitive damages for the
    > suits would be negligence.

    Readers of the Atkins book follow the diet (or not) of their own free will. It would be hard to
    prove foundation for damages, even for the cleverest of lawyers.

    >
    > In fact, the only nutrition that an Atkins dieter could get would be from Nutritional supplements-
    > which of course Senator Durbin wants to make illegal.
    >
    > McDonald's has the money to appeal litigation until Plaintiff's die, Atkins dosen't have that
    > luxury. People who have suffered from this disaster diet can do much more than file a complaint
    > with the Atkins Diet Alert site, or contact the FDA to end Atkins.
    >
    > They could consult a lawyer, or be pro se if they are lawyers, and file a lawsuit. For it's quite
    > terrifying to think of an America where the media runs ads for Atkins while health foods are being
    > pulled off the shelf.
    >
    > So, to those bazillion former Atkins people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical
    > bills, call a local lawyer and get your money back that a diet program preached by quacks have
    > manifested.
    >
    > Unfortunately, you can't sue any media outlet for running ads, because of what we call The First
    > Amendment. A newspaper can run an ad preaching well, I don't want to give any ideas and they
    > couldn't be sued by anyone harmed. But, Atkins can and should.
    >
    > If Atkins isn't regulated out of business, maybe it can be litigated.

    Fat chance.

    --Rich
     
  3. "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > STEVE BAYT
    > >
    > > (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
    > >
    > > While Illinois Senator Durbin and his SB 722 would create an unfathomable health crisis in
    > > America, there already is one. And the FDA, FTC, and FCC should never have allowed The Atkins
    > > Diet to even be marketed.
    >
    > SB722 posits no threat whatsoever to America's health.
    >
    > The FDA, FTC, and FCC have no juridiction over the publication of the
    Atkins
    > Diet which is, after all, free speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

    Bayt has been told that SB722 does not do what he claims, but, like a posting bot, he perpetuates
    his baloney.
     
  4. Steve Bayt

    Steve Bayt Guest

    "Mark Probert-February 20, 2004" <Mark [email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > STEVE BAYT
    > > >
    > > > (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
    > > >
    > > > While Illinois Senator Durbin and his SB 722 would create an unfathomable health crisis in
    > > > America, there already is one. And the FDA, FTC, and FCC should never have allowed The Atkins
    > > > Diet to even be marketed.
    > >
    > > SB722 posits no threat whatsoever to America's health.
    > >
    > > The FDA, FTC, and FCC have no juridiction over the publication of the
    > Atkins
    > > Diet which is, after all, free speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
    >
    > Bayt has been told that SB722 does not do what he claims, but, like a posting bot, he perpetuates
    > his baloney.

    First of all ATkins isnt't just a book. The company sells super high fat foods, such as bars, shakes
    so it is not protected by Free Speech. Second SB 722 would eliminate systematically all health
    foods, the bill can be found at a link to www.vitaminworld.com

    It has 5 co-sponsors already.

    Third this replier has the stupidity to post these stupid one-line brain dead flames in many
    other sites. These people should do research and instead of doing mass stupidity try doing one
    good posting.

    If I were to post that gravity exists, he would state no it dosen't. This person or people need to
    take some classes in analytical thinking.

    The fact is that SB722 would create do more harm than ATkins could ever.

    But, it would take only a handful of lawsuits against Atkins to close it down. Because unlike suits
    against fast food joints (Consumer Reports January 2004 page 13 paragraph 5) ATkins plaintiffs could
    include punitive damages in their relief. For Fast Food Joints aren't trying to market their menus
    as healthy, just good tasting.

    Atkins, despite being told by virtually every source, including an interview on MSNBC's Deborah
    Norville Tonight that their diet and products are endangering American's health. Thus, Atkins can't
    claim it doesn't know how bad their products and diets are.

    The 1994 DSHEA disclaimer needed on supplements provides legal protection and responsibility to
    consumers. Before DSHEA supplement raids were common, production and marketing without FDA approval
    was in some cases illegal. That is what SB 1532 is all about.

    The fact is that any Atkins sufferer should contact a lawyer willing to work on commission. It would
    take but a few suits complete with milions of dollars in punitive damages to shut down Atkins.

    Sort of like these two flamers with their one-line generic responses should be.

    Atkins is a product of which a book is only a small part of. First Amendment rights would only apply
    if it were only a book.

    As for foods which are claiming to be "Atkins Friendly" that would be up to a debate about what
    lawyers call legal privity. Foods which claim to be low carbs can't really be sued unless those
    manufacturers are marketing that Low Carb is good.

    The only legal debate about Atkins is whether it would take under 20 lawsuits to close it down, or
    if 30 would be requried.

    The only debayt about SB722 is up to the hope that idiot responses like these two flamers aren't
    representative of the whoele electorate.

    (This posting is not yet approved by any Bar Association, I am not YET a lawyer, and is not intended
    to be legal advice in and of itself. But merely an encouragement of Atkins sufferers to get
    professional legal advice.)
     
  5. "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "Mark Probert-February 20, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
    wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:J7SdnQS_m5E-JKjdRVn-
    > > [email protected]
    > > >
    > > > "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > STEVE BAYT
    > > > >
    > > > > (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
    > > > >
    > > > > While Illinois Senator Durbin and his SB 722 would create an unfathomable health crisis in
    > > > > America, there already is one. And the FDA, FTC, and FCC should never have allowed The
    > > > > Atkins Diet to even
    be
    > > > > marketed.
    > > >
    > > > SB722 posits no threat whatsoever to America's health.
    > > >
    > > > The FDA, FTC, and FCC have no juridiction over the publication of the
    > > Atkins
    > > > Diet which is, after all, free speech guaranteed by the U.S.
    Constitution.
    > >
    > > Bayt has been told that SB722 does not do what he claims, but, like a posting bot, he
    > > perpetuates his baloney.
    >
    > First of all ATkins isnt't just a book. The company sells super high fat foods, such as bars,
    > shakes so it is not protected by Free Speech. Second SB 722 would eliminate systematically all
    > health foods, the bill can be found at a link to www.vitaminworld.com

    I have read the bill, and your interpretation of it is utterly absurd. No one with a reading
    comprehension level of second grade would think that it means what you say.

    > It has 5 co-sponsors already.

    It needs a 100 in the Senate and 435 in the House.

    > Third this replier has the stupidity to post these stupid one-line brain dead flames in many other
    > sites. These people should do research and instead of doing mass stupidity try doing one good
    > posting.

    Listen, numbnuts, I have read the bill. and it does not say what you claim. As I said, supra, one
    needs only a 2nd grade education to know that.

    > If I were to post that gravity exists, he would state no it dosen't. This person or people need to
    > take some classes in analytical thinking.

    I was thinking analytically before your first diaper analysis.

    > The fact is that SB722 would create do more harm than ATkins could ever.

    Who cares about Atkins? Not me. The bill would require that supplement manufacturers submit all
    reports of adverse events to the FDA for the FDA to review. What is so wrong about that? What has
    the supplement industry got to hide? Who is paying you to post this crap?

    Atkins BS snipped. Lets focus on the bill....

    > The 1994 DSHEA disclaimer needed on supplements provides legal protection and responsibility to
    > consumers. Before DSHEA supplement raids were common, production and marketing without FDA
    > approval was in some cases illegal. That is what SB 1532 is all about.

    What it was all about was Orrin Hatch paying back one of Utah's largest industries for supporting
    him over the years. He even owned stock in some of the companies.

    snip atkins

    > Sort of like these two flamers with their one-line generic responses should be.

    snip of atkins

    > The only debayt about SB722 is up to the hope that idiot responses like these two flamers aren't
    > representative of the whoele electorate.

    Actually, I hope we are since we read the bill and know what it says.
     
  6. Steve Bayt

    Steve Bayt Guest

    "Mark Probert-February 21, 2004" <Mark [email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > "Mark Probert-February 20, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
    > wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > > > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:J7SdnQS_m5E-JKjdRVn-
    > > > [email protected]
    > > > >
    > > > > "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > > STEVE BAYT
    > > > > >
    > > > > > (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
    > > > > >
    > > > > > While Illinois Senator Durbin and his SB 722 would create an unfathomable health crisis in
    > > > > > America, there already is one. And the FDA, FTC, and FCC should never have allowed The
    > > > > > Atkins Diet to even
    > be
    > > > > > marketed.
    > > > >
    > > > > SB722 posits no threat whatsoever to America's health.
    > > > >
    > > > > The FDA, FTC, and FCC have no juridiction over the publication of the
    > Atkins
    > > > > Diet which is, after all, free speech guaranteed by the U.S.
    > Constitution.
    > > >
    > > > Bayt has been told that SB722 does not do what he claims, but, like a posting bot, he
    > > > perpetuates his baloney.
    > >
    > > First of all ATkins isnt't just a book. The company sells super high fat foods, such as bars,
    > > shakes so it is not protected by Free Speech. Second SB 722 would eliminate systematically all
    > > health foods, the bill can be found at a link to www.vitaminworld.com
    >
    > I have read the bill, and your interpretation of it is utterly absurd. No one with a reading
    > comprehension level of second grade would think that it means what you say.
    >
    > > It has 5 co-sponsors already.
    >
    > It needs a 100 in the Senate and 435 in the House.
    >
    > > Third this replier has the stupidity to post these stupid one-line brain dead flames in many
    > > other sites. These people should do research and instead of doing mass stupidity try doing one
    > > good posting.
    >
    > Listen, numbnuts, I have read the bill. and it does not say what you claim. As I said, supra, one
    > needs only a 2nd grade education to know that.
    >
    > > If I were to post that gravity exists, he would state no it dosen't. This person or people need
    > > to take some classes in analytical thinking.
    >
    > I was thinking analytically before your first diaper analysis.
    >
    > > The fact is that SB722 would create do more harm than ATkins could ever.
    >
    > Who cares about Atkins? Not me. The bill would require that supplement manufacturers submit all
    > reports of adverse events to the FDA for the FDA to review. What is so wrong about that? What has
    > the supplement industry got to hide? Who is paying you to post this crap?
    >
    > Atkins BS snipped. Lets focus on the bill....
    >
    > > The 1994 DSHEA disclaimer needed on supplements provides legal protection and responsibility to
    > > consumers. Before DSHEA supplement raids were common, production and marketing without FDA
    > > approval was in some cases illegal. That is what SB 1532 is all about.
    >
    > What it was all about was Orrin Hatch paying back one of Utah's largest industries for supporting
    > him over the years. He even owned stock in some of the companies.
    >
    > snip atkins
    >
    > > Sort of like these two flamers with their one-line generic responses should be.
    >
    > snip of atkins
    >
    > > The only debayt about SB722 is up to the hope that idiot responses like these two flamers aren't
    > > representative of the whoele electorate.
    >
    > Actually, I hope we are since we read the bill and know what it says.

    STEVE BAYT Parma/Brook Park, Ohio

    Below is directly from a nutritional supplement website. Along with a link directly to the text
    bill. There is also a H.R. 3377 which was introduced a few months ago. For information on both and a
    list of fax numbers already compiled to all Senators go to your local Vitamin World, for one of many
    fliers they have been handing out.

    If there was no threat to supplements, why would a national franchise be soliciting their customers
    to activism. For the first rule of business is not to spread rumors of your own business or
    industries death. If there was no threat, then VW wouldn't be telling their customers they might not
    be in business much longer. For customers always await dime on the dollar discount going out of
    business sales, when they hear of closings.

    In a recent mass e-mail and harvesting to a few hundred other manufacturers and direct sellers, most
    have links to the TAKE ACTION NOW site.

    So, stop in to a Vitamin World,or find one nearby at vitaminworld.com for many fliers supporting all
    of my claims. And no I don't work for them. I actually spend a great deal of money there. For anyone
    in the Cleveland area there is one at the front entrance of Parmatown, Great Northern, Erieview.

    This is the last response to this Mark Roberts person, who needs to learn what supra means. By the
    way the Vitamin World fliers and articles in their vertical trade publication are wrote by people
    with MBA's and even more advanced degrees.

    I would demand an apology from "Mark Roberts". But being a huge Jamie Sale' and David Pelletier fan
    supra their Love Story performance, along with tomorrow infra being Nancy Kerrigan's Llilenhammer
    10th Anniversary, I won't for this stopping an American Health Crisis is not just a cause but a
    raison d'etre. And Kerrigan didn't want an apology from Harding. Because to her, Sale'/Pelletier and
    me with my causes. "Love Means Never Having To Say. You're Sorry."

    I do though feel sorry for anyone on Atkins who might not be able to buy supplements upon SB 722
    or HR 3377.

    **********TEXT FROM VITAMIN WORLD SITE***********

    PROTECT YOUR ACCESS TO VITAMINS AND NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENTS THE GOVERNMENT MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO
    LIMIT THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE OF AMERICAN CONSUMERS WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR HEALTH.

    Don't Let Congress Overturn the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994

    Support S. 1538 and Oppose S. 722 Because the Food and Drug Administration has failed to fully
    uphold the law, Congress is looking into making changes that will undermine many of the freedoms
    that American consumers of dietary supplements hold dear.

    SUPPORT S. 1538 No more excuses from the Food and Drug Administration! Give the FDA the resources it
    needs to implement DSHEA!

    This bill will eliminate the Food and Drug Administration's favorite excuses that it doesn't have
    enough staff, money or power to regulate supplements. The FDA has fallen short when it comes to
    enforcing the law.

    Support research that validates the safety, effectiveness and quality of dietary supplements.

    Because dietary supplements come from natural ingredients, they can't be patented. While this
    insures that these products are readily—and affordably — available, it takes away the ability of
    manufacturers to recoup research costs.

    The bill doubles the funding given to the Office of Dietary Supplements to expand research and
    consumer information about these products. Hold the government accountable for its actions.

    This bill will require the FDA to file annual reports to Congress about how they're regulating
    dietary supplements. If they fail in their responsibilities to fully implement the law, they'll be
    held accountable.

    OPPOSE S. 722

    The Food and Drug Administration must not be granted new and unprecedented authority to subject safe
    and beneficial products to additional and unnecessary scrutiny.

    This bill would subject nearly all vitamins, minerals, herbal products and other supplements to a
    level of scrutiny that is both unwarranted and unnecessary. Products that have been used safely for
    hundreds ­ and in some cases, thousands ­ of years would be subject to clinical evaluation using
    standards that are at the complete discretion of the FDA. Click here to view S. 722.

    http://www.nnfa.org/services/government/pdf/s722.pdf

    The government must not be allowed to limit the freedom of choice of American consumers when it
    comes to their health.

    By questioning the safety of any dietary supplement that receives even one complaint, hundreds of
    products that have been safely and beneficially used could be removed from the marketplace. Under
    this new legislation, the FDA has complete discretion to make this determination, regardless of
    whether the product was used under conditions cautioned against by the manufacturer on the label.

    The government must not be allowed to single-out dietary supplements. By almost every measure, and
    by a wide margin, dietary supplements can be used more safely than conventional foods and OTC drugs.
    Yet this legislation exempts foods in these product categories from being classified as stimulants.
    Specifically, the bill unfairly excludes the most common "stimulant" ingredient in foods ­ caffeine.

    TAKE ACTION NOW! This bill could be added to existing Senate legislation at any time. We need you to
    take two vital steps: 1) immediately let your Senators know that you support S. 1538 and ask them to
    co-sponsor the bill, and
    2) ask them to oppose S. 722.

    E-MAIL YOUR SENATORS NOW To email your Senators simply go to:
    http://capwiz.com/nnfa/issues/alert/?alertid=4089036 Enter your ZIP code in the "Take
    Action Now" box.

    Make any changes you feel necessary to the sample letter, and click "submit." A copy of your letter
    will be sent to the two U.S. Senators from your state. A copy of the letter will also be sent to you
    confirming which Senators received the letter.

    Call your Senators now. To reach your Senators' offices, call them either through the Capitol Hill
    switchboard at (202) 224-3121 or directly at their Washington, D.C. or local offices. When you reach
    your Senator's office, ask to speak with the staff member in charge of health-related issues. To
    find contact information for your elected officials, simply click on
    http://capwiz.com/nnfa/dbq/officials/
     
  7. "Steve Bayt" <[email protected]> wrote in message

    Do no post sales crap in response to me.
     
Loading...