FDA: You Must Not Dissent From the Medical EstablishmentMonday, July 25, 2011
The Medical Establishment is a malignant arm of the state – omnipotent, enabled by decrees, backed by propaganda, and fed by the agencies that subsist via the looting of peaceful Americans. This is an amazing, little story on I Programmer: “FDA to Scrutinize Medical Mobile Apps.”
The United States Government and its terrorist arm, the FDA, apparently have a monopoly on medical information that you’d better not challenge. Unapproved mobile apps are now a potential criminal venture. The FDA is proposing that it should be the supreme authority concerning the wonderful world of mobile medical applications. The corrupt agency says it doesn’t propose to oversee all apps – just those that “could present a risk to patients if the apps don’t work as intended.” This is the consummate, disjointed governmentspeak – a proposal that could be interpreted to mean whatever the Feds want it to mean at any point in time.
The Feds want to regulate apps to protect you from the “quack” mobile apps that contain information that has not been approved by the almighty powers of medical intelligence. “Quack” – meaning information or protocol that bucks the government’s declared monopoly on information and treatment for any and all medical conditions. These mobile medical apps will be defined as “regulated medical devices.” This is from the FDA’s draft guidelines:
Although some mobile apps that do not meet the definition of a mobile medical app may meet the FD&C Act’s definition of a device, FDA intends to exercise enforcement discretion towards those mobile apps. The FDA intends to monitor the performance of other mobile apps that are outside this guidance and determine whether additional or different actions are necessary to protect the public health. A manufacturer may, however, at its discretion, elect to register and list, and to seek approval or clearance for these mobile apps with the FDA.The article specifically points to “alternative approaches” as the overriding dilemma in the free and voluntary mobile app world. “Alternative” means that someone somewhere made a mindful choice to seek out new information and assess various alternatives to the medical establishment’s special interest-influenced protocol.
I love apps and I take a great pleasure in wading through the Apple apps store for all of those free or ridiculously low-priced apps that impassioned developers bring to the market because they take great pride in creating innovative products that serve basic and extraordinary needs. Oh, but think about it – some evil and “unapproved” app could give you information or advice contrary to the established opinion of organizations, doctors, and researchers who are on the payroll of Medical Establishment. Here are the complete draft guidelines for regulating mobile software applications. Thanks to A.b. Dada for the link.