I can agree with that statement concerning the structure of the
FDA [who does what and how it's funded definitely needs a work over] but
the people who work there, are just like anyone else..NOT a pack of Devils,
but people working within the constrains of a faulty structure and doing
On 10/26/2007, Jonathan B. Britten (jbrit...@cc.nakamura-u.ac.jp) wrote:
For all the criticism of the FDA here, most of it deserved, they have
to get credit for lifting the ban eventually. I hadn't known.
Surely you don't think it was voluntary? There was much pressure, for a
long time, to
The FDA is not a pack of Devils.
They are, however, in a compromising funding position due to the way
testing is structured. [who does it and who pays for it ]
Makes for some weird and biased conclusions now and then.
The FDA mission is protecting the public, however, they don't know much
Ode Coyote, on 10/26/2007 8:29 AM, said the following:
The FDA is not a pack of Devils.
For the most part, you are wrong - but not everyone who works there is
in a position of power. Many people who have attempted to blow the
whistle on all of the insider machinations that go on have been
At 02:03 PM 10/26/2007, you wrote:
Ode Coyote, on 10/26/2007 8:29 AM, said the following:
The FDA is not a pack of Devils.
More than a Pack. A whole Battalion.
The article in the Lancet summed it up nicely.
It stated,
The FDA is so corrupt that it is beyond repair. It should be
For all the criticism of the FDA here, most of it deserved, they have
to get credit for lifting the ban eventually. I hadn't known. Thanks
for the information.
On Thursday, Oct 25, 2007, at 01:47 Asia/Tokyo, faith gagne wrote:
That ban was lifted in 2002. You should be able to get it at
6 matches
Mail list logo
