mr. chairman , i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
mr. chairman , those who support this bill argue that food manufacturers should be sheltered from lawsuits claiming that their products cause someone to become obese . 
i can understand their reasoning , because there is a sense of personal responsibility involved . 
but what my amendment would do is to limit that language so it is not so broad as to include what are called `` dietary supplements , '' because some of these products are not like food . 
they are not reviewed by the fda . 
they are not even subject to fda intervention , unless they can show real harm being done , and we have had examples of ephedra and andro that have been withdrawn from the market because they caused serious injury , or dhea , which is a steroid precursor . 
the bill authors would say that they want to protect from lawsuits when people say they have gained weight or there is obesity or health conditions associated with a person 's weight gain or obesity . 
imagine you are overweight and suffer from high blood pressure because you are overweight , and you decide to try losing weight by taking a dietary supplement product . 
but what you do not know is that the product you are taking contains a potentially dangerous stimulant ; and instead of helping you lose weight , the product causes your blood pressure to go even higher and makes you really sick . 
if this bill passed , you could not sue the dietary supplement company even if the product did not have a warning label ; even if the companies received thousands of adverse event reports that they have kept hidden ; even if a professional medical society and experts have concluded that the product is dangerous ; and even if the company has never tested the product to see if it is safe . 
removing the threat of liability for dangerous dietary supplements would be a grave mistake . 
despite evidence that supplements containing ephedra are dangerous and have caused heart attacks or strokes or death , it took the fda years to act to take higher-dose ephedra supplements off the market . 
in the meantime , some dietary supplement companies stopped making ephedra products because of the mounting litigation . 
without having to take responsibility for their products , manufacturers could be free to sell dangerous substances to the public . 
the threat of a lawsuit could have a real impact here , and it is not one simply of personal responsibility . 
we are seeing now a new generation of weight-loss products marketed as dietary supplements that have stimulant ingredients that may be similar to ephedra . 
according to a recent study , these new products may raise blood pressure and heart rate , making them potentially dangerous particularly to those people who already have heart disease . 
however , it is perfectly legal for a dietary supplement manufacturer to sell these products without testing to see if they are safe and without warning consumers of potential adverse effects . 
this bill , as it is drafted , is a license for reckless behavior by dietary supplement manufacturers . 
i do not know if that is what the authors intended ; i tend to think they probably did not look at that issue . 
it allows them to sell dangerous products to americans without ever having to take responsibility in a court of law , and our amendment would close the dietary supplement loophole . 
i urge my colleagues to support it . 
mr. chairman , i reserve the balance of my time . 
