Yeah, but the subject in question was the use of the term "a drug free workplace". Doesn't seem to me like the sort of context that requires a medical doctorate to define.
> Using a generic dictionary for a legal or medical > definition is silly. > It's fine for basic common use definitions, but not for > precise legal, > medical, or technical definitions. > -Kevin > On 8/9/05, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Now wait a minute. You might want to re-read your >> definition. >> >> There were 3 different definitions, labelled 1-3. Any of >> which could >> identify a "drug". However, definition 1 had two >> subsections to it, a) and >> b). >> >> So for a substance to satisfy definition 1, it had to >> both a) be used in >> diagnosis, treatment or prevention AND b) be recognized >> or defined by the US >> Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. >> >> Sugar might be used to treat certain conditions, but if >> it aint listed in >> that Act...it aint a drug. s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.fusiontap.com http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:168634 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
