Weekend archives: Brodie Butland: Government Licensure for Personal Trainers

[AndrewLewis]

It's almost like there doesn't exist a perfect solution that solves all problems of a system and that we simply have to choose the one that maximizes benefit and liberties.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Kinda like a, a, a market... maybe a market that's, uh, free. Yeah, a free market.

[Pluripotent]

Kinda like a, a, a market... maybe a market that's, uh, free. Yeah, a free market.

No no, we have to find the solution! The single solution that solves all the problems for everyone! And if you're just some weird fucker that doesn't fit into the prescribed solution, then WTF? Obviously you're the problem. It's like the Procrustean bed. If you don't fit the bed, well.. sorry about that. That's the only bed we have. Obviously there's something wrong with you! So, if you're too short, we need to stretch you out on the rack, or if you're too tall, then we just need to chop off your legs a little. Not to worry! Everyone fits the bed eventually!

[Scaldrew]

Kinda like a, a, a market... maybe a market that's, uh, free. Yeah, a free market.

But then how will cronies get to regulate people's lives to make money off the books? I mean, I like what you're proposing, but it seems to me like this "solution" would mostly favour those who want to make their own mistakes and learn from them, not the people who want to make more money? Furthermore, don't you remember, like, the nineteenth century and, like, slavery? Is it ok if I end every sentence with a question mark, thereby communicating I'm talking with an upwards inflection? Like how teenage girls talk? Don't you think people should get to tell other people what to do at gunpoint, Rip?

[LimieJosh]

And the worst part? Because of principles of agency deference, whatever the agency says is very likely to go if you were to challenge their findings in a court of law. (Back in 2014 I spoke about agency deference in the context of dietetics at the SSCA conference, but it's just as true for this area as well.) So unless you can get the legislature to put the genie back in the bottle, the agency decisions will become practically unreviewable by courts.

In my field, there is a pretty famous Supreme Court decision from the 60s that sided with the FDA, over ruling two lower court decisions, largely on the basis that the FDA are the experts and so should be allowed to interpret the act that gives them jurisdiction however they feel is right to do so.

[Brodie Butland]

In my field, there is a pretty famous Supreme Court decision from the 60s that sided with the FDA, over ruling two lower court decisions, largely on the basis that the FDA are the experts and so should be allowed to interpret the act that gives them jurisdiction however they feel is right to do so.

For anyone interested in this area, google "Chevron deference." A lot has been written on it, and it explains why it is so hard to challenge an agency decision. The doctrine has been walked back a little bit since the 1980s, but it still is very much in force. Though I am curious whether Gorsuch will be able to bargain for some chipping away at it in future SCOTUS decisions.