Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: Mark Probert <markprobert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 12:47:20 -0400
Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert" <markprobert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:iDU4g.96$pP6.2@xxxxxxxxxxxvernon wrote:"Mark Probert" <markprobert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:c%v4g.46$6V5.34@xxxxxxxxxxxI would love to see you document, by only one case report, of a fatality due to lactose intolerance.vernon wrote:Hype, pure hype."Mark" <mlowry3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1146257109.837000.223620@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxDepends on the condition of the person consuming it. It also depends on how accurately the chemical manufacturer is in labeling. Several years back a report said that some tablets of something, I cannot recall what, ranged from 0% to 200+% of the chemical.PeterB wrote:What about ephedra?Mark wrote:My point. Supplement manufacturers don't have to prove their productrander3127@xxxxxxxxx wrote:You are sadly misinformed. FDA regulates dietary supplements compliantApple Cider Vinegar? Or Just Acid?<snip>
Advertisements in magazines and on the Internet offer what seems like a
simple remedy for a range of health problems - apple cider vinegar
tablets. But University of Arkansas researchers have found that some of
these tablets may not contain apple cider vinegar at all and could be
hazardous to the taker's health.
This comes as no surprise, since makers of herbal products or
"supplements" not only don't have to prove their products are safe,
they don't have to prove they are effective, and the products don't
even have to really contain any of what the label says is supposed to
be present.
with DSHEA, which is compatiable with FDA's position that such products
present no "unreasonable risk" to consumers. It's the law that dietary
supplements must be proven UNsafe.
safe; it's up to post-market surveillance to prove the product is
UNsafe, *after* it has been marketed.
Ephedra anyone?
Do you know how much it takes to have negative effects?
More people are hospitalized and DIE from lactose intolerance than ephedrine ever did.
I would like to see you look something up on your own just once, but it is hopeless...
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/ancient/AncientRepublish_1353681.htm
Thanks for the link. However, Darwin did not die from lactose intolerance. He died of a heart attack.
Death
19 April 1882
(heart attack)
http://www.who2.com/charlesdarwin.html
So, I ask again, for some form of proof that lactose intolerance is fatal.
.
- References:
- Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: rander3127
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: Mark
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: PeterB
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: Mark
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: vernon
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: Mark Probert
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: vernon
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: Mark Probert
- Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- From: Jan Drew
- Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- Prev by Date: Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- Next by Date: Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- Previous by thread: Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- Next by thread: Re: Hey, morons who believe in quack cures, read this
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|