News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Should DayQuil Be Legal? by alistairSH on Monday July 06, 2026 @02:30PM (#48808583)
Not to mention it ignores reality. Most consumers have neither the time now knowledge to research everything they buy. That's one of the roles of government.
Re:Should DayQuil Be Legal? by Nifty3929 on Monday July 06, 2026 @05:33PM (#48810793)
That's one of the important reasons - I thought - that we have the FDA in the first place. But these days I'm really not so sure. So many promising treatments rejected (or just stalled forever) while pointless placebos and worse get or remain approved.

So - why again does the FDA exist?

Re:Should DayQuil Be Legal? by no-name-here on Tuesday July 07, 2026 @01:11AM (#48813880)
> why again does the FDA exist?

Is the argument that because the FDA may not be perfect, the public would be better off if it didn’t exist?

The FDA handles many thousands of product categories, tens of thousands of prescription drugs, etc. Which items (and how many total) are you referring to? For many of them might there be a reason available as to why they didn’t end up as you recommended?

Is there any country on earth without an FDA where you think the result is better than the US’s FDA?

Re:Should DayQuil Be Legal? by alistairSH on Tuesday July 07, 2026 @08:29AM (#48816784)
Sunscreen is the first thing that pops to mind. Until last week(?) we hadn't had a new sunscreen ingredient in decades, despite the RoW getting newer/better stuff for years. It was to the point that tourists to Korea and the EU would stock up on product to bring back.

Yes, that (roughly) happened because the FDA regulates sunscreen like a drug and RoW mostly treats it as a cosmetic. And FDA drug approval is expensive, so nobody was bothering.

Regardless, for those of us with pasty white skin, it kinda blows not being able to get a good daily sunscreen that doesn't make us look even more ghostly.

EDIT - Yes, the FDA needs to exist, it's WAY better than nothing. But, it's probably due for some reform.