Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
With everything having to be "approved" by the FDA, anything that makes it through the process is considered safe by the people! Since the trials are actually conducted by the producer it is easy to fudge the data if youo so choose.
The fox/hen house is not a suitable analogy. The fox is seeking food, i.e. survival. In business if you "eat" your customers you are out of business. Were "certification" voluntary it is easy to surmise that people will, except in a very few cases, choose that "certified" product. Further if the Government is not directly involved it would likely be quicker and less expensive.




"(L)ost their life savings to a ponzi scheme." You mean like Social Security? Yes, bad people do exist. But does that mean that the rest must suffer in an attempt to control the few? It may seem to be not appropriate, but is indicative of the Government thought process. People know that riding a motorcycle without a helmet poses additional risk, They choose to do so. Yet various governments have enacted laws that REQUIRE motorcycle riders to wear helmets. I live in such a place and yet see many riders without helmets. To carry your logic into this arena all manufacturers should be required to make helmets part of the motorcycle.
Were people to have a choice between a "tested" & "certified" product vs one that is not they will choose that which they believe is best for them. If that is the "tested" & "certified" than those concerns that elected to forego such certification would either go out of business or submit to testing.




First of all a "loophole" implies that regulation is already in place. That is a major problem with regulation! "People have killed inspectors to protect mining frauds. It happens in all avenues of life a lot of the time." I suspect that this is a historical event. The second sentence implies that inspectors are being killed even today!




Approved drugs are on the market that actually have a side effect of DEATH. Seems to me that the process is not serving us as it should!




Regulations do nothing to prevent; "people who behave badly" or "one bad decision in one moment of weakness to cause a serious problem". All the regulation can do is provide an additional means to punish that particular individual!
Most regulations on business actually punish said business before the fact!



Interesting that the support for drug regulation is the problems in a non-drug concern!
If there are problems in the "system of safety" than the "system of safety" needs to be overhauled. Not added to!
Kind of like the failed health bills in Congress. The President's solution? Add to the bill, make it larger and more complicated!




Can't accept that rationale. With out a serious research effort it is hard to prove, but the term "coffin nails" for cigarettes as synonymous. There is evidence that prior to "coffin nail" they were known as "coffin tacks" a term in use in the 19th century.
To use your motorcycle example I'm not arguing for attaching the helmet to the motorcycle or having it come with the motorcycle I'm arguing for not abolishing the law that requires helmets.

As for suffering, it is pretty clear to me that rules that mitigate the suffering caused by unscrupulous or negligent actions do far less harm to the general populous than the suffering that is caused when those rules are not in place or enforced.

Regarding the mining fraud it was a historic event, regarding loopholes it does happen all the time. Probably even right now there is some company exploiting a loophole in some regulation as I type. As far as the drugs go, there are already regulations in place.

As for regulations doing nothing to prevent bad behavior, when is the last time a drug company released a drug into the US market without adequate testing and pulled it due to easily anticipated consequences that would have shown up in the studies they never conducted? This is exactly the behavior your proposed changes in the rules would allow, that I suggest needs to be prevented. As far as I can tell the FDA rules have successfully prevented this.