An Example of Government Overreach

[Revmitchell]

Under pressure from Congress, celebrity Dr. Mehmet Oz on Tuesday offered to help "drain the swamp" of unscrupulous marketers using his name to peddle so-called miracle pills and cure-alls to millions of Americans desperate to lose weight.

Oz appeared before the Senate's consumer protection panel and was scolded by Chairman Claire McCaskill for claims he made about weight-loss aids on his TV show, "The Dr. Oz Show."

Oz, a cardiothoracic surgeon, acknowledged that his language about green coffee and other supplements has been "flowery" and promised to publish a list of specific products he thinks can help America shed pounds and get healthy — beyond eating less and moving more. On his show, he never endorsed specific companies or brands but more generally praised some supplements as fat busters.

McCaskill took Oz to task for a 2012 show in which he proclaimed that green coffee extract was a "magic weight loss cure for every body type."

"I get that you do a lot of good on your show," McCaskill told Oz, "but I don't get why you need to say this stuff because you know it's not true."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ors-over-weight-loss-scams/?intcmp=latestnews

 

[Revmitchell]

The feds have no business being involved in this. No matter how dishonest Dr. Oz may be. The far left in our government are more and more trying to control the speech of people.


Our government has gotten more and more tyrannical.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I'd agree, up to a point, except for the fact that Oz is among the most underhanded, dirtiest of huckster types, winning trust through his personality, and then using it to hype products that have absolutely no known value for what they claim to be able to do. There is no scientific research on the effectiveness of these "weight loss" products Oz shamelessly endorses, knowing full well the claims can't be supported with facts.

I agree, the government is far too involved in limiting access to effective medications, but these aren't effective, and they aren't medications.

Back in the days of the Old West, what Oz does was known as a "traveling medicine show," with the "Doc" loading up pure whiskey in a "medicine bottle" and selling it to all the frontier wives and spinsters for whatever ailed them. Now they don't have to buy horses, wagons, or whiskey. They can put some powder in a gelatin capsule and call it whatever they want and make a fortune.

 

[Revmitchell]

I don't care how underhanded he is. That does not give the federal government the right to call him in front of them.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I don't care how underhanded he is. That does not give the federal government the right to call him in front of them.

In your opinion is there any situation concerning business where the government has the right to step in and alter or stop a particular practice?

 

[Rolfe]

The feds have no business being involved in this. No matter how dishonest Dr. Oz may be.

Even in cases of deceptive advertising? :tonofbricks:

 

[just-want-peace]

Even in cases of deceptive advertising? :tonofbricks:

Just consider how many would advertise if this concept were enforced.

Consider that "deceptive" would include what the product CAN'T do, that is implied, as well as what the claims are that it CAN/WILL do.

IMHO, the above would eliminate virtually every ad on TV, if not actually kill advertising as a profession.

 

[Rolfe]

IMHO, the above would eliminate virtually every ad on TV, if not actually kill advertising as a profession.

So deceived and defrauded consumers are preferable?

http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/truth-advertising

 

[Crabtownboy]

Profits before people and honesty.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I don't care how underhanded he is. That does not give the federal government the right to call him in front of them.

Even in cases of deceptive advertising? :tonofbricks:

I agree, Rolf. Some things are criminal in nature, and that's one job of a limited government. Instead of calling him before Congress, he should have been interrogated by the FBI.

 

[just-want-peace]

So deceived and defrauded consumers are preferable?

http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/truth-advertising

Is this going to keep the gullible safe??
Perhaps a few forays into "Doc Jones Snake Oil Cure-all" and/or "This is Too Good Too Be True" purchases, and they will learn to be a bit more discerning; and if not what do you do now????

If this is going to be implemented at all, it needs to be on a state level, NOT federal!!!

The camel has not only gotten his nose in the tent, but his whole body except for the back legs, and he is desperately trying to complete the entrance --- he doesn't need any more encouragement!:BangHead:

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Is this going to keep the gullible safe??

No. The gullible are just that, gullible. Tell them not to stick a table knife in an electrical receptacle, and they'll see if you really mean it.

National companies require national regulation. Too many chances for variances across state lines for local enforcement to be consistent.

It's part of the free and fair trade responsibility of a limited government. It fits, and should be used.

 

[Revmitchell]

National companies require national regulation.

Well I am sorry but conservatives do not agree with that.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

National companies can abide by the laws in the states they do business in. We do not need centralized federal oversight. And the feds have not shown themselves to be fair arbiters of our rights, I don't see how anyone could want them involved.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Well I am sorry but conservatives do not agree with that.

Then I guess I only qualify as an "independent thinker."

If you value regulation and oversight of my profession, of doctors, of lawyers, etc., by government agencies, then it is disingenuous not to value it for advertisers and "health supplement" manufacturers.

 

[Revmitchell]

Then I guess I only qualify as an "independent thinker."

If you value regulation and oversight of my profession, of doctors, of lawyers, etc., by government agencies, then it is disingenuous not to value it for advertisers and "health supplement" manufacturers.

Valuing regulation is not the same as supporting calling someone before congress.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Valuing regulation is not the same as supporting calling someone before congress.

It's pretty obvious FDA isn't doing its job letting all these "health supplements" companies say anything they want without proof about their probably-useless if not outright harmful products.

Remember Dexa-Trim? Speed in a bottle, because as a "supplement" it couldn't be regulated.

 

[Revmitchell]

Whether the FDA is doing its job or not has nothing to do with being called in front of congress.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Whether the FDA is doing its job or not has nothing to do with being called in front of congress.

When any government agency fails to perform its appointed duties, Congress has a responsibility to find out why. That's what McCaskill did in calling Oz before her committee. I don't like McCaskill, but in this case she was right.

 

[Revmitchell]

No she wasn't/ It is tyrannical to call individual citizens with no government authority in front of congress because one does not like what they do. If she has issues with the FDA then that government agency should be in that seat not individual citizens.