Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentLaw & Ethics · 2 months ago

If I were to say "this chemical is BELIEVED to cure cancer" that doesn't mean for a FACT that it cures cancer, right?

7 Answers

Relevance
  • 2 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    Right, that doesn't mean at all that it is fact.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Right. However, absent actual studies to justify such a "belief", under US consumer protection laws, it would still be a violation of federal laws to attach such a statement to any sort of advertising or packaging.  A "disclaimer" as to efficacy cannot generally overcome an outright fraudulent claim. Example, "This may cure cancer*" "*This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease."

    Still a violation, based upon the initial statement.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    Correct, but it is still a misleading statement that could be overcome by also providing a disclaimer that is clear and concise.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    If you're talking about selling bottles of medical quackery, you'd be hard pressed to cite WHO actually "believes" that.

    I doubt many judges would take very kindly to scamming cancer patients, so you can expect a sentence near the maximum.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 2 months ago

    Correct. It's very difficult to prove for a fact that anything causes cancer. Most times they just come up with a correlation between exposure to something and cancer developing. 

    The question would then be who believes it to cause cancer, and why? 

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    If you were Professor Sir Arthur Krudpole FRCS, world-renowned oncologist saying that, it would probably be nearer to a fact than it is being said by you, an ignorant moron!

    But you are, in principle, correct!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    No. But it would mean there is some evidence that it did which is better than nothing.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.