"Richard Schultz" <schultr@mail.biu.ack.il> wrote in message
news:g67t1i$pog$2@news.iucc.ac.il...
> In article <dQJhk.786$%f.234@fe091.usenetserver.com>, vernono
> <vernono@there.com> wrote:
> : "Richard Schultz" <schultr@mail.biu.ack.il> wrote in message
> : news:g66h2p$2ik$6@news.iucc.ac.il...
> :> In article <eFyhk.1081$7g.944@fe109.usenetserver.com>, vernono
> :> <vernono@there.com> wrote:
>
> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
> :> : someone suffers a very negative response.
>
> :> That's not the "pharm" game -- that's the effect of lobbying (and at
> least
> :> one well-placed "political contribution") on the part of the "natural
> :> supplements" industry.
>
> : Do what?
>
> It was the "nutritional supplement" industry that made sure that as long
> as they make no explicit claims, the FDA can't do a thing to them.
>
> : Natural supplement industry? Which of the 300 plus? DUUHHH
>
> The industry that rakes in something like $27 billion/year in the U.S.
> alone.
>
> : ONE contribution? ha ha ha ha ha ha
YOU SAID
"(and at least one well-placed "political contribution")"
>
> I'm sure that they've made more than one (although you don't seem to
> realize
> that the more that they've made, the weaker your case is). The one I was
> thinking of was the well-publicized one they made to Orrin Hatch, who
> obediently pushed through the legislation that removed "nutritional
> supplements" from the list of things that the FDA can regulate.
>
> -----
> Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
> Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
> Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
> -----
> "Apparently, you take me for a complete fool."
> "Yeah -- more or less."
> Bob & Ray, "Garish Summit"
