4 ms·

Can't the free market just make this problem go away?

by isoprophlex 4mo ago

pseidemann 4mo ago
You seem to be unaware of the asymmetry of information and competence. This is why consumer protection exists.
- jliptzin 4mo ago
  Existed*
- culi 4mo ago
  What specific consumer protections are you referencing?
  - pseidemann 4mo ago
    The FDA's purpose is protection of the public health. Drug approval would be one specific example. The SCCS (EU) evaluating UV filter safety is another.
1shooner 4mo ago
Consider the potential for economic growth in private testing services. It's called job creation!
petre 4mo ago
It could, but everybody got an orange tan afterwards.
hinata08 4mo ago
If it's straightforward to approve new cosmetics, REACH, Cosmetic Products Regulation 1223/2009 updated no latter than this year in regulation 2026/78, ISO 22716 and whatnot still apply You can find lists of ingredients banned in cosmetics in the EU, or across EVERY industry in general Perfume manufacturers are the only ones who get away with virtually everything as they don't have to declare their ingredients (but "perfumes" are also an ingredient in a bunch of cosmetics, so here is the loophole as Europe always has loopholes)
anon7000 4mo ago
Oh yeah, the free market is great at burying problems so consumers remain in the dark.
abc123abc123 4mo ago
It already has. That is why you are reading this right now.
Pragmata 4mo ago
Seems like the free market does make this problem go away. This is simply one of the (few) instances where there is a freer market in the EU that in the US >In the European Union, sunscreens are regulated as cosmetics, which means greater flexibility in approving active ingredients. In the U.S., sunscreens are regulated as drugs, which means getting new ingredients approved is an expensive and time-consuming process. Because they’re treated as cosmetics, European-made sunscreens can draw on a wider variety of ingredients that protect better and are also less oily, less chalky and last longer. You should take this as an opportunity to reflect on the amount of lives lost as a result of the regulations in place for drugs, in both the EU and US. If the negative effect is this obvious in sunscreen, just imagine how much more impactful removing regulation on cancer drugs would be.
- DangitBobby 4mo ago
  The flipside of this is that companies put dangerous chemicals into food, cookware, etc. Not convinced things would be better on net.
  - Pragmata 4mo ago
    Except you can check the differences easily. China doesn't have the same strict regulations, and yet when we compare life expectancy the difference isn't particularly big. Thought terminating cliches like "Better safe than sorry" simply don't stand up to scrutiny once you actually check the numbers. No, eating brasilian beef isn't going to kill you, and stopping imports from there is going to do a whole lot more to make you poorer than it will help your health. Take a walk, that will help you a whole lot more, and won't make you poorer.
    - filterfish 4mo ago
      Life expectancy and quality of life are very different things.
    - lazide 4mo ago
      Lol. There are so many confounding variables and long-delay influences, it’s nearly impossible to compare. Prior generation Chinese tended to eat much less than any generation Americans, which has a proven positive effect on longevity. Older generation Chinese also tended to (might still?) smoke like chimneys, which has a proven negative effect on longevity. Older generation Chinese also lived through some crazy ‘population bottleneck’ events like the Great Leap Forward, which can cause very odd one time and unpredictable long term effects on longevity. China started and enforced their one child policy early on, which has very weird population distribution effects, which will also have weird influences on longevity for everyone (due to excess or lacking societal support, etc). They have also (relatively recently) been exposed to a wide variety of industrial chemicals, artificial fertilizers and pollutants. Americans have had rapidly shifting food sources, pervasive but changing exposure to pesticides and artificial fertilizers, a massive shift from rural to urban to sedentary knowledge work, and widely shifting stress factors across a wide variety of areas. And a rather unique ability to spend massive amounts of time in commutes and automobiles. This is also offset in time; and quantitatively different than Chinese have experienced.

Can't the free market just make this problem go away?

pseidemann 4mo ago

You seem to be unaware of the asymmetry of information and competence. This is why consumer protection exists.

jliptzin 4mo ago
Existed*
culi 4mo ago
What specific consumer protections are you referencing?
- pseidemann 4mo ago
  The FDA's purpose is protection of the public health. Drug approval would be one specific example. The SCCS (EU) evaluating UV filter safety is another.

1shooner 4mo ago

Consider the potential for economic growth in private testing services. It's called job creation!

petre 4mo ago

It could, but everybody got an orange tan afterwards.

hinata08 4mo ago

If it's straightforward to approve new cosmetics, REACH, Cosmetic Products Regulation 1223/2009 updated no latter than this year in regulation 2026/78, ISO 22716 and whatnot still apply You can find lists of ingredients banned in cosmetics in the EU, or across EVERY industry in general Perfume manufacturers are the only ones who get away with virtually everything as they don't have to declare their ingredients (but "perfumes" are also an ingredient in a bunch of cosmetics, so here is the loophole as Europe always has loopholes)

anon7000 4mo ago

Oh yeah, the free market is great at burying problems so consumers remain in the dark.

abc123abc123 4mo ago

It already has. That is why you are reading this right now.

Pragmata 4mo ago

Seems like the free market does make this problem go away. This is simply one of the (few) instances where there is a freer market in the EU that in the US >In the European Union, sunscreens are regulated as cosmetics, which means greater flexibility in approving active ingredients. In the U.S., sunscreens are regulated as drugs, which means getting new ingredients approved is an expensive and time-consuming process. Because they’re treated as cosmetics, European-made sunscreens can draw on a wider variety of ingredients that protect better and are also less oily, less chalky and last longer. You should take this as an opportunity to reflect on the amount of lives lost as a result of the regulations in place for drugs, in both the EU and US. If the negative effect is this obvious in sunscreen, just imagine how much more impactful removing regulation on cancer drugs would be.

DangitBobby 4mo ago
The flipside of this is that companies put dangerous chemicals into food, cookware, etc. Not convinced things would be better on net.
- Pragmata 4mo ago
  Except you can check the differences easily. China doesn't have the same strict regulations, and yet when we compare life expectancy the difference isn't particularly big. Thought terminating cliches like "Better safe than sorry" simply don't stand up to scrutiny once you actually check the numbers. No, eating brasilian beef isn't going to kill you, and stopping imports from there is going to do a whole lot more to make you poorer than it will help your health. Take a walk, that will help you a whole lot more, and won't make you poorer.
  - filterfish 4mo ago
    Life expectancy and quality of life are very different things.
  - lazide 4mo ago
    Lol. There are so many confounding variables and long-delay influences, it’s nearly impossible to compare. Prior generation Chinese tended to eat much less than any generation Americans, which has a proven positive effect on longevity. Older generation Chinese also tended to (might still?) smoke like chimneys, which has a proven negative effect on longevity. Older generation Chinese also lived through some crazy ‘population bottleneck’ events like the Great Leap Forward, which can cause very odd one time and unpredictable long term effects on longevity. China started and enforced their one child policy early on, which has very weird population distribution effects, which will also have weird influences on longevity for everyone (due to excess or lacking societal support, etc). They have also (relatively recently) been exposed to a wide variety of industrial chemicals, artificial fertilizers and pollutants. Americans have had rapidly shifting food sources, pervasive but changing exposure to pesticides and artificial fertilizers, a massive shift from rural to urban to sedentary knowledge work, and widely shifting stress factors across a wide variety of areas. And a rather unique ability to spend massive amounts of time in commutes and automobiles. This is also offset in time; and quantitatively different than Chinese have experienced.