FDA bans life risking ‘Sprinkles’ from cupcakes

I am trying to stay upbeat with good news and a Holiday theme. Well, I tried. So I bring you the last season that we will see the deadly sprinkles adorning cupcakes. Like a sniper taking his best shot, the FDA put their scope’s red light on the infamous cupcake. So folks, get out there before the new year and grab yourself some sprinkles. Here we go:

Come the New Year, the Food and Drug Administration, ignoring the principle that in most cases it’s the dose that defines the poison, will issue new regulations designed to remove even trace amounts of hydrogenate oils, commonly known as trans fats, from our diets.

Trans fats have been in our foods since the 1950s to increase shelf life and improve taste. A small amount appears naturally in some foods, but research has determined that large quantities of trans fats in one’s diet can be dangerous for long-term health.

But so can large quantities of bacon, and no one has proposed banning bacon, at least not yet, but we’re sure that thought has occurred to those who want 16-ounce soft drinks banned while forcing our children to eat cardboard school lunches.

Each American consumes a mere 1.3 grams of trans fats per day. That’s roughly 0.6% of our total daily calories, and no research suggests that this poses a health risk. But that’s not enough to dissuade the federal nannies from regulating even the most minute aspect of our daily lives.

Deadly Sprinkles adorn cupcake

Deadly Sprinkles adorn cupcake

Read More At: Investors Daily

FDA wants Mandatory Salt Reductions

This is the first step to what surely will become the law of the land by a non-elected governmental agency. Wars were fought over salt, but alas, we are doomed to a bland, unappealing  diet. Why should we be able to enjoy food pleasing to the palate? After all, enjoyment of life must be eliminated for the betterment of the few. H/T: The Agitator for the find.

With little publicity, the federal Food and Drug Administration has begun laying groundwork for one of the more audacious regulatory initiatives of the Obama administration: mandatory reductions in the salt content of processed foods in the supermarket aisle and at restaurants. From Cato:

In the mean time, you can file comments here about whether you’d like to go on making these choices yourself, or have FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg make them for you.

In a September 15 “Request for Comments, Data, and Information” (PDF) published in the Federal Register, the FDA solicits from the public “comments, data, and evidence relevant to the dietary intake of sodium as well as current and emerging approaches designed to promote sodium reduction.” Among the specific ideas it has in mind: setting federally prescribed “targets” for “stepwise” reductions in the amount of salt allowable in various foods, the phased nature of the reductions indicated because consumers’ “taste preference for sodium is acquired and can be modified.”

Various government programs (notably in Mayor Bloomberg’s New York City) already arm-twist producers into supposedly voluntary reductions, but the FDA notice hints broadly that voluntary measures will not suffice. Its public comment period ends next Tuesday, November 29; let’s hope the agency gets an earful from citizens about the importance of freedom and consumer choice.

 Full story at  Cato

FDA Helps States Get Execution Drug

The Food and Drug Administration helped Arizona and California obtain a quick overseas source of a hard-to-find execution drug even as the agency declared it would not regulate or block imports, records show.

The ACLU accused the FDA of trying to hold two contradictory positions at once.

“The FDA is actively assisting these states, but they’re not enforcing the law, and they’re not doing anything to determine that the drugs are what they’re claimed to be and that they work properly,” said Natasha Minkser, death penalty policy director for the ACLU’s Northern California chapter More at .CNBC

Down memory lane, recall this? Supreme Court OK’s non-apporved execution drugs – yes, the ACLU had brought this up last year before the Supreme Court because the Non-approved drug “could be dangerous”

Guess who voted to stay the executions?? Yes, Sotomayer and Kagan.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayorand Kagan voted for the stay. Justice Elena Kagancast her first vote on the Supreme Court late Tuesday, joining the liberals in dissent when the high court cleared the way for the execution of an Arizona murderer.

“There is no evidence in the record to suggest that the drug obtained from a foreign source is unsafe,” the Supreme Court said.  GEE WHIZ.

Beware the Earmark Ban.. Clothed in the FDA Food Modernization Act

The Current hits one out of the park today. Defensive Lessons:  Political Theater     This is an old Alinksy trick of scattering our attention and having us move in all directions, thus overwhelming us. A great sport’s analogy is used.. slide on over for a great read. Beware of S.510 the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. It is a Trojan Horse. 

A vote against the earmark ban, brands you as one who supports pork.  It’s a trap.  Now you don’t pull your guards one way and send the running back the other way.  That is completely counterproductive and will accomplish very little.  The guards are the ball carrier’s blockers.  This is why I believe that the key bill they want to push through during this lame duck session is the Food Safety Modernization Act.  You don’t waste your blockers when you trying to score and the earmark ban is the blocker for the Food Safety Modernization Act.  It’s designed to open the way for the passage of this destructive bill.  They’re using it as a tool to get what they want and move forward with the progressive agenda.  As for the other issues and bills they are nothing more than a tool being used to misdirect and confuse us.

Follow the earmark ban; it’s leading you to the play and revealing their plan.

The Current

Does The FDA Really Need More Power?

Looks like all we need to do now is call up the FDA to have a product banned. It is the precedent that is most disturbing to me. Twinkies next? Happy Meals? The complete control of our food supply by the DHS in case of, well you know what.  The expansion of the FDA could be limitless. We tried Prohibition for right living and proved to be a disaster. Yet ten’s of thousands die each year from driving drunk, untold havoc in the lives of so many.. yet we are not going to try this again? What is the difference?

Our long national nightmare is over. Phusion Projects, the makers of Four Loko brand caffeinated malt beverages, announced yesterday that it will remove the caffeine from its products. Phusion’s decisions came just one day after Senator Chuck Schumer (D–NY) pushed the Food and Drug Administration to ban “these dangerous and toxic drinks.”

Unfortunately Schumer never explained what exactly makes these drinks “dangerous and toxic.” For now, Americans are still free to buy malt beverages. And for a limited time they are also still free to buy caffeinated drinks like coffee and Red Bull. So please, nobody tell Schumer how easy it is to buy alcohol and caffeine and mix them together. Because then Schumer might pressure the FDA to take away your morning coffee and table wine, too. Please don’t tell him about Rum and Coke… a mixed drink that is just riddled with danger.

And now Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) wants to grant the FDA even more unaccountable administrative authority. Specifically, he is pushing for passage of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act in the lame duck session that opened this week

So just how big an expansion of government does Dingell, Pelosi, and Reid want to inflict on the American people to combat a non-existent food safety crisis?

Well, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the legislation would require 50,000 domestic and foreign inspections in 2015, compared to just 7,400 in 2009. That is a sevenfold increase in government inspections. And the government would be reaching into a lot of new places as well. The act requires that all food “facilities”—including those home-based businesses that make jam, bread, and cheese for local markets—would be required to undertake periodic hazard analyses and produce “risk-based preventive controls.”

And then there is the wasteful spending that accompanies every liberal expansion of government: grants to schools for allergy management ($107 million); food safety training, education, outreach, and technical assistance ($21 million); and food safety participation grants for states and tribes ($83 million). Heritage Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy Diane Katz writes: “The Reid bill clearly contradicts the message sent by voters just two weeks ago: Americans do not want and cannot afford yet more unnecessary regulation and expansion of government. This proposal constitutes a costly and ineffective answer to a manufactured crisis.”

More at Heritage

FDA bans product for tasting good

Good story from Jacob Grier:

No, the headline is not an April Fool’s joke. This week the FDA began its inquiry into whether it ought to ban the sale of menthol cigarettes:

A scientific advisory panel that will advise the Food and Drug Administration on regulating tobacco opened a two-day meeting Tuesday and began reviewing hundreds of published studies on menthol cigarettes. The panel, largely made up of scientists, physicians and public health experts, has a year to make a recommendation to the FDA on menthol cigarettes, which are used by about 26 percent of smokers and make up almost one-third of the $70 billion U.S. cigarette market.

This is a dangerous road. It’s one thing to forbid sales to minors, to tax tobacco, to require warning labels, and to restrict the sorts of places where one can light up. It’s quite another to take a product off the market simply because many people prefer it. That is pure paternalism; take individual agency out of the picture and it’s a much smaller step to banning tobacco entirely.

These scare tactics neglect to mention that menthol itself is harmless. It’s not habit-forming like nicotine. It’s not dangerous and is used widely in medicinal, dental, and food products. Tobacco companies don’t put it in cigarettes as part of a dark conspiracy to addict people. They use it because it tastes good, is soothing, and consumers want it.

If this is accepted as a legitimate reason to ban menthol cigarettes there’s no limit to what the government could do next. It could ban other forms of flavored tobacco in cigars, pipes, chew, and hookahs — in fact, New York City has already passed a low doing almost exactly that.

HAT TIP to Jacob Grier who is on the job- take a look at the full story at:

http://www.jacobgrier.com/blog/archives/3706.html

Here is a look at Hot Air on what is coming! http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/01/exclusive-the-new-federal-menu-mandate-meets-the-real-world/

%d bloggers like this: