"Err, doesn't that link in the article deserve an [NSFW] tag ..." -- 1980s_coder
and maybe an NSFB tag, too!
Robert Dean may be questioning his career decisions. The division director of US drug regulator the FDA has warned the public that Kim Kardashian's social network pages are not a particularly reliable source of medical advice. In an open-letter [PDF], Dean said endorsements from celebrity buttocks Kardashian were misleading …
Err, doesn't that link in the article deserve an [NSFW] tag, given that it contains pictures of her topless?
I thought it was *extremely* suitable for bankers. Oh, wait..
In all seriousness though, it is hard to find anyone I could possibly care about less. Or it would be Kanye or whatever his name is. On my personal meter of People Who Matter, they're off the scale on the "Not" end.
Wasn't too long ago they (NHS) used to prescribe smoking for those that had shortness of breathe like bronchitis or asthma. The oddity was that smoking meant you worked the inhalation of your lungs more and in a stronger exercise that normal breathing, which actually improved your breathing (Or so I am reliably informed)
That's the first thing that come up for me as well. Interestingly, the non-teratogenic isomer of thalidomide seems to have some uses nowadays.
As to the whole Kim thing; I read something about a TV host who couldn't stomach having to "report" about those creatures anymore and walked off-stage. Now if everyone would do that, the world would become a better place.
Kardashian is clearly shilling for some firm who paid her a lot of money to tweet this guff. The FDA should be slapping her with a hefty fine instead of a stern warning. Make it clear to all celebs that the rules concerning the advertising of drugs, diet pills and snakeoil apply equally to their tweets as it does for other forms of paid promotion.
She's doing the human race a favour.
If anyone is stupid enough to follow her advice and consequently kills themselves AND their future offspring, then Darwin's principles are operating perfectly in helping to ensure the continuing improvement of the human gene pool.
Fortunately, we don't allow advertising of prescription-only medicine (POM) to general public in UK. But just as in US the marketing authorization holder is responsible for what is said in promotion of any of their medicines. In this case it seems the MAH is a repeat offender. Their regulatory affairs people need a bollocking if they weren't trying to enforce the rules, if the marketing dept was ignoring regulatory affairs then they need a double bollocking, and if senior management is a fault then they need their pension plans and share options redistributed to the poor. To encourage the others....
Nice one, though it would be ambiguous, as I believe there are several Kardashians (each with several buttocks).
I am simultaneously repulsed and fascinated by the fact that people can be famous just for being famous, and nothing else.
And though it's fun to scorn them, who's raking in the millions for not doing anything much? I figure they have the last laugh.
Not their first time according to the letter. Seems they did something similar a couple of years ago, fines should now be imposed, on the Kardashian bint too. The stuff that gets advertised in the US as having some kind of pharmaceutical property is just mind boggling, the purveyors seem to make their cash from the mindless masses and get out of Dodge before the behemoth that is the FDA wakes up.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019