nUSEweb.com

>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.