|
|
 |
| [Feb 26, 2008, 10:25 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
It must be clear by now that I'm an inveterate name-dropper, so I with no
apologies I'll share my brush with fame yesterday. I stopped by the vet's office
to pick up some food and supplements, and someone was there dropping off one of
Martha Stewart's Chow Chow's. These dogs can be quite a handful (I'm friendly
with a Chow-mix who is a danger to any stranger she meets), but this dog seemed
very friendly and calm. Apparently had I been there at the right time a couple
of days earlier, I would have met Martha herself, but I'm more of a dog person
than a craft person anyway.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 14. |
Re: Smilin' Bob |
Feb 26, 2008, 12:40 |
Toebot |
|
|
This conviction was a good start, now its time to rescind the law that allowed this type of grifting to happen in the first place - the Dietary Supplement Act of 1992.
On edit:
What this law did was remove all requirements for truth in advertising for anything that could be labeled a dietary supplement. It was primarily designed to allow herb peddlers to make whatever claims they wished about the effects of their products. You notice that the criminal conviction wasn't for making false claims about the efficacy of their product, but for their billing irregularities. This is not just about playing on male insecurities over penis size either; the law also allows the promotion of all those weight loss treatments. Like the one that not only makes you lose weight but also acts as an anti-depressant. Or how about bodyfat, got too much of that?
Of course if they did rescind the law - dozens of cable television networks would likely go broke.
This comment was edited on Feb 26, 17:28. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Twitter 
