Conservative political and social commentary

Contact us: dstol@prodigy.net
Links
Search

First they came for the communists, but I was not a communist, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the socialists and the trade unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
– Pastor Martin Niemoeller.

You are welcome to post or publish these articles, in whole or in part, provided that you cite the author and website.



View All News Items

The Government Protects Us...From Cheerios? - Monday, May 18, 2009 at 00:07

 

The Government Protects Us…From Cheerios?

David C. Stolinsky, MD
May 18, 2009

Under the heading of “you’ve got to know what’s important,” we learn that the Food and Drug Administration has cracked down on General Mills. The FDA objects to the wording on the box of Cheerios, America’s favorite breakfast cereal.

The FDA objects to the statement that “eating two 1½ cup servings daily of Cheerios cereal reduced bad cholesterol when eaten as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol.” Since the FDA has not approved this wording, it represents an unsubstantiated health claim. Even worse, the FDA asserts that such a claim means that Cheerios is a “drug.”

No doubt the FDA and General Mills will agree on new wording. No doubt the new wording will be vague and uninformative. But that’s not the problem. The problem is that the government believes it has the power to regulate everything. Still, even the most intrusive government in the most suffocating nanny state has neither the personnel nor the time to stick its nose into everything.

So how does the government decide to allocate its resources? If governments were logical, attention would be focused on the greatest dangers and the worst offenders. But that governments will be logical is about as likely as that pigs will fly. In fact, if I were forced to choose, I would bet on pigs flying.

Take breakfast cereals. I ate cheerios this morning. I like the fact that it is not drenched in sugar, as are so many cereals. I like the fact that it has soluble fiber, which can lower bad cholesterol.

My family history is filled with heart disease. A few years ago, my total cholesterol had been creeping up and reached about 225. I didn’t want to take a statin drug. Instead, I switched from low-fat milk to non-fat milk, and from low-fat yogurt to non-fat yogurt. I ate more fiber, especially soluble fiber. I tried to get more exercise and lose weight. As a result, my cholesterol fell to 195 − not great, but much better.

So what is the FDA’s problem? It has no objection to sugar-laden cereals that are shamelessly marketed to children. It has no objection to popped cereals that consist largely of air. It has no objection to toaster tarts that are brimming with fat and sugar. No, it decided to demonstrate its power by attacking one of the most healthful breakfast foods.

But there is another cereal in my cupboard. It too is advertised as healthful. I was unfamiliar with the brand, so I checked the box to discover where it was made. Instead, the box reported that the cereal was “distributed” by a company in La Jolla, California. La Jolla is an upscale suburb of San Diego. There are no factories there. For all I know, the cereal is made in China.

A similarly vague label adorns my toothpaste. When news broke that some toothpaste made in China was contaminated with antifreeze, I e-mailed the company that “distributes” my toothpaste, asking where it is actually made. I got no reply.

A health claim, even if true, makes cheerios a “drug”? Really? A visit to the health-foods section of the supermarket reveals shelves full of “dietary supplements” and “homeopathic remedies” with all sorts of unsubstantiated health claims on the label. But all these tablets and capsules are not “drugs,” because lobbyists convinced Congress to restrict the FDA’s authority over these supplements.

A pill is a “dietary supplement,” even if it has not been shown to add anything useful to our diet. On the contrary, a breakfast food is not a “dietary supplement,” but is a “drug.” This goes beyond the illogical and reaches the irrational.

Recently I had dental work and was given antibiotic tablets. The tablets were huge horse-pills. But I trusted that the generic drug had been tested by the FDA and was equivalent to the brand-name drug. As I tried to swallow a tablet, it stuck in my throat and refused to go down. I drank water and ate bread, but it remained stuck in my esophagus for about 20 minutes before I felt relief.

Curious, I placed a tablet in a glass of water. Sure enough, it took over 20 minutes before it began to disintegrate, much less dissolve. And who knows where it was made? Perhaps it is one of the low-cost drugs that ObamaCare will force on us. I threw the bottle out and ordered the brand-name drug, which is available in capsules that actually make the drug available to the body.

Junk foods that lead to obesity? Sugar-laden cereals that lead to tooth decay and diabetes? Air-filled cereals with little food value? Salty foods that may aggravate high blood pressure? Unproven “dietary supplements”? Cereals and toothpastes made who-knows-where? Generic medicines that may not work? No problem. But low-sugar, fiber-containing Cheerios? Hit it with the full force of the law.

Since government cannot do everything, officials must choose. Being lazy and cowardly, they usually choose to do what is easy and safe. They attack General Mills rather than the makers of junk foods or the importers of potentially unsafe products from unknown locations overseas.

For another example, take Martha Stewart. She was suspected of insider trading when she sold a stock shortly before it fell in value. But evidence was insufficient, so she was never charged with insider trading. Instead, Stewart was charged with making false statements to federal agents. This is a crime in itself, even if what the agents are investigating is not a provable crime.

We were protected from Martha Stewart. Meanwhile, Bernard Madoff and his ilk were ripping off tens of billions of dollars as they wiped out people’s life savings. And corrupt or incompetent bankers were loaning money they didn’t have to people who couldn’t repay it. But the feds were too busy with Martha to notice.

If Stewart was convicted even if the underlying crime could not be proved, Lewis “Scooter” Libby was convicted even if there was no underlying crime. The chief of staff to former Vice President Cheney was suspected of “outing” CIA employee Valerie Plame. But she had not been a covert agent for years, and the prosecution didn’t assert that she was. Nevertheless, Libby recalled interviews with reporters differently from how the reporters recalled them.

The man who “outed” Plame was known to the prosecution. He was not Libby. But Libby, like Stewart, was convicted of making false statements to federal agents. Stewart served time in prison. President Bush commuted Libby’s sentence to a fine and probation. But both Libby and Stewart will be convicted felons for the rest of their lives. They can never hold a security clearance, or be bonded, or be an officer in a public corporation, or touch a firearm, or perhaps even vote.

What can we learn from all this?

1.     Never talk to federal agents without a good criminal-defense attorney present. If you recall events differently from other witnesses, you can be sent to prison and bankrupted − even if you had nothing to do with what the agents are investigating, and even if it wasn’t a crime in the first place.

2.     If bureaucrats have a choice, they will go wherever laziness and cowardice take them − especially if there is also a political motivation.

3.     If bureaucrats can choose between a healthful food and sugary, air-popped junk made in unknown places, they will pursue the maker of the healthful food.

4.     If bureaucrats can choose between productive citizens and terrorists or street gangs, they will prosecute the productive citizens − it’s a lot safer.

No need to worry about mass-murdering terrorists − the government is scaling back surveillance of overseas communications and planning to close Guantanamo. No need to worry about nuclear weapons in the hands of unstable tyrants in North Korea and Iran − the government is scaling back our nuclear weapons. No need to worry about drug-dealing street gangs − the government is scaling back the already inadequate control of our borders. If the government no longer worries about these problems, why should we?

So rest easy. You need not fear to go out tonight, lest Martha Stewart accost you and offer you a bran muffin. You need not fear to have breakfast tomorrow, lest you be deceived into eating a healthful cereal. You’re safe. The government is working hard to protect you.

Dr. Stolinsky writes on political and social issues. He can be contacted at dstol@prodigy.net.

www.stolinsky.com