Please replied to my classmates post for example you might start hello nice post ….
POst 1: Asley wrote this:
Nature Made vitamins are regulated for their ingredients. As far as OTC meds go there are regulations for safety but the claim that a vitamin provides a certain benefit is not evaluated by the FDA. If you look on a bottle of vitamins it says ‘statement not evaluated by the FDA. Prescriptions require trials to prove safety and effectiveness. YES regulations (for substances that I will ingest) are wonderful. You can trust that these products have quality ingredients that have been tested for safety coming together in a product whose efficacy has been tested also.
Post 2: Rachel wrote this:
I was given the score of 5/10 on the FDA’s cosmetic quiz. I feel very uneducated about regulations. I was shocked that cosmetics can use basically any ingredient they want. I was also shocked that cruelty free means that the ingredients can be tested on animals as long as the main product is not. I feel that I need to educate myself much more on cosmetic and other regulations to better understand what I am buying for myself.
Identify another consumer product that is regulated (it does not have to be regulated by the FDA)
Tobacco and tobacco products are regulated by the FDA: “Tobacco use is the single largest preventable cause of disease and death in the United States. Since 2009, FDA has regulated cigarettes, smokeless, and roll-your-own tobacco. FDA finalized a rule, effective August 8, 2016, to regulate all tobacco products” (FDA, 2016). The FDA does not regulate tobacco the same way they regulate medical products, food, or even veterinary equipment:” FDA evaluates new tobacco products based on a public health standard that considers the risks and benefits of the tobacco product to the population as a whole, including users and nonusers” (FDA, 2016). Tobacco products are barely regulated because of how generally bad they are for people.
What similarities or inconsistencies are there between the two products?
They can both pretty much use any ingredient in their creation process. The tobacco regulations are very lenient. The production of cosmetics is not as regulated as I original thought, but it is definitely more regulated than the tobacco industry. Cosmetics is somewhat a broad category: “The FDA’s definition of cosmetics includes substances and preparations for cleansing, altering the appearance of, and promoting the attractiveness of a person” (Cheeseman, 2016). Tobacco products are anything that has tobacco in it which is very specific.
Do you think regulation is a good thing or bad thing, why or why not?
I think that regulations are very important. Many people do not read labels or actually bother to look into items they buy for their families. People rely on the FDA to make sure that food, cosmetics, and medical devices are safe for people to use. The FDA is responsible for trying to reduce the use of tobacco in minors: “FDA also has responsibility for regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors” (FDA, 2016). Overall, I believe that regulating any item that is used or consumed by people should be regulated for overall safety.
What conclusions can you draw from your analysis?
My conclusion is that I thought I was much more informed as to what is regulated in the cosmetic industry. I assumed the tobacco industry was not well regulated because it is based around people voluntarily inhaling smoke and chemicals. What I was shocked about, is the lack of ingredient usage in cosmetics. Regulations are a very important part of our society. Without any standard, any crazy person can sell any item and claim it does anything that suites them best,
Post 3: Christopher wrote:
As of 2010, approximately 57 Americans have some type of disability (DiNitto & Johnson, 2016). In government and public policy, disability programs predominately concern “education, employment, housing, and cvil rights” (DiNitto & Johnson, 2016). The public consensus of disability programs has changed in recent decades by becoming more politicalized and controversial. Disability is evaluated differently than that of poverty, and does not receive the same recognition by the U.S. Census Bureau (Proctor, Semega, & Kollar, 2016). While it is true that a disabled person may not necessarily be poor, they are more likely to be low-income. For this reason, the disabled should generally be included in official poverty statistics.
Major government statutes, such as The Rehabilitation Act and The Americans with Disability Act, have prohibited workplace discrimination and provided equal work opportunities to disabled persons. Social Security and its respective social insurance programs, such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) have established needed compensation benefits to eligible disabled persons. Another benefit system, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), covers both temporary and permanent disabilities to military veterans (DiNitto & Johnson, 2016).
In considering federal budgetary restraints, programs such as Social Security, have shown to partially contribute to higher deficits, since there is more spending on the program’s benefits than there is in its tax rates (Robertson, 2015). When prioritizing spending and ensuring that the disabled are provided for, there should be somewhat counter-balance of liberal and conservative ideals. First, Social Security payroll taxes should be raised to ensure that SSI and SSDI can be adequately funded. This includes raising the cap on Social Security so that the wealthy, or those making over $118,500 a year, can contribute more to the program (Robertson, 2015). Also, spending cuts in other areas, such as defense, should take place in order to strengthen social welfare and reduce deficit spending. In addition, to help reduce the “welfare inventive,” independent living centers (ILCs), volunteer initiatives, and non-profit groups should be embraced. This helps to accommodate for people with severe disabilities, while taking some of the “cost burden” off of government.
DiNitto, D.M., & Johnson, D.H. (2016). Social Welfare: Politics and Public Policy. (pp. 153-187, 195-226). Austin, TX: Pearson Education, Inc.
Proctor, B.D., Semega, J.L., & Kollar, M.A. (2016). Income and Poverty in the United States: 2015. United States Census Bureau. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/library/publications/2016/demo/p60-256.html
Robertson, L. (2015). Sanders Misleads on Social Security. FactCheck
Post 4: Chad wrote this
Yes, I believe individuals whom are disabled should continue to be classified in society as its own protected group. Many of the disabled qualify for public assistance and benefits under the SSA, and their a numerous government programs put in place to assist them in bettering their lives and becoming more independent such as Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Services, Plan to Achieve Self-Support (PASS), Ticket to Work, and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. However, the majority of the disable population in America still lack stability and depend on support to go about their daily lives, and without that support they would be far from self sufficient.
I don’t think all disabled individuals receiving assistance should be grouped as impoverished because many of them are not. Most retired workers qualify for social insurance under the SSA and have contributed to the program for most of their adult working lives, and are more than likely being financially supported by their individual pensions, and savings and investments as well. However, I do think think individuals whom are disabled, receiving public assistance, and cant hold employment should be included with official poverty statistics of the country because citizens tax dollars greatly support their livelihood. I think the Social Security benefits under the SSA should remain a public program controlled by the federal government and its continued funding is paramount to the well being of society. I think each generation has a duty to support the current aging generation that came before them. I think taxes should be raised fairly across the labor market to ensure each tax bracket is providing a adequate support to maintain the funding and sustainability of the SSA.
Dear writer what would you replied to these classmates