If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   FDA: "Your products are drugs and therefore they may not legally be marketed without an approved new drug application." Are they talking about: A: Hemp? B: Untested medicine? or C: Walnuts?   (worldtruth.tv) divider line 191
    More: Asinine, FDA, drug applications, coronary artery disease, cancer types, HDL, Dietary mineral, investments, Frito-Lay  
•       •       •

14689 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Feb 2013 at 3:14 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



191 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-25 11:36:40 AM
fark you, marketers. There's nothing stupid about this particular law. Go think of some other way to sell your walnuts.
 
2013-02-25 12:07:45 PM
The law says that if you make any medicinal claims about a substance, that substsance has to be approved by the FDA for that purpose.

For example, I used to make soap (as a hobby) and the law states that you cannot ascribe any property to a soap/lotion/etc beyond "moisturizing".  Even if a particular essential oil is known to be good for acne, if it's not FDA approved to treat acne, you cannot claim that a soap that contains that essential oil "treats acne" or is "anti-acne".

Walnuts may be healthy and good for you, but implying or claiming it will cure disease or make you healthier by eating them greatly exaggerates what benefits someone can expect to have from them (to the point of fraud).
 
2013-02-25 12:13:44 PM
The first two posts seem to have covered the subject nicely. Subby must work for Big Walnut.
 
2013-02-25 12:24:12 PM
The agency even threatened Diamond with "seizure" if it failed to comply.

Don't take my nuts, man!
 
2013-02-25 01:14:48 PM
If you start saying your product works like a medication, that's how the FDA will treat it.

If you take motor oil and slap a sticker on it saying "Cures Cancer!", you can expect to have it pulled from shelves unless you also slap on a sticker saying:

"These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.
This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease."
 
2013-02-25 01:51:56 PM
I have major stock holdings in junk food/beverage companies, fast food chains, pharmaceutical companies, healthcare corporations, and funeral homes, and I just want to say...

THANKS FDA!
 
2013-02-25 02:33:48 PM
You gotta problem with Walnuts...?

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-02-25 02:34:35 PM
Hmm.  Worldtruth.tv.  So what other major bombshells has this website exposed?


"Ten facts that prove Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax".
"Chemtrail flu: Have you got it yet?"
"The vaccine hoax is over"

Yeah, I'm gonna go with "Your Blog Sucks" for $500, Alex.
 
2013-02-25 02:42:49 PM
Back in the 70s my parents always kept flat Coca-Cola in the medicine cabinet for upset stomachs based on our pediatrician's advice [wink wink]. If Coca-Cola dared market this medical benefit of their product they would have the FDA up their butt in no time flat.
 
2013-02-25 02:44:42 PM
It's about time someone stood up to the overarching walnut lobby!
 
2013-02-25 02:45:06 PM
 
2013-02-25 02:45:32 PM
This is a perfectly legitimate application of the FDA's regulatory authority. If you want to make health claims about a product, you run it by them first.
 
2013-02-25 02:47:36 PM

timujin: Welcome to 2010...

http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/ucm202825 .h tm


And a repeat: http://www.fark.com/comments/6417731/
 
2013-02-25 03:02:06 PM

timujin: timujin: Welcome to 2010...

http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/ucm202825 .h tm

And a repeat: http://www.fark.com/comments/6417731/


Beat me to it.

Thought that sounded familiar.
 
2013-02-25 03:16:35 PM
The new contraband...
wwwdelivery.superstock.com
 
2013-02-25 03:16:37 PM
Walnuts give me the runs.
 
2013-02-25 03:17:46 PM
This kind of bureaucratic tyranny sends a strong signal to the food industry not to innovate in a way that informs the public about foods that protect against disease

If by "innovating" you mean "coming up with new marketing BS", then yeah, maybe.
 
2013-02-25 03:18:57 PM
Damn, isn't it tough enough being a walnut farmer?
 outside-satan.trailertheater.com
/you smell like canned tamales
 
2013-02-25 03:19:47 PM
Feh, I agree with the FDA.  Same as when they cracked down on all those cereals with all their health claims.

Best part of this is the link from subby looks like some dang conspiracy website, or at best, a rag newspaper.
 
2013-02-25 03:20:05 PM
gossipsucker.com
 
2013-02-25 03:20:08 PM
Oh nuts.
 
2013-02-25 03:20:40 PM

kingoomieiii: If you start saying your product works like a medication, that's how the FDA will treat it.

If you take motor oil and slap a sticker on it saying "Cures Cancer!", you can expect to have it pulled from shelves unless you also slap on a sticker saying:

"These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.
This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease."


Buy my CancerCure<sup>TM</sup> brand motor oil today!
 
2013-02-25 03:20:50 PM
i.imgur.com

Walnut farming, eh? This guy just opened up his first pecan farm. Cleared a cool million without planting a single pecan.
 
2013-02-25 03:21:19 PM
As the squirrel says...
 
2013-02-25 03:21:21 PM
I don't know about walnuts, but pistachios are horribly addictive and should be controlled. Or maybe it's just the salt.

Anyways, back on topic:

images.wikia.com
 
2013-02-25 03:21:33 PM

Ambivalence: I used to make soap


Is that you, Tyler?
 
2013-02-25 03:22:42 PM
This is bogus.  Everyone knows that the FDA will readily approve any kind of nuts sent to them for testing individually wrapped in thousand dollar bills.
 
2013-02-25 03:22:44 PM

MBooda: Damn, isn't it tough enough being a walnut farmer?
 [outside-satan.trailertheater.com image 480x360]
/you smell like canned tamales


There's been a walnut uprising.
 
2013-02-25 03:23:44 PM
Well, they sure taste bad enough to be medicinal. Bitter shaite.
 
2013-02-25 03:23:47 PM
www.reednutcracker.com
In other nut news, my coworker came in with oneof these babies today.
Farker will bust a farking nut, i'm telling you.
Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.
 
2013-02-25 03:24:09 PM

Ambivalence: The law says that if you make any medicinal claims about a substance, that substsance has to be approved by the FDA for that purpose.

For example, I used to make soap (as a hobby) and the law states that you cannot ascribe any property to a soap/lotion/etc beyond "moisturizing".  Even if a particular essential oil is known to be good for acne, if it's not FDA approved to treat acne, you cannot claim that a soap that contains that essential oil "treats acne" or is "anti-acne".

Walnuts may be healthy and good for you, but implying or claiming it will cure disease or make you healthier by eating them greatly exaggerates what benefits someone can expect to have from them (to the point of fraud).


Right then. So who wants to sue the shiat out of PepsiCo for the blantantly fraudulent implications and claims it makes saying it'll lower your cholesterol and prevent heart disease to eats bags and bags of their heart-healthy chips? Surely that's fraud?

Oh wait..there are studies that indicate it may help if you don't eat a family sized bag a day. But PepsiCo has massive lobbyists pouring money into capitol hill. So do the drug manufacturers that treat all that heart disease.

But walnuts... 50-some papers backing up the claims and no lobbyists. So sorry, walnuts.

Follow the money, honey.
 
2013-02-25 03:24:16 PM
af11.files.wordpress.com
Illegal? Get the fark outta here.
 
2013-02-25 03:25:32 PM
"Your products are drugs and therefore they may not legally be marketed without an approved new drug application."

More like "If you make medical claims about your product YOU are calling your product a drug, and thus need to prove your claims via clinical testing."

The solution's simple.  Stop making medical claims about your non-medical product.
 
2013-02-25 03:25:35 PM
I've been thinking of combining my origami skills with my stash of discount aluminum foil and marketing very fashionable mind control deflector headgear. I don't have to run that by the FDA first, do I?

/mine looks like a Samurai hat!
 
2013-02-25 03:25:52 PM

Capt.Plywood: Well, they sure taste bad enough to be medicinal. Bitter shaite.


Black Walnuts are the shiznit, and way more bitter than English. And that is one tough nut to crack. Not even sure if the Rocket 816 is up for a black walnut.
 
2013-02-25 03:26:09 PM

St_Francis_P: The first two posts seem to have covered the subject nicely. Subby must work for Big Walnut.


Why should 0bummer's jackbooted FDA have the authority to decide what is a valid claim of medical benefit?

I was once a doubter too, until I heard an ad for IncomeAtHome.com on the Sean Hannity radio show.  I signed up for some extra pocket money, but now I make so much from selling healthy, all-natural, organic foods and supplements that I was able to quit my dead-end, boring job.

Can 0bongo claim that he's made a small business that has helped people cure their diabetes, asthma, irritable bowl syndrome, and even cancer?  NO!!!  So instead he tries to stop me from trying to tell people about the many wonderful products made by Herbal-  um....

If you would like to know more, send me an email at ju­stanordinary­momw­o­r­kingf­r­o­mhome19­69­[nospam-﹫-backwards]LOA*co­m and I'll tell you how you can potentially earn significant income, right from home.  Mention "Sean Hannity" and I'll even give you a 10% discount on your registration fee.
 
2013-02-25 03:26:14 PM

Aigoo: Right then. So who wants to sue the shiat out of PepsiCo for the blantantly fraudulent implications and claims it makes saying it'll lower your cholesterol and prevent heart disease to eats bags and bags of their heart-healthy chips? Surely that's fraud?


I'm curious, what products are you talking about?
Personally I am fine with the FDA cracking down on advertising and packaging that suggests health benefits based on nothing.
 
2013-02-25 03:27:04 PM

loki see loki do: Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.


Is that the one with the attractive wooden base?
 
2013-02-25 03:27:55 PM
But if you want to rush a drug to market for something like 'restless leg syndrome' with hardly any testing the FDA has your back.

/If it's found to be fatal later, that's just the price you pay for progress.
 
2013-02-25 03:28:13 PM
Has no one ever submitted a walnut to the FDA?
I mean, they should be aware of this stuff.
 
2013-02-25 03:29:19 PM

WinoRhino: loki see loki do: Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.

Is that the one with the attractive wooden base?


Damn straight.
 
2013-02-25 03:29:43 PM
"Worldtruth.tv", eh?

I can imagine what I'd find in your archives if your crappy blog weren't Farked after 700 clicks.
 
2013-02-25 03:29:58 PM
Not sure if they are drugs, but I am sure walnuts are alien...

www.freepresshouston.com
 
2013-02-25 03:30:08 PM
and yall keep voting Democrat....

media.npr.org
 
2013-02-25 03:31:20 PM

Ambivalence: Walnuts may be healthy and good for you, but implying or claiming it will cure disease or make you healthier by eating them greatly exaggerates what benefits someone can expect to have from them (to the point of fraud).


This.

 I was all ready to support the company, thinking that the FDA just came out of nowhere and tried to pull some BS, but trying to use medical benefits to sell a product? I'm glad Diamond got slapped.
 
2013-02-25 03:31:41 PM

damageddude: Back in the 70s my parents always kept flat Coca-Cola in the medicine cabinet for upset stomachs based on our pediatrician's advice [wink wink]. If Coca-Cola dared market this medical benefit of their product they would have the FDA up their butt in no time flat.



It's already an FDA approved medicine. Just go to your pharmacy and ask for Coke Syrup.
 
2013-02-25 03:32:08 PM
Agrees.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-02-25 03:33:07 PM

MBooda: Damn, isn't it tough enough being a walnut farmer?
 [outside-satan.trailertheater.com image 480x360]
/you smell like canned tamales


I farm pecans, myself.
 
2013-02-25 03:33:52 PM
Wow, a massive page full of mysql warnings.
 
2013-02-25 03:34:02 PM

Aigoo: But walnuts... 50-some papers backing up the claims and no lobbyists. So sorry, walnuts.

Follow the money, honey.


Yes, follow the money. Big Walnut puts lots of cash into 50 studies that purport their super incredible awesome health benefits. That doesn't mean they're good studies, but at least they can claim persecution when FDA finds they're being incredibly dishonest by paying scientists to conduct studies that make their products look healthier than they actually are.

/Love walnuts. super tasty snack.
 
2013-02-25 03:34:21 PM
That site has a lot of wharrgarble.
 
2013-02-25 03:34:28 PM

clane: and yall keep voting Democrat....

[media.npr.org image 850x637]


The law is on the books to protect the public from claims made by snake oil salesmen......something that Palin followers wouldn't understand.
 
2013-02-25 03:34:29 PM
Here is another site with the same story that isn't Farked...Yet.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/07/fda-sa ys -walnuts-are-drugs.aspx
 
2013-02-25 03:37:02 PM
I hear a few dozen wild almonds will cure almost any disease as well.
 
2013-02-25 03:37:15 PM
Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.
 
2013-02-25 03:37:43 PM

Snargi: Here is another site with the same story that isn't Farked...Yet.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/07/fda-sa ys -walnuts-are-drugs.aspx


In other words, if a product makes a medical claim, it's automatically classified as a drug.

Umm yeah, doesn't that actually make sense?
 
2013-02-25 03:38:37 PM

Citrate1007: The law is on the books to protect the public from claims made by snake oil salesmen


Yeah, that's working just great.
 
2013-02-25 03:39:02 PM

Real Women Drink Akvavit: I've been thinking of combining my origami skills with my stash of discount aluminum foil and marketing very fashionable mind control deflector headgear. I don't have to run that by the FDA first, do I?

/mine looks like a Samurai hat!


Hmmm... does the "condition" your product is used for have to even exist?  What if your origami foil creations also said they prevent Unicornitis?  Would that classify it as a medical device subject to testing and approval?
 
2013-02-25 03:39:19 PM

DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.


If something is already approved for use for one treatment your doctor can prescribe it for another. You don't have to wait for the FDA. Maybe your doctor is just deciding not to use it because the results aren't there.
 
2013-02-25 03:39:19 PM

Citrate1007: clane: and yall keep voting Democrat....

[media.npr.org image 850x637]

The law is on the books to protect the public from claims made by snake oil salesmen......something that Palin followers wouldn't understand.


Pfft.  Why protect them?  Let the weaklings get weeded out, the way the Good Lord intended.  They're probly all Librulz anyways.
 
2013-02-25 03:39:40 PM
One of the greatest cons was creating the FDA (it's for your own good) and letting the larger pharmaceutical concerns pull the strings.

How's that working out for you, america?
 
2013-02-25 03:40:28 PM

loki see loki do: WinoRhino: loki see loki do: Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.

Is that the one with the attractive wooden base?

Damn straight.


Here's the thing with that particular model. One Christmas Eve I'm drinking martinis, I'm cracking nuts, smoking a little of the haze, right? I start to bug out a bit. The Christmas tree starts growing, I'm shrinking and all these army mice come out of nowhere led by this, like, mouse king I guess. At that point I'm calling at the ol' model 816 to help me out, right? Nutcrackers are supposed to fight this shiat off. But no. He's all "Look, I have an attractive wooden base!" Not legs, mind you, like a proper nutcracker. No bayonet. No intimidating red uniform. He's just wagging his wooden handle like a scared puppy. I had to fight off the mice creatures with a goddamned sword swizzle stick, and it was a biatch to get that olive off first. I finish off the mouse king, suffer a few bites, possibly rabies, all while the 816 just apologizes and offers me a goddamned filbert. fark the model 816 and its attractive wooden base. I regifted that biatch the next morning.
 
2013-02-25 03:40:58 PM
What if the walnut people don't put any of those claims on their packaging, but instead, pay for a PSA stating the claims?  "Walnuts be good for cancer and stuff!"  If it isn't on the packaging, would this still count?
 
2013-02-25 03:41:07 PM

Snargi: Here is another site with the same story that isn't Farked...Yet.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/07/fda-sa ys -walnuts-are-drugs.aspx


Oh, it's Mercola. Another site full of alternative medicine craziness.

Anyway the FDA seems to be right. If you want to advertise medical benefits then get FDA approval for those benefits. If the existing research is as good as you say then getting approval should be easy.
 
2013-02-25 03:41:36 PM

loki see loki do: [www.reednutcracker.com image 650x467]
In other nut news, my coworker came in with oneof these babies today.
Farker will bust a farking nut, i'm telling you.
Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.


I typically bust my nuts by hand.

You may interpret that both literally AND euphemistically.
=Smidge=
 
2013-02-25 03:42:13 PM

WorkingInParadise: Not sure if they are drugs, but I am sure walnuts are alien...

[www.freepresshouston.com image 500x506]


Huh.  Laura Petrie/Mary Tyler Moore was kinda hot!

3.bp.blogspot.com

2.bp.blogspot.com

24.media.tumblr.com

25.media.tumblr.com

Still sorta GMILF-y.

blog.zap2it.com

Whoa, WTF is this?  o_O

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-02-25 03:42:31 PM

Corvus: DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.

If something is already approved for use for one treatment your doctor can prescribe it for another. You don't have to wait for the FDA. Maybe your doctor is just deciding not to use it because the results aren't there.


But will insurance pay for the non-approved use?
 
2013-02-25 03:42:46 PM

Smidge204: I typically bust my nuts by hand.


Honey?
 
2013-02-25 03:42:55 PM
Food, it prevents/cures starvation!

Now all food is a drug...
 
2013-02-25 03:43:03 PM

dahmers love zombie: Hmm.  Worldtruth.tv.  So what other major bombshells has this website exposed?


"Ten facts that prove Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax".
"Chemtrail flu: Have you got it yet?"
"The vaccine hoax is over"

Yeah, I'm gonna go with "Your Blog Sucks" for $500, Alex.


But thanks to them, my precious essence remains pure!
 
2013-02-25 03:44:59 PM
Walnut oil cured ringworm when I was a kid. Don't know if it still does or not.
 
2013-02-25 03:45:14 PM
I thought the supplements reg that went though congress years back you can basically put anything on your package if you say it's not evaluated by the FDA... assuming it is a product that wont kill/severely harm people in short spans of time. Grind em up into a pill add some harmless flower, call it by Latin name and sell it for $13 a bottle at whole foods.

/please send my check asap.
 
2013-02-25 03:47:09 PM

odinsposse: Snargi: Here is another site with the same story that isn't Farked...Yet.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/07/fda-sa ys -walnuts-are-drugs.aspx

Oh, it's Mercola. Another site full of alternative medicine craziness.


Yeah, didn't really look before I posted the link.
 
2013-02-25 03:49:24 PM
In case you missed it (from 7/25/2011)
The FDA has announced that walnuts are drugs. Read that again if you need to
link
Looking forward to September of 2014 when we can discuss the exact same thing again.
 
2013-02-25 03:49:38 PM
Walnuts are better than chin nuts.
 
2013-02-25 03:49:46 PM

Ambivalence: The law says that if you make any medicinal claims about a substance, that substsance has to be approved by the FDA for that purpose.

For example, I used to make soap (as a hobby) and the law states that you cannot ascribe any property to a soap/lotion/etc beyond "moisturizing".  Even if a particular essential oil is known to be good for acne, if it's not FDA approved to treat acne, you cannot claim that a soap that contains that essential oil "treats acne" or is "anti-acne".

Walnuts may be healthy and good for you, but implying or claiming it will cure disease or make you healthier by eating them greatly exaggerates what benefits someone can expect to have from them (to the point of fraud).


www.d.umn.edu
We know your game.
 
2013-02-25 03:51:41 PM

ga362: Walnut oil cured ringworm when I was a kid.


You need FDA approval to say that.
 
2013-02-25 03:52:08 PM
Good on them! I just love the government when they stop bad things like this! It makes me feel safe.
 
2013-02-25 03:53:09 PM

J. Frank Parnell: But if you want to rush a drug to market for something like 'restless leg syndrome' with hardly any testing the FDA has your back.

/If it's found to be fatal later, that's just the price you pay for progress.


"Restless leg syndrome" is about as real as Morgellons. Curing a fake disease is impossible. The FDA doesn't regulate obviously impossible claims.
 
2013-02-25 03:53:48 PM

WinoRhino: loki see loki do: WinoRhino: loki see loki do: Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.

Is that the one with the attractive wooden base?

Damn straight.

Here's the thing with that particular model. One Christmas Eve I'm drinking martinis, I'm cracking nuts, smoking a little of the haze, right? I start to bug out a bit. The Christmas tree starts growing, I'm shrinking and all these army mice come out of nowhere led by this, like, mouse king I guess. At that point I'm calling at the ol' model 816 to help me out, right? Nutcrackers are supposed to fight this shiat off. But no. He's all "Look, I have an attractive wooden base!" Not legs, mind you, like a proper nutcracker. No bayonet. No intimidating red uniform. He's just wagging his wooden handle like a scared puppy. I had to fight off the mice creatures with a goddamned sword swizzle stick, and it was a biatch to get that olive off first. I finish off the mouse king, suffer a few bites, possibly rabies, all while the 816 just apologizes and offers me a goddamned filbert. fark the model 816 and its attractive wooden base. I regifted that biatch the next morning.


You must have been trippin balls, holmes, cause the 8 motherfarking 16 has your back. Remeber, this is the ROCKET 816, and if you do not avail yourself of its formidable leverage, which is capable of exerting metric farkloads of gleaming alloy crunch death on invading mousies, all you need to do is unscrew the bustanut reciever and the Rocket 8 mousestomping 16 can turn a standard pecan or brazil nut into a high velocity shrapnel hail .

You'll rue that regifting, bub.
 
2013-02-25 03:54:08 PM

Oliver Twisted: Corvus: DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.

If something is already approved for use for one treatment your doctor can prescribe it for another. You don't have to wait for the FDA. Maybe your doctor is just deciding not to use it because the results aren't there.

But will insurance pay for the non-approved use?


I don't know. But that's not what he said. So it has nothing to do with the point I was making.
 
2013-02-25 03:55:04 PM
Is this like how the alternative medicine nuts claim the cyanide in apricot seeds has "anti-cancer properties"?
 
2013-02-25 03:55:44 PM

vudukungfu: One of the greatest cons was creating the FDA (it's for your own good) and letting the larger pharmaceutical concerns pull the strings.

How's that working out for you, america?


Much better than before when was had lots of people getting sick and ill because of lack of sanitary conditions in food preparation.
 
2013-02-25 03:57:13 PM
I'm allergic to walnuts, so I'm getting a kick out of this.
 
2013-02-25 03:57:19 PM

Oliver Twisted: Corvus: DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.

If something is already approved for use for one treatment your doctor can prescribe it for another. You don't have to wait for the FDA. Maybe your doctor is just deciding not to use it because the results aren't there.

But will insurance pay for the non-approved use?


Besides what you insurance company will pay for is up to the rules of the insurance company. If you have a problem with them it's them not the FDA.
 
2013-02-25 03:57:57 PM

vudukungfu: One of the greatest cons was creating the FDA (it's for your own good) and letting the larger pharmaceutical concerns pull the strings.

How's that working out for you, america?


THIS.  So much this so hard right now.
 
2013-02-25 03:59:02 PM

Oliver Twisted: Corvus: DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.

If something is already approved for use for one treatment your doctor can prescribe it for another. You don't have to wait for the FDA. Maybe your doctor is just deciding not to use it because the results aren't there.

But will insurance pay for the non-approved use?


That is entirely up to them. But usually.... no.
 
2013-02-25 04:00:37 PM
Basically, the same rules that allow companies to sell almost anything under the sun as a supplement -- with little to no FDA oversight -- are getting in the way of a company labeling a natural product (in this case a nut) as being able to prevent or cure disease.

 

odinsposse: Oh, it's Mercola. Another site full of alternative medicine craziness.


Though I don't dismiss all alternative medicine out of hand...
I'm sure people like Mercola would love to be able to market supplements as being able to prevent, treat and/or cure disease with no oversight from the FDA. Find a guy who'll write a paper saying fish oil cures lukemia, smack a label on it and ship it.
Personally, I'd rather have the FDA hassling a company for the way they market Walnuts than that.
 
2013-02-25 04:05:31 PM
Yeah, thalidomide babies give the FDA the finger.
Oh wait, they can't.
But oh yeah, there weren't any thalidomide babies in the US because the FDA wouldn't approve it.
 
2013-02-25 04:05:37 PM
I don't know if this has anything to do with it but the former head of Monsanto is now the head of the FDA.

but i'm sure it makes me really nervous and distrustful of the FDA.
 
2013-02-25 04:08:20 PM

DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.


Xarelto got approved for DVT recently
 
2013-02-25 04:14:01 PM
Walnuts cure the marthambles, the Strong Fives, and moon pall.

They rectify the humors, you see. It's science.
 
2013-02-25 04:15:12 PM

clane: and yall keep voting Democrat....

[media.npr.org image 850x637]


Dude. That's an American snowbilly. I don't think they're allowed to be called anything other than tragic reminders of the dangers of permafrost to the frontal lobe. 'Tis why a disapproving look from an American snowbilly of any political, ideological or theological persuasion means you are doing something right.
 
2013-02-25 04:17:39 PM

Dirtybird971: I don't know if this has anything to do with it but the former head of Monsanto is now the head of the FDA.

but i'm sure it makes me really nervous and distrustful of the FDA.


I think the FDA is useless. They'll jump all over stuff like walnuts but approve Aspartame, GMO's and let chicken factory farms inspect themselves?... just to mention a few.
 
2013-02-25 04:18:03 PM
Never underestimate the stupidity and greed of bureaucracy.
 
2013-02-25 04:25:59 PM
You can't market walnuts or broccoli as good for you but Lay's can call their chips heart healthy. farkin bullshiat
 
2013-02-25 04:26:06 PM
Medicinal efficacy < > "drug". It is just a label of enforcement convenience, much like "law".
 
2013-02-25 04:30:28 PM
Deez Nuts....that is all.
 
2013-02-25 04:35:27 PM

loki see loki do: Yeah, thalidomide babies give the FDA the finger.
Oh wait, they can't.
But oh yeah, there weren't any thalidomide babies in the US because the FDA wouldn't approve it.


Sure there were, mom's got it from Europe.
 
2013-02-25 04:41:47 PM

the ha ha guy: It's already an FDA approved medicine. Just go to your pharmacy and ask for Coke Syrup.


That is not the same as Coca-Cola marketing it on their soda bottles. The intended use of Coke is as a food,not a medicine. Coke is a soda (food) and is good for upset stomachs when flat (drug). Coca-Cola will never advertise on their bottles that letting the soda go flat helps in curing stomach aches because they don't want to be regulated twice. Going back to the walnuts, perhaps a better comparison is that if apple companies advertised that "an apple a day keeps the doctor away"  they would have similar problems.

/been almost 15 years since I took a food and drug law class, but this is what I recall
 
2013-02-25 04:47:06 PM

J. Frank Parnell: But if you want to rush a drug to market for something like 'restless leg syndrome' with hardly any testing the FDA has your back.

/If it's found to be fatal later, that's just the price you pay for progress.


I am really getting sick of people acting like "Restless Leg Syndrome" is some type od big joke/scam

your legs are not Restless because they will not stop moving, they are restless because you hope you can find some combo of movement and postion that they will at last be conferable and you can sleep for a few hours before they wake you back up

///This is the reason your grandfather would do a shot before he went to bed
 
2013-02-25 04:51:33 PM
We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.
 
2013-02-25 04:54:31 PM
 Yet another example of how modern regulatory agencies exsist only to protect and facilitate the industries they're supposed to regulate. Pharmaceutical companies had been pushing pretty hard for them to crack down on truthful health claims for a long time. Hell at one point they had lobbied for some common plants and foods to be "better regulated" becauses they provided long proven medical benifits but were forced to back down once enough people called BS on it.

Hypnozombie
/hey wait, I hear there are all kinds of medical benifits from drinking water... oh damn.
 
2013-02-25 04:54:48 PM

loki see loki do: WinoRhino: loki see loki do: WinoRhino: loki see loki do: Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.

Is that the one with the attractive wooden base?

Damn straight.

Here's the thing with that particular model. One Christmas Eve I'm drinking martinis, I'm cracking nuts, smoking a little of the haze, right? I start to bug out a bit. The Christmas tree starts growing, I'm shrinking and all these army mice come out of nowhere led by this, like, mouse king I guess. At that point I'm calling at the ol' model 816 to help me out, right? Nutcrackers are supposed to fight this shiat off. But no. He's all "Look, I have an attractive wooden base!" Not legs, mind you, like a proper nutcracker. No bayonet. No intimidating red uniform. He's just wagging his wooden handle like a scared puppy. I had to fight off the mice creatures with a goddamned sword swizzle stick, and it was a biatch to get that olive off first. I finish off the mouse king, suffer a few bites, possibly rabies, all while the 816 just apologizes and offers me a goddamned filbert. fark the model 816 and its attractive wooden base. I regifted that biatch the next morning.

You must have been trippin balls, holmes, cause the 8 motherfarking 16 has your back. Remeber, this is the ROCKET 816, and if you do not avail yourself of its formidable leverage, which is capable of exerting metric farkloads of gleaming alloy crunch death on invading mousies, all you need to do is unscrew the bustanut reciever and the Rocket 8 mousestomping 16 can turn a standard pecan or brazil nut into a high velocity shrapnel hail .

You'll rue that regifting, bub.


I think I've seen that missing Rocket 816-my future father in law has that bad boy. He bought it at a yard sale from a widow-she was scared of it, even though her departed old man had added a wicked nut catcher base to it, so you can let the Rocket fly for an hour and not even get a shell on the tabel. Didn't know what she had-that puppy now had a place of honour in the FFIL's living room, right next to his chair. Guy's heavy duty mechanic, I figure it's a matter of time before I come by and there's a log splitter in its place.
 
2013-02-25 04:55:10 PM
FDA  www.pacovilla.com  BIG RX
 
2013-02-25 04:56:06 PM

Revek: We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.


because it is so Evil to say

"If you are going to say your product has medical benefits, you need to be prepared to prove it"
 
2013-02-25 04:56:56 PM

Ehcks: J. Frank Parnell: But if you want to rush a drug to market for something like 'restless leg syndrome' with hardly any testing the FDA has your back.

/If it's found to be fatal later, that's just the price you pay for progress.

"Restless leg syndrome" is about as real as Morgellons. Curing a fake disease is impossible. The FDA doesn't regulate obviously impossible claims.


lewl
 
2013-02-25 05:00:37 PM

lostcat: Wow, a massive page full of mysql warnings.


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-02-25 05:04:24 PM

DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.


I have A-Fib. Many people are happy with Pradax, but a word of caution: I was on Pradax for several months and the stomach pains were nearly unbearable. Pradax is an acid pill that you have to take twice a day, so, if like me, you have a sensitve stomach you might want to a have a thorough discussion with your doctor before going on it.

Xarelto, on the other, hand is a tiny non-acidic pill that you only take once a day.  For me it has proven .the best choice, no contest.
 
2013-02-25 05:15:09 PM

thenumber5: J. Frank Parnell: But if you want to rush a drug to market for something like 'restless leg syndrome' with hardly any testing the FDA has your back.

/If it's found to be fatal later, that's just the price you pay for progress.

I am really getting sick of people acting like "Restless Leg Syndrome" is some type od big joke/scam

your legs are not Restless because they will not stop moving, they are restless because you hope you can find some combo of movement and postion that they will at last be conferable and you can sleep for a few hours before they wake you back up

///This is the reason your grandfather would do a shot before he went to bed


Why don't you just take a shot before bed, then? ;)
 
2013-02-25 05:31:37 PM
If you market something as having curative properties, it becomes a drug in the eyes of the FDA. This is a Good Thing (TM). It prevents the resurgence of the snake-oil industry. Obviously many food items have various health benefits, and it is not illegal to point that out. However, it is the job of the public to educate themselves about what they put in their bodies. Or have we dropped to the level that we get all our information from the marketing departments of large corporations? Oh right... I guess we have.
 
2013-02-25 05:32:33 PM
The FDA is full of people too wimpy to work for the Oregon Liquor Control Commission.
 
2013-02-25 05:34:58 PM

Snargi: Here is another site with the same story that isn't Farked...Yet.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/07/fda-sa ys -walnuts-are-drugs.aspx


"As unbelievable as it sounds, current law makes it illegal for food producers to share certain types of scientific information with you."

Yeah, 'certain types' like 'made-up', 'highlyexaggerated' and 'baseless'.
 
2013-02-25 05:38:41 PM

Revek: We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.


I absolutely LOVE it when someone walks in, strolls past 100 opposition comments, and posts a short comment glad-handing the article.
 
2013-02-25 05:42:27 PM

HypnozombieX: Yet another example of how modern regulatory agencies exsist only to protect and facilitate the industries they're supposed to regulate. Pharmaceutical companies had been pushing pretty hard for them to crack down on truthful health claims for a long time. Hell at one point they had lobbied for some common plants and foods to be "better regulated" becauses they provided long proven medical benifits but were forced to back down once enough people called BS on it.

Hypnozombie
/hey wait, I hear there are all kinds of medical benifits from drinking water... oh damn.


Yes they are in bed together but at a minimum the FDA does require even big pharma to back up their claims, sure the side affects will melt you like the robocop dude but at least you don't have the restless leg!
 
2013-02-25 05:48:16 PM

J. Frank Parnell: ga362: Walnut oil cured ringworm when I was a kid.

You need FDA approval to say that.


No. You need FDA approval to make money from selling it.
 
2013-02-25 05:51:15 PM

Mr_Fabulous: J. Frank Parnell: ga362: Walnut oil cured ringworm when I was a kid.

You need FDA approval to say that.

No. You need FDA approval to make money from selling it.


Yup and stick it in a tiny bottle & overcharge for it.
 
2013-02-25 06:15:37 PM
What about Chin-nuts?
 
2013-02-25 06:37:49 PM
McCain? John McCain?

Anyone?

/fark, I am disappoint
 
2013-02-25 06:39:34 PM

Aigoo: Ambivalence: The law says that if you make any medicinal claims about a substance, that substsance has to be approved by the FDA for that purpose.

For example, I used to make soap (as a hobby) and the law states that you cannot ascribe any property to a soap/lotion/etc beyond "moisturizing".  Even if a particular essential oil is known to be good for acne, if it's not FDA approved to treat acne, you cannot claim that a soap that contains that essential oil "treats acne" or is "anti-acne".

Walnuts may be healthy and good for you, but implying or claiming it will cure disease or make you healthier by eating them greatly exaggerates what benefits someone can expect to have from them (to the point of fraud).

Right then. So who wants to sue the shiat out of PepsiCo for the blantantly fraudulent implications and claims it makes saying it'll lower your cholesterol and prevent heart disease to eats bags and bags of their heart-healthy chips? Surely that's fraud?

Oh wait..there are studies that indicate it may help if you don't eat a family sized bag a day. But PepsiCo has massive lobbyists pouring money into capitol hill. So do the drug manufacturers that treat all that heart disease.

But walnuts... 50-some papers backing up the claims and no lobbyists. So sorry, walnuts.

Follow the money, honey.


This is the first intelligent post. That is sad. The amount of govt boot licking stupidity in here is shocking (yes, even for Fark).

/FDA is out of control.
//Farkers need to actually COMPREHEND the article, not just skim it.
 
2013-02-25 06:42:53 PM

thenumber5: Revek: We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.

because it is so Evil to say

"If you are going to say your product has medical benefits, you need to be prepared to prove it"


yup, just like the 50 studies have proven.

/oh wait studies - that's science! it's like magic or something, disregard it.
 
2013-02-25 06:43:16 PM
benzedrex aka OTC methamphetamine??
 
2013-02-25 06:43:59 PM

Ehcks: J. Frank Parnell: But if you want to rush a drug to market for something like 'restless leg syndrome' with hardly any testing the FDA has your back.

/If it's found to be fatal later, that's just the price you pay for progress.

"Restless leg syndrome" is about as real as Morgellons. Curing a fake disease is impossible. The FDA doesn't regulate obviously impossible claims.


wow, you are dumb. look at how dumb you are.

/you should feel bad
 
2013-02-25 06:45:28 PM

kingoomieiii: Revek: We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.

I absolutely LOVE it when someone walks in, strolls past 100 opposition comments, and posts a short comment glad-handing the article.


it's not hard when most of the comments are about fellating the FDA

/there is something white and sticky on your chin btw...
 
das
2013-02-25 06:58:22 PM
Good. I hate walnuts.

grumpycat.jpg
 
2013-02-25 06:58:57 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: /there is something white and sticky on your chin btw...


The article is a paranoid conspiracy site complaining about the FDA telling a food company they aren't allowed to make factual medical claims without FDA approval.

The FDA isn't exactly shiatting rainbows, but it seems that conservatives only REALLY get upset at them when they actually do their jobs and violate the freedom of businesses to lie to consumers.
 
2013-02-25 07:01:01 PM

kingoomieiii: HindiDiscoMonster: /there is something white and sticky on your chin btw...

The article is a paranoid conspiracy site complaining about the FDA telling a food company they aren't allowed to make factual medical claims without FDA approval.

The FDA isn't exactly shiatting rainbows, but it seems that conservatives only REALLY get upset at them when they actually do their jobs and violate the freedom of businesses to lie to consumers.


the site made no medical claims, the site made factual claims about studies that made medical claims... in other words:

Diamond didn't say "we say this is true", they said: "These studies say this is true."
 
2013-02-25 07:09:35 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: Diamond didn't say "we say this is true", they said: "These studies say this is true."



According to some, there are "studies" that say homeopathic sugar pills will slow aging, cure cancer, regrow lost limbs, and bring the dead back to life.

But even if said studies do exist, that doesn't make them accurate, nor sufficient evidence to get a pass from the FDA.
 
2013-02-25 07:10:40 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: Diamond didn't say "we say this is true", they said: "These studies say this is true."


That's pretty firmly in the FDA's neighborhood.  By the way, let's pour one out for the poor, poor marketers, shall we?

Every pseudo-medicine out there has claims that multiple studies support them. There are rules about what you're allowed to present to consumers as medical fact without the FDA disclaimer, and Diamond's marketers knew what they were. If they didn't, they're terrible at their jobs.
 
2013-02-25 07:13:05 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: Diamond didn't say "we say this is true", they said: "These studies say this is true."


According to some, there are "studies" that say homeopathic sugar pills will slow aging, cure cancer, regrow lost limbs, and bring the dead back to life.

But even if said studies do exist, that doesn't make them accurate, nor sufficient evidence to get a pass from the FDA.


this is about omega-3 fatty acids, not about sugar pills. RTFA.

regardless, discredit the studies if you have a problem with them, but leave Diamond alone... they made NO claims.
 
2013-02-25 07:14:19 PM

kingoomieiii: HindiDiscoMonster: Diamond didn't say "we say this is true", they said: "These studies say this is true."

That's pretty firmly in the FDA's neighborhood.  By the way, let's pour one out for the poor, poor marketers, shall we?

Every pseudo-medicine out there has claims that multiple studies support them. There are rules about what you're allowed to present to consumers as medical fact without the FDA disclaimer, and Diamond's marketers knew what they were. If they didn't, they're terrible at their jobs.


once again...

Diamond made NO claims.
Diamond cited studies that made claims

/this is not hard to understand.
 
2013-02-25 07:20:16 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: Diamond made NO claims.
Diamond cited studies that made claims


"On its website and packaging, the company stated that the omega-3 fatty acids found in walnuts have been shown to have certain health benefits, including reduced risk of heart disease and some types of cancer."

That's not a citation. That's using the existence of un-cited studies to make a medical claim. If it's not an FDA-approved one, you're not allowed to do that.

The FDA maintains a list of qualified and unqualified health statements that are acceptable for use in advertisements. They're A-OK with the claim that Omega 3s improve hearth health (depending on how it's phrased), but as far as I know they don't allow advertisements to claim that Omega 3s "Treat, cure, or prevent" any variety of cancer.
 
2013-02-25 07:28:33 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: regardless, discredit the studies if you have a problem with them, but leave Diamond alone... they made NO claims.



Which studies did they cite?

If they had said "According to a study by Doctor Roberts at John Hopkins...", that would be a verifiable claim by a recognized institution.

Instead, their claim is basically "According to Wikipedia, 35 guys in lab coats said..."
 
2013-02-25 07:29:04 PM
Why is the article text centered?
 
2013-02-25 07:32:26 PM

kingoomieiii: HindiDiscoMonster: Diamond made NO claims.
Diamond cited studies that made claims

"On its website and packaging, the company stated that the omega-3 fatty acids found in walnuts have been shown to have certain health benefits, including reduced risk of heart disease and some types of cancer."

That's not a citation. That's using the existence of un-cited studies to make a medical claim. If it's not an FDA-approved one, you're not allowed to do that.

The FDA maintains a list of qualified and unqualified health statements that are acceptable for use in advertisements. They're A-OK with the claim that Omega 3s improve hearth health (depending on how it's phrased), but as far as I know they don't allow advertisements to claim that Omega 3s "Treat, cure, or prevent" any variety of cancer.


if you don't see the problem with labeling a farking walnut as a new "drug", then there is no help for you. it is a patently false claim which is made apparent by the fact that they allow junk food to have a heart healthy label at the same farking time.
 
2013-02-25 07:33:55 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: regardless, discredit the studies if you have a problem with them, but leave Diamond alone... they made NO claims.


Which studies did they cite?

If they had said "According to a study by Doctor Roberts at John Hopkins...", that would be a verifiable claim by a recognized institution.

Instead, their claim is basically "According to Wikipedia, 35 guys in lab coats said..."


oh, i can see the packaging now... 285 pages of citations attached to the packaging... won't that be great for the price of walnuts? $18.00 for packaging alone... great idea.
 
2013-02-25 07:36:53 PM

stonicus: Food, it prevents/cures starvation!

Now all food is a drug...


Great now you need a prescription to buy groceries
 
2013-02-25 07:37:35 PM

the ha ha guy: If they had said "According to a study by Doctor Roberts at John Hopkins...",


That's actually not allowed either, at least on advertising information.

It's not like they'd be publishing the abstract of the study. They'd be providing a (vested) lay person's analysis of whatever the best-case scenario of the study is (from the perspective of their bank account).

Study:
Out of 4,000 rats, 100 on placebo developed cancer, but only 75 given Walnuts did- we recommend further study

Ad:
Johns Hopkins recently published a study DEFINITIVELY PROVING THE CANCER-CURING POWER OF WALNUTS, WHICH WE SELL
 
2013-02-25 07:39:48 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: if you don't see the problem with labeling a farking walnut as a new "drug", then there is no help for you. it is a patently false claim which is made apparent by the fact that they allow junk food to have a heart healthy label at the same farking time.


The FDA is 100% within their power to treat the product as an unapproved medical supplement, because that's how Diamond decided to market it.

If you want to sell nuts hassle-free, don't spend millions of dollars telling people they cure diseases.
 
2013-02-25 07:42:29 PM

kingoomieiii: HindiDiscoMonster: if you don't see the problem with labeling a farking walnut as a new "drug", then there is no help for you. it is a patently false claim which is made apparent by the fact that they allow junk food to have a heart healthy label at the same farking time.

The FDA is 100% within their power to treat the product as an unapproved medical supplement, because that's how Diamond decided to market it.

If you want to sell nuts hassle-free, don't spend millions of dollars telling people they cure diseases.


artistic spin does not make it factual.
they indicated studies said it not that they claimed it.

/and around and around we go.
//goodbye
 
2013-02-25 07:43:03 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: oh, i can see the packaging now... 285 pages of citations attached to the packaging... won't that be great for the price of walnuts? $18.00 for packaging alone... great idea.



They don't have to provide the list on the packaging, they only have to make it available somewhere.

So far, they haven't even done that, they only cite "stuff we found in some library" and "a tabloid-quality alternative health magazine", neither of which are verifiable claims.

And in any case, you asked me to disprove the studies, yet you refuse to let me see those studies. Do you really not see the flaw in that argument, or are you just making a lazy attempt at trolling?
 
2013-02-25 07:43:16 PM

WeenerGord: stonicus: Food, it prevents/cures starvation!

Now all food is a drug...

Great now you need a prescription to buy groceries


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hopefully, we'll only have a small copay.
 
2013-02-25 07:44:13 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: oh, i can see the packaging now... 285 pages of citations attached to the packaging... won't that be great for the price of walnuts? $18.00 for packaging alone... great idea.


They don't have to provide the list on the packaging, they only have to make it available somewhere.

So far, they haven't even done that, they only cite "stuff we found in some library" and "a tabloid-quality alternative health magazine", neither of which are verifiable claims.

And in any case, you asked me to disprove the studies, yet you refuse to let me see those studies. Do you really not see the flaw in that argument, or are you just making a lazy attempt at trolling?


that ain't my job...

/google is your friend.
 
2013-02-25 07:50:14 PM
C:) Subby is a Person of drug company, the answer is c:) money.
 
2013-02-25 07:51:01 PM
Andy Murray's Bald Spot:

[www.d.umn.edu image 350x257]
We know your game.


That movie actually had a several key inaccuracies.

1) you do not get glycerine by rending fat (human or otherwise).  Glycerine is a byproduct of the chemical process of soapmaking (called soponification).  Most commercial soapmakers separate out the glycerine by adding salt to the soap while it's still in a liquid or mushy form. handmade soap retains its glycerine which is very moisurizing.

2) if you do experience a lye burn do not, under any circumstances, pour vinegar  or any other acid on it. yes lye is an alkaline and vineger is an acid and the one will cancel out the other, but it will cause a LOT of bubbling and actually make the burn worse.  Always ALWAYS flush any chemicals from your skin or eyes with cold water.

Animal fat does make a very good bar of soap though (whether it be tallow or lard) but often carries with it a slightly porcine smell (in the case of lard) or a beefy smell (in the case of tallow).  You can combine several different plant oils to get a similar result without the odor.

Now ask me about lotions (I dare you).
 
2013-02-25 07:51:19 PM
It's true. They are drugs.  I'm hooked on Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds
 
2013-02-25 07:52:00 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: that ain't my job...

/google is your friend.



You claim that Diamond has cited verifiable studies. According to Google, they cite anonymous "studies" and vague "research", neither of which are verifiable by any metric.

So, you made the claim that they cite specific studies, therefore it is your job to prove your claim.
 
2013-02-25 07:53:24 PM

relaxitsjustme: It's true. They are drugs.  I'm hooked on Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds


pistachios.... now those are drugs.

/little green specks of crack
 
2013-02-25 07:53:45 PM

rumpelstiltskin: fark you, marketers. There's nothing stupid about this particular law. Go think of some other way to sell your walnuts.




No!

I call for a war on walnuts!

If we can save just one child.
 
2013-02-25 07:56:20 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: that ain't my job...

/google is your friend.


You claim that Diamond has cited verifiable studies. According to Google, they cite anonymous "studies" and vague "research", neither of which are verifiable by any metric.

So, you made the claim that they cite specific studies, therefore it is your job to prove your claim.


read what i wrote again... and again if you still don't get it: i claimed only that they cited studies, not SPECIFIC studies. I also made no claim as to verifiability.

also note: I am not the CEO of the Diamond Nut Company, so they are not MY claims.

/not my job... write Diamond about that.
 
2013-02-25 07:57:25 PM

rumpelstiltskin: fark you, marketers. There's nothing stupid about this particular law. Go think of some other way to sell your walnuts.


Done in one. Just because you want to sell shiat doesn't give you carte blanche to market pseudo-science and out-of-context half truths. 

/fark you, marketers.
//And fark you again for getting publicity for this contrived bullshiat.
 
2013-02-25 07:59:13 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: read what i wrote again... and again if you still don't get it: i claimed only that they cited studies, not SPECIFIC studies. I also made no claim as to verifiability.



So you honestly think that "According to Wikipedia, some guy in a lab coat told a blogger" is sufficient to satisfy the FDA about specific health claims?
 
2013-02-25 07:59:27 PM
I hate food lobby groups.

Fark Pistachios.
Fark Walnuts.
Fark Florida Oranges.
Fark The Other White Meat.
Fark the Incredible Edible Egg.
And double fark the American Dairy Council.

/I probably missed a few.
//I just needed to vent.
 
2013-02-25 08:03:22 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: read what i wrote again... and again if you still don't get it: i claimed only that they cited studies, not SPECIFIC studies. I also made no claim as to verifiability.


So you honestly think that "According to Wikipedia, some guy in a lab coat told a blogger" is sufficient to satisfy the FDA about specific health claims?


This in no way constitutes an authorization to take artistic license in what i said. Please look up the words that i used at Dictionary.com or a similar source, then try to read it without those artistic glasses on. If I make a claim, I will be VERY clear in said claim.

/or i will be a smartass
 
2013-02-25 08:04:25 PM

The Irresponsible Captain: I hate food lobby groups.

Fark Pistachios.
Fark Walnuts.
Fark Florida Oranges.
Fark The Other White Meat.
Fark the Incredible Edible Egg.
And double fark the American Dairy Council.

/I probably missed a few.
//I just needed to vent.


I hate all lobby groups.

/law for money
 
2013-02-25 08:08:12 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: This in no way constitutes an authorization to take artistic license in what i said. Please look up the words that i used at Dictionary.com or a similar source, then try to read it without those artistic glasses on. If I make a claim, I will be VERY clear in said claim.

/or i will be a smartass



I wasn't referring to your claims, I was referring to the claims made by Diamond, which currently consist of "studies on file in a library" and "studies published by a supermarket tabloid".

In any case, Diamond is required to provide legitimate studies to the FDA upon request. Apparently, they refuse to do so, thus the action being taken by the FDA.
 
2013-02-25 08:11:43 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: This in no way constitutes an authorization to take artistic license in what i said. Please look up the words that i used at Dictionary.com or a similar source, then try to read it without those artistic glasses on. If I make a claim, I will be VERY clear in said claim.

/or i will be a smartass


I wasn't referring to your claims, I was referring to the claims made by Diamond, which currently consist of "studies on file in a library" and "studies published by a supermarket tabloid".

In any case, Diamond is required to provide legitimate studies to the FDA upon request. Apparently, they refuse to do so, thus the action being taken by the FDA.


now that is an entirely different issue... and THAT i agree with. What I do not agree with is trying to classify a nut as a drug. That is the same kind of derpy bullshiat the DEA does with Marijuana AND Hemp. Same principle... That is a different subject, however, and it's dinner time for me, so I'll be back after eating.
 
2013-02-25 08:13:00 PM

Curt Blizzah: What about Chin-nuts?


they cure hysteria
 
2013-02-25 08:18:48 PM

Jument: Aigoo: Right then. So who wants to sue the shiat out of PepsiCo for the blantantly fraudulent implications and claims it makes saying it'll lower your cholesterol and prevent heart disease to eats bags and bags of their heart-healthy chips? Surely that's fraud?

I'm curious, what products are you talking about?
Personally I am fine with the FDA cracking down on advertising and packaging that suggests health benefits based on nothing.


Why don't you go have a look at the Frito Lay site (they're owned by Pepsi)? Or look at a package. Both strongly imply that they're healthy for you--0 transfats! Use only oils that are good and lower LDL (bad cholesterol) while maintaining HDL (good cholesterol)! All natural ingredients (um...potato chips should only have potatoes, oil, and salt...any chip can say that, it doesn't make it good for you). Their website has an entire secion dedicated to "your health."

Don't believe me they make these claims? Go look. Here's a direct quote from the website:

Frito-Lay snacks start with real farm-grown ingredients.  You might be surprised at how much good stuff goes into your favorite snack. Good stuff like potatoes, which naturally contain vitamin C and essential minerals. Or corn, one of the world's most popular grains, packed with Thiamin, vitamin B6, and Phosphorous - all necessary for healthy bones, teeth, nerves and muscles.

And it's not just the obvious ingredients. Our all-natural sunflower, canola, corn and soybean oils are considered to be healthier oils by the FDA because they contain good polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats, which help lower total and LDL "bad" cholesterol and maintain HDL "good" cholesterol levels. They also contain <20% of the bad saturated fat, which raises LDL, cholesterol and 0g of trans fat. Even salt, when eaten in moderation as part of a balanced diet, provides sodium which is essential for the body
.

They make those damn chips sound like farking health food, for the love of God! And the FDA lets them get away with it. Double standard. Pepsi should be held just as liable as Diamond, period, or Diamond should be allowed to state that many, many studies state the walnuts have these beneficial effects. Because fact is, walnuts are a goddamned health food compared to farking potato chips and cheetos.
 
2013-02-25 08:22:24 PM

papafree: Aigoo: But walnuts... 50-some papers backing up the claims and no lobbyists. So sorry, walnuts.

Follow the money, honey.

Yes, follow the money. Big Walnut puts lots of cash into 50 studies that purport their super incredible awesome health benefits. That doesn't mean they're good studies, but at least they can claim persecution when FDA finds they're being incredibly dishonest by paying scientists to conduct studies that make their products look healthier than they actually are.

/Love walnuts. super tasty snack.


I don't disagree that walnuts probably paid for the studies. The same as the cereal companies paid for the studies saying that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. Like I said, follow the money.

You don't think Monsanto paid for the studies on corn and canola oil? you're kidding yourself.
 
2013-02-25 08:25:37 PM
What is it with all the nut hate, farking nutists

I hope walnuts do prevent cancer and you all get nut cancer and your nuts fall off due to your raging nuthatred

/nuts to you
//nuts
 
2013-02-25 08:31:05 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: now that is an entirely different issue... and THAT i agree with. What I do not agree with is trying to classify a nut as a drug.



They are not trying to classify all walnuts as a drug, only that specific product, with that specific packaging and advertising.

And even then, "classified as a drug" is merely an enforcement measure. If the FDA were to impose a small fine per infringement, the large corporations would pay it like a tax. If it were a large fine, the local/regional companies would be crippled over one honest mistake.

But under their current method, "if you call it a drug we treat it as a drug", everyone is treated equally under the law. Both small and large companies have a chance to retract or prove their claims. Only when the companies refuse do we even hear about it in the first place, as we're seeing here.

If Diamond had said "here are the reliable studies", the FDA would have backed off. If Diamond had said "we'll change our advertising", the FDA would have backed off. Instead, Diamond said "we're going to keep making our claims anyway because our studies say we can, but we're not going to let you see those studies that may or may not exist". Thus, the FDA is making them submit to the same standards as a drug manufacturer.
 
2013-02-25 09:13:00 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: now that is an entirely different issue... and THAT i agree with. What I do not agree with is trying to classify a nut as a drug.


They are not trying to classify all walnuts as a drug, only that specific product, with that specific packaging and advertising.

And even then, "classified as a drug" is merely an enforcement measure. If the FDA were to impose a small fine per infringement, the large corporations would pay it like a tax. If it were a large fine, the local/regional companies would be crippled over one honest mistake.

But under their current method, "if you call it a drug we treat it as a drug", everyone is treated equally under the law. Both small and large companies have a chance to retract or prove their claims. Only when the companies refuse do we even hear about it in the first place, as we're seeing here.

If Diamond had said "here are the reliable studies", the FDA would have backed off. If Diamond had said "we'll change our advertising", the FDA would have backed off. Instead, Diamond said "we're going to keep making our claims anyway because our studies say we can, but we're not going to let you see those studies that may or may not exist". Thus, the FDA is making them submit to the same standards as a drug manufacturer.


FTA: "These claims, Faloon notes, are well supported by scientific research: "Life Extension has published 57 articles that describe the health benefits of walnuts"; and "The US National Library of Medicine database contains no fewer than 35 peer-reviewed published papers supporting a claim that ingesting walnuts improves vascular health and may reduce heart attack risk.""

which indicates to me that these studies are well known... no searching the ancient archives of Egypt, or having to avoid the large cat in the basement guarding the file cabinet necessary... so, given that, why is this not evidence enough for the FDA, esp. considering the FDA itself makes similar claims?

/can we say "money grab" ?
//just my opinion
 
2013-02-25 09:27:56 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: which indicates to me that these studies are well known...



Are they? One source is a tabloid, and the other is a library that accepts everything submitted.

Regardless, Diamond obviously knows the names of the studies, yet they refuse to cooperate with the FDA at all. They could have settled this long ago with a simple list, instead they're trying to martyr themselves in the eyes of the "deregulate medicine" community.

This isn't like a police officer pulling someone over for a miraculously "busted taillight" that was intact seconds before, this is like someone with no taillights at all using the defense of "my anonymous mechanic who lives in some state you've never heard of says I don't need taillights and you can't prove otherwise".
 
2013-02-25 09:40:07 PM

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: which indicates to me that these studies are well known...


Are they? One source is a tabloid, and the other is a library that accepts everything submitted.

Regardless, Diamond obviously knows the names of the studies, yet they refuse to cooperate with the FDA at all. They could have settled this long ago with a simple list, instead they're trying to martyr themselves in the eyes of the "deregulate medicine" community.

This isn't like a police officer pulling someone over for a miraculously "busted taillight" that was intact seconds before, this is like someone with no taillights at all using the defense of "my anonymous mechanic who lives in some state you've never heard of says I don't need taillights and you can't prove otherwise".


so, the FDA uses the same suspect data about omega-3 fatty acids? maybe it should fine itself then.

that is a horrible analogy...

this is more accurate:
this is like someone with taillights using the defense of "my well known mechanic who lives in a different state says "my taillights are road legal in this state."

/there are far more sources available than the two you mention... Here is a primer.
 
2013-02-25 09:53:00 PM
I'll bite, all you restless leg syndrome haters. It's a real thing, I have it. At the same time, I agree that it definitely sounds like BS to someone who doesn't. I don't have it that bad. I'll go a month, two, maybe more without anything at all, then I'll have a rough week or two of maybe 10-15 minutes a night of my leg wanting to spasm, which I can usually get rid of by getting up and pacing around the room for a few minutes. Nothing too bad, definitely not enough to even think about braving the magic drugs that supposedly cure it, which mostly seem to cause side effects that I would consider way worse than the RLS. But it is a real thing, no matter how shady it sounds.
 
2013-02-25 09:57:16 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: so, the FDA uses the same suspect data about omega-3 fatty acids? maybe it should fine itself then.



The FDA does allow specific claims about omega-3, but only from specific sources, which do not include walnuts. [1]

Since walnuts aren't on that list, Diamond has to cite their specific sources when asked. The rules are simple. If you say X cures Y, you must prove that X cures Y.

But despite the alleged prevalence of proof, Diamond is refusing to cite their claims at all. When the FDA gave them multiple avenues of becoming legal, Diamond decides to go with "help help I'm being repressed".
 
2013-02-25 09:59:48 PM

Olfin Bedwere: center


Because whoever formatted it is overdue to be slapped with a large trout. Way overdue.
 
2013-02-25 10:01:48 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: this is like someone with taillights using the defense of "my well known mechanic who lives in a different state says "my taillights are road legal in this state."



More like "my mechanic who lives somewhere in California but I will not name says..."

If they have the studies, they can name those studies. But what they're saying so far is "the studies are somewhere in that building, find them yourself".
 
2013-02-25 10:23:54 PM

WinoRhino: loki see loki do: WinoRhino: loki see loki do: Model 8 motherfarking sixteen, yo.

Is that the one with the attractive wooden base?

Damn straight.

Here's the thing with that particular model. One Christmas Eve I'm drinking martinis, I'm cracking nuts, smoking a little of the haze, right? I start to bug out a bit. The Christmas tree starts growing, I'm shrinking and all these army mice come out of nowhere led by this, like, mouse king I guess. At that point I'm calling at the ol' model 816 to help me out, right? Nutcrackers are supposed to fight this shiat off. But no. He's all "Look, I have an attractive wooden base!" Not legs, mind you, like a proper nutcracker. No bayonet. No intimidating red uniform. He's just wagging his wooden handle like a scared puppy. I had to fight off the mice creatures with a goddamned sword swizzle stick, and it was a biatch to get that olive off first. I finish off the mouse king, suffer a few bites, possibly rabies, all while the 816 just apologizes and offers me a goddamned filbert. fark the model 816 and its attractive wooden base. I regifted that biatch the next morning.


Thanks! you made my day. that was the funny!
 
2013-02-25 10:29:04 PM
FDA is right about this one. If the walnut folks dont want their product treated like a medicine then they cant run around claiming it treats diseases.
 
2013-02-25 11:03:16 PM

vudukungfu: One of the greatest cons was creating the FDA (it's for your own good) and letting the larger pharmaceutical concerns pull the strings.

How's that working out for you, america?


Pretty damn well actually.  Go and get a copy of the USP or NF before  FDA, take a look at the worthless and/or dangerous things that were prescribed at one point.  Or read up on the tragedy that was Elixir Sulfanilamide and ask again if FDA was worthwhile.
 
2013-02-25 11:47:15 PM

kingoomieiii: Revek: We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.

I absolutely LOVE it when someone walks in, strolls past 100 opposition comments, and posts a short comment glad-handing the article.


I didn't stroll, I breezed past them.  I need 500 dollars more medicine than I get monthly.  There are no programs for me.  I work, I have no insurance, I live in the land of plenty but I can't have any due to a system that is corrupt beyond redemption.  The FDA and their clients the drug company's will forever be on my shiat list for creating this environment.  They didn't do it alone but they are a huge influence.
 
2013-02-25 11:56:56 PM
So, the FDA's doing its job, and therefore that's bad? What's next, walnuts becoming the central theme of "Atlas Shrugged III: The Nuttening"?
 
2013-02-26 12:06:46 AM

vudukungfu: One of the greatest cons was creating the FDA (it's for your own good) and letting the larger pharmaceutical concerns pull the strings.

How's that working out for you, america?

It's not like there's any connection between the FDA and an evil multinational biotech corporation

http://emmaspeaks.hubpages.com/hub/The-Revolving-Door-Between-Monsan to -the-FDA-and-the-EPA-Your-Safety-in-Peril
 
2013-02-26 01:39:19 AM
FWIW, here's the link to the actual FDA letter:

http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/ucm202825 .h tm

While I haven't read enough about walnuts to form an opinion one way or the other, searching the term "FDA conflict of interest" sure brings up a lot of stuff.
 
2013-02-26 01:44:36 AM
That's just nuts!
 
2013-02-26 02:39:05 AM

anotar: FWIW, here's the link to the actual FDA letter:

http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/ucm202825 .h tm

While I haven't read enough about walnuts to form an opinion one way or the other, searching the term "FDA conflict of interest" sure brings up a lot of stuff.


I posted it above... notice the date? Old news is really quite old.
 
2013-02-26 03:01:35 AM
Did you know that oranges cure scurvy? Hey presto! Oranges are now an illegal drug!

A normal food does not become a drug just because a seller mentions that it has health benefits. It is still just a healthy food.

It is ridiculous and over the top to claim that normal healthy food has suddenly been classified as a drug because it was noticed that it is healthy. It's about as stupid as those zero tolerance news articles where kindergartners were charged with drug crimes for bringing lemon drops to school. Calling normal healthy food a drug and trying to deny people access to it is not what the FDA was designed to do.

But don't let that stop you from expressing your righteous rage at walnuts, you  anti - nut - ite bastards.
 
2013-02-26 03:08:26 AM
Look, folks, you might want to control your ragey rage... this was in 2010.  As of today, you can still purchase Diamond Walnuts and they still have Omega 3 listed on the package:
http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-Shelled-Walnuts-16-Ounce-Bags/dp/B001E Q4 GZ4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1361865884&sr=8-1&keywords=diamond+walnuts

Contains walnuts in 16 ounce bags in each packet of 6(totally 96 ounces)
A great source of protein, fiber, vitamins and mineralsContains anti-oxidants and high percentage of omega-3 fatty acids
Inside a tough shell, its curly nutmeat and the edible papery skin adds bitterness
Originated in California


The only difference is that they don't say "that the omega-3 fatty acids found in walnuts have been shown to have certain health benefits, including reduced risk of heart disease and some types of cancer."

Ferfuxake, this is an old story and a non-story at that.
 
2013-02-26 03:12:55 AM

timujin: Look, folks, you might want to control your ragey rage... this was in 2010.  As of today, you can still purchase Diamond Walnuts and they still have Omega 3 listed on the package:
http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-Shelled-Walnuts-16-Ounce-Bags/dp/B001E Q4 GZ4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1361865884&sr=8-1&keywords=diamond+walnuts

Contains walnuts in 16 ounce bags in each packet of 6(totally 96 ounces)
A great source of protein, fiber, vitamins and mineralsContains anti-oxidants and high percentage of omega-3 fatty acids
Inside a tough shell, its curly nutmeat and the edible papery skin adds bitterness
Originated in California

The only difference is that they don't say "that the omega-3 fatty acids found in walnuts have been shown to have certain health benefits, including reduced risk of heart disease and some types of cancer."

Ferfuxake, this is an old story and a non-story at that.


Never mind, I see that my concerns over rage were limited to only a few folks and don't reflect the general tone of the thread.  Still... this has long since been settled.  This is also a repeat.  Why the hell is the article still green?
 
2013-02-26 04:35:03 AM

damageddude: Back in the 70s my parents always kept flat Coca-Cola in the medicine cabinet for upset stomachs based on our pediatrician's advice [wink wink]. If Coca-Cola dared market this medical benefit of their product they would have the FDA up their butt in no time flat.


Coke syrup is very effective against upset stomachs.  It's what I used to use as a kid.  It's tough finding the stuff now.  The last time I had really bad stomach cramp (after some food poisoning), a dose of the syrup really helped.
 
2013-02-26 06:45:21 AM
I just can't take a center-justified web page seriously.
 
2013-02-26 07:04:13 AM
Here, read the actual FDA enforcement letter that started this:

http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/ucm202825 .h tm

It's their standard enforcement language, if someone makes a claim that something behaves like a drug, the FDA says "ok, you're claiming it's behaving like a drug, then you need to get it approved as a drug.  Otherwise, stop making the claims, and we'll cheerfully go back to treating it like a food."

And the claims they were making aren't generic "it's good for you" claims, the FDA would have left them alone for that.  No, they were claiming pretty specific benefits for cancer, stroke, and heart disease prevention, and depression and arthritis treatment and prevention.  Those are NOT claims you make when you're trying to sell a food, those are claims you make for a drug.

The regulation isn't silly, it's not frivolous, it's entirely appropriate.  The FDA has no desire to actually regulate walnuts as a drug, that's not what they're trying to do.  They just want walnut marketers to stop claiming that walnuts have drug-like benefits.
 
2013-02-26 07:17:42 AM

Revek: kingoomieiii: Revek: We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.

I absolutely LOVE it when someone walks in, strolls past 100 opposition comments, and posts a short comment glad-handing the article.

I didn't stroll, I breezed past them.  I need 500 dollars more medicine than I get monthly.  There are no programs for me.  I work, I have no insurance, I live in the land of plenty but I can't have any due to a system that is corrupt beyond redemption.  The FDA and their clients the drug company's will forever be on my shiat list for creating this environment.  They didn't do it alone but they are a huge influence.


Wait, you're upset with the FDA because we don't have a national health service in this country?  That's not their job.

The Affordable Care Act will finally kick in next January, and you'll be able to get insurance.  It's not perfect, true single-payer health care would be far better, but it's a good start.
 
2013-02-26 08:11:25 AM
What about chinnuts?
 
2013-02-26 08:41:39 AM

Broktun: DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.

Xarelto got approved for DVT recently


Did it?  I hadn't heard anything, I know all the "new" drugs are getting their AFib approvals.  Wasn't about to drop $30/pill for daily meds
 
2013-02-26 08:46:29 AM

Broktun: DoBeDoBeDo: Hey FDA, how about getting on approving better treatments for DVT?   I'm tired of watching my vitamin K intake and testing my blood all the time.  You've already approved them for A Fib, just check the little box for DVT so my docs will presecribe them.

Xarelto got approved for DVT recently


You are my new hero, thanks!   Making appointment now.

You start to miss having salad/vegetables whenever you feel like instead of having to watch how much and how often you eat.
 
2013-02-26 09:34:25 AM

DarkVader: Revek: kingoomieiii: Revek: We need to identify these useless crats and sue the government to have them fired.  They waste tax payer money and provide nothing but bad will to the public.

I absolutely LOVE it when someone walks in, strolls past 100 opposition comments, and posts a short comment glad-handing the article.

I didn't stroll, I breezed past them.  I need 500 dollars more medicine than I get monthly.  There are no programs for me.  I work, I have no insurance, I live in the land of plenty but I can't have any due to a system that is corrupt beyond redemption.  The FDA and their clients the drug company's will forever be on my shiat list for creating this environment.  They didn't do it alone but they are a huge influence.

Wait, you're upset with the FDA because we don't have a national health service in this country?  That's not their job.

The Affordable Care Act will finally kick in next January, and you'll be able to get insurance.  It's not perfect, true single-payer health care would be far better, but it's a good start.


I'm upset with a corrupt system represented by people that are trying to say that walnuts are a new drug.  They waste time with frivolous crap like this while allowing drug company's to apply for patents on 60 year old drugs so they can sell them at outrageous prices with no over site on price fixing or any other controls that help us.
Don't talk to me about the joke that is the affordable care act.  No solution will ever work unless we attack the problem from all angles.
 
2013-02-26 01:18:12 PM

DarkVader: And the claims they were making aren't generic "it's good for you" claims, the FDA would have left them alone for that.  No, they were claiming pretty specific benefits for cancer, stroke, and heart disease prevention, and depression and arthritis treatment and prevention.  Those are NOT claims you make when you're trying to sell a food, those are claims you make for a drug.

The regulation isn't silly, it's not frivolous, it's entirely appropriate.  The FDA has no desire to actually regulate walnuts as a drug, that's not what they're trying to do.  They just want walnut marketers to stop claiming that walnuts have drug-like benefits.


WRONG!

Some foods actually do have health benefits. Citrus, for instance, DOES prevent and cure scurvy. Saying so does NOT make it a drug, or give cause to harass citrus growers into intimidated silence about citruses real health benefits until they do years of expensive studies to prove citrus as an FDA approved scurvy drug. It is still JUST a food...that also happens to cure scurvy. Also numerous studies have proved that cruciferous vegetables prevent cancer. Does that make broccoli a drug?

It may very well be that walnuts do prevent heart disease and cancer. Saying so, does not make the nut a drug. It is still just a food, that also happens to prevent heart disease and cancer.

I think the FDA is trying to silence information about healthy preventative foods. so that more uninformed fools continue to eat junk ( like hearth healthy labeled potato chips ffs) and end up with expensive diseases that they can be prescribed expensive FDA approved medications for. That way all the corporations who are playing the FDA's game profit enormously. The sick bastards who ate chips instead of walnuts, not so much.

But then again, we were told for years that eggs cause high cholesterol and you should never eat the yolk. Who started that rumor? Was it the FDA? The rumor started around the time that drug corporations were trying to push their new statin drugs like Lipitor, to lower cholesterol.

Now they are telling us that whole eggs are fine and healthy and do not, in fact, raise cholesterol,  and that statin drugs have serious side effects.

Maybe egg manufacturers were forced, by the FDA, into a position of doing expensive studies to prove that eggs DID NOT raise cholesterol, while meanwhile, statin drug users found out about the bad side effects the hard way.
 
2013-02-26 02:25:04 PM

Pants full of macaroni!!: Walnuts give me the runs.


So you're saying they should be marketing them as a cure for constipation?
 
Displayed 191 of 191 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report