It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FDA's New Claim: "Your Body Is a Drug—and We Have the Authority to Regulate It"

page: 5
54
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Our body is a drug ?!






Psst !
Hey buddy, would ya like to buy a toenail clipping ?





posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerLou
 


Here is my reply to what the FDA says. *kick into the groin* "Buzz off, Freakin Dumbhead Animals! Come back again with that saying and I'll pump you full of lead!"


They have no right and if they want my body, then they can have it, when I'm dead.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by openeyeswideshut
 



The illegialization of Cannabis is esentialy the same thing.


No. No, it's not.


Your body produces an exact chemical replica to Cannibadol.


Our bodies produce many chemicals. Many drugs do not, in fact, directly affect our moods; many of the most powerful and addictive simply stimulate the massive release of other chemicals that -do- give us various highs.


This isn't anything new. The governments been regulating your bodies chemicals for years. '___' is another example of this.


No, this is completely different.

Look - if you're going to argue against the illegal status of pot/weed/cannabis/marijuana/etc - do it in a way that can at least make sense. You don't need to try and argue the case every time the word "drug" appears in a conversation and try to make it sound like smoking pot is as sacred as the family dinner.

It's like the homosexuals who go around and try to validate their homosexuality to the rest of the world, and just as annoying.

I can rattle off a number of reasons why we should not make it illegal (the government doesn't have the power to make something legal; only declare something illegal) in a manner very similar to my explanation of why we don't need the FDA.

In other words - I'm saying you sound like you're trying to convince yourself it's okay more than you understand the reasoning behind taking cannabis off of the controlled substances lists.

Of course - it's my opinion that it is a pathetic state of humanity that resorts to the use of substances to achieve cheap-thrill highs. Even worse is the impatience many utilize in their efforts to achieve said high results in their use of horribly inefficient and damaging methods of introducing the drug into the body (smoking - in any form). Of all the ways there are to extract the desired active ingredient and administer it in a less damaging way; the mighty, intelligent, reigning super-predator resorts to wafting in the ejected byproducts of combustion.

Then, in the desired altered state, the mighty human ponders how the source of their high might be utilized so as to spoof criticism of their use of the plant. Nevermind the impracticality these half-baked "101 uses for cannabis" ideas represent....

Forgive the expression - but put that in your pipe and smoke it.

*wanders off, mumbling about social degenerates*



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Erongaricuaro
If that is the criterion by which all activities should be judged acceptable in society then we should look at banning all potentially dangerous activities, like skateboarding, riding in automobiles, etc.
We have in fact passed laws requiring automobile occupants to wear seat belts, which doesn't remove all the risk of riding in the car but it does improve your chances of escaping serious injury.



Perhaps this is the case because there is no money to be gained from a dead person..but a permanently disabled person who happened to survive the automobile crash because of the use of that seat belt..well that can be a gift that keeps on giving...a life long dependency on therapy, nursing assistance..and the big one..DRUGS.


Peace



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:25 AM
link   
The brain produces '___' and imo thats a stronger "drug" than Stem cells lol



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Maybe get an unbiased source for this article?
I don't think they actually said "your body is a drug-and we have the authority to regulate it." That's just an extremely biased interpretation of what the FDA said.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:33 AM
link   
MY CHALLENGE TO THE GOVERNMENT.......
I DARE YOU TO ENFORCE THE REGULATION OF MY OWN BODY SUCCESSFULLY..........
So when do we as a people draw the line, and then do something about it when the big gov crosses it?



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
Maybe get an unbiased source for this article?
I don't think they actually said "your body is a drug-and we have the authority to regulate it." That's just an extremely biased interpretation of what the FDA said.

yep, i was right....


Stem cells are drugs and therefore fall within their jurisdiction. (The clinic argues that stem cell therapy is the practice of medicine and is therefore not within the FDA’s jurisdiction!) The clinic is engaging in interstate commerce and is therefore subject to FDA regulation because any part of the machine or procedure that originates outside Colorado becomes interstate commerce once it enters the state. Moreover, interstate commerce is substantially affected because individuals traveling to Colorado to have the Regenexx procedure would “depress the market for out-of-state drugs that are approved by FDA.”


whoever wrote this is a moron....

"The clinic argues that stem-cell therapy is the practice of medicine, and is therefore not withing the FDA's jurisdiction!"

yes, there's an exclamation point right there in the actual article.

Medicine and drug mean the same thing....morons.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375

Originally posted by Ghost375
Maybe get an unbiased source for this article?
I don't think they actually said "your body is a drug-and we have the authority to regulate it." That's just an extremely biased interpretation of what the FDA said.

yep, i was right....


Stem cells are drugs and therefore fall within their jurisdiction. (The clinic argues that stem cell therapy is the practice of medicine and is therefore not within the FDA’s jurisdiction!) The clinic is engaging in interstate commerce and is therefore subject to FDA regulation because any part of the machine or procedure that originates outside Colorado becomes interstate commerce once it enters the state. Moreover, interstate commerce is substantially affected because individuals traveling to Colorado to have the Regenexx procedure would “depress the market for out-of-state drugs that are approved by FDA.”


whoever wrote this is a moron....

"The clinic argues that stem-cell therapy is the practice of medicine, and is therefore not withing the FDA's jurisdiction!"

yes, there's an exclamation point right there in the actual article.

Medicine and drug mean the same thing....morons.

38 flags? What is ATS coming down to?



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
www.youtube.com...

couldn't resist, this one rocks, and all you NIN fans out there will appreciate this.
thought it went well with the thread..



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Over the line. They seek to manipulate and control the evolution of mankind. I'd rather that not happen. Looks like I'm going to have to join the lobbying game. Fun stuff. The evolution of man is a peculiar thing. Our next step is an augmented evolution, crafted by our own hands...we can't allow the government or any business to have say over it...or else all is TRULY lost.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by openeyeswideshut
 



The illegialization of Cannabis is esentialy the same thing.


No. No, it's not.


Your body produces an exact chemical replica to Cannibadol.


Our bodies produce many chemicals. Many drugs do not, in fact, directly affect our moods; many of the most powerful and addictive simply stimulate the massive release of other chemicals that -do- give us various highs.


This isn't anything new. The governments been regulating your bodies chemicals for years. '___' is another example of this.


No, this is completely different.

Look - if you're going to argue against the illegal status of pot/weed/cannabis/marijuana/etc - do it in a way that can at least make sense. You don't need to try and argue the case every time the word "drug" appears in a conversation and try to make it sound like smoking pot is as sacred as the family dinner.

It's like the homosexuals who go around and try to validate their homosexuality to the rest of the world, and just as annoying.

I can rattle off a number of reasons why we should not make it illegal (the government doesn't have the power to make something legal; only declare something illegal) in a manner very similar to my explanation of why we don't need the FDA.

In other words - I'm saying you sound like you're trying to convince yourself it's okay more than you understand the reasoning behind taking cannabis off of the controlled substances lists.

Of course - it's my opinion that it is a pathetic state of humanity that resorts to the use of substances to achieve cheap-thrill highs. Even worse is the impatience many utilize in their efforts to achieve said high results in their use of horribly inefficient and damaging methods of introducing the drug into the body (smoking - in any form). Of all the ways there are to extract the desired active ingredient and administer it in a less damaging way; the mighty, intelligent, reigning super-predator resorts to wafting in the ejected byproducts of combustion.

Then, in the desired altered state, the mighty human ponders how the source of their high might be utilized so as to spoof criticism of their use of the plant. Nevermind the impracticality these half-baked "101 uses for cannabis" ideas represent....

Forgive the expression - but put that in your pipe and smoke it.

*wanders off, mumbling about social degenerates*


If I sat that high on my horse..I might agree with you.


Peace



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerLou
 


Found a bit more . This will definitely clear up the question re the wording.


As many of our followers know, we’ve been engaged in a David and Goliath struggle over a basic civil right-who gets to regulate your body. Most of us, when posed this question, would say that the answer is clear, our body is ours to regulate. However, not according to the FDA, which in court documents has now said that since it regulates chemical drugs, and since all living things produce chemicals, then all living things fall under FDA jurisdiction (there’s an excellent legal review of the background issues leading up to that point by KL Gates). This nutty statement by FDA came in recent court filings in response to a judge’s order slapped on the agency in our landmark case. The judge pointed out that congress only authorized FDA to consider chemicals which had “chemical action” as a drug. The judge also asked the obvious question, how do you get from chemicals=drugs to cells=drugs? She gave the FDA 30 days to respond and denied their motions.


FULL article here: www.regenexx.com...
edit on 3-2-2012 by SeekerLou because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerLou
reply to post by SeekerLou
 


Found a bit more . This will definitely clear up the question re the wording.


As many of our followers know, we’ve been engaged in a David and Goliath struggle over a basic civil right-who gets to regulate your body. Most of us, when posed this question, would say that the answer is clear, our body is ours to regulate. However, not according to the FDA, which in court documents has now said that since it regulates chemical drugs, and since all living things produce chemicals, then all living things fall under FDA jurisdiction (there’s an excellent legal review of the background issues leading up to that point by KL Gates). This nutty statement by FDA came in recent court filings in response to a judge’s order slapped on the agency in our landmark case. The judge pointed out that congress only authorized FDA to consider chemicals which had “chemical action” as a drug. The judge also asked the obvious question, how do you get from chemicals=drugs to cells=drugs? She gave the FDA 30 days to respond and denied their motions.


FULL article here: www.regenexx.com...
edit on 3-2-2012 by SeekerLou because: (no reason given)

please link to where the FDA actually said that...
(see my posts above where i rip this idea to shreds.)

"Hahaha, you Americans always provide us with the best jokes. Pizza is a vegetable and the human body is a drug, well played sir!"
-from your link

yeah, when you look at the "pizza is a vegetable" thing...you realize that that is a gross summarization of it...
in fact, they would only allow pizza on the menu, if a vegetable would be served with it.

STOP MANIPULATING FACTS! That's Fox News' job. Honestly though, they should hire some of you guys, you're pretty good at manipulating facts.

edit on 3-2-2012 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerLou
 


No I'm sorry, but this is not winnable for the FDA..

Stem Cells inside our bodies are ours to do with as we wish.. Nobody owns my body but me and its taht simple..

Stem Cells are not a commodity like Ice, Extacy and other physical drugs. Stem Cells themselves hold no narcotic effcts. Saying theya are a drug is a grab at thin air.

Although the people they are spinning this to are ad dumb as bricks, so they'll believe what the Hrmmm "experts" tell them and pas a law making it illegal to have Stem Cells in your body...



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 04:35 AM
link   
Wanna piece of me, one hundred bucks...but you don't get my w......r its already sold.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


What I was trying to say...(if you can put two and two together) was that there are many plants in the world that are chemical replicas to chemicals produced by your body. Marijuana and '___' were just two examples. I would give you a real good lesson in natural chemicals and there interaction with your body but i've already got in sh*t for trying to do this before


16e.) Illicit Activity: Discussion of illicit activities, specifically the use of mind-altering drugs & substances, engaging in computer hacking, promoting criminal hate, discussing sexual relations with minors, and furtherance of financial schemes and scams are strictly forbidden. You will also not link to sites or online content that contains discussion or advocacy of such material. Any Post mentioning or advocating personal use of illicit mind-altering drugs will result in immediate account termination. i) Narcotics and illicit mind-altering substances: Due to abuse of the subject matter by some (promoting various aspects of personal use, and discussing actual personal use), no new topics on this subject are allowed in any form.


Do yourself a favour and do some research on something before you completely blow sh*t out the window.
edit on 3-2-2012 by openeyeswideshut because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Medicine and drug mean the same thing....morons.

Practice of medicine and medicine are not the same.

Do doctors and hospitals that practice medicine and have out of state customers, come under the purview of interstate commerce for their service?



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Ironclad
 



Stem Cells inside our bodies are ours to do with as we wish.


But when they are extracted and cultured, they are no longer in your body and you are trusting the person who is processing them... but that's just a quibble.

This thread has been dominated by people who read the headline and pounced on it to voice their own knee jerk reactions. If you did just the tiniest bit of research, you would know that the FDA did not say "Your body is a drug and we have the authority to regulate it." Who said it then? The Alliance for Natural Health, a lobbying group for the alternative medicine industry. You are being played by Washington lobbyists. Here is what the FDA actually said:


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is seeking an injunction in federal court against Regenerative Sciences LLC, of Broomfield, Colo., citing violations of current good manufacturing practice (cGMP) that cause its cultured cell product to be adulterated. The product is also misbranded due to the lack of adequate directions for use and the failure to bear the “Rx only” symbol.

The company’s cultured cell product is derived from a patient’s bone marrow or fluid surrounding the patient’s joints (synovial fluid). The cells are grown, processed, and mixed with drug products outside the body before being injected back into the patient.

Regenerative Sciences’ cultured cell product is not approved by the FDA, and no adequate and well-controlled studies have been done to demonstrate its safety or effectiveness for any indication.

“FDA recognizes the importance of the development of novel and promising new therapies,” said Karen Midthun, M.D., acting director of FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. “However, when companies like Regenerative Sciences fail to comply with FDA laws and regulations, they put the public’s health at risk.”

The complaint for the injunction was filed Aug. 6, 2010, by the Justice Department on behalf of the FDA in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, against Regenerative Sciences and three of its employees, Christopher J. Centeno, M.D., John R. Schultz, M.D., and Michelle R. Cheever. The injunction would permanently prevent the company and cited individuals from adulterating and misbranding the cultured cell product while the product, or one or more of its components, is held for sale after shipment in interstate commerce.


www.fda.gov...

[Emphasis mine. --DJW001] (I ask the Mods' indulgence for the length of this quotation.)

I ask you: does extracting bodily fluid, mixing it with chemicals and re-injecting it into the body sound "natural?' Why is The Natural Health Alliance championing this cause? They're not; they're using it as an attempt to score propaganda points against their nemesis, the FDA. By misrepresenting the FDA's position and spamming it across the blogosphere, they hope knee jerk reactions will undermine the FDA's support in Congress. Their ultimate goal? Complete deregulation of the food and pharmaceutical industries. Does that sound like it's in your best interest?



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


How is the FDA making money exactly?

Once again someone finds a conspiracy spin article that makes it sound like the FDA is regulating you.

It is regulating the stem cells that are being used to heal an injury.It doesn't matter if it comes from your or not, its a procedure.
And absolutley it should be regulated.

People aren't getting up an arms that insulin is regulated, but the body makes it. This is the same thing.

If a company is going to harvest cells in the body and place them anywhere for medical healing, you would want to know that there are standards in place to protect you.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join