OT Ephedra to be banned

Page 1 of 4  
I found this pretty funny. The government (US) is gonna ban the diet supplement Ephedra starting next year because it has been linked to 155 deaths. Smoking kills 400,000 Americans each year.
Am I missing something?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How much tax revenue does Ephedra generate?
Barry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And how much does the ephedra lobby contribute to political campaigns?
Lionel ............ Take the dog out before sending email.
in message wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Not enough I guess. Pretty sad.
in message wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
    Greetings and Salutations...

    Yea...I am listening to the NPR discussion on this even as I type. It feels to me that this is one of several things.     1) it is a "high profile" problem, in that someone famous has died because of it. Like several other laws based on events that are so unusual as to be statistically meaningless, it is a "feel good" thing that politicians can do. It makes it LOOK like they are trying to "protect" us, but in actual fact it one affects a vanishingly small number of folks.     2) It is part of the ongoing attempt of government to take advantage of our formless fears to end up putting us ALL in "camp X-Ray". As mentioned in passing in the NPR story, passing a law against ephedra will set a precedent to allow the FDA and Congress to ban OTHER "dangrous" products. We, the sleeping citizenry, allow this because, each slice is only a TINY sliver of freedom of choice gone.     However...before we know it...instead of rolling miles of unfettered movement...we are in a box too small to lay down in.     I think that the Feds would do far more to "protect" us by implementing the following policies:     1) Not allowing driver's licenses for folks under the age of 19.     2) Mandatory driver's education.     3) As with Israel and some other countries, 2 years service in the military after high school.
    It would not make America perfect, but, I suspect it would produce a citizen that was a lot stronger of will and would produce much safer roads for all of us (which would cut down noticeably on the traffic problems).     However, it ain't gonna happen, because it is too painful for the politicians to actually change anything substantual, and, too many American parents would whine too loudly at having to take such a larger part in their children's lives.
    By the by...in case you were wondering...yes... Swift's "A Modest Proposal" IS one of my favorite readings. For you folks who have come through the American educational system...and likely have never heard of this: http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~benjamin/316kfall/316ktexts/swift.html     Regards     Dave Mundt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:32:16 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@esper.com (Dave Mundt) wrote:

Including collision avoidance and bad weather driving. No bad weather permit, no bad weather privileges, just like a private pilot's license. <G>
While we're at it, how about banning _hand held_ cell phone use?
Barry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
B a r r y B u r k e J r . wrote:

Useless to marginally useful at best. What I've noticed about yacking on a cell phone is the major distraction is the diversion of brain cycles to solving whatever the business or home crisis of the moment is. IMO the hands / hands-free has little to do with the real distraction.
Yes, I drink coffee, change radio stations, smoke & gnaw on a Big Mac from time to time while driving. (Not all at the same time, usually. <g>) IMO none of these are as distracting as having my mind transported to the client's setup problem or the clogged kitchen sink.
-- Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:03:00 GMT, "Mark Jerde"

I'll agree, plenty of diversion even with hands free. But if you're that distracted, you really should pull over for deepconversations.
However, with hands free you can still turn your head to look in the next lane, shift and steer the car when on a not so deep conversation. I've personally been nearly dusted by someone who couldn't hold the wheel and the phone at the same time.
Having the hands free cradle in the company car makes me a much safer driver than in my personal rides that don't have the cradle.
Barry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
B a r r y B u r k e J r . wrote:

I had to admire a guy in a SUV on the Washington DC beltway one day. He managed to pass me at about 80 mph, cell phone in one hand, flashing the international symbol of disrespect at me with the other. He was probably steering with his knee but I'll be he thought he was steering with his ____ <g>.
Another time traffic was moving in all 4 lanes but basically all were moving at the same average rate. I was behind a lady who was apparently late for something. After a few miles of her driving I wanted *so bad* to force her off the road and ask what the old record for lane changes was. <g> Unlike many others I've observed, at least she used the turning signals. However, they weren't signals "asking permission," they were indicators of impending action no matter what was happening in the other lanes. ;-) It was very interesting to watch.
-- Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@esper.com (Dave Mundt) wrote in message
...

How about:
2) Mandatory education.
Including woodworking, of course.
--

FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@esper.com says...

.. snip

... snip

... and you don't see *that* as chipping away at freedom? What would occur in that 2 years? Seems like a perfect opportunity to instill a little "discipline" and acceptance of government control of one's personal life.
Better for 3) would be to re-institute the study of civics as a required course in all high schools where:     a) All students were fully educated on the formulation of the US government as a republic and what that means in a practical sense in terms of limiting the strength of the federal government,     b) That the constitution was intended to be a document limiting the powers and scope of the federal government, not a document to describe its powers, and, most importantly:     c) Exactly how our government is structured, with three branches of government and the prescribed scope of each branch. Surveys of high school and college students with questions regarding this topic show them to be woefully ignorant of how our government is supposed to work and the very basic details of its structure. That this is such a widespread phenomena indicates it isn't that these kids are stupid, they are just not being taught something that is a fundamental part of why they have the freedom they do.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark & Juanita responds:

I don't think so. It may be that a working lifetime (23 years now) in the military gets someone to accept doctrine without question, though I'm inclined to doubt even that. Most lifers I've known are ultimate cynics. But AFAICT, almost all short-termers in the military reject most of the acceptance of control, while maintaining a reasonably strong self discipline, after a couple years on the outside." Some don't take that long. I do think doctrinaire thinking is more prevalent in the officer corps of the various services than in the enlisted ranks, but even that is a long, long ways from 100%.
But I can't argue at all with your idea that a good civics course with an accurate presentation of the Constitution and the rationales used in forming our government is sorely needed. Whether or not it will do any good, it should be tried.
Charlie Self "If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to. " Dorothy Parker
http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
    Greetings and Salutations....
On 31 Dec 2003 20:09:27 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@aol.comnotforme (Charlie Self) wrote:

    That has been my thought too. I suspect that the folks that are going to get 'brainwashed' into buying the party line would do so whether or not they HAD the military experience.

    Hear, Hear! I agree completely that the schools probably SHOULD get back to a more basic focus on their job, and, that more Americans should be exposed to the principles that founded the country. And...spending a bit of time in the military might well help that.     Regards     Dave Mundt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 19:55:53 +0000, Dave Mundt wrote:

The current administration would never reinstate the draft for fear of getting beat about the head and shoulders of the opposition, and the opposition would never reinstate the draft as the 4 or 5 or 10 fold increase in personnel and the facilities and equipment required would consume way too much moolah that could be used for social programs.
-Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com says...

... unless they make *it* a social program. You'll note that a lot of proponents of this kind of plan don't call it 2 years of military service, but "2 years of service". The opposition could leverage off of this idea very easily, making it a "clean up the inner cities, cure cancer, clean up the air, clean up the water" kind of plan.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 02:36:14 +0000, Mark & Juanita wrote:

The current administration could nix that in a heartbeat by proposing it themselves first :-)
-Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com says...

Yeah, I'm afraid you're right. No place for a fiscally conservative, strong defense person to go these days I'm afraid.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 02:51:30 +0000, Mark & Juanita wrote:

Yup, if Scoop came back today, he'd be considered a far right winger.
-Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There isn't enough kick-back to the government from Ephedra. Cigarettes on the other hand support MANY government programs through outrageous taxes!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Very simply, Ephedra is a drug, tobacco is not. FDA would like tobacco to be a drug so they can regulate it, but since tobacco has been around prior to the drug laws, it can not be regulated unless a specific law is enacted by congress to declare it a drug.
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.