This is not about the Blackberry. A conspiracy-theory laden report in the BBC tells how the US sweetener (corn?) industry manipulated the FDA to crush competition:

Legal advice and contact with the FDA had led Harvey to believe that the extract from the berry would be allowed under the classification “generally recognised as safe”. Having been eaten for centuries in Africa, without anecdotal reports of problems, it could be assumed not to be harmful.

But the FDA decided it would be considered as an additive which required several years more testing. In the poor economic climate of 1974, this could not be funded and the company folded.

“I was in shock,” says Harvey. “We were on very good terms with the FDA and enjoyed their full support. There was no sign of any problem. Without any opportunity to know what the concern was and who raised it, and to respond to it – they just banned the product.”

One might also suspect Harvey was naive, or there was a general lack of planning on his part, or his financial backers threw in the towel. However, other aspects of the story suggest industrial interference played a role.

A car was spotted driving back and forwards past Miralin’s offices, slowing down as someone took photographs of the building. Then, late one night, Harvey was followed as he drove home.

“I sped up, then he sped up. I pulled into this dirt access road and turned off my lights and the other car went past the end of the road at a very high speed. Clearly I was being monitored.”

Finally, at the end of that summer, Harvey and Emery arrived back at the office after dinner to find they were being burgled. The burglars escaped and were never found, but the main FDA file was left lying open on the floor.

A few weeks later the FDA, which had previously been very supportive, wrote to Miralin, effectively banning its product. No co-incidence, according to Don Emery.

“I honestly believe that we were done in by some industrial interest that did not want to see us survive because we were a threat. Somebody influenced somebody in the FDA to cause the regulatory action that was taken against us.”

All questions of “if you suspected foul play why didn’t you plan to defend yourself” aside, I have to wonder why it was only a product marketed for the US. Barclays was a backer, so surely they were aware of market options in Europe, let alone Asia.

The BBC highlights a study that shows humans can actually sense danger with smell, assuming prior experience/exposure:

The 12 volunteers were exposed to two “grassy” odours, and none of them could accurately tell the difference between them.

After they were shocked while smelling one of them, they developed the ability to discriminate between the two.

Do they mean marijuana? Was this really a study to get people with addictions to steer clear? Imagine the impact to the cocaine market if convicted addicts were conditioned so the smell would turn them away.

Ethical questions abound, but it also makes me think about the discussions I often have with risk managers. They do not smell danger while the technical security engineers do, and thus a discussion erupts about who is right and what is real. In the end, the primary issue I see with the study above is that it shows pre-conditioning response as opposed to the ability to actually smell danger itself.

You might be amused by a story about a someone who just can not bear the risks of wildlife:

The case was brought by the exasperated beekeeper after a year of trying vainly to protect his beehives.

For a while, he kept the animal away by buying a generator, lighting up the area, and playing thumping Serbian turbo-folk music.

But when the generator ran out of power and the music fell silent, the bear was back and the honey was gone once more.

Is this case not like suing a landlord for the behavior of a tenant?

The beekeeper should have sued whomever aided and abetted this bear, rather than the organization that provided it habitat, no?

Wonder if anyone will sue Bear Stearns for eating up all the money in Wall Street.

The “ran out of power” argument is interesting too. Perhaps a low-power music device that does not need a generator would have made more sense? Then again, it sounds like Serbian turbo-folk music might need a lot of power, even if running from a USB stick.