The purpose of this post is to call for volunteers to debate the motion given below and for a volunteer to moderate this debate.
Motion:
The Brownwood Acres Company should be allowed to make the following statement:
"Tart Cherry Juice Concentrate (68 Brix)/CherryFlex Softgels For Gout, Arthritis, Migraine Headaches, Fibromyalgia, and Inflammatory Relief."
on their product labels and in their product marketing for FruitFast Tart Cherry Juice Concentrate without interference from the FDA or any other government entity. Prohibiting them from making this statement violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Motivation:
- Cherry juice is a recent subject of discussion on OS: http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=67568.
- Debating is also a recent subject of discussion on OS:
- My dad has gout.
- The product is marketed and sold here: http://www.brownwoodacres.com/cherry_juice_concentrate.htm
- The FDA sent the company the following letter: http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~acrobat/chrltr2.pdf
- The company eventually came to the following agreement with the FDA: http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2008/NEW01800.html
- There's a lot about cherry juice and gout on the Internet: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&hs=beg&q=cherry+juice+gout&btnG=Search
Debate Format:
- Guidelines for conducting the debate are posted here: http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=69832.
- There are two possible formats, A and B, for the debate. In format A, the moderator may delete comments, in format B, the moderator is barred from deleting comments.
- There are three volunteers necessary to have this debate: someone arguing the affirmative, someone arguing the negative, and a moderator.
Volunteering to participate in this debate can be done by placing a comment in this post that reads exactly as one of the six statements below:
- "I volunteer to debate the affirmative of the motion posted here, using Open Salon Debate Format A"
- "I volunteer to debate the affirmative of the motion posted here, using Open Salon Debate Format B"
- "I volunteer to debate the negative of the motion posted here, using Open Salon Debate Format A"
- "I volunteer to debate the negative of the motion posted here, using Open Salon Debate Format B"
- "I volunteer to moderate a debate of the motion posted here, using Open Salon Debate Format A"
- "I volunteer to moderate a debate of the motion posted here, using Open Salon Debate Format B"
Multiple comments may be entered in order to volunteer for different roles/formats. Since an automated parsing program will probably be used to evaluate the comments, the comment statements must read exactly as stated above.
Just to be perfectly clear, I am not personally volunteering to participate in this debate in any capacity. I am merely coordinating the volunteers. And I hope to read the debate.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
trilogy
LostInCheeseland
dirndl skirt
Caroline Hagood
Grace Hwang Lynch
femme forte aka candace
Salon.com
Comments
(Disclaimer: Catamitebastard is in no way responsible for any water retention caused by his tea).
-- in conjunction with an MD or other medical professional who can speak to the medical aspect. My comments would be limited to the regulatory aspect.
I could do format B also, but good luck with that!
Ahhh . . heaven!
In the areas of science that I read, there's relatively little in the way of formal debate. I imagine the reasons why may be complex, but here's one possibility: In a debate, if one side comes across information that could be damaging to an argument but might not be well-known, is it brought up anyway, even if the other side might not even been aware of it? Most scientists would feel obliged to do so. (In probably the most famous modern scientific debates, over Creationism, I think this puts the science side at a significant disadvantage.) So I was first thinking, concerning this debate, that a good way to start would be for everyone to agree on what the science says and what it doesn't say.
I think mishima's focus on regulatory issues--given what we know and don't know, what should we do?--is great for debating. I wish I had the time to volunteer on the affirmative side. (Without knowing much about this issue, but trusting mishima's and sanjuro's judgment, I'd probably be on the negative side, personally, but personal disagreement shouldn't be a disqualification, I'm thinking.) I hope someone steps up on the affirmative side, and that the debate takes place and turns out to be informative.