What’s your claim again?
Really, is that what it said? Please quote from the article that the only harm is fiduciary based. Or, you know, I’ll have to show where you’ve been wrong. Again.
The burden of evidence is on the one who makes the claim, frankly I go by treating many things as false (especially medical claims) until they have credibility. Makes things easier. A big problem with colds is one) often people seek treatment when it’s at its peak and two) they will all get better. So if I take magic remedy A, it’s more than likely I will feel better. But how much as that from magic remedy A and just the natural progression of the cold? Mainly, most of the evidence I’ve seen for a lot of cold products is purely anecdotal. However zinc has some positive studies showing some reduction in severity and duration so I don’t think they are all bunk.
You’ve shown no such thing.
This is what the site says:
"thousands of Airborne customers
Bonita Springs, Florida
Misled that it could cure colds
March 3, 2008
Airborne is based on Chinese herbal remedies and large doses of vitamins. The box claimed it could cure a cold based on a study that was discovered to be bogus. A lawsuit awarded $23.3M to defrauded customers. The product is still on the shelves. Read more & more"
I eat lots and lots of cough drops with zinc in them.
You’re right, I’ve not shown nor proven YOUR claim. Please, let’s have you go ahead and prove YOUR claim.
What claim do you think I have made?
Here:
[QUOTE=AnaMen]
This only further substantiates my assertion. The “harm” cited is that the product has not been proven to perform as claimed and thus the monetary expenditure may have been for naught. Which is exactly what I have said all along.
The harm is that you may be out $4 or $5. Eek, I’m terrified.
[/QUOTE]
This is like that old joke.
“When I feel a cold coming on, I know it’s going to last a week. But when I take X, it only lasts seven days!”
In your own words, what is it you think I am claiming?
I either indulge in strawberries, or garlic soup, depending. Fresh strawberries will knock out FLAT, within a day, any of the occasional cold-sores I feel coming on. And slicing up a bulb of garlic, heating it on low in some butter or olive oil, then adding to some other hot soup will scare off anything else. Also, vampires. And dates. 
but to be fair, I very rarely get really ‘sick’. Whether this is due to preventative measures or a naturally hyperactive immune system, I’ve no clue. But I’m not complaining.
Seriously? :rolleyes: Get back to us when you read posts. Including your own. I’m done.
Might want to brush up on your own reading comprehension… Just running your eyes back and forth over the words isn’t quite the same thing.
Post 56 proves my point.
Not sure which “point” you are referring to.
You seem quite reluctant to state exactly what claim you think I have made. Is it because you are afraid that you have misunderstood?
Your rampant aliteracy.
I can quote again since you choose to close over it:
[QUOTE=AnaMen]
This only further substantiates my assertion. The “harm” cited is that the product has not been proven to perform as claimed and thus the monetary expenditure may have been for naught. Which is exactly what I have said all along.
The harm is that you may be out $4 or $5. Eek, I’m terrified.
[/QUOTE]
Please show where the website proved your claim.
Let me further it with a quote that has been lobbed against you a couple times that you seem to keep dodging
Feel free to keep handwaving that it’s only $4-$5 that a person is out.
In case you need things directly pointed out to you (which is quite evident):
I already quoted directly from the website. I included the entire listing, though not the two articles it linked to, as they were a bit long to post directly. Showing you where it doesn’t say something (that people have been non-financially harmed by Airborne) is nonsensical.
I know you can’t handle too many words at once, so I will answer your next post separately.
It’s not “only $4 - $5 that a person is out,” it’s only $4 - $5 that I am out. As you may recall, I do not take the product as directed; I take no more than one tablet per day.
I do indeed need things “directly pointed out,” and why not? Only when a premise or claim is sharply defined may it be analyzed. Don’t fear precision, it is essential to science.
You allude to a concern regarding the Vitamin A content of the supplement. Determining whether the amount of Vitamin A it contains is a danger is a bit more complicated that comparing a couple of numbers, unfortunately. I will post a couple of links about this separately. Let’s say for a moment though that we agree that if taken according to directions that the user risks hypervitaminosis and that this is a potentially serious condition. Where is the evidence that this has actually happened to people? The hypothetical risk should translate into real harm to someone, but where is the mention of the victims?
The whatstheharm.net site lists case after case like this in the “vitamin megadose” section:
" “Patient X”
Cape Town, South Africa
Died
October 8, 2005
He was being treated by a quack when his disease got out of control and he was hospitalized. He never had a chance to beat AIDS because of the time he wasted on the treatments. Read more"
And this:
"Christopher Arbuckle
Age: 25
Portland, Oregon
Died
October 26, 1991
He was taking a Scientology “Purification Rundown” which involved extreme exercise and vitamin megadoses. He died of liver failure and his parents filed suit against the church. Read more"
The harm it is claiming is that “Patient X” and “Christopher Arbuckle” died. Other people are listed as having suffered cardiac arrest, being hospitalized, etc.
The Airborne entry is this:
"thousands of Airborne customers
Bonita Springs, Florida
Misled that it could cure colds
March 3, 2008
Airborne is based on Chinese herbal remedies and large doses of vitamins. The box claimed it could cure a cold based on a study that was discovered to be bogus. A lawsuit awarded $23.3M to defrauded customers. The product is still on the shelves. Read more & more"
So the “harm” claimed is that customers were “misled.” Not that they got sick or suffered symptoms of vitamin A overdose. Being misled isn’t a good thing, but it’s not similar to getting sick. They spent money on an unproven item. The lawsuit obligates Airborne to refund money to customers that want it up to $23 million or whatever.
They haven’t been ordered to cover any medical bills or compensate for deaths.
To clarify, the above deaths did not relate to Airborne; they were other cases listed in the “vitamin megadose” section of the site. There is no indication that they took Airborne or that it was the source of their megadoses.
Here is a link about Vitamin A:
The source of the Vitamin A determines the relevant measurement, the IU (International Unit):
“RDAs for vitamin A are given as mcg of retinol activity equivalents (RAE) to account for the different bioactivities of retinol and provitamin A carotenoids (see Table 1). Because the body converts all dietary sources of vitamin A into retinol, 1 mcg of physiologically available retinol is equivalent to the following amounts from dietary sources: 1 mcg of retinol, 12 mcg of beta-carotene, and 24 mcg of alpha-carotene or beta-cryptoxanthin. From dietary supplements, the body converts 2 mcg of beta-carotene to 1 mcg of retinol.
Currently, vitamin A is listed on food and supplement labels in international units (IUs) even though nutrition scientists rarely use this measure. Conversion rates between mcg RAE and IU are as follows [7]:
1 IU retinol = 0.3 mcg RAE
1 IU beta-carotene from dietary supplements = 0.15 mcg RAE
1 IU beta-carotene from food = 0.05 mcg RAE
1 IU alpha-carotene or beta-cryptoxanthin = 0.025 mcg RAE
An RAE cannot be directly converted into an IU without knowing the source(s) of vitamin A. For example, the RDA of 900 mcg RAE for adolescent and adult men is equivalent to 3,000 IU if the food or supplement source is preformed vitamin A (retinol). However, this RDA is also equivalent to 6,000 IU of beta-carotene from supplements, 18,000 IU of beta-carotene from food, or 36,000 IU of alpha-carotene or beta-cryptoxanthin from food. So a mixed diet containing 900 mcg RAE provides between 3,000 and 36,000 IU of vitamin A, depending on the foods consumed.”
The important thing to note to determine the safe amount to consume is not the RDA, as some articles imply. It is the “Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL): maximum daily intake unlikely to cause adverse health effects” that is relevant. This site says that it is 10,000 IU for adults.
I’ll go ahead and continue in another post.