> Now wait a minute. You might want to re-read your > definition. > There were 3 different definitions, labelled 1-3. Any of > which could > identify a "drug". However, definition 1 had two > subsections to it, a) and > b).
> So for a substance to satisfy definition 1, it had to both > a) be used in > diagnosis, treatment or prevention AND b) be recognized or > defined by the US > Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. > Sugar might be used to treat certain conditions, but if it > aint listed in > that Act...it aint a drug. I don't believe that's what sub-definitions in a dictionary are for... I believe a) and b) in a dictionary are separate definitions within definition class/category 1) Asside from which, if your interpretation is correct, then it's an inherently flawed definition, because then you're making the definition of the word depend on the politics of medical officials in the US only... So... in other words, the opinion of any other medical person or group the world over (the WHO for instance) is then irrelevant... bad definition. s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.fusiontap.com http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:168626 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
