3 ms·

>It's crazy that we're doing "innocent until proven guilty" with food additives. Should be the other way around Even this story doesn't say that were doing tha

>It's crazy that we're doing "innocent until proven guilty" with food additives. Should be the other way around Even this story doesn't say that were doing that. >(FDA) said all food additives require "pre-market evaluation" and "regulations require evidence that each substance is safe at its intended level of use before it may be added to foods." You can argue the evaluations aren't strict enough, but saying we're doing "innocent until proven guilty" isn't true.

mlatu 4y ago
[flagged]
- rfrey 4y ago
  > the FDA is perfect and changing them in any way, shape or form would destroy THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT Absolutely nobody said anything of the sort, and I'm not sure what your goal is in caricaturing the position of people with somewhat different opinions than you.
  - mlatu 4y ago
    that is a quote from wikipedia. i wanted to display what a papertiger the FDA really is. _begging_ an industry to stop using potentially harmful substances? -.- come on... thats also to show how this is not a case of "not guilty until proven otherwise" the fda wants this to stop but doesnt seem to have any foothold in that attempt...
  - mlatu 4y ago
    your original post did not quote. just wanted to point that out.
bryanlarsen 4y ago
My impression is that "innocent until proven guilty" is what Europe does, and that's what many want the US to switch to. edit: Oops, I typed that backwards, I meant to say "guilty until proven innocent".
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  How do you reach that impression? "Innocent until proven guilty" would mean the additive should be presumed safe, or innocent, until proven unsafe, or guilty. They also say it's crazy to do innocent until proven guilty.
- ovi256 4y ago
  I think you mean "guilty until proven innocent" which the EU calls "principle of precaution"
pastacacioepepe 4y ago
Europeans don't really trust the FDA to make their best interest. We have our own regulations and we want those to be respected.
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  How was I implying that the FDA should apply to Europe?

mlatu 4y ago

[flagged]

rfrey 4y ago
> the FDA is perfect and changing them in any way, shape or form would destroy THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT Absolutely nobody said anything of the sort, and I'm not sure what your goal is in caricaturing the position of people with somewhat different opinions than you.
- mlatu 4y ago
  that is a quote from wikipedia. i wanted to display what a papertiger the FDA really is. _begging_ an industry to stop using potentially harmful substances? -.- come on... thats also to show how this is not a case of "not guilty until proven otherwise" the fda wants this to stop but doesnt seem to have any foothold in that attempt...
- mlatu 4y ago
  your original post did not quote. just wanted to point that out.

bryanlarsen 4y ago

My impression is that "innocent until proven guilty" is what Europe does, and that's what many want the US to switch to. edit: Oops, I typed that backwards, I meant to say "guilty until proven innocent".

boomboomsubban 4y ago
How do you reach that impression? "Innocent until proven guilty" would mean the additive should be presumed safe, or innocent, until proven unsafe, or guilty. They also say it's crazy to do innocent until proven guilty.
ovi256 4y ago
I think you mean "guilty until proven innocent" which the EU calls "principle of precaution"

pastacacioepepe 4y ago

Europeans don't really trust the FDA to make their best interest. We have our own regulations and we want those to be respected.

boomboomsubban 4y ago
How was I implying that the FDA should apply to Europe?