Bhairitu wrote:
 << Apparently I need to do a reader's digest version for Judy.  But what the 
writer was pointing out that the problem with many supplements are the cheap 
ones that big pharma makes which indeed does seem a bit contradictive. >>

 Yes, that's exactly what I was asking about, given that, according to the 
article, Big Pharma makes sure that its own low-quality supplements are used 
for the evaluative studies. If what it wants is the whole supplement market, 
one would think that Big Pharma would want the studies to have good results and 
therefore would want them to test the best possible supplements available 
(i.e., not its own) so as not to scare away consumers.

 Once science gave supplements its stamp of approval, Big Pharma could just 
compete on price because consumers wouldn't know about the difference in 
quality. That would make sense as a strategy--but, according to the article, 
that isn't what Big Pharma is doing.

 If Big Pharma wants people not to buy supplements at all, its own or any 
others (as the article also claims), it would make sense to have the studies 
test its own low-quality supplements and come up with negative results.

 The problem with making Big This and Big That guilty of every conceivable type 
of conspiracy is that some of the conspiracies' goals may be in conflict with 
each other.

 In this case, if Big Pharma wants everyone to use its supplements, it can't 
also want people to stop using supplements altogether and use its medicines 
instead. Those two goals are incompatible.

 BTW, you do realize the guy who wrote the article is a nutcase, right? I mean, 
he claims that medicines are never tested for effectiveness while supplements 
always are. That's just cuckoo; it's exactly the opposite.

  << Real natural health practitioners will be very fussy about supplement 
sources (as I pointed out as did the article).  And if you actually have enough 
background in the supplement therapy you can also use some of the cheap 
supplements too for certain conditions.  It''s all just biochemistry (which as 
I've said before that a friend who went to medical school told me many of the 
students were lousy at).
Also this trying to stop supplements has been going on for ages.  It won't go 
anywhere because even standard medicine uses supplements for some things.  But 
the funny thing is the pseudo scientific 'tude I'm seeing here against natural 
medicine. >>

 Seeing here where? Oh, you mean Xeno.

  Back in the 1970s my fellow TM'ers were interested in alternative medicine 
and supported local MDs, naturopaths and chiropractors who used it.  Remember 
MMY hadn't blessed us with his brand of ayurveda yet.  I guess some of the 
folks here have turned into old fogies seeking salvation by being pharmadicts 
standing in line at CVS or Walgreens to get their fix.
 On 12/18/2013 10:09 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
   Translation: Bhairitu can't figure out why he (and the writer of the 
article) contradicted himself either...
 Can anyone else here explain it?
 Bhairitu wrote:
 << Apparently this issue for discussion is above your pay grade. ;-) >>
 On 12/18/2013 06:37 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
   Wait. First you said Big Pharma wanted the supplement market all to itself. 
That doesn't jibe with making the public terrified of supplements, period.
 Bhairitu wrote:
 Because the public doesn't know which are theirs and which are not.  They just 
want the public terrified of supplements period and then sell them the higher 
profit "Brave New World" pharmaceuticals.
 On 12/17/2013 02:48 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
   Bhairitu wrote:
 << Big pharma is after the supplement market and wants it all to themselves. >>
 But but but...according to the Natural News article you linked to, Big Pharma 
arranged for all the testing to be done on its own supplements. Why would it do 
that knowing the study results would be negative and that folks would be 
discouraged from using supplements generally?

Reply via email to