Monsanto Protection Act
Options
Replies
-
What are GMO'S?
Frequently in the news there is discussion regarding the use of GMO's in crops and foods. The term "genetically modified organism" (GMO) was originally used by the molecular biology scientific community to denote a living organism that had been genetically modified by inserting a gene from an unrelated species. Incorporation of genes from an unrelated species does not occur in nature through sexual reproduction and thus, various types of sophisticated technologies are used to accomplish this. These types of plants are generally called "transgenics". Transgenic technology has been used in over 40 species of plants including corn, cotton, tomatoes, potatoes, soybeans, tobacco, rice, cranberries, papayas, raspberries, chrysanthemums, gladioli, petunias, poplars, spruce, and walnuts. In crop plants, the technology has generally been used to incorporate insect resistance or herbicide tolerance. More recently, transgenic rice strains having high vitamin A or high iron content have been developed. In the future, transgenic plants may be used as "bioreactors" to produce large quantities of inexpensive pharmaceuticals, polymers, industrial enzymes, as well as modified oils, starches, and proteins.
Just good info on what organic is:
http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC50964930 -
if you are really concerned about how your food is grown, my suggestion, each person plant your own, grow it yourself, cultivate the seeds yourself, then you only have to answer to yourself. I'm only 34 but I know this already. I plant a garden every spring, I plant my own potatoes, beans, carrots, onions, etc., I reuse seed from year to year, I know where my food comes from, I know who I answer to. I think consumerism is what leads companies into producing GMO plants. We all want to make money, how can a farmer who makes next to nothing on his crops survive to grow another crop if the wheat, corn, potatoes etc. that are subject to disease, insects and drought and are not of quality to sell and are only good for silage? To survive they grow crops that are guaranteed to grow and have high percentages of yield. Unfortunately like everything in the world, even farming costs are going up. Now the GMO produce does not have any less amount of nutrients or minerals than organic, it may be modified to be the best it can be and to grow in any type of conditions but do you think you are any better living in recycled smog filled air, drinking chemicals in cans (ie sodas or energy drink or anything but water) or drinking water out of bottles that has been run through filters filled with crap designed to "clean" it?0
-
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
There is that regurgitated partial evidence again.
FTC lawsuits are not civil lawsuits.
Two VERY different things.0 -
Sure and with them allowing GMO to occur.. they put the little farmers completely upside down. They can't win and we the people lose.. eat or starve.. better check the seeds you initially buy to plant.. around 80% of soybeans and 70% of corn are GMO seeds.. good luck getting the real stuff. Esp if they deregulate it and let them take over. It will allow Monsanto a real monopoly as no one can beat them.
I do participate in a co-op and shop at natural grocers and farm markets.. i don't eat 100% organic, but I am getting there.0 -
I think we should let half of the world's population starve to death. Really. There's just no need for the advances in agriculture that we've seen for the last several decades.
All those nasty modified crops that survive on less water and fewer pesticides...ditch that crap. Let's go back to cyclical famine! Yea, that's be great.
Wrong. Yeah, that's what was promised, but the "modified" crops actually use more water, fertilizers etc. and much more negative impact on the environment and as a result, on all humans.
To the people who can't see their hand in front of their face and don't think that the taking control of the world's food supply by a handful of companies is a 'real issue"; time to wake up. Food/water security is pretty much the ONLY issue. Being aware and doing what we can to support/boycott certain industries is something we can all do immediately with just a little bit of effort. Yeah, I know, that's just too "hard", and isn't the government protecting us? LMAO
Edit: So how do you feel about your family starving to death? Oh, right, you probably just meant people in Africa and Asia. Yeah, they don't love their kids at all! The Green Revolution was bad, but do some research on what the WTO has been up to lately... they are making sure that previously self-sufficient third world countries are forced into slavery by growing cash crops and relying on food imports that are neither affordable, culturally appropriate, nor healthy. Yes, evil really exists. And most of us here in NA who are sitting in front of our tv, pumped full of pharmaceuticals and non food, don't have a clue and don't care and ridicule anyone who tries to point out the atrocities happening all around us.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
I know, but even civil suits will only hold water on the basis I described, where there was either a false claim made or lack of warning of risks.
Should've just cut the quote off0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
Exactly. You are wrong again Reddy. You can put all the freaking warnings you want. You can make no claims. You can still be sued.0 -
if you are really concerned about how your food is grown, my suggestion, each person plant your own, grow it yourself, cultivate the seeds yourself, then you only have to answer to yourself. I'm only 34 but I know this already. I plant a garden every spring, I plant my own potatoes, beans, carrots, onions, etc., I reuse seed from year to year, I know where my food comes from, I know who I answer to.
This is what I do.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
I know, but even civil suits will only hold water on the basis I described, where there was either a false claim made or lack of warning of risks.
Should've just cut the quote off
Admittance to what I have been harping about.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
I know, but even civil suits will only hold water on the basis I described, where there was either a false claim made or lack of warning of risks.
Should've just cut the quote off
Even if you put warning labels on the supplement and make no claims, if I am harmed or I can convince a lawyer I was harmed, I can still sue that company and win or have the company settle with me.0 -
BUMP for tomorrow when I see my friend so I can show her this.
OMFG. I'm so angry.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
Exactly. You are wrong again Reddy. You can put all the freaking warnings you want. You can make no claims. You can still be sued.
And you'll probably lose unless it's a high profile class action suit in the public eye. They'd rather settle in suh cases than deal with drawn out legal battles.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
Exactly. You are wrong again Reddy. You can put all the freaking warnings you want. You can make no claims. You can still be sued.
And you'll probably lose unless it's a high profile class action suit in the public eye. They'd rather settle in suh cases than deal with drawn out legal battles.
So it wouldn't be thrown out of court because you can't sue products that aren't regulated?0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
I know, but even civil suits will only hold water on the basis I described, where there was either a false claim made or lack of warning of risks.
Should've just cut the quote off
Actually, civil lawsuits are a lot more subjective than that. If there is any hint of impropriety or negligence or any of a number of things the company could still have to pay whether they are in a regulated industry or not. There has to be some hint to wrongdoing or negligence by the company but the burden of proof in a civil case is much lower than in a criminal case and lack of regulations is not an adequate defense.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
Exactly. You are wrong again Reddy. You can put all the freaking warnings you want. You can make no claims. You can still be sued.
And you'll probably lose unless it's a high profile class action suit in the public eye. They'd rather settle in suh cases than deal with drawn out legal battles.
So you went from they can't be sued to they can be sued...
So confused now.
So what is it? Non-regulated can be sued or can not be sued?!0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
Exactly. You are wrong again Reddy. You can put all the freaking warnings you want. You can make no claims. You can still be sued.
And you'll probably lose unless it's a high profile class action suit in the public eye. They'd rather settle in suh cases than deal with drawn out legal battles.
So you went from they can't be sued to they can be sued...
So confused now.
0 -
It's very expensive, at least where I live, to buy all organic all the time. I do vote with my dollar, but my dollars alone aren't going to make enough difference, and in the meantime, I'm going broke. I'm so frustrated!! If everyone would buy SOME organic we could start to see some changes, and hopefully organics would come down in price a bit.Sure and with them allowing GMO to occur.. they put the little farmers completely upside down. They can't win and we the people lose.. eat or starve.. better check the seeds you initially buy to plant.. around 80% of soybeans and 70% of corn are GMO seeds.. good luck getting the real stuff. Esp if they deregulate it and let them take over. It will allow Monsanto a real monopoly as no one can beat them.
I do participate in a co-op and shop at natural grocers and farm markets.. i don't eat 100% organic, but I am getting there.0 -
Says the guy who didn't believe you could sue a supplement company because they weren't regulated by the FDA because they had a one sentence line on the bottle.
ah damn, before i go - i did some research on that:It's against the law for companies to claim that any supplement can prevent, treat, or cure any disease except some nutrient-deficiency conditions. But in the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission has filed or settled 30 cases against supplement marketers, charging that they made exactly those kinds of claims.
so as long as the supplement makes no claims, you've got no legal standing (in the case of most herbal supplements)
for other supplements like gainers/weight loss/pre-workout drinks etc, they're playing with fire and they know it, but it's a game they'll play every single time because they make way more money than they have to pay out in settlements. ****ed up, but reality.
so we were both right. you CAN sue supplement manufacturers if they make claims and the product doesn't live up to those claims OR if the product fails to warn of potential risks, but not if there is adequate warning and no claim being made (again, this is common on most herbal supplements)
Not exactly, that is a suit brought by the FTC but any party can bring a civil lawsuit for any reason. The makers of ephedra settled a lawsuit because the jury was likely to award major damages against them.
Exactly. You are wrong again Reddy. You can put all the freaking warnings you want. You can make no claims. You can still be sued.
And you'll probably lose unless it's a high profile class action suit in the public eye. They'd rather settle in suh cases than deal with drawn out legal battles.
So it wouldn't be thrown out of court because you can't sue products that aren't regulated?
Not for that reason, no.
Well. Played. :drinker:0 -
Monsanto has the money to just pay off anyone who wants to sue them. For it to really make a difference it's have to be over turned by the supreme court of be a class action lawsuit that gets peoples attention. it's have to be something in the spot light. Then they'd have to find some law the company violated, based on whatever evidence the prosecution has. I'm usually a proponent for de-regulation, but in this case I'm completely against it. all it's going to do is allow Monsanto to form a monopoly and then we'll all have to eat whatever they decide we should.
PS.. i would like to know how the FTC will change anything? their members are appointed by the president and congress. They are funded, run and report to the government the same government that passes law, and regulations based on who pays them the most. i don't get see how they are independent...
****The Commission, which is known as the FTC, was created in 1914 and is part of the federal government. It's an independent agency within the Executive branch of the federal government, although it also reports on its activities to Congress, the Legislative branch. It's run by five Commissioners, nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress. Each Commissioner serves for a seven-year term. The President chooses one Commissioner to act as Chairman. No more than three Commissioners can be of the same political party.**0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions