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 55
    More: Asinine, FDA, drug applications, coronary artery disease, cancer types, HDL, Dietary mineral, investments, Frito-Lay  
•       •       •

14682 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»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-02-25 12:07:45 PM
19 votes:
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 11:36:40 AM
15 votes:
fark you, marketers. There's nothing stupid about this particular law. Go think of some other way to sell your walnuts.
2013-02-25 02:34:35 PM
11 votes:
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 01:14:48 PM
7 votes:
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 03:25:32 PM
4 votes:
"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 03:19:47 PM
4 votes:
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 02:45:32 PM
4 votes:
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 12:13:44 PM
4 votes:
The first two posts seem to have covered the subject nicely. Subby must work for Big Walnut.
2013-02-25 05:34:58 PM
3 votes:

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 09:27:56 PM
2 votes:

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 07:39:48 PM
2 votes:

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 06:58:57 PM
2 votes:

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 05:31:37 PM
2 votes:
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 04:56:06 PM
2 votes:

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 04:55:10 PM
2 votes:
FDA  www.pacovilla.com  BIG RX
2013-02-25 04:47:06 PM
2 votes:

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 04:05:37 PM
2 votes:
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 04:00:37 PM
2 votes:
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 03:57:19 PM
2 votes:

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 03:41:07 PM
2 votes:

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 03:39:19 PM
2 votes:

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 03:17:46 PM
2 votes:
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 02:42:49 PM
2 votes:
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.
2013-02-26 07:04:13 AM
1 votes:
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 03:08:26 AM
1 votes:
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 03:01:35 AM
1 votes:
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.
2013-02-25 11:47:15 PM
1 votes:

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 11:03:16 PM
1 votes:

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 10:29:04 PM
1 votes:
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 09:57:16 PM
1 votes:

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 09:40:07 PM
1 votes:

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 08:31:05 PM
1 votes:

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 08:08:12 PM
1 votes:

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 07:59:13 PM
1 votes:

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 07:57:25 PM
1 votes:

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 07:52:00 PM
1 votes:

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 07:51:01 PM
1 votes:
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 07:43:03 PM
1 votes:

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 07:28:33 PM
1 votes:

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 07:20:16 PM
1 votes:

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 07:10:40 PM
1 votes:

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 07:09:35 PM
1 votes:

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.
das
2013-02-25 06:58:22 PM
1 votes:
Good. I hate walnuts.

grumpycat.jpg
2013-02-25 06:39:34 PM
1 votes:

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 05:38:41 PM
1 votes:

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 04:05:31 PM
1 votes:
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 03:55:44 PM
1 votes:

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 03:42:13 PM
1 votes:

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 03:40:28 PM
1 votes:

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 03:39:19 PM
1 votes:

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 03:34:28 PM
1 votes:

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 03:31:20 PM
1 votes:

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 03:24:09 PM
1 votes:

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 03:23:44 PM
1 votes:
Well, they sure taste bad enough to be medicinal. Bitter shaite.
2013-02-25 02:45:06 PM
1 votes:
 
Displayed 55 of 55 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report