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?
How much tax revenue does Ephedra generate?
Barry
And how much does the ephedra lobby contribute to political campaigns?
Li>
Not enough I guess. Pretty sad.
There isn't enough kick-back to the government from Ephedra. Cigarettes on the other hand support MANY government programs through outrageous taxes!
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.
RThe source of Ephedra (ephedrine) is herbal (Mau Haung). The diet companies are using Mau Haung in their diet products as the source of ephedra. They are banning Mau Haung (the herb) which contains ephedra.
Mau Haung (ephedra) has not been regulated to date because it is listed as a food supplement.
(snip) >Ephedra is a drug, tobacco is not
Mau Haung is just like tobacco in the since that they are both all natural and plant/herbal.
(snip) >but since tobacco has been around prior to the drug laws
Mau Haung has also been used before drug laws.
(snip) >but since tobacco has been around prior to the drug laws
The Chinese were using ephedra (Mau Haung) 5000 years ago!
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:
Ephedrine is a drug. Ephedra is not.
Ephedra is being banned for the same reason marijuana is - the FDA has determined (rightly or wrongly) that the dangers of the item exceed the benefits of the item, and that the general public is unable to reliably avoid the dangers.
Hmmmmm,
Lets consider these two plants, Tobacco and Mau Haung (Ephedra).
MauHaung (Ephedra) has reportedly killed 15 people in since its reported use by the diet industry. Tobacco kills 400,000 people per year.
Which plant is more dangerous Tobacco or Mau Haung (Ephedra) ?
I think I would pop a few ephedra every day before I puffed back a carton of marlboros.
I would like to politely ask you to 'Wake up and smell the coffee'. The first couple of responders hit the nail on the head. It all comes down to money $$$. :)
It amuses me when the law makers tell me I can't take an herbal diet supplement then they retreat to their plush office and lite up a lucky.
Do you really think ephedra (remember, its a plant just like tobacco) is more dangerous than tobacco? It's not. Tobacco is much much worse. Plus tobacco use is killing us nonsmokers.
I think this is just one more reason to move to Canada. :)
That was 155 deaths for ephedra not 15. Sorry. Typo.
No, let's not. I said nothing about whether the FDA was doing the right thing or not, just noting how the FDA claims jurisdiction over such items, and how that jurisdiction works. And also correcting the mistake that "ephedra is a drug", which it isn't.
Assuming, of course, that I agree with the FDA, which I do not. Hence the "rightly or wrongly" comment. Since your entire post seems to be based on your assumptions about my beliefs, which turn out to be bad assumptions, your whole post becomes moot in this context.
And I can't stand the smell of coffee.
Including collision avoidance and bad weather driving. No bad weather permit, no bad weather privileges, just like a private pilot's license.
While we're at it, how about banning _hand held_ cell phone use?
Barry
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. ) IMO none of these are as distracting as having my mind transported to the client's setup problem or the clogged kitchen sink.
-- Mark
Nonsense -- cigarettes are a delivery system for nicotine which is unquestionably a drug.
It already is a drug, and the FDA has had for many years the legal authority to regulate it.
More nonsense. Marijuana and alcohol have been around a lot longer than drug laws have existed, too, but we regulate them.
It comes down to one thing, and one thing only: money. State and Federal governments make a shipload of money from taxes on tobacco. Since smokers generally die early, they don't collect Social Security for as long as nonsmokers do, which saves the Federal Gummint another shipload. Last but not least, the tobacco industry contributes yet another shipload to the politicians that continue to protect their existence.
-- Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?
It's Canada's fault ... again.
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
(snip) > They make crank out of that shit. Glad it's being banned myself.
Wrong.
Crack is cocaine based. However ephedrine can and is used to make methamphetamine and methcathinone. This could be the underlying reason that it is being banned and the health issue is a smoke screen.
I don't use ephedrine, but banning ephedrine (I think its the first dietary supplement to be banned) could create a slippery slope. More will be banned.
HomeOwnersHub website 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.