Hi Peter, You are right on that :o) The difference in categorizing them only comes into play when it comes to the FDA and what they regulate. The FDA regulates prescription drugs, but not all foods. That was my point.



>As I see it, both pseudoephedrine and apples ARE food to your body. Both have an effect in the body, are consumable and indeed are consumed by some or many for that reason. Whether or not it's healthy or influences the state of mind is not the crucial, decisive factor here. The category of prescription drugs is only a subcategory of food.
>
>I think we would have an argument here if were asked to write the design of the database. :)
>
>>The problem is that pseudoephedrine does NOT fall into the category of FOOD. It falls into the category of prescription drugs. Apples do NOT. They are not in the same category. The FDA regulates all prescription drugs, but does not regulate all types of FOODs.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Both Refox and Total Commander are part of the collection 'computer tools', both an apple and pseudoephedrine are part of the collection 'food'.
>>>
>>>The FDA deals with only a part of the collection food. In a same vein, I propose the regulation of only a part of the collection computer tools. The consequence is that I am not advocating an FDA for computer tools.
>>>
>>>>We were comparing prescription drugs (not food) to development tools (granted it is apples/oranges) and YES the FDA approves all PRESCRIPTION drugs before they can go on the market.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Am I? Do you read my words asif I'm proposing that? Does the FDA check ALL food? No, it doesn't. It only checks a number of specifically mentioned drugs.
>>>>>I do not mind that/if governments formally forbid certain specifically types of tools and games. Tools like Refox might be allowed, but only in a controlled environment, as I proposed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Are you advocating the equivalent of the 'FDA' exist for computer tools?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That is like the makers of pseudoephedrine (an excellent drug for legitimate medical purposes) responsible for the actions of consumers who use it in methlabs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ah, but there is a lot of legislation (is that the right word here?) that prescribes who is allowed to produce and sell pseudoephedrine and who isn't. And these laws have been implemented because we don't want it to be produced or sold by people who have immoral intentions to do so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This same reasoning should be applied to tools like Refox and WE, the community, should have dealt with it a long time ago. We should have regulated its usage: when is it appropriate and when is it illegimite.