Do you think pharmaceutical companies should own food companies ?

Sure. I tend to believe people should have free choice, and also be responsible and accountable for their own actions, rather than corporations/government do it for their own good.

This "It's for your own good". "What about the children" and "national security" attitude the government uses to expand it's power is what has gotten us into this mess, in the first place.

I think the big drug companies do provide most of the money to oppose legalizing pot. As someone else said, here in California where we have medical marijuana, the dispensaries are opposing legalization because it would hurt their business also. But most politicians oppose it just for political purposes. Nobody wants to be seen as 'soft on drugs', so even just admitting that our marijuana laws do more damage than the marijuana itself is a no-no. You hear this from retired politicians who fought tooth-and-nail against drugs when they were in office. There's also some 'soft intolerance' built into the issue--remember pot was originally made illegal partly because it was seen as a drug used mostly by blacks and Hispanics.

No. Food and medicine are still two different things. Food can have medicinal purposes like Vitamin C but medicine should not be used as food. And you do not want food regulated by the FDA, which is controlled by the pharmaceutical companies.

Should we let the fox guard the hen house?

This is only the top of the iceburg.

How about the proposed mothers act, which would require pregnant and new mothers to take antidepressants if their doctor prescribes them? Many of these drugs are toxic to an infant. Follow link to see pictures of the children who have died because their mothers took paxil while pregnant.

No they should not. I would see it as a conflict of interest and completely unethical.

To Galaxy Girl: By your premise you would also think it fine for a tobacco company to be in the business of producing lung cancer medication.

They help create a disease and then they make even more money treating the disease ... I call this unscrupulous and there should be legislation to stop it!

Well first off I refuse to classify High Fructose Corn Syrup as a "food." I know exactly how that's made and to be honest it's much closer to the process for manufacturing a drug or chemical than making food. It's not a drug company producing it that I have a problem with, it's putting something like that in all of our food (HFCS is in almost EVERYTHING, even stuff you wouldn't expect to be sweetened like Bran Flakes) without informing the general population of its risks and side effects I have a problem with. There are so many chemicals and engineered products in our food anymore it should have MSDS data sheets and Side Effects & Interactions info on the box. But ultimately it's up to the consumer to determine what they will and won't consume. I refuse to eat/drink anything containing HFCS if I can help it...maybe if enough people did that they would stop adding it to everything, but I'm not holding my breath.

In a free country, yes. Why not?

Hence a buyer needs to stay informed and always beware.

High fructose corn syrup has been implicated in diabetes, insulin resistance and fatty liver disease. Fructose is metabolized much more quickly than table sugar thereby causing increased triglyceride synthesis and fat storage.

With that said, there are many processed foods and synthesized chemicals in foods that contribute to health disorders.

scientifically HFCS is cheap to produce so the FDA doesn't care how deadly it is.

there used to be protections from large companies buying up smaller ones, eliminating and/or cornering markets. There is too much Franken-science going on with GMO foods. my answer ..... NO