I recently saw it pointed out (can't remember where) that implicit in the FDA's argument is that young women can't understand instructions that tell them to take one pill then the other 12 hours later (complete with giant arrows that point out which pill to take when), yet are perfectly capable of having a child

From the CNN article, it was apparent that safety was the first concern, because test data excluded those under 16. And, when the OTC abortion pill is available, there's not a good way to prevent those under 16 from misusing it.

It seemed as though this concern was justified, because rather than rejecting the pill outright, there were solutions given. In fact, the FDA was willing to allow them to use a mixed approach to sales that has never been allowed/used before.

Now, that said, I think they kowtowed to pressure, but I don't think they should exist in the first place.

Look, plenty of us have had that 'where are my panties?' moment.

Personally, I prefer not to refer to my undershorts as "panties," but point taken nonetheless.

I don't buy it; there's not a good way to prevent those under 16 from misusing any OTC medication. I imagine that it's difficult to orchestrate emergency contraception tests for minors and that's a significant advantage to the stall, but I can't back that up for sure.

Nor do I think the FDA is some puppet of the Baptist Church. This agency is inevitably politicized, so whatever, but at the same time Plan B is safe to the point of incontrovertibility, so it's kind of ridiculousness.

And this is really off-topic, but how can you knock drug regulation? Doesn't the illicit drug industry show that you can't trust the market to enforce or endorse brands, e.g., cocaine isn't actually cocaine in the way that claritin is claritin? Your dream world is so damned scary to me....

Well, comparing the illicit drug market to the market for legit drugs is wrong. They both have different kinds of regulation, and neither is free in any sense. In the illicit drug market, you can literally have a gun pointed at you, whether by the state or an irate customer/supplier. In the above-ground market, you have a similar gun pointed at you, but more in the manner of prison time/slavery for not playing along with the regulatory schemes.

So, I don't buy the idea that the illegal market is a free market. There's an intense amount of coercion implicit in it, removing it from the idea of freedom.

But neither is our sanctioned market a free market, which should be readily apparent.

By the way, I'm working on this idea of market enforcement. I don't think it is as efficient as it could be, due to all of the perceived and/or actual failures.

The FDA is just one of my favorite issues, I mean, just look at how the whole Erbitux thing played out. How many people died who could have been saved in those six months?

So if individuals just choose to interfere with the Market, that's regulation? Crime is regulation? Wha?

Seriously. By those standards, there's no such thing as a free market in the real world. Which I guess means we should all just go home.

"... dating in America would be one long, national nightmare of a cocktease ..."

So ... I've been dating convservatives all my life? I never realized...

A market under the influence of physical force is not a free market, at least under my definition. Whether that physical force is being hit with a few shells and walking with a limp or federal pound-me-in-the-ass penitentiary, it is physical force. And the corollary to that is that regulation is physical force, due to the penalties imposed. Regulation is just another way of saying prison.

Oh, and erik, you're right. There isn't a free market in the world. There is only the potential for them.

It's interesting that noone here has mentioned the pharmaceutical companies behind it all...or insurance companies. Think about it, Kriston. Is it the Baptist Church that stands to profit?

There isn't a free market in the world.
Yes, okay, fine, and there's also no pure democracy in the world either (such a thing is probably completely untenable.) Practical applications of these ideas that are pure in the abstract are always contortions of some ideal form. But it's kind of beside the point don't you think?

We still have to be able to talk productively about democracy as we experience it on earth, and the same goes for markets.

And the same goes for this little pill. Shouldn't this make the pro-choice and the pro-life people happy (since it prevents abortions)? Or does it really boil down to the fact that some people want to consider a fertilized egg -- all two cells of it -- a human being? If so, then shouldn't we also be shutting down the whole fertility and pregnancy assisstance business, too? And in that case, aren't we in essence preventing life from coming into this world?

I agree with you Susan. I responded to that above my lament about the non-existence of the free market.

We must solve the problems that we see. That's why the FDA has to go. No one at all has taken me or the FDA to task about this Erbitux business. And that involved actual lives, not feti.

Link?

Perhaps the FDA ought to be punished appropriately, if necessary, for whatever it is you're talking about. Clearly it would serve your ideological purposes, but in that case, might as well call for the resignation of the Fed, too. As for me, I'm happy that my food and drugs are relatively free of rat poison; and I'm always up for discussing ways to regulate the regulators.

This might be one of the more useless threads the Internet has produced.

(And by that I'm not picking on Walsh. I'm ultimately responsible for all this crap.)

Yes, I'll end it. Erbitux was the drug that precipitated the stock drop of IMClone, and in the process of approval when Bacanovic called Martha Stewart to let her know that it wouldn't happen and she should drop her shares. Six months later, no changes in the actual drug, it was approved.

The reason it was denied in the first place? It was less effective at completely destroying cancerous tumors than the FDA considered appropriate. It had more than enough benefit on the two other criteria used to judge applications. IMClone goes back, does more research, finds they were right all along, and six months later, are allowed to market the drug.

Erbitux helped destroy tumors due to head and neck, colon, lung, and pancreatic cancers. Within the head and neck section alone, 12000 people die every year. So, in that six months, the FDA was responsible for about 6000 deaths.

I got all this information from CenterWatch, some sort of medical watchdog group. But the data is off of the report of the clinical trials. I don't have the url anymore, I researched this about three months ago. So yeah, it may not be as credible without the actual link, but those should be correct.

I'm sorry for derailing that comment section. I try to stick to concretes while I'm in class, and I should do so more when I comment.

God! (pulls out pistol) *POW* *POW* *POW* Sometimes it's best to put a lame horse out of its misery.

And the same goes for this little pill. Shouldn't this make the pro-choice and the pro-life people happy (since it prevents abortions)? Or does it really boil down to the fact that some people want to consider a fertilized egg -- all two cells of it -- a human being? If so, then shouldn't we also be shutting down the whole fertility and pregnancy assisstance business, too? And in that case, aren't we in essence preventing life from coming into this world?

I think Kriston is saying, and I agree, that it's not really about thinking emergency contraception is murder at all. It's not even really about abortion being murder. It's that these people think, what they really think, is that sex should be about pregnancy, that sex for recreation is sinful, and that contraception of any sort facilitates the sinful notion that it's ok to think about sex as something to have without the intention to get someone/get oneself pregnant.

Ban abortion, ban emergency birth control, allow only contraceptive techniques that prevent fertilization (as opposed to preventing implantation), and see if the blue noses shut up about it all.

But the blue noses won't shut. They really do oppose all contraception. It's in most of their creeds:

I believe in Jesus Christ, God, and some spooky ghost thing.

I believe sex should only be for procreation.

I believe we should execute all criminals.

etc...

And while the purpose of the FDA should be to make sure 1) that drugs for a specific purpose don't kill people at an abnormally high rate when used for that purpose under specifically defined rules, and 2) that drugs do what their manufacturers claim, the real function of the FDA over the last 20 or so years has been to make sure that American megagiant pharmaceutical companies maintain their monopolies and market share. Just follow the money...

Nice site about Free paris hilton sex tape

are you stupid watch kristin davis sex tape

are you stupid watch kristin davis sex tape

iQhjWT comment4 ,

iQhjWT comment4 ,

Very interesting sites., http://showhype.com/profile/chyna_sex_tape/ chyna sex tape, =-)), http://showhype.com/profile/jessica_simpson_sex_tape/ jessica simpson sex tape, mcdtm, http://showhype.com/profile/meg_white_sex_tape/ meg white sex tape, 42221, http://showhype.com/profile/amy_fisher_sex_tape/ amy fisher sex tape clips, kpvkpw, http://showhype.com/profile/adriana_lima_sex_tape/ adriana lima sex tape clips, >:))),

Very interesting sites., http://showhype.com/profile/chyna_sex_tape/ chyna sex tape, =-)), http://showhype.com/profile/jessica_simpson_sex_tape/ jessica simpson sex tape, mcdtm, http://showhype.com/profile/meg_white_sex_tape/ meg white sex tape, 42221, http://showhype.com/profile/amy_fisher_sex_tape/ amy fisher sex tape clips, kpvkpw, http://showhype.com/profile/adriana_lima_sex_tape/ adriana lima sex tape clips, >:))),

It is a very good thing, http://showhype.com/profile/no_credit_check_car_loans/ no credit check car loans, 8]], http://showhype.com/profile/no_credit_check_loans/ no credit check loans payday, auoxeq, http://showhype.com/profile/1000_loan_payday/ 1000 loan payday, 3330, http://showhype.com/profile/guaranteed_online_personal_loa/ unsecured guaranteed online personal loans, >:D, http://showhype.com/profile/personal_loan_for_poor_credit/ high risk personal loan for poor credit, 449875,

It is a very good thing, http://showhype.com/profile/no_credit_check_car_loans/ no credit check car loans, 8]], http://showhype.com/profile/no_credit_check_loans/ no credit check loans payday, auoxeq, http://showhype.com/profile/1000_loan_payday/ 1000 loan payday, 3330, http://showhype.com/profile/guaranteed_online_personal_loa/ unsecured guaranteed online personal loans, >:D, http://showhype.com/profile/personal_loan_for_poor_credit/ high risk personal loan for poor credit, 449875,

It is a very good thing, http://showhype.com/profile/no_credit_check_car_loans/ no credit check car loans, 8]], http://showhype.com/profile/no_credit_check_loans/ no credit check loans payday, auoxeq, http://showhype.com/profile/1000_loan_payday/ 1000 loan payday, 3330, http://showhype.com/profile/guaranteed_online_personal_loa/ unsecured guaranteed online personal loans, >:D, http://showhype.com/profile/personal_loan_for_poor_credit/ high risk personal loan for poor credit, 449875,