It is fine (and correct) to be cautious about any situation where the government gets involved and starts setting limits. But to discard an argument entirely i

It is fine (and correct) to be cautious about any situation where the government gets involved and starts setting limits. But to discard an argument entirely is to bury your head in the sand. Regulations are applied to many industries and limit the kinds of claims that can be made about products, and those regulations are important to public safety. Such regulations most often apply to products that involve life or death consequences. A company marketing vitamin supplements can’t claim that the supplements are proven to cure cancer, and that’s a good thing. This is not to say that the government can’t or doesn’t get things wrong. But I’m curious how you feel about limitations placed on financial, food, and pharmaceutical companies. At a minimum, there’s a fraud angle. You shouldn’t be able to claim to sell something that does A when that thing cannot in fact do A. And when A happens to be critical to not dying, the implications of that claim just raise the stakes even higher.