›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Bill C-51

ErynEryn
edited May 2008 in Politics
Up here in Canada, there is a new bill going through readings in Parliament currently that proposes a few changes to the existing Food and Drugs Act, namely concerning natural health products. The full text of the bill can be found here, but if it's TL;DR for you, all that text doesn't actually change much. It really only proposes adding more inspectors and adding extra regulation to make sure that claims made by therapeutic products are supported by scientific evidence. Doesn't sound so bad, right? What could possibly be so evil about making sure medicinal and therapeutic products have scientific backing and actually, you know, work?

But I'm finding that there is significant outcry against bill C-51 all over the internet. I first became aware of the issue because several of my friends have joined the official Facebook group against the bill. So many people seem to think that this bill is somehow a plot by "big pharma" to force natural health products off shelves, and that the government must be up to something evil by *gasp!* putting their herbs and supplements up to more tests. People are claiming that this bill will criminalize 60-70% of natural health care products in Canada (source on that figure, anyone?), make it illegal to give herbs and supplements to children, allow the government to change over-the-counter natural products to prescription-only products willy-nilly, or allow raids and seizures without warrant. Quote from a naturopath, David Wang: "It’s basically forcing consumers to choose conventional medicine over alternative. At the same time, enforcement agents are allowed to throw people in jail without proper judicial process, which again is very non-constitutional. If I was selling, distributing vitamins...they don’t even need a warrant to come into my office, handcuff me, and throw me in jail."

The Health Minister claims that the effects on products currently on the shelf won't be nearly so dramatic. Quote from him: "I think the vast majority of health products are safe, and I think the manufacturers of those products want Canadians to be healthier and happier. But there are obviously some that don’t meet that test. Those are the ones we would want to target."

I haven't read the full text of the bill myself, so I can't firmly place myself in one camp or another until I do. As it is now, the feeling I get from this is that a lot of Canadians are making a huge fuss over nothing. But I could be wrong. I haven't read up enough on it yet, though I will do more when I get home from work today. I especially don't know because I haven't gotten to the parts supposedly about seizure and raid without warrant (which does sound a bit more worrisome). What do you guys think?

Here are some more links concerning the issue, including the source article for the quotes I used:

Article from Straight.com
FAQ about C-51 on the government's Healthy Canadians website
Official Stop C-51 Website
Article from CTV.ca
Blog post by Martin Winer
Article from the Vancouver Sun

Comments

  • AprecheApreche
    Most people think conspiracy theories are harmless. Well, this is what happens when a lot of people end up actually believing in them. All these people believing in a crazy conspiracy about big evil pharmaceutical companies are actually going to worsen the health situation while they think they are making it better. Good intentions with bad results do to irrational and unscientific thinking.

    I hope this law passes, and I wish the US would move in a similar direction.
  • JasonJason
    But it's a democracy! If the majority think pharmaceuticals are bad, they can't be wrong! Can they? CAN THEY?
  • ErynEryn
    edited May 2008
    Fallacy: Appeal to Popularity
    Also Known as: Ad Populum

    The Appeal to Popularity has the following form:

    1. Most people approve of X (have favorable emotions towards X).
    2. Therefore X is true.
    Bah, whadda they know? :P
    Post edited by Eryn on
  • Victor FrostVictor Frost
    But it's a democracy! If the majority think pharmaceuticals are bad, they can't be wrong! Can they? CAN THEY?
    *Laughs profusely*
  • ErynEryn
    edited May 2008
    Just found that Science-Based Medicine had made a wonderful post about this issue earlier in the month. Figures they would have. I should have checked there before.

    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=117
    Post edited by Eryn on
  • ΣπεκωσποκΣπεκωσποκ
    The only thing I disagree with from that bill is the "raids without warrants" bit. Otherwise, it seems to be a bill to keep randy bullshit out of the bodies of those who need medicine, children especially.
  • Luke BurrageLuke Burrage
    Randy bullshit out of children? I couldn't agree more!
  • jccjcc
    But it's a democracy! If the majority think pharmaceuticals are bad, they can't be wrong! Can they? CAN THEY?
    The freedom to be wrong is one of the most valuable freedoms of all. :)
  • FunfetusFunfetus
    edited May 2008
    keep randy bullshit out of the bodies of those who need medicine, children especially.
    Randi bullshit. Though keeping randy bullshit out of children's bodies is probably a good policy as well.
    Post edited by Funfetus on
  • ErynEryn
    edited June 2008
    The freedom to be wrong is one of the most valuable freedoms of all. :)
    Unless the freedom to choose fake medicine ends up causing serious detriment to or costing a life that normal medicine could have done something about.

    Besides, as far as I can see, the bill should still allow people to continue choosing to buy most of their existing nutritional supplements and other natural health products. It's mainly just targeting the ones that really don't come up to snuff in the face of testing and regulation.
    Post edited by Eryn on
Sign In or Register to comment.