91–100 of 135 posts
so stop putting baby powder on my nuts during the summer? :(
Baby powder is fine, given that I don't know that one can even buy talc powder anymore. It's all made with corn starch now. Go right ahead and bread those nuts (verifying that it's non-talc breading, just to be safe).
So if you are a small cosmetics company the FDA will prevent you from selling your product without thorough testing but if you are a large cosmetic company you can simply tell the FDA that everything is OK. This benefits the larger companies and therefore, monopolies. Strikingly similar to how the FAA seems to operate with Boeing and look how that turned out.
Possibly they're stricter on small companies because if they mess up, you can't fix the issue with a big class-action lawsuit? If Johnson & Johnson mess up, they're big enough to be able to compensate consumers directly.
Not saying it's an ideal solution but if I were a budget-constrained federal agency trying to minimize harm with limited resources I could see myself making a similar call.
So if you are a small cosmetics company the FDA will prevent you from selling your product without thorough testing but if you are a large cosmetic company you can simply tell the FDA that everything is OK. This benefits the larger companies and therefore, monopolies. Strikingly similar to how the FAA seems to operate with Boeing and look how that turned out.
> So if you are a small cosmetics company the FDA will prevent you from selling your product without thorough testing but if you are a large cosmetic company you can simply tell the FDA that everything is OK. Possibly they're stricter on small companies because if they mess up, you can't fix the issue with a big class-action lawsuit? If Johnson & Johnson mess up, they're big enough to be able to compensate consumers…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real root of the problem is probably that the FDA is also a monopoly.
Do you seriously think that we'd have fewer of these issues if companies could shop around for the cheapest & most lax regulator? If you believe that, please explain to me why the BBB exists, and what positive social purpose it serves. It is the poster child for a toothless opt-in 'regulator', and it is worse than useless at dealing with malfeasance by its members. (But it's pretty good at collecting membership dues.…
And we can't vote these regulators out nor boycott them. Stories like this erode my faith in...everything.
Don't despair citizen, our corporate benefactors still allow us to Peacefully Protest™. Peaceful Protest™ solves everything!
So if you are a small cosmetics company the FDA will prevent you from selling your product without thorough testing but if you are a large cosmetic company you can simply tell the FDA that everything is OK. This benefits the larger companies and therefore, monopolies. Strikingly similar to how the FAA seems to operate with Boeing and look how that turned out.
This is a frustration to me because neither the left or the right seem to fight for better government, more just, more fair. The right have this childish dream that no government will magically work, which happens to dovetail into what criminal corporations want. The left protect the government unions and allow them to become dysfunctional.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One has to wonder about a lengthy article which refuses to cite any numbers and instead repeats endlessly that 'no level is known to be safe', which is irrelevant.
I'll probably get down voted to hell, but this seems to be quite overblown. The FDA has posted their latest analysis of J&J talcum powder.[1] Of the 3 samples, 1 had "none detected" and 2 had 0.00002% or less by TEM (electron microscope). We're talking close to limit of detection. The bigger issue is the link to ovarian cancer. The data is all over the place. This one paper [1] sums up the data nicely - when looking…
I do a bunch of mining and know the dangers of talc and its contaminants - it only takes ONE PARTICLE of tremolite or actinolite to start you on the road to mesothelioma. You just don't know which specific particle will trigger it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree with the sentiment, keep in mind it's a little more complicated than that. People who work on some category of regulations can only find relevant work in the government or in that sector of industry. Making it impossible to move from the government to an industry job effectively traps people for life in their one job unless they change careers. As a concrete example, my fiance is a lawyer working in env…
There exist tertiary jobs that employ the same skillsets without the danger of pervasive incentives. No one minds if a EPA regulator that does agriculture cases his whole career then take a lawyer job in the fishing or mining industry. It's when that person drops immediately into a legal career at Monsanto that people start seeing a conflict of interests.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair enough. Here's research from one clinic: https://regenexx.com/results/research/
People mean citations to researchers that don't stand to directly profit from their spurious (i.e., fake) research, like the idiot/murderer that spawned the anti-vaxx movement. So far you've only cited doctors and clinics that directly benefit from promoting stem-cell research, and no unbiased (i.e., academic) studies showing any sort of statistical benefit.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2095130/
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Daisuke_Sakai/publicati...
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/ten.tea.2010.0248
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03009...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00395-005-0553-4
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1582-4934...
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=stem+cell+regenerative+...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you seriously think that we'd have fewer of these issues if companies could shop around for the cheapest & most lax regulator? If you believe that, please explain to me why the BBB exists, and what positive social purpose it serves. It is the poster child for a toothless opt-in 'regulator', and it is worse than useless at dealing with malfeasance by its members. (But it's pretty good at collecting membership dues.…
Imagine if absolutely nothing changed about the BBB except that I forced you to fund them against your will.
All the work involved in capturing the FDA demonstrates that the FDA is not a "mandatory BBB", if they really had no teeth there would be no need to devote all these resources to dupe/intimidate/capture them.