Comments:Obama calls food safety system a 'hazard to public health'

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Lol, nobody else commenting... w/e... I think that Obama is doing a smash up job, and that he needs to keep it up! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 05:54, 16 March 2009

It's interesting to read the Monsanto article with this announcement. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 08:13, 16 March 2009

Of course, consumers do not know what is healthy for them. Certainly mr. Obama knows what is healthy for budget and for inspectors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)

I wonder, will he change the way the FDA performs their checks? At the moment, ingredients such as transfat do not have to be listed if constituting less than 1% of the product. Furthermore, the FDA, as I understand it, allows for companies to either evaluate their own products. Especially in the realm of drugs and pharmaceuticals, I believe that this is a dangerous practice born of neglect and corruption.

What will our President do of these hazards to public health? I already do not trust the FDA, and I wonder if pumping them full of new money that we don't have is the answer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)

I agree, throwing money at the FDA probably isnt going to help significantly.. or at least wouldnt be worth the 1 billion dollars. I don't know a whole lot about the FDA, but from what I have heard they're a broken system when it comes to drugs, I hope thats not equally true when it comes to food. But really whats the alternative? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)



People are so underminded these days. They see a small paragraph and since it won't take up an hour of their time, they let every word sink in to them and allow it to decide their decision of what the heck is going on in society. This small statement blasting against our food safety just preaches how we trick each other into believing the folly of another man's opinion. Has anyone promoted the FDA and our food safety system? Sure, for some it's just not enough (This includes Obama) which may be true in some cases but compared to the early 1900s food production where complete abominations that would be called "food" was shipped out, this is not a terrible situation. Though still, people are smacking down on our society, and perhaps I'm just too right-wing here- perhaps we do need a serious reformation, but in general, and to sum it up, always know both sides of the story: For food safety, although not perfect, it is no longer The Jungle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:51, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

What's hilarious is that Obama appointed the same lady who had to step down from FDA after being charged with racketeering for hiding the deaths and adverse events associated with Johnson & Johnson's drug Levaquim. Her husband is manager of a hedge fund heavily invested in Johnson & Johnson, so that this little paragraph we're discussing left out evidence that Obama's either an idiot or taking money to get her back on the payroll and hiding deaths from Johnson & Johnson's fine line of pharmaceuticals. "Both" is always a possibility with Obama. Vfrickey (talk) 21:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply



But really, I don't like argula.

Thank you Jesus...I had a feeling that FDA weren't doing their job properly. I am so happy to see this peace of news come out.

As well, I liked to add that I noticed that a lot of supplements on the market that claim to provide relief for ailments are never monitored by the can we have an agency whose job is to protect and inform consumers of what they consume if they won't monitor it because of some policy. That is politics at its worst...when it begins to sound like non-sense! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 13:17, 14 April 2009

You're serious, right? If a government agency is violating policy in any action it takes, that's illegal. When we have a government which does things Congress says it cannot do, that's nonsense. And illegal.
In related news, the lady Obama just appointed an agency commissioner to FDA had to quit that same agency after being charged with hiding fatalities and other adverse side effects of Levaquin, a product of one of the companies she and her hedge-fund manager husband made money from. So, if you think people are getting sick now.... Vfrickey (talk) 21:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is Obama doing the right thing?



Yes he is 100% right & the FDA needs to stop approving genetically altered food. We are seeing the results of that in (not only) our childrens health but viruses that are so resistant to any medication we have that we are all in danger. STOP the putting of antibotis in animal food. STOP the growth honmones in in animals. STOP GENIETIC ALTERED FOOD the only thing we know for sure is that it makes MONEY for the producers at the risk of our health. PLEASE ...WE ARE KILLING OURSELVES FOR THE SAKE OF MONEY,MONEY, MONEY. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 15:09, 31 August 2010

BRONX NEW YORK GO YANKEES —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 21:09, 6 August 2009

Comments from feedback form - "ok ok"


ok ok — (talk) 09:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Really? MARGARET HAMBURG? Currently facing RICO Racketeering Charges!


"That is a hazard to public health. It is unacceptable. And it will change under the leadership of Dr. Margaret Hamburg," Obama promised. The leadership of Dr. Margaret Hamburg? Seems that Dr Hamburg has been charged with RACKETEERING for hiding the dangerous side effects of drugs while head of the FDA because her husband managed a hedge fund heavily invested in Johnson & Johnson, makers of the drug Levaquin, which made the couple HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS as hundreds, maybe thousands of Americans lost their lives because of the deceitful actions of this woman.

This is the very same woman who drafted the current regulations that are designed to put the vaping industry out of business. Why would the head of the FDA want to make it harder for Americans to quit smoking? Can you guess who makes the nicotine patch, gum and nasal spray? If you guessed Johnson & Johnson you're correct!

Here we have a person who was given the trust to lead the FDA to a safer direction and she wants to make it more difficult for Americans to quit smoking, unless they do it using the products that put MONEY in her pocket of course. That's after she hides the dangers of a drug that caused the death of many Americans and made several other moves while head of the FDA that were designed to use her position to put more and more MONEY in her pocket. This female has betrayed the trust that The President put in her, she betrayed the FDA and she betrayed the people of the United States of America.

She did step down in 2015, after using the FDA to make hundreds of millions of dollars for her and her husband. Her replacement, Dr Robert Califf, who is also on Johnson & Johnson's bankroll is determined to see her restrictions on the vaping industry implemented as vaping, while saving the health of millions of Americans, is costing Johnson & Johnson sales of their nicotine patch and other nicotine products. He also has financial ties to dozens of other drug companies, which can only leave us asking WHY the FDA is being used as a means to enrich whoever is in charge instead of doing what it's supposed to do, which is to make sure that the health of American citizens is being protected, not sold for personal financial gain.

When will this hypocrisy end? How is this knowingly being tolerated? Isn't the United States supposed to be better than this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 03:53, 25 August 2016

This is pretty much in line with Democratic Party decision-making. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz helps the money men pick this year's Presidential nominee? Hillary Clinton thanks her by making her honorary chair of her campaign committee. And like that incredibly tone-deaf decision, the press is ignoring Obama's tapping Margaret Hamburg as agency commissioner for FDA after having been charged with racketeering in concert with her hedge-fund manager spouse. The Democrats couldn't get away with this if the press were as alert to malfeasance by Obama and the rest of the Democratic party leadership as they are to their political opposition. Vfrickey (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

The article omits this racketeering complaint filed in Federal court in April of this year: 

in which Mrs. Hamburg's accused of concealing deaths and other adverse side effects from Levaquin, a drug manufactured by Johnson & Johnson.

The complaint, interestingly, includes this allegation:

"Specifically, on or about May of 2009, President Barack Obama nominated Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg as a political appointee to become Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). On information and belief, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg was nominated as a result of huge political and other gratuities to Hillary Clinton and The Clinton Foundation, and at Mrs. Clinton’s recommendation. During the confirmation process before Congress, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, acting in concert with her husband, Peter F. Brown and the other Defendants named in this Amended Complaint, at all material times the Co-CEO of a hedge fund named Renaissance Technologies, L.L.C., failed to disclose to Congress and other relevant authorities, her and her husband’s clear-cut conflict of interest –specifically, that Renaissance Technologies, L.L.C. held hundreds of millions of dollars of Johnson & Johnson stock, the manufacturer of the deadly drug, Levaquin.

Once confirmed as FDA Commissioner, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg acted as the instrumentality that all Defendants used to perpetrate their conspiracy and racketeering enterprise by having her act illegally and outside the scope of her authority as FDA Commissioner to suppress material information to Plaintiffs and the public that Levaquin was inherently dangerous and in fact, deadly. Had this information been disclosed to Plaintiffs and the public at large, her and her husband’s financial gain and net worth would have plummeted, since Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg’s husband, Peter F. Brown, reaped and continues to reap huge financial gain as a result of Renaissance Technologies, L.L.C.’s holdings of Johnson & Johnson stock. To further this conspiracy, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, acting in concert with each and every Defendant, jointly and severally, appointed officials of Johnson & Johnson to key FDA Advisory Committees and colluded with Johnson & Johnson and its officials and subsidiaries to suppress information about the dangerous and deadly effects of Levaquin.

As a result, during Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg’s tenure as FDA Commissioner from 2009 to 2015, over 5,000 people died as a result of consuming Levaquin and other dangerous drugs promoted, manufactured, marketed, distributed and sold by Johnson & Johnson, suffered debilitating, life-threatening, and deadly illnesses and effects.

This deadly harm is continuing as Plaintiffs and thousands of other people are suffering and dying from the highly dangerous effects of Levaquin."

Apparently it's fine to sell drugs with deadly side effects over the pharmacy counter, if you pay Hillary her cut, first. Vfrickey (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply