8 ms·

I feel alone in thinking I don't want the government regulating any of this. What's next? A prayer disclaimer as you walk into a church? The people who buy t

by mstodd 10y ago

I feel alone in thinking I don't want the government regulating any of this. What's next? A prayer disclaimer as you walk into a church? The people who buy this are probably the ones who can't afford real medicine, and now regulation is going to make this even more expensive. If you think this is the government trying to protect us against ourselves: it's not, and that's not the role of government anyway. This is just an alternative medicine attack to remove competition and keep the price of real drugs high.

scott_karana 10y ago
Praying is free, and arguably a form of expression. However, goods sold with the expectation of efficacy should _be controlled_ based on that promise.
- duskwuff 10y ago
  Bingo. Homeopathic treatments are simply not fit for purpose, even by the standards of ordinary products. If an engine oil failed to provide any lubrication, or if an electric cord could not power devices attached to it, it would promptly be withdrawn from the market. Standards should only be higher for products that are intended for human consumption.
aoeuasdf1 10y ago
Putting on a label doesn't cost anything. I don't see why you think this would make (non-) medicine more expensive? Also, the FDA has the responsibility to make sure that fake medicine cannot be advertised as being medicine. It doesn't remove competition, it removes fraudulent competition from competing with real medicine.
bradenb 10y ago
I'm not always for regulation but in this instance I absolutely think it is necessary. "The people who buy this are probably the ones who can't afford real medicine" This is the reason. If they can't afford real medicine I am doubly-supportive of labeling that prevents them from wasting that money entirely. I'm also not sure how often real medicine is more expensive... I've seen some expensive homeopathic treatments.
DanBC 10y ago
> The people who buy this are probably the ones who can't afford real medicine Homeopathy is popular in the UK where medication is usually free and has a low cost if it's not free.
nommm-nommm 10y ago
Go to the drug store and look, homeopathic medicine is just as expensive as real medicine.
darklajid 10y ago
So over here every pack of cigarettes has a big label saying 'smoking kills' and might show graphic images that 'prove' that smoking can cause lung cancer, blindness etc. Given that I don't smoke and hate the smell I'm sure that I'm heavily biased, but I still think that this is a good thing. The government isn't restricting access to your drug of choice, it just tries to make it less appealing. Labeling water with 'Actually, this is useless' feels like a good idea to me. People that jumped the fence, 'true believers', won't be affected. They shake their head, mumble that The System is broken and doesn't support alternative treatments and .. will continue to buy that shit. But people that are in need of help might actually read that disclaimer and save time & money. If you cannot buy real medicine for some reason (how barbaric is that, btw?) I don't think that you should buy overpriced water instead.
ryuker16 10y ago
Since the medicine doesn't work, the poor person still needs to buy the real stuff eventually or wait it out.

by mstodd 10y ago

scott_karana 10y ago

Praying is free, and arguably a form of expression. However, goods sold with the expectation of efficacy should _be controlled_ based on that promise.

duskwuff 10y ago
Bingo. Homeopathic treatments are simply not fit for purpose, even by the standards of ordinary products. If an engine oil failed to provide any lubrication, or if an electric cord could not power devices attached to it, it would promptly be withdrawn from the market. Standards should only be higher for products that are intended for human consumption.

aoeuasdf1 10y ago

Putting on a label doesn't cost anything. I don't see why you think this would make (non-) medicine more expensive? Also, the FDA has the responsibility to make sure that fake medicine cannot be advertised as being medicine. It doesn't remove competition, it removes fraudulent competition from competing with real medicine.

bradenb 10y ago

I'm not always for regulation but in this instance I absolutely think it is necessary. "The people who buy this are probably the ones who can't afford real medicine" This is the reason. If they can't afford real medicine I am doubly-supportive of labeling that prevents them from wasting that money entirely. I'm also not sure how often real medicine is more expensive... I've seen some expensive homeopathic treatments.

DanBC 10y ago

> The people who buy this are probably the ones who can't afford real medicine Homeopathy is popular in the UK where medication is usually free and has a low cost if it's not free.

nommm-nommm 10y ago

Go to the drug store and look, homeopathic medicine is just as expensive as real medicine.

darklajid 10y ago

So over here every pack of cigarettes has a big label saying 'smoking kills' and might show graphic images that 'prove' that smoking can cause lung cancer, blindness etc. Given that I don't smoke and hate the smell I'm sure that I'm heavily biased, but I still think that this is a good thing. The government isn't restricting access to your drug of choice, it just tries to make it less appealing. Labeling water with 'Actually, this is useless' feels like a good idea to me. People that jumped the fence, 'true believers', won't be affected. They shake their head, mumble that The System is broken and doesn't support alternative treatments and .. will continue to buy that shit. But people that are in need of help might actually read that disclaimer and save time & money. If you cannot buy real medicine for some reason (how barbaric is that, btw?) I don't think that you should buy overpriced water instead.

ryuker16 10y ago

Since the medicine doesn't work, the poor person still needs to buy the real stuff eventually or wait it out.