Claiming your First Amendment rights are being violated is a sure way to have the spotlight shone on you. It's also an effective way to shut down criticism of whatever you're selling. From the 1940s-60s, supplements manufacturers used the free speech gambit to keep regulators away from their products, resulting in a 1969 Supreme Court case. Derek looks at the 20th century evolution of medical regulations, and how companies are still using a similar argument to dissuade consumers from looking too deeply into what's inside the bottle.Sign up today at <a href="https://www.butcherbox.com/CONSPIRITUALITY">butcherbox.com/CONSPIRITUALITY</a> and use code CONSPIRITUALITY to get two 100% grass-fed filet mignons and two wild-caught lobster tails for FREE in your first box plus $20 off your first order.Show Notes<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216048/">Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety</a><a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1969/87">United States v Kordel</a><a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/26651733">Some Implications of the Kordel Decision</a><a href="https://www.conspirituality.net/episodes/163-the-huberman-paradox-jonathan-jarry">163: The Huberman Paradox</a> Learn more about your ad choices. Visit <a href="https://megaphone.fm/adchoices">megaphone.fm/adchoices</a>

Podurama

Home

Trending

Personal

Your Podcasts

New Episodes

My Files

Favourite Episodes

Tags (Folders)

Recently Played

Bookmarks

Followed Playlists

Bonus Sample: The Perils of "Free Speech"

Conspirituality

AI Chapters

AI Insights

Reviews