THe FDA uses the phrase "Not proven safe and effective" which doesn't
mean "Proven unsafe and ineffective"
But it does throw the burden of proof elsewhere..to a place from which no
proof available is acceptable to the FDA.
Mere clinical trials are not acceptable proof. They are only indications
that proof can be had...that studies are worth doing [except they can't pay
off for anyone who would finance them]
Got a few mill to throw at officially acceptable triple blind studies of a
few thousand people?
Ode
At 12:24 AM 6/3/2003 -0400, you wrote:
Ohh yea... Hypothetically even if CS did cause argyria, which I doubt, we
shouldn't focus so much on the negatives of CS. Or maybe we could put a
little focus on cons of CS vs the cons of synthetic meds. Between this group
we have much knowledge and with reputable people like "ole" Bob and Frank
Key they would be able to sort out any BS thrown towards the lawsuit....
scientifically speaking. If they were to be involved.
Might be nice to know I made some kinda mark during my life. I know there is
a lawsuit for aspartame so why not start one with CS/IES? I think this could
be a mile stone for this list as well as the world if we were to win. :)
Besides we already have a pretty good idea what they will try to throw at
us. The FDA's exibit A,B, and C will all be related argyria..... cough cough
bull sh#%.... we would have a good start on 'em.
Ice
--
The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.
Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org
To post, address your message to: [email protected]
Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
