Re: OT: Oops

[J.D. Baldwin]

In the previous article, Terry del Fuego <t_del...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2007-12-05-supplement-study_N.htm
>
> I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned this. Makes me wonder how
> many are owed an apology. Oh, no, wait, it's their own fault for
> not having sophisticated testing equipment in their homes.

Officials from Informed-Choice and HFL declined to reveal
which supplements were tested or where they were purchased,
but Hall said some of best-selling brands were randomly
selected, mostly from mall-based stores.

What the HELL?
--
_+_ From the catapult of |If anyone disagrees with any statement I make, I
_|70|___:)=}- J.D. Baldwin |am quite prepared not only to retract it, but also
\ / bal...@panix.com|to deny under oath that I ever made it. -T. Lehrer
***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Charlene]

On Dec 8, 11:37 am, Terry del Fuego <t_del_fu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2007-12-05-supplement-study_N.htm
>
> I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned this. Makes me wonder how many
> are owed an apology. Oh, no, wait, it's their own fault for not
> having sophisticated testing equipment in their homes.

This is hardly news. Not a week goes by without a spate of recalls by
the feds on so-called "natural supplements" containing everything from
Viagra and steroids to horse tranquilizers and carcinogenic
antibiotics.

THIS is the main reason why the alternative medicine mega-industry
doesn't want to be regulated.

wd43

[J.D. Baldwin]

In the previous article, Terry del Fuego <t_del...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> > Officials from Informed-Choice and HFL declined to reveal
> > which supplements were tested or where they were purchased,
> > but Hall said some of best-selling brands were randomly
> > selected, mostly from mall-based stores.
> >
> >What the HELL?
>

> The best part of the above is that someone calling itself
> "Informed-Choice" would refuse to allow anyone to make one.
>
> [...]
>
> I have to wonder if the refusal to name names or deal with the
> testing issue is some pathetic attempt to cover the drug testers'
> asses. If the innocent (or the "guilty", of course) don't know the
> names of the tainted products, they can't claim that's what caused
> the positive test(s).

Since posting my short commentary, I have thought of a potential
reason arguing against release of the info that actually seems, to me,
pretty legitimate: if you announce which products contain andro and
so forth, every scrawny teenager looking to pump his thick is going to
run down to the GNC and stock up on the stuff before it's pulled from
the shelves.

Of course, that's a reason for *delaying* the announcement, not
witholding it entirely.

[J.D. Baldwin]

In the previous article, Terry del Fuego <t_del...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> >Since posting my short commentary, I have thought of a potential
> >reason arguing against release of the info that actually seems, to
> >me, pretty legitimate: if you announce which products contain andro
> >and so forth, every scrawny teenager looking to pump his thick is
> >going to run down to the GNC and stock up on the stuff before it's
> >pulled from the shelves.
>

> I have a two word response: Tough shit.

For the subset of "teenagers" that are 18 and 19, I agree. But even
in J.D. Baldwin's Imaginary Libertarian Paradise, where you can get
diamorphine over-the-counter at the Rite-Aid, you can't sell andro to
a 17-year-old.

[J.D. Baldwin]

In the previous article, Terry del Fuego <t_del...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> What's worse: Voluntarily using LSD or putting it in the community
> punchbowl without telling anyone else at the party?

As usual, the answer to "what's worse?" is the same as the answer to
"what's more fun?"