Yes, it does specifically bother me. I don’t think you realize how much time and effort goes into passing a federal regulation. Meanwhile, herbal remedies are giving babies seizures.
If they were doing their job, they would remove dangerous “herbal” remedies people are giving to their kids and hurting or even killing them, not something that has a small chance of causing cancer if you feed a shit ton of it to a rat.
In the sense that they are both so poorly regulated that they both have contained all kinds of substances which are actively harmful to people? No, they really aren’t.
That’s like arguing cars and treadmills are the same thing. You can move in/on both of them!
Between homeopathics and herbal remedies, one is a sugar tablet (or should be unless it wasn’t made properly.) The other has been used medicinally in some form likely before Homo sapiens had even evolved. Acting like these things can all “just be regulated” is exceedingly naive. Surely you know there’s more nuance and working parts to that argument.
Oh hey, you just figured out my point… which you would have figured out to begin with if you had read the article I posted about the “homeopathic” teething remedy that gave babies seizures because it wasn’t made properly and didn’t have to be.
In the context of this article, they are. Your argument about something else is a straw man and a whataboutism.
If you think the FDA should regulate something else that it currently does not, take it to Congress. They’re the ones who decide what the FDA does and does not regulate.
Right so I mean—the cost of research and analysis and the entire process of determining the possible risks is money that simply must be spent either way, even on products that are ultimately deemed suitable for market. That’s the entire purpose of the FDA, to find these things out.
So we’re really just looking at the costs associated with the ban itself. Such as the labor hours of FDA employees setting it up? Communicating it to people? I agree with your concerns I’m just trying to get a sense of what we actually spent to arrive here
I can’t give you numbers, but it’s a federal regulation. A lot of reports have to get written and a lot of research has to be done, especially in the field of federal regulation as a whole, which is so insane that we literally have no idea how many federal laws there are. And then all of that documentation has to be read by other people and approved all the way up the chain. So we are talking a lot of people’s time and effort (which translates into taxpayer money) that could have better been spent on things which are causing active harm.
Because this took a hell of a lot of time and effort and taxpayer money that the FDA could have spent on so many other more important things.
They do more than one thing at a time. It isn’t like all other evaluations stopped to look at red dye #3.
They have a limited amount of time and resources. What was spent on this could have been spent on something more dangerous.
Without investigating, it could have been more dangerous and we wouldn’t know.
These were the results. Not an issue that effects everyone, but enough that it should be banned.
There is nothing to complain about here. Thats how this works for anything being evaluated.
It had already been investigated.
And this is an evaluation of that information.
Of all the things to get hung up on, I have no idea why this specifically bothers you so much.
This is nothing compared to all the other efforts they are involved with, its just media attention.
Yes, it does specifically bother me. I don’t think you realize how much time and effort goes into passing a federal regulation. Meanwhile, herbal remedies are giving babies seizures.
I dont think you realize that by red dye #3 getting put up for evaluation, it was going to go through all those hands no matter what.
I’ll say again - this is a super weird thing to get hung up on.
Again - other work does not stop. More people <> more quicker (yes, this is intentional).
Again, time and resources are limited.
Why are you complaining about the FDA doing their job, rather than the large corps that likely lobbied to avoid this and make it much harder for them?
They banned it in cosmetics in 1990, it seems pretty obvious that if it’s unsafe for the outside of our body it shouldn’t be inside either.
They’re a troll. Don’t waste your time.
If they were doing their job, they would remove dangerous “herbal” remedies people are giving to their kids and hurting or even killing them, not something that has a small chance of causing cancer if you feed a shit ton of it to a rat.
As I showed to someone else, it took ten years for the FDA to get a company to voluntarily recall a product that was causing seizures in hundreds of babies. https://www.statnews.com/2017/04/13/homeopathy-tablets-recall/
Are you aware that homeopathics and herbal remedies are completely different things?
In the sense that they are both so poorly regulated that they both have contained all kinds of substances which are actively harmful to people? No, they really aren’t.
In fact, some claim to be both.
I don’t know where to start to try to explain the differences because you’re trying so hard to miss the point. They are not the same thing at all.
Again- in terms of the lack of regulation and the danger the pose, there is no difference. And again, products claim to be both.
Are you arguing that lack of regulation of these products is a good thing?
That’s like arguing cars and treadmills are the same thing. You can move in/on both of them!
Between homeopathics and herbal remedies, one is a sugar tablet (or should be unless it wasn’t made properly.) The other has been used medicinally in some form likely before Homo sapiens had even evolved. Acting like these things can all “just be regulated” is exceedingly naive. Surely you know there’s more nuance and working parts to that argument.
Oh hey, you just figured out my point… which you would have figured out to begin with if you had read the article I posted about the “homeopathic” teething remedy that gave babies seizures because it wasn’t made properly and didn’t have to be.
That’s a deflection, not an answer
How is that a deflection? I don’t agree that they are doing their jobs.
In the context of this article, they are. Your argument about something else is a straw man and a whataboutism.
If you think the FDA should regulate something else that it currently does not, take it to Congress. They’re the ones who decide what the FDA does and does not regulate.
I’d be curious about what the cost actually is?
Right so I mean—the cost of research and analysis and the entire process of determining the possible risks is money that simply must be spent either way, even on products that are ultimately deemed suitable for market. That’s the entire purpose of the FDA, to find these things out.
So we’re really just looking at the costs associated with the ban itself. Such as the labor hours of FDA employees setting it up? Communicating it to people? I agree with your concerns I’m just trying to get a sense of what we actually spent to arrive here
I can’t give you numbers, but it’s a federal regulation. A lot of reports have to get written and a lot of research has to be done, especially in the field of federal regulation as a whole, which is so insane that we literally have no idea how many federal laws there are. And then all of that documentation has to be read by other people and approved all the way up the chain. So we are talking a lot of people’s time and effort (which translates into taxpayer money) that could have better been spent on things which are causing active harm.