Processed Food/Pharmacueticals.

[thaicat]

Last time I looked, it was your responsibility for what you put in your mouth.

I'm pretty sure the FDA's culpability goes as far as keeping you from ingesting something that will kill you within a couple of days.

After that, you're on your own.

I feel this is a reasonable assumption to operate on.

Actually, that isn't quite true.

Over 80% of the "food" in groceries are GMO's. Municipal water supplies are poisoned. Our air is sprayed with oxides and who only knows what. Organic farming is litigated out of existence. Short of becoming a vegan and living off your own garden...We're fucked!

I've always grown the majority of my own fruits/vegetables and this year, I'm raising chickens. Still, short of moving to a sane Country. I see no way to dodge toxins and carcinogens in every day life.

The FDA was supposedly created to protect from harmful substances in both our food and medicine...It ain't quite workin" out like that, is it?

 

[thaicat]

Racked my brains trying to work out what Quantum Field Theory had to do with processed food and had to look it up.

Somehow missed that one despite years online.

Anyone googling for the Federation of European Motorcycle Associations will get entirely the wrong idea , possibly why we struggle to get members . . .

I had to look it up also. Initially, I got "Quadratic Frobenius test"

 

[foomar]

This has some relevance to the thread.

Seems like big pharma may have overstated its effectiveness in the pursuit of profits again.

Not helped by many people demanding a prescription drug for the simplest ailment , when a cheap out of patent one would be as effective.

Hundreds of millions of pounds may have been wasted on a drug for flu that works no better than paracetamol, a landmark analysis has said.

The UK has spent £473m on Tamiflu, which is stockpiled by governments globally to prepare for flu pandemics.

The Cochrane Collaboration claimed the drug did not prevent the spread of flu or reduce dangerous complications, and only slightly helped symptoms.

The manufacturers Roche and other experts say the analysis is flawed.

Barry Clinch from Roche said Tamiflu had been approved by 100 regulators around the world

The antiviral drug Tamiflu was stockpiled from 2006 in the UK when some agencies were predicting that a pandemic of bird flu could kill up to 750,000 people in Britain. Similar decisions were made in other countries.

The drug was widely prescribed during the swine flu outbreak in 2009.

Drug companies do not publish all their research data. This report is the result of a colossal fight for the previously hidden data into the effectiveness and side-effects of Tamiflu.

It concluded that the drug reduced the persistence of flu symptoms from seven days to 6.3 days in adults and to 5.8 days in children. But the report's authors said drugs such as paracetamol could have a similar impact.

On claims that the drug prevented complications such as pneumonia developing, Cochrane suggested the trials were so poor there was "no visible effect".

James Gallagher

Health and Science reporter, BBC News

"Does a drug work?" should be an easy question to answer. Yet after hundreds of millions of pounds, either down the drain or saving lives depending on your stance, this question is being asked of Tamiflu.

It stems from the way drugs are approved. Pharmaceutical companies conduct trials, some but not all of the data is made publicly available and regulators decide if it works. It is estimated that, entirely legally, half of clinical trials have never been reported and that favourable data is more likely to published.

The UK Public Accounts Committee said the lack of data available to researchers and doctors was "of extreme concern".

So the Tamiflu saga raises another important question - what other drugs are we using that might not work as well as we thought?

 

[mrcreosote]

Actually, that isn't quite true.

Over 80% of the "food" in groceries are GMO's. Municipal water supplies are poisoned. Our air is sprayed with oxides and who only knows what. Organic farming is litigated out of existence. Short of becoming a vegan and living off your own garden...We're fucked!

I've always grown the majority of my own fruits/vegetables and this year, I'm raising chickens. Still, short of moving to a sane Country. I see no way to dodge toxins and carcinogens in every day life.

The FDA was supposedly created to protect from harmful substances in both our food and medicine...It ain't quite workin" out like that, is it?

Actually, it is quite true and your statements only reinforce my point.
If you depend on the FDA to protect you from harmful additives and chemicals in food, you are a fool. The stated mission of the FDA and the reality of who they work for is diametrically opposed.

I repeat: YOU and only you are responsible for what you put in your mouth.
Just because the Govt. is watching you doesn't mean they are watching OUT for you.

 

[JointOperation]

research shows.. homegrown food to be twice to ten times more nutritious and healthy for you.. same with grass fed and meat raised in a more natural way.. given natural food... the healthier the animal.. the healthier the food coming from that animal.. same with plants.. the GMO to resist disease and drought and all the other bullshit.. is great.. buttt in order to get the plants to be like that.. u lose the nutritional values ..

seriously.. if ur going to say. i dont smoke any weed i dont grow..then u should also say the same thing for the food you put into your body.. because now more then ever.. WE ARE WAT WE EAT!..

 

[foomar]

God alone knows what goes into kebab meat . . .

As I suspected , and pretty obvious given the high cost of lamb and the low price of takeaways.

Consumer watchdog Which? tested 60 takeaway lamb curries and minced lamb kebabs from restaurants in Birmingham and London and found that 24 of them had been mixed with other meats such as beef and chicken.

Seven of the samples contained no lamb at all, the tests found.

In Birmingham, 16 of the 30 samples contained other meat and five of the samples contained no lamb at all, while in London eight of the 30 samples were mixed with other meat with two of the minced lamb kebabs containing just beef.

The meat in five of the samples could not be identified, with the most likely explanation for this being the meat had been overcooked or re-cooked.

Which? rated the lamb samples to be contaminated, or adulterated, if they contained more than five per cent of another meat.

 

[headband 707]

what wouldn't the FDA and drug scums do?

what wouldn't the FDA and drug scums do?

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/15/health/fda-acetaminophen-dosage/

Last time I looked, it was your responsibility for what you put in your mouth.

I'm pretty sure the FDA's culpability goes as far as keeping you from ingesting something that will kill you within a couple of days.

After that, you're on your own.

I feel this is a reasonable assumption to operate on.