Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Idran
Jan 13, 2005
Grimey Drawer

Some herbs do fall under that category, but only because dietary supplement restrictions apply to supplements intended to add nutritional value to the diet.

quote:

A dietary supplement is a product intended for ingestion that contains a "dietary ingredient" intended to add further nutritional value to (supplement) the diet. A "dietary ingredient" may be one, or any combination, of the following substances:

a vitamin
a mineral
an herb or other botanical
an amino acid
a dietary substance for use by people to supplement the diet by increasing the total dietary intake
a concentrate, metabolite, constituent, or extract

Herbal supplements intended for medicinal purposes rather than nutritional purposes aren't covered, though they also aren't allowed to make specific medicinal claims, like saying they will cure or treat some specific ailment. General claims only.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Idran
Jan 13, 2005
Grimey Drawer

Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:

No, because the FD&C definition of drug includes


Any medical claims at all means it's regulated under one class or another.

Huh, I've been misinformed, then; I was under the impression that so long as you didn't make specific medicinal claims, the FDA had no jurisdiction over you. How does something like Airborne or a homeopathic remedy get away with not needing FDA approval, then?

Idran
Jan 13, 2005
Grimey Drawer

Tim Raines IRL posted:

Placebos work and are very safe; why shouldn't their sale and advocacy be just as allowable as things which are active and potentially much more dangerous?

If they sold them as placebos instead of alternative medicine, explained what the placebo effect was, and were regulated to ensure that a situation like the zinc poisoning mentioned earlier couldn't happen, then that would be a more reasonable argument.

Just giving placebos as a treatment without stating that they're placebos, though, is medically unethical, because it's misinforming the patient about the nature of the treatment they're receiving.

Idran
Jan 13, 2005
Grimey Drawer

Tim Raines IRL posted:

I haven't said anything about homeopathy other than that it's bullshit, and therefore won't hurt anything besides your wallet (or help anything besides the provider's bankroll).

You're right that acupuncture isn't homeopathic medicine (though I assume that was just a misstatement by the previous poster in refering to any alternative medicine as homeopathic), but it is very much not the case that homeopathy won't hurt anything but your wallet. Zicam Cold Remedy contains zinc acetate diluted to 1/100 and zinc gluconate diluted to 1/10, both still strong enough that some people that have taken it have suffered anosmia as a result of minor zinc toxicity. Earlier in the thread a case was mentioned where a homeopathic treatment even caused blindness through zinc toxicity, which I assume was also Zicam. Because it's labeled "homeopathic", it's exempt from FDA regulation even in spite of this.

  • Locked thread