No this is not a rant on the government department responsible for monitoring the health of our nation. This is my vacant brain trying to assimilate what defines food and what constitutes drugs and describe the funny way people can get obsessed with one or the other or both.
A drug, broadly speaking, is any substance that, when absorbed into the body of a living organism, alters normal bodily function.
It can also be a chemical that corrects the malfunctioning portion of an otherwise healthy body.
Food on the other hand is also a bunch of chemicals that when consumed, provides nutritional support for the body.
So you can see how one can argue the use of one or the other depending on one's proclivities. I personally prefer the motto - caveat emptor and once proclaimed - I say to the consumer - go and enjoy your purchase.
Whether they are buying 2% non disturbed (by human intervention like hormones etc) cow milk or pure cocaine, frankly we should let the buyer make the educated decision. Charge fair market value and let the dude go ahead and consume his food or drug of choice.
Why meddle?
It appears from my vantage point (I know not too many where I am sitting) that our collective governments spend a lot of time arguing about the hazards of variety of drugs (those that are legally banned in most countries for human consumption) and spend trillions of dollars to prevent their production, distribution and consumption. But the reality of it is that the underground market proceeds to circumvent this legal boundary and rake in illegal profits; kill and maim thousands of innoncents and continue to deplete our resources to provide health care that could otherwise have been spent on worthy causes.
So my suggestion to our Surgeon General is this -
Please publish BOLD ADVICE warning user of possible DEATH in near term on every packet of pure grade crack and sell it in little pouches at Kmart. Charge substantial taxes on each pouch which will all be spent on providing health care for our nation's underprivileged class that complain of rising costs of healthcare.
Most recently there was a move to showcase the hazards of smoking through graphic depictions on the cartons itself. BRAVO. But that is to me too little too late. If it makes an impact then great but otherwise the boxes should simply say DEATH SMOKE or something like that and no other branding.
Some can list the potency of their tobacco on the box which can be translated into how quickly one can meet the soil or wherever they prefer to be transferred upon leaving the living.
As to foods - that is another ridiculous subject of having become political fodder. What should the labels say? Should there be an emphasis on organic vs. inorganic? Should we modify hormones? Should everyone have the right to farm (now that housing is a bust perhaps we can convert it back to farmlands?).
Again I say - provide all the information in easy to understand language of the people and let the people decide. Some may prefer a diet of QP with Cheese 3 times a day or 8 tacos in a box 2 times a day or organically grown hydroponic tomato salad with microgreens and run amuck chicken meat for their daily consumption.
Leave the humanity be - cannot micromanage them like toddles in kindergarten. Let the will of the people decide. If they keel over sooner then they died enjoying what was theirs to enjoy.
Again it is big business for each side of the food spectrum to move their product into the gullible oral cavities of the millions that seem to want to follow the Atkins, or the Jennies, or Marthas while dreaming of longevity and erect body parts to pursue all pursuits at all ages.
FDA should merely ensure that each product provides clear language on content but allow anything to be sold on the open market.
A drug, broadly speaking, is any substance that, when absorbed into the body of a living organism, alters normal bodily function.
It can also be a chemical that corrects the malfunctioning portion of an otherwise healthy body.
Food on the other hand is also a bunch of chemicals that when consumed, provides nutritional support for the body.
So you can see how one can argue the use of one or the other depending on one's proclivities. I personally prefer the motto - caveat emptor and once proclaimed - I say to the consumer - go and enjoy your purchase.
Whether they are buying 2% non disturbed (by human intervention like hormones etc) cow milk or pure cocaine, frankly we should let the buyer make the educated decision. Charge fair market value and let the dude go ahead and consume his food or drug of choice.
Why meddle?
It appears from my vantage point (I know not too many where I am sitting) that our collective governments spend a lot of time arguing about the hazards of variety of drugs (those that are legally banned in most countries for human consumption) and spend trillions of dollars to prevent their production, distribution and consumption. But the reality of it is that the underground market proceeds to circumvent this legal boundary and rake in illegal profits; kill and maim thousands of innoncents and continue to deplete our resources to provide health care that could otherwise have been spent on worthy causes.
So my suggestion to our Surgeon General is this -
Please publish BOLD ADVICE warning user of possible DEATH in near term on every packet of pure grade crack and sell it in little pouches at Kmart. Charge substantial taxes on each pouch which will all be spent on providing health care for our nation's underprivileged class that complain of rising costs of healthcare.
Most recently there was a move to showcase the hazards of smoking through graphic depictions on the cartons itself. BRAVO. But that is to me too little too late. If it makes an impact then great but otherwise the boxes should simply say DEATH SMOKE or something like that and no other branding.
Some can list the potency of their tobacco on the box which can be translated into how quickly one can meet the soil or wherever they prefer to be transferred upon leaving the living.
As to foods - that is another ridiculous subject of having become political fodder. What should the labels say? Should there be an emphasis on organic vs. inorganic? Should we modify hormones? Should everyone have the right to farm (now that housing is a bust perhaps we can convert it back to farmlands?).
Again I say - provide all the information in easy to understand language of the people and let the people decide. Some may prefer a diet of QP with Cheese 3 times a day or 8 tacos in a box 2 times a day or organically grown hydroponic tomato salad with microgreens and run amuck chicken meat for their daily consumption.
Leave the humanity be - cannot micromanage them like toddles in kindergarten. Let the will of the people decide. If they keel over sooner then they died enjoying what was theirs to enjoy.
Again it is big business for each side of the food spectrum to move their product into the gullible oral cavities of the millions that seem to want to follow the Atkins, or the Jennies, or Marthas while dreaming of longevity and erect body parts to pursue all pursuits at all ages.
FDA should merely ensure that each product provides clear language on content but allow anything to be sold on the open market.
A radical thought but probably will work as well as any other prevalent ones in terms of overall impact. But if it kills the bootlegging market for drugs what will the drug lords do? Go into farming?
ReplyDeleteYou hit it. Biggest opposition to this idea is the purveyors themselves.
ReplyDeleteSwitzerland is a practicing example of where they take a compassionate approach to the drug abuse issue than policing.