Results 1 to 30 of 42

Thread: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Arena Senior Member Crazed Rabbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Between the Mountain and the Sound
    Posts
    11,074
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro View Post
    Shouldn't you address the claimed health risks?

    It doesn't have anything to do with diet (poor straw man).
    Your diet is what you eat and drink. So I do think it relates.

    The claim is that it leads to alcohol poisoning by masking the effects so that people can't judge how intoxicated they are.
    It's easy to have an idea of how drunk you are by keeping track of how much you drink. What, we can't count and have to determine our sobriety using self-applied intoxication tests?

    The government has no place deciding how we should be drinking. Just because its possible to overindulge is no excuse for a nationwide ban.

    Q11. What's the difference between a drink that combines alcohol and cola and a beverage that contains alcohol and caffeine?

    A11. Cola is a carbonated beverage made up of many ingredients, including caffeine.The addition of caffeine to cola-type beverages up to certain levels is GRAS. Consumers may themselves choose to add cola to alcoholic beverages according to their preferences. The beverages that are the subject of FDA's request for information are characterized by the intentional addition of caffeine to alcoholic beverages by the manufacturer.
    And consumers can't choose whether or not to buy beverages that contain alcohol and caffeine like they choose to mix drinks themselves? There is no real difference, a fact that 'answer' neatly ignores.

    CR
    Ja Mata, Tosa.

    The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement! - William Pitt the Elder

  2. #2

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit View Post
    Your diet is what you eat and drink. So I do think it relates.
    Hardly

    It's like the outcry over the banning of trans fat. "the government is trying to ban tasty food!". But actually they are banning an industrial product that is used because it's cheap and convenient not because it tastes better.

    This is not about banning foods because of the taste or because the government thinks its business is to intervene in peoples diets. It's genuinely about the alcohol poisoning issue.

    It's easy to have an idea of how drunk you are by keeping track of how much you drink. What, we can't count and have to determine our sobriety using self-applied intoxication tests?
    A second issue is people thinking they can drive. But the main issue is that the products are deemed deceptive. That's what you're skipping.

    The government has no place deciding how we should be drinking. Just because its possible to overindulge is no excuse for a nationwide ban.
    No age limit either? And it isn't about overindulging.


    And consumers can't choose whether or not to buy beverages that contain alcohol and caffeine like they choose to mix drinks themselves? There is no real difference, a fact that 'answer' neatly ignores.

    CR
    If you acknowledge that consumers can mix the drinks themselves then what was all that about "the government deciding how we drink". They are only deciding what we can buy conveniently prepackaged.

    I have actually not even examined the science behind the risk claims. It could all be a scare. I thought you had information to that point actually.


    More generally though, I think you do a disservice to the true spirit of wanting to be free from government interference when you use this kind of rhetoric in defense of 24 ounce blue raspberry 12.0% abv energy drinks...if they are wrong then it is purely for the principle and the slippery slope nature.

  3. #3
    Devout worshipper of Bilious Member miotas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,035

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro View Post
    And it isn't about overindulging.
    But you just said it was...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro View Post
    It's genuinely about the alcohol poisoning issue.
    We had a similar thing a few years back where pre mixed alcoholic drinks like vodka cruisers were taxed to high hell in an effort to make them prohibitively expensive for teenagers to buy since teens were drinking them like they were soft drink and getting absurdly drunk. Government interference had no effect in this case and I doubt it will in yours either. Young people just switched to drinking hard liquor straight or mixing it themselves, neither of which is preferable to buying premixed.

    - Four Horsemen of the Presence

  4. #4

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by miotas View Post
    But you just said it was...
    No..."overindulging" is used to mean "getting to drunk" but in a specific way. An indulgent way. This is an "oops" way.

    We had a similar thing a few years back where pre mixed alcoholic drinks like vodka cruisers were taxed to high hell in an effort to make them prohibitively expensive for teenagers to buy since teens were drinking them like they were soft drink and getting absurdly drunk. Government interference had no effect in this case and I doubt it will in yours either. Young people just switched to drinking hard liquor straight or mixing it themselves, neither of which is preferable to buying premixed.
    The claim is that the caffeine masks the signs of intoxication. So that people who would stop drinking because they felt trashed don't stop.



    perfect.

    Cle Elum Police Chief Scott Ferguson says that not only were the students drinking the crazy-in-a-can, they were also spiking it with rum and vodka. Questionable mixology that led to blood-alcohol levels ranging from the seriously soused (.12) to the perilously-close-to-death (.35).
    The "they were drinking it" and "then they got alcohol poisoning" is not the kind of evidence I had in mind, for obvious reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by comment section said
    four lokos aren't bad just the people who drink them are dumb i've been drinking them for as long as they've been in stores don't ban FOUR LOKOS
    Last edited by Sasaki Kojiro; 11-17-2010 at 06:18.

  5. #5
    Hope guides me Senior Member Hosakawa Tito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Western New Yuck
    Posts
    7,914

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    They can take my Irish Coffee when they can pry my cold intoxicated fingers from the cup.
    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." *Jim Elliot*

  6. #6
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,690
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Is this ready mixed, or at point of sale (i.e. can bars sell the aforementioned Rum and coke or would the customer have to purchase both then mix them)?

    Neither makes any sense to me. Red Bull and Vodka has been a popular drink for ages and people are prepared to go the extra mile of purchasing two drinks, as they have with many other types previously.

    My personal favourite is vodka jelly. You could feed it to toddlers as there's no perception of alcohol. It sits in the stomach and slowly dissolves so you can eat a vast amount and it only kicks in later allowing one to get vastly more drunk than one intended to... Happy times.

    I can understand that packaging should not hide the fact there is an alcoholic content, and it should also not be packaged in such a manner to appeal to an inappropriate audience, but FFS, in America you have to be 21 to even have a tipple!

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  7. #7
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,958

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    ah the FDA, how i love them.

    i once spent a fortnight trying to understand their massively convoluted medical device acceptance program, the result was a twenty four page report for our venture capital partners into how our software-device could be 'processed' through the FDA.

    great fun, in a masochistic way.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  8. #8
    Arena Senior Member Crazed Rabbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Between the Mountain and the Sound
    Posts
    11,074
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro View Post
    It's like the outcry over the banning of trans fat. "the government is trying to ban tasty food!". But actually they are banning an industrial product that is used because it's cheap and convenient not because it tastes better.
    Something they (Center for Science in the Public Interest) used to (1990) encourage the use of?

    This is not about banning foods because of the taste or because the government thinks its business is to intervene in peoples diets. It's genuinely about the alcohol poisoning issue.
    How is this not intervening in people's diets? Even if the issue is alcohol poisoning, it's still interference in what people consume.

    Does this product really make it more likely, or are politicians just overreacting to some recent events? Some idiots misusing the drinks are no excuse for a ban, just like idiots killing themselves speeding are no excuse for a ban on really fast cars.

    A second issue is people thinking they can drive. But the main issue is that the products are deemed deceptive. That's what you're skipping.
    I thought it was genuinely about the alcohol poisoning, not deceptiveness. Does it not state the ABV and that it contains caffeine?

    If you acknowledge that consumers can mix the drinks themselves then what was all that about "the government deciding how we drink". They are only deciding what we can buy conveniently prepackaged.
    They are putting barriers to drinking certain items - making it harder to consume certain types of products and not others.

    More generally though, I think you do a disservice to the true spirit of wanting to be free from government interference when you use this kind of rhetoric in defense of 24 ounce blue raspberry 12.0% abv energy drinks...if they are wrong then it is purely for the principle and the slippery slope nature.
    It's like freedom of speech; you have to defend hateful speech to defend all speech. Here you have to defend something you'd never care to drink in order to protect your right to eat what you want without government taxes or regulations compelling you one way or another.

    EDIT:
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat View Post
    Bless the Western democracies for having health inspections and food safety agencies.

    You eat and drink stuff, kids put it in their mouths. Thank God independent government run agencies provide the consumer with some protection. Much as the cowboys of this world would prefer for all that regulation to dissappear.
    I am here to call your bluff. You haven't read the article or even a related wiki article.

    This isn't about consumer protection. Caffeine and alcohol are both safe to drink, together or apart. An unsafe product would harm people who used any amount of it. This is a ban because the government believes there's the possibility you will drink too much and not control yourself.

    As for the FDA; I have no love for them, nor for how they deny dying patients access to experimental treatments.

    Against all this, consumers need to protect themselves.
    Then let them do so by making their own decisions. We are not children and should not be treated as such.

    CR
    Last edited by Crazed Rabbit; 11-18-2010 at 03:16.
    Ja Mata, Tosa.

    The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement! - William Pitt the Elder

  9. #9
    TexMec Senior Member Louis VI the Fat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Saint Antoine
    Posts
    9,935

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit View Post
    It's like freedom of speech; you have to defend hateful speech to defend all speech. Here you have to defend something you'd never care to drink in order to protect your right to eat what you want without government taxes or regulations compelling you one way or another.

    CR
    But..but what if I just want to pay somebody $1.62 a year to check all of my food for me? It's marvellously efficient.

    They do not tell me what to eat, they are rather told by me to keep safe the food I enjoy eating.
    Anything unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
    Texan by birth, woodpecker by the grace of God
    I would be the voice of your conscience if you had one - Brenus
    Bt why woulf we uy lsn'y Staraft - Fragony
    Not everything
    blue and underlined is a link


  10. #10

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    This is a non-sequitar CR

    Why do you think trans fat isn't how I described it?

    How is this not intervening in people's diets? Even if the issue is alcohol poisoning, it's still interference in what people consume.
    So is controlling city tap water. Saying that it's intervening with something that people put in their mouths does not make your case, even when you try and phrase it so that it sounds like they are making the food pyramid compulsory.


    Does this product really make it more likely, or are politicians just overreacting to some recent events? Some idiots misusing the drinks are no excuse for a ban, just like idiots killing themselves speeding are no excuse for a ban on really fast cars.
    Yes exactly, does it? That's what I was asking you. If it does then they are justified don't you think?

    I thought it was genuinely about the alcohol poisoning, not deceptiveness. Does it not state the ABV and that it contains caffeine?
    caffeine-->feel like not drunk--> actually have alcohol poisoning == deceptive

    They are putting barriers to drinking certain items - making it harder to consume certain types of products and not others.
    Yes, so that people who want to drink energy drinks with caffeine have to go through an extra step, showing that they understand the risks and genuinely want to take them. And if they do they are free to do so.

    It's like freedom of speech; you have to defend hateful speech to defend all speech. Here you have to defend something you'd never care to drink in order to protect your right to eat what you want without government taxes or regulations compelling you one way or another.

    CR
    You should sound different when you talk about the government banning non-hate speech than you do when you talk about them banning hate-speech. Way different. Same here. We're not going to ban the fda because they believe in some science research that claims 4 loko is unsafe. The slippery slope doesn't work here given the justification they used.
    Last edited by Sasaki Kojiro; 11-18-2010 at 03:23.

  11. #11
    Arena Senior Member Crazed Rabbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Between the Mountain and the Sound
    Posts
    11,074
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro View Post
    This is a non-sequitar CR

    Why do you think trans fat isn't how I described it?
    My point is that the government often gets science wrong, and they shouldn't hold such broad power.

    So is controlling city tap water. Saying that it's intervening with something that people put in their mouths does not make your case, even when you try and phrase it so that it sounds like they are making the food pyramid compulsory.
    They don't ban private wells though.

    Yes exactly, does it? That's what I was asking you. If it does then they are justified don't you think?
    No. We aren't children. I don't support seatbelt laws either. The government's role should not be to protect us from our own choices.

    caffeine-->feel like not drunk--> actually have alcohol poisoning == deceptive
    If that's the case, why hasn't it been an issue with drinks like vodka and redbull?

    Yes, so that people who want to drink energy drinks with caffeine have to go through an extra step, showing that they understand the risks and genuinely want to take them. And if they do they are free to do so.
    They shouldn't have to.

    You should sound different when you talk about the government banning non-hate speech than you do when you talk about them banning hate-speech. Way different. Same here. We're not going to ban the fda because they believe in some science research that claims 4 loko is unsafe. The slippery slope doesn't work here given the justification they used.
    Four lokos may well be unsafe when misused - the point being that it's possible for people to responsibly drink it.

    But..but what if I just want to pay somebody $1.62 a year to check all of my food for me? It's marvellously efficient.

    They do not tell me what to eat, they are rather told by me to keep safe the food I enjoy eating.
    The point of this thread is that they aren't simply just checking the food and informing you of the risks associated with consuming it. Also, your definition of 'safe' may well be different from other peoples - which means you want to impose your definition upon them.

    CR
    Ja Mata, Tosa.

    The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement! - William Pitt the Elder

  12. #12

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    When I drink, I (and most people) rely on being able to tell when I've had to much based on how I feel. You want the government to force counting or precise measuring. I want them to ban things that interfere (if they do) with that ability so that people don't think they can drive when they can't, and don't think they aren't drunk when they are near vomiting.

    That's the basic difference, aside from the questions about the legitimacy of the science, which I think we are both doubtful of, or at least I'm doubtful you seem more sure. You are mandating something as well, you have to admit--you are putting the onus on me to examine everything I eat or drink, in the name of freedom (when you speak of stripping the fda of legal power).

    Basically libertarianism is an overly-systemized version of a good political philosophy. It cuts corners for the sake of straight lines. And it's overly dramatic to, since all you are saying in the end is "people shouldn't have to mix their drinks on their own, they should have to keep careful count!".

  13. #13
    The very model of a modern Moderator Xiahou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in the cloud.
    Posts
    9,007

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro View Post
    Yes exactly, does it? That's what I was asking you. If it does then they are justified don't you think?
    Let's look at their reasoning:
    GRAS status is not an inherent property of a substance, but must be assessed in the context of the intended conditions of use of the substance. The assessment includes a consideration of the population that will consume the substance. Therefore, the scientific data and information that support a GRAS determination must consider the conditions under which the substance is safe for the use for which it is marketed. Reports in the scientific literature have raised concerns regarding the formulation and packaging of pre-mixed products containing added caffeine and alcohol. For example, these products, presented as fruity soft drinks in colorful single-serving packages, seemingly target the young adult user. Furthermore, the marketing of the caffeinated versions of this class of alcoholic beverage appears to be specifically directed to young adults. FDA is concerned that the young adults to whom these pre-mixed caffeine and alcohol products are marketed are especially vulnerable to the adverse behavioral effects associated with consuming caffeine added to alcohol, a concern reflected in the publicly available literature.
    In other words... Both alcohol and caffeine are GRAS. Alcohol and caffeine together are GRAS. BUT, alcohol and caffeine together and marketed to young adults is not GRAS. So it's being banned because of marketing. What a load.
    "Don't believe everything you read online."
    -Abraham Lincoln

  14. #14

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Xiahou View Post
    Let's look at their reasoning:In other words... Both alcohol and caffeine are GRAS. Alcohol and caffeine together are GRAS. BUT, alcohol and caffeine together and marketed to young adults is not GRAS. So it's being banned because of marketing. What a load.
    Studies suggest that the combined ingestion of caffeine and alcohol may lead to hazardous and life-threatening situations because caffeine counteracts some, but not all, of alcohol's adverse effects. In one study, a mixture of an energy drink and alcohol reduced subjects' subjective perception of intoxication but did not improve diminished motor coordination or slower visual reaction times using objective measures (Ferreira et al., 2006). In a dual-task model, subjects co-administered caffeine and alcohol reported reduced perception of intoxication but no reduction of alcohol-induced impairment of task accuracy (Marczinski and Fillmore, 2006).
    • Because caffeine alters the perception of alcohol intoxication, the consumption of pre-mixed products containing added caffeine and alcohol may result in higher amounts of alcohol consumed per drinking occasion, a situation that is particularly dangerous for naive drinkers (Oteri et al., 2007).

    From right before the bit you quoted. Do believe that it's inaccurate?


    I'm curious what you guys think about San Fran banning happy meals (the inclusion of a toy with a meal of over 600 calories). It also seems very reasonable to me.

  15. #15
    The very model of a modern Moderator Xiahou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in the cloud.
    Posts
    9,007

    Default Re: The FDA: Federal Doofus Association

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro View Post

    From right before the bit you quoted. Do believe that it's inaccurate?
    Lots of things may lead to hazardous situations. Consumption of any alcohol can and does lead to such. Where's the standard? They try to use the GRAS standard as a fig leaf... tobacco is known to cause cancer- where's the ban? I guess the tobacco companies have better lobbyists...

    Again, it gets back to the marketing- why were only 4 companies issued FDA warning letters? They aren't the only ones making caffeinated alcoholic beverages.

    I'm curious what you guys think about San Fran banning happy meals (the inclusion of a toy with a meal of over 600 calories). It also seems very reasonable to me.
    It's stupid. If, as a parent, I want to take my child to McDonald's to have a Happy Meal once a month- why can't I? The whole premise is that I'm too stupid to make an informed decision and need the nanny state to make decisions for me.
    Last edited by Xiahou; 11-18-2010 at 04:36.
    "Don't believe everything you read online."
    -Abraham Lincoln

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO