When I see “the FDA has stated…” I automatically think it is probably a corrupt conclusion bought by some powerplayer to maximize their own profit instead of having to do with whether the statement is true or not. I’ve always viewed FDA as basically a council of a bunch of power players on boards of Big Capitalism companies like Pepsi that make decisions based on control and market share rather than health.
but I see posts now about how trump attacking FDA equals bad. So is my view of FDA wrong? Are they noncorrupt? Are they a necessary evil? Should they be thrown in a volcano and remade?
had never looked up rbst but doing so right now and right from the start here’s this.
i assume tho that the profit from rbst milk caused the FDA to overlook something like that. Anyway, this is my point. When the FDA states something, i just assume they are doing it to sway the public for the sake of allmighty capitalism; and that them specifically going out of their way to say something actually implies the opposite is true.
Is the American FDA perfect? Of course not. but them existing is a net positive because without them your food would have literally no safety standards in the US. Even if theyre corrupt and incompetent they can still be a net positive when compared to just letting companies put cat piss in your koolaid if they want to.
Ideally the FDA should not be swayed by business interests, but everything controlled by our government is. That said, you want the FDA to exist and protect us from bullshit snake oil products and keep corporations from lacing our food with cheap poisons and carcinogens.
Trump gutting the organization makes it go from “could do better” to “actively subverting its own purpose.”
Good. Next question.
I was told - but I never fact checked it - that the FDA actually has less than 10 employees. Everyone else is an outside contractor. And if it is true, I do think it needs better organization.
If an agency that has to protect all consumers is organized this way, that’s really worrisome.
That is a fascinating rumor, but not at all true. Good on you for being skeptical. Otherwise, I personally know all FDA employees plus a mysterious eleventh.
the FDA actually has less than 10 employees. Everyone else is an outside contractor.
You can search for FDA employees here (the US Government has a lot of transparency around employees). Also, it wouldn’t surprise me to find a lot of contractors in scientific and technical roles in the FDA, the FedGov uses a lot of contractors. I actually spent time, at a site, first as a contractor and then as a direct employee. The only thing that materially changed was whether or not my badge said “contractor” on it. I literally sat in the same seat and did the same job. Pay was pretty close, but the benefits were way better. The line between contractor and govie was pretty blury and more of a running joke than a real wall. Maybe that was just the departments I worked for, but I suspect my experience was more typical.
