Post by Rook on Mar 24, 2012 11:14:54 GMT -5
I’ve been reading about herbalism quite a bit lately, as well as alternative medicine and homeopathy. In doing so I’ve come across a disheartening trend, that many herbal supplements and concentrates do not contain what the package reports it to. Independent studies have found that many companies will put just enough of a specific herb in a pill to avoid ‘false advertising’ claims but then fill the rest with inert substances. In the ends the quantities and concentrations are not high enough to make many of these pills any more than a placebo.
Most people point to these discrepancies as a lack of FDA oversight. As always when I’m thinking about things I think about how I would do it in Uantir. I was tossing about ideas of making an Uantiri equivalent to the FDA when I caught myself in my tracks. Is the FDA something that’s the government’s job? Using tax payer money to investigate and regulate an industry that individual tax payers may never interact with isn’t a fair use of funds. The less the Crown spends on things like an FDA is more money it has to spend on things that are actually the government’s job, or the less it requires in taxes in general. If the people buy it, it’s the people’s job to understand what exactly they are buying.
But that hasn’t really worked out too well has it? The entirely unregulated herbal remedy marketplace is rampant with scams and half truths. Even the most diligent consumer does not have the time, expertise or equipment to chemically evaluate the products they buy and obviously cannot trust the company to be completely honest. So where is the middle ground?
The answer is, of course, oversight. But the oversight must be in a non-biased, professional manner. My answer is the creation of a universally respected consumer advocacy group, a business whose job is to endorse companies and products that conduct honest business.
The basic concepts behind this company:
-It will operate in a review and evaluation capacity with no regulatory or approval powers.
-A logo or some similar proof of inspection will be issued to compliant companies and products to place on their merchandise.
-The cost of inspection will be the burden of the company who wishes to bear the logo.
Issues that are immediately apparent and my thoughts:
-Corruption: It seems all too easy to try to bribe inspectors or the company as a whole. If review companies like this one were required to keep their books completely public, fraud and such could be caught quickly.
As for individual inspectors, every organization of this nature, including the FDA, has to contend with this problem. What this company has that a government organization as we recognize it doesn’t is the ability to immediately terminate the employment of any inspector found guilty of fraud, accepting bribes, or submitting to corruption.
Competition and the marketplace also incentivize the company to maintain its integrity. Though the most prominent the company I am designing is by no means the only one. Unlike a government organization that has a monopoly on the issue, other smaller competing investigative firms are always waiting for the ‘big dog’ company to falter, so that they can step up and replace them as the trusted authority.
-Cost and Consumers: It is likely that some or all of the cost of maintaining the logo will be pushed onto the consumers in the form of higher prices for the products. The key is choice, both on the distributor and consumer end. The consumer can choose which product, inspected or not, they wish to buy. Likewise the producer has to choose to be inspected, and many companies will likely consider it more profitable not to. There will always be a market for both those who want to pay more for the assurance of quality and those who are willing to take the gamble for lower prices. It is how designer clothing stores and discount thrift stores manage to exist alongside each other in the same economy.
I can’t think of a name, or a better term for approved companies than ‘logo’d.’ I’d appreciate help with that, as well as having other eyes look at the pros and cons of the entire concept that I may have missed.
Most people point to these discrepancies as a lack of FDA oversight. As always when I’m thinking about things I think about how I would do it in Uantir. I was tossing about ideas of making an Uantiri equivalent to the FDA when I caught myself in my tracks. Is the FDA something that’s the government’s job? Using tax payer money to investigate and regulate an industry that individual tax payers may never interact with isn’t a fair use of funds. The less the Crown spends on things like an FDA is more money it has to spend on things that are actually the government’s job, or the less it requires in taxes in general. If the people buy it, it’s the people’s job to understand what exactly they are buying.
But that hasn’t really worked out too well has it? The entirely unregulated herbal remedy marketplace is rampant with scams and half truths. Even the most diligent consumer does not have the time, expertise or equipment to chemically evaluate the products they buy and obviously cannot trust the company to be completely honest. So where is the middle ground?
The answer is, of course, oversight. But the oversight must be in a non-biased, professional manner. My answer is the creation of a universally respected consumer advocacy group, a business whose job is to endorse companies and products that conduct honest business.
The basic concepts behind this company:
-It will operate in a review and evaluation capacity with no regulatory or approval powers.
-A logo or some similar proof of inspection will be issued to compliant companies and products to place on their merchandise.
-The cost of inspection will be the burden of the company who wishes to bear the logo.
Issues that are immediately apparent and my thoughts:
-Corruption: It seems all too easy to try to bribe inspectors or the company as a whole. If review companies like this one were required to keep their books completely public, fraud and such could be caught quickly.
As for individual inspectors, every organization of this nature, including the FDA, has to contend with this problem. What this company has that a government organization as we recognize it doesn’t is the ability to immediately terminate the employment of any inspector found guilty of fraud, accepting bribes, or submitting to corruption.
Competition and the marketplace also incentivize the company to maintain its integrity. Though the most prominent the company I am designing is by no means the only one. Unlike a government organization that has a monopoly on the issue, other smaller competing investigative firms are always waiting for the ‘big dog’ company to falter, so that they can step up and replace them as the trusted authority.
-Cost and Consumers: It is likely that some or all of the cost of maintaining the logo will be pushed onto the consumers in the form of higher prices for the products. The key is choice, both on the distributor and consumer end. The consumer can choose which product, inspected or not, they wish to buy. Likewise the producer has to choose to be inspected, and many companies will likely consider it more profitable not to. There will always be a market for both those who want to pay more for the assurance of quality and those who are willing to take the gamble for lower prices. It is how designer clothing stores and discount thrift stores manage to exist alongside each other in the same economy.
I can’t think of a name, or a better term for approved companies than ‘logo’d.’ I’d appreciate help with that, as well as having other eyes look at the pros and cons of the entire concept that I may have missed.
