448
FDA bans use of Red No. 3 dye in food, drinks
(abcnews.go.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
448 points (100.0% liked)
News
23837 readers
2939 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It had already been investigated.
And this is an evaluation of that information.
Of all the things to get hung up on, I have no idea why this specifically bothers you so much.
This is nothing compared to all the other efforts they are involved with, its just media attention.
Yes, it does specifically bother me. I don't think you realize how much time and effort goes into passing a federal regulation. Meanwhile, herbal remedies are giving babies seizures.
I dont think you realize that by red dye #3 getting put up for evaluation, it was going to go through all those hands no matter what.
I'll say again - this is a super weird thing to get hung up on.
Again - other work does not stop. More people <> more quicker (yes, this is intentional).
Again, time and resources are limited.
You're letting your imagination run with this. You're bringing up completely different issues and trying to act like they should be prioritized the way you think they should because you somehow know exactly how much time and resources the FDA has to do anything. Go get some fresh air.
I think they should prioritize what saves the most lives.
Please explain why they should not.
Is anything ever that cut and dry? It may take much more time to come to a conclusion on what you think should be regulated first. Does that mean other recommended regulations should not be made even if the research on those have been completed? It doesn't happen in this single pipeline, one thing after another. There are many different studies happening concurrently and they will finish at different times.
This was studied a long time ago. This is not new information. This is not a major health risk compared to all sorts of things that have also been studied and have not been regulated, which I have already pointed out. Why haven't they been regulated when they are demonstrably more dangerous?
Go look up the creation of bovine growth hormone and its regulatory process and you'll start to see that the FDA is most often dysfunctional at best. I'll give you a nutshell version as best I can. BGH was created by Monsanto (was largely a chemical and pesticide company.) They've repeatedly gone to great lengths to deprioritize human health. Polychlorinated biphenyls are another well documented example of that. Back to BGH, the head researcher and her assistant wrote their paper for approval by the FDA. Immediately quit their jobs, were hired by the FDA for the purpose of reviewing BGH for approval in the milk supply. Sus? Yeah. Of course it was approved. Then was passed to an FDA lawyer to see if it should be labeled for milks that contain it. The FDA lawyer had previously worked for Monsanto. It was decided that not only would it not be labeled, but they would regulate that milk could not be labeled as NOT containing it for fear of "confusing the consumer." It's a big organization though. I'm not claiming that everyone there is corrupt, but I will point out that Clarence Thomas was a former Monsanto lawyer, has never recused himself when the former biotech corporation was involved and always ruled in their favor.
This is only one facet of why regulation is slow to do the things that help the most people.
I'm not going to keep repeating myself. In general, I agree with you on a lot of things.
This is not one of those things. This is a ridiculous hill to die on.
Enjoy your day.