Thread: Well, my city finally did it!

Great. I don't care if someone cares so little about themselves, and like to give into peer pressure, but I shouldn't have to smell that shit and be exposed to their carcinogens.

I was living in Cali when they passed the bill there. Here's a list of which states that have smoking bans.

Originally Posted by Evil Eagle

Springfield, MO finally voted to ban smoking in public places! Now I can go grind up on some dirty skanks without smelling like an ash tray afterwards! Woohoo!

that's awesome!

we could make this a lot easier, the FDA needs to ban tobacco, I mean aren't they supposed to be looking out for our health which is why anything anabolic gets banned?

15 Disturbing Facts About the FDA

Americans count on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate food and pharmaceutical items so that only the safest, most effective products hit the market. That’s definitely not the case, as these disturbing facts show. If you’re interested in pursuing a career in the medical field or just want to learn more about the processes of drug and food approval, consider these news stories and scandals that are inspiring FDA reform today.

1. They keep important drug information off the label: Two drug safety experts called out the FDA in the fall of 2009 for leaving off important drug information when listing ingredients on labels. Even doctors were left in the dark about certain drug information, and in the case of the osteoporosis drug, Zometa, a slightly higher dose could increase the risk of death in cancer patients.

2. Their tomato mistake ruined the industry: During one of the many salmonella outbreaks in the last few years, the FDA pointed to tomatoes as being the carrying culprit. People all over the country stopped eating tomatoes, a major ingredient in all types of foods made at home and in restaurants. The slow-down of the industry was a huge hit to farmers, and Florida lost most of its harvest because of the FDA’s cautioning. Turns out tomatoes had nothing to do with the outbreak whatsoever.

3. Budget cuts might be coming: Earlier this year, Congress looked ready to cut funding to the FDA as with many other government agencies. The FDA is worried about handling the fallout from Japanese radiation, however, possibly swaying President Obama to override the cuts and in fact give more money to the FDA for 2012.

4. The FDA approved canola oil: There’s a bit of debate among health experts and natural foodies about the safety of canola oil, which is no longer extracted from the somewhat toxic plant, rapeseed. Mayo Clinic blogger Katherine Zeratsky, R.D., L.D., points out that “canola oil is generally recognized as safe by the Food and Drug Administration,” which isn’t a very strong stance one way or the other, and it has actually been banned in Europe.

5. They failed to comment on a test subject’s suicide: A 19-year-old college student who was working as a test subject for the FDA as it researched a new antidepressant hanged herself in the lab of an Indianapolis-area drug company. Because the drug manufacturer hadn’t publicized any negative side effects about their product, the FDA was expected to share its findings and continue with research to attempt to find a reason for the suicide. They didn’t. Instead, the FDA said that if they released information about how the suicide and drug’s side effects were related, they would be releasing trade secrets, possibly compromising the drug company’s recipe and overall business.

6. The FDA tends to “sit on” questionable data: In a 2009 New York Times article, it was revealed that the FDA has a nasty habit — it “often sits on data that raise questions about a drug’s safety or therapeutic value.” In other words, FDA agents keep quiet when they learn about adverse side effects, including shocking symptoms like increased heart attack risks in one painkiller and an increase in children’s suicidal thoughts and behaviors in antidepressants. Their obsession with keeping trade secrets safe inspired a call for more transparency in the process of drug approval.

7. They were partly behind the Vioxx deaths: Along with drug company Merck, the FDA was blamed for promoting and refusing to recall the drug Vioxx, which “caused an untold number of fatalities among the American population,” according to NaturalNews.com. Apparently, the FDA was pressed to run additional clinical trials after Vioxx caused heart attacks, but the FDA approved the drug anyway, without extra research or recalls.

8. Just because a drug is approved, doesn’t mean the FDA believes it works well: The main rule of thumb for drug approval is that if its benefits outweigh its side effects, it gets the go-ahead to hit the market. But while many Americans think that FDA-approved medicine means the drug is high quality, it may not be.

9. FDA leaders have chosen to side with drug companies, and ignore science: Two years ago, a group of FDA scientists wrote a letter to President Obama asking for wholesale change of the organization, as they believed leaders were corrupt and consistently ignoring their research, and instead choosing to promote drug companies. At first, some believed the letter was a fake, but when it was validated, a closer look of the letter revealed that the scientists also accused the FDA of actually breaking their own laws, “altering scientific findings,” removing Black Box warnings, made false statements in FDA documents, and the approval of a mammogram device after FDA experts voted unanimously against it.

10. They re-approved a drug that killed 80,000 people: Many health and patient advocates felt that the diabetes drug Avandia should be taken off the market after it was suspected of killing around 80,000 people, but after a special meeting was called, the FDA disagreed. Although the FDA proved through a vote that they believed the drug was dangerous, they decided stronger warning labels would be a sufficient solution.

11. Most Americans don’t approve of the FDA’s alleged neutrality: Four out of five Americans believe that the FDA is too heavily influenced by drug companies, and 96% of Americans want the government to put warning labels on drugs with known safety concerns.

12. It’s all relative: In a report by NaturalNews.com, the FDA’s twisted logic for drug approval was unwound. Their decisions are based on relative comparisons — not on drug safety but on drug deadliness. If a drug is no more deadly than any other comparable drug on the market, it can be approved.

13. Stock scandal: A FDA chemist was charged with insider trading, stockpiling — along with his son — $3.6 million. He used inside information about drug approvals to make calculated trades.

14. “Extraordinarily complex” data is an excuse for making the wrong decisions: When called out on the Avandia scandal, FDA officers blamed the drug company Glaxo for throwing “extraordinarily complex” data at them, apparently thinking that was a valid excuse for making a bad decision endangering tens of thousands of lives.

15. They were reluctant to pursue criminal prosecutions: Last spring, the FDA began stepping up its criminal prosecutions of offending drug and food company executives after it was pressured by Congress to do so. Critics of the FDA had noticed that the agency was being too lax with its investigations and had “fallen short” in terms of developing performance standards in its criminal unit.

Cali has some strict smoking laws which is good. Can't smoke at any beaches or parks.

The smoking ban in my city went into effect a few years ago. I dunno, I go back and forth on it and I don't smoke. If an establishment wants to cater to smokers, why restrict them? Just have them post before you go in and on their websites that they are smoker friendly. If the non-smoker doesn't like it, bring your money elsewhere. Besides, a number of years ago they brought down regulation, forcing all local restaurants to spend a small fortune in smoke barriers and high end filtration systems to protect non-smokers. The establishments were forced to eat a dick on that one, since now the smoking ban makes them irrelevant.

I hate cigarette smoke. I hate government intrusion more - it just gives bureaucrats more relevance where there should be less.

Originally Posted by phosphor

The smoking ban in my city went into effect a few years ago. I dunno, I go back and forth on it and I don't smoke. If an establishment wants to cater to smokers, why restrict them? Just have them post before you go in and on their websites that they are smoker friendly. If the non-smoker doesn't like it, bring your money elsewhere. Besides, a number of years ago they brought down regulation, forcing all local restaurants to spend a small fortune in smoke barriers and high end filtration systems to protect non-smokers. The establishments were forced to eat a dick on that one, since now the smoking ban makes them irrelevant.

I hate cigarette smoke. I hate government intrusion more - it just gives bureaucrats more relevance where there should be less.

It was voted for on a ballot yesterday. Majority rules, no government intervention.

Sent from my Android device

Originally Posted by Evil Eagle

Springfield, MO finally voted to ban smoking in public places! Now I can go grind up on some dirty skanks without smelling like an ash tray afterwards! Woohoo!

Sent from my Android device

You live in Springfield so death shouldn't sound like a bad option.

Originally Posted by Evil Eagle

It was voted for on a ballot yesterday. Majority rules, no government intervention.

Sent from my Android device

Since you put it that way, It's all good. I still play the devils advocate on this one, but good to know voting still counts for something.

Originally Posted by vortrit

You live in Springfield so death shouldn't sound like a bad option.

Hahahaha. Cmon man, its not THAT bad. Of course, if it wasn't for my family being here I would've moved somewhere warmer a loooong time ago.

Sent from my Android device

Originally Posted by Evil Eagle

It was voted for on a ballot yesterday. Majority rules, no government intervention.

Sent from my Android device

"No government intervention"? Just what do you think a law is???

Even if a law is put in place based on a vote, it's still government intervention.

Originally Posted by phosphor

The smoking ban in my city went into effect a few years ago. I dunno, I go back and forth on it and I don't smoke. If an establishment wants to cater to smokers, why restrict them? Just have them post before you go in and on their websites that they are smoker friendly. If the non-smoker doesn't like it, bring your money elsewhere. Besides, a number of years ago they brought down regulation, forcing all local restaurants to spend a small fortune in smoke barriers and high end filtration systems to protect non-smokers. The establishments were forced to eat a dick on that one, since now the smoking ban makes them irrelevant.

I hate cigarette smoke. I hate government intrusion more - it just gives bureaucrats more relevance where there should be less.

If someone wants to use anabolic steroids why can't they? Unlike tobacco anabolic steroids have not killed one person ever in history, tobacco kills tens of thousand of people per year.

Originally Posted by Prince

If someone wants to use anabolic steroids why can't they? Unlike tobacco anabolic steroids have not killed one person ever in history, tobacco kills tens of thousand of people per year.

It's even more stupid than that. Steroids build up your body, smoking just tears it down. Yet they ban steroids. How fucked up is that logic?

Originally Posted by Prince

If someone wants to use anabolic steroids why can't they? Unlike tobacco anabolic steroids have not killed one person ever in history, tobacco kills tens of thousand of people per year.

That pisses me off too. Instead I have to risk incarceration for BS laws. Ok, so it is legal to abort fetuses in this country (it's their body), but I cannot take aas (it's my body)? Your point is much higher on my hatelist (for absurd bans), since this goes federal and DEA, wheras his smoking law was simply a local yes/no vote.

Originally Posted by phosphor

That pisses me off too. Instead I have to risk incarceration for BS laws. Ok, so it is legal to abort fetuses in this country (it's their body), but I cannot take aas (it's my body)? Your point is much higher on my hatelist (for absurd bans), since this goes federal and DEA, wheras his smoking law was simply a local yes/no vote.

Yeah, but tobacco is legal Federally via some special exception law the FDA has for it, I cannot remember the absurd details, its a bunch of bullshit because we all know how much money the government makes from cigarette sales.

I just find it hilarious that Americans think the FDA is out to protect us, if that were the case most of these prescription drugs that I see commercials for nightly and are "FDA approved", yet often the side effects they read off at the end include DEATH.

Its such a fucking joke.

Originally Posted by Evil Eagle

Hahahaha. Cmon man, its not THAT bad. Of course, if it wasn't for my family being here I would've moved somewhere warmer a loooong time ago.

Sent from my Android device

I guess not. I lived there for years and went to college there at OTC. I live in Warrensburg now. I think they just passed the same law. Anyway, I like it 100X better up here, but I guess Springtown is okay...

Originally Posted by ALBOB

"No government intervention"? Just what do you think a law is???

Even if a law is put in place based on a vote, it's still government intervention.

That's called the government enforcing the peoples will. Are you really so stupid that you couldn't comprehend what I said?

Sent from my Android device

Originally Posted by vortrit

I guess not. I lived there for years and went to college there at OTC. I live in Warrensburg now. I think they just passed the same law. Anyway, I like it 100X better up here, but I guess Springtown is okay...

Hell ya man, Off The Chain is booming!

Sent from my Android device

Originally Posted by Evil Eagle

That's called the government enforcing the peoples will. Are you really so stupid that you couldn't comprehend what I said?

Sent from my Android device

Are you really so stupid you can't understand what YOU posted? Governement enforcement is government intrusion, they're synonymous. Whether it's by a public ballot or congressional decree, it doesn't change the fact that it's the government doing it.

Originally Posted by ALBOB

Are you really so stupid you can't understand what YOU posted? Governement enforcement is government intrusion, they're synonymous. Whether it's by a public ballot or congressional decree, it doesn't change the fact that it's the government doing it.

You're an idiot.

Sent from my Android device

Originally Posted by Prince

If someone wants to use anabolic steroids why can't they? Unlike tobacco anabolic steroids have not killed one person ever in history, tobacco kills tens of thousand of people per year.

over 1,200 deaths a day from big tobacco as compared to about 30 deaths total from ephedrine in the past 40 years and zero deaths from steroids..

Originally Posted by LAM

over 1,200 deaths a day from big tobacco as compared to about 30 deaths total from ephedrine in the past 40 years and zero deaths from steroids..

Source. Each line has a source entry in the original document.

This is per year.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Source. Each line has a source entry in the original document.

This is per year.

Damn, guns are pretty low on that list. Looks like I better get busy.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Great. I don't care if someone cares so little about themselves, and like to give into peer pressure, but I shouldn't have to smell that shit and be exposed to their carcinogens.

I was living in Cali when they passed the bill there. Here's a list of which states that have smoking bans.

When that happened in Houston, it was truly a blessing. There are still some shotty places that allow it but man, when you come home and don't smell like smoke, it is so nice.

Originally Posted by oufinny

When that happened in Houston, it was truly a blessing. There are still some shotty places that allow it but man, when you come home and don't smell like smoke, it is so nice.

No doubt. I don't need cancer causing second hand smoke or my leather jacket smelling like they wore it.