OT - when politics gets personal
 

On Feb 27, 7:49*am, jeff wrote:


should have read the thread before responding to califbill... i don't
know the answers (hell, i don't know the questions), but
profit-incentive as driving reasonable healthcare isn't on my solution list.

My questions were directed toward califbill.

I haven't found anything to disagree with in your contributions to
this thread.....or most others, for that matter.

Well, not yet, anyway. :)

giles

OT - when politics gets personal
 

jeff wrote:
CalifBill wrote:


But those nice life extending drugs, and devices are developed because
of the profit motive. Last job I had was part of a Bio-med company
developing a cure for stage 1 incontinence in women. Investors poured
$45,000,000 in to the company. Problem was bad management, and we
failed in clinicals and they may have recovered 3-4 million in the
end. How many groups would bet $45 million if not a prospect of
gaining 4-5x that amount in the end?


so...i reckon they don't have that stuff in canada, uk, france?

Potential side effects include heart attack, stroke, liver failure,
acne, erectile dysfunction, and anal leakage. If you experience any of
these symptoms consult your doctor.

I'm convinced that many, if not most, of these "life extending" drugs
are at best useless and at worst harmful -- especially the ones that are
touted in TV commercials.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

OT - when politics gets personal
 

On Feb 27, 5:30*am, jeff wrote:
CalifBill wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
t...
Bill McKee wrote:
"Giles" wrote in message
....
On Feb 24, 1:12 pm, "Bill McKee" wrote:

...ways to lower costs. Number one is increase the supply of
doctors....
Hm.....

So, the number of doctors in America has been falling precipitously in
recent decades.....and nobody told me? * * * * :(

g.
always the last to know.

Reply:
Population growth and very controlled numbers of prospective doctors
admitted to med school. *And if you can not make enough money to justify
the $200k+ to get through doctor school, there will be even less doctors
per person in the country.
there's an easy remedy on the cost of med school tuition...and i suspect
you can figure it out. look at what we do for (to) teachers...etc. yours
is a non-argument for continuing the insane profit driven health care
system we are condemned to have in this country for the middle and lower
socio-economic class (i.e., majority). *there has to be a better way.. i'm
all for a tax, a restructure, something that assures reasonable,
affordable health care for our citizens.

jeff

But those nice life extending drugs, and devices are developed because of
the profit motive. *Last job I had was part of a Bio-med company developing
a cure for stage 1 incontinence in women. *Investors poured $45,000,000 in
to the company. *Problem was bad management, and we failed in clinicals and
they may have recovered 3-4 million in the end. *How many groups would bet
$45 million if not a prospect of gaining 4-5x that amount in the end?

so...i reckon they don't have that stuff in canada, uk, france?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ah, but it is my understanding that most or ALL Lipitor, comes from
Ireland. A plant in Galway. I wonder if that is safe? ;+))
And who but thousands of capitalist stockholders and the finance
office of the Peoples Liberation Army, (newly empowered to make
campaign contributions by the US Supreme Court) would have come up
with the idea of raising leprecon clones to keep the labor costs down.
And if the odd clone doesn't work out? Tastes like chicken. Nuff said?

Dave
..

OT - when politics gets personal
 

On Feb 27, 8:49*am, rw wrote:
jeff wrote:
CalifBill wrote:

But those nice life extending drugs, and devices are developed because
of the profit motive. *Last job I had was part of a Bio-med company
developing a cure for stage 1 incontinence in women. *Investors poured
$45,000,000 in to the company. *Problem was bad management, and we
failed in clinicals and they may have recovered 3-4 million in the
end. *How many groups would bet $45 million if not a prospect of
gaining 4-5x that amount in the end?

so...i reckon they don't have that stuff in canada, uk, france?

Potential side effects include heart attack, stroke, liver failure,
acne, erectile dysfunction, and anal leakage. If you experience any of
these symptoms consult your doctor.

I'm convinced that many, if not most, of these "life extending" drugs
are at best useless and at worst harmful -- especially the ones that are
touted in TV commercials.


Correlation (let alone causation) might be difficult to prove......but
it would be fun research. The trouble is coming up with funding; it
ain't likely the networks or the pharmaceutical company are gonna pony
up a few billion dollars for this one.

Meanwhile, I suspect there's a great deal more merit to the
proposition than anyone involved is likely to admit to. Without going
into a great deal of detail (which would take months to do justice to
and bore everyone to death) suffice it to say that public confidence
in the efficacy and safety of most modern drugs is more a matter of
faith, based on indoctrination, than of anything else.

giles

OT - when politics gets personal
 

On Feb 26, 11:01*pm, "CalifBill" wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message

...



Bill McKee wrote:
"Giles" wrote in message
....
On Feb 24, 1:12 pm, "Bill McKee" wrote:

...ways to lower costs. Number one is increase the supply of
doctors....

Hm.....

So, the number of doctors in America has been falling precipitously in
recent decades.....and nobody told me? * * * * :(

g.
always the last to know.

Reply:
Population growth and very controlled numbers of prospective doctors
admitted to med school. *And if you can not make enough money to justify
the $200k+ to get through doctor school, there will be even less doctors
per person in the country.

there's an easy remedy on the cost of med school tuition...and i suspect
you can figure it out. look at what we do for (to) teachers...etc. yours
is a non-argument for continuing the insane profit driven health care
system we are condemned to have in this country for the middle and lower
socio-economic class (i.e., majority). *there has to be a better way. i'm
all for a tax, a restructure, something that assures reasonable,
affordable health care for our citizens.

jeff

Yes, make doctor school a free school for qualified people that agree to
spend a few years taking care of people for a decent professional salary for
a few years, before setting up private shop and getting what the traffic
will bear.

That's the way it works if you want to spend 4 yrs. as a military doc.

cheers

oz

OT - when politics gets personal
 

In article ,
"CalifBill" writes:

"jeff" wrote in message
...
Bill McKee wrote:
"Giles" wrote in message
...
On Feb 24, 1:12 pm, "Bill McKee" wrote:

...ways to lower costs. Number one is increase the supply of
doctors....

Hm.....

So, the number of doctors in America has been falling precipitously in
recent decades.....and nobody told me? :(

g.
always the last to know.


Reply:
Population growth and very controlled numbers of prospective doctors
admitted to med school. And if you can not make enough money to justify
the $200k+ to get through doctor school, there will be even less doctors
per person in the country.

there's an easy remedy on the cost of med school tuition...and i suspect
you can figure it out. look at what we do for (to) teachers...etc. yours
is a non-argument for continuing the insane profit driven health care
system we are condemned to have in this country for the middle and lower
socio-economic class (i.e., majority). there has to be a better way. i'm
all for a tax, a restructure, something that assures reasonable,
affordable health care for our citizens.

jeff

But those nice life extending drugs, and devices are developed because of
the profit motive. Last job I had was part of a Bio-med company developing
a cure for stage 1 incontinence in women. Investors poured $45,000,000 in
to the company. Problem was bad management, and we failed in clinicals and
they may have recovered 3-4 million in the end. How many groups would bet
$45 million if not a prospect of gaining 4-5x that amount in the end?




Yes, developing drugs is expensive (although much of the R&D is done
at universities using NIH funding). However, the amount pharma spends
on advertizing greatly dwarfs that actually spent on drug development.
The financial risks is start-ups, as appears to be this case, is almost
certainly no worse than that of hi-tech companies. So cry me no
crocodile tears on how cutting pharma profits will hurt drug development.


__________________________________________________ ______________________
Craig A. Gullixson
Technical Support Manager INTERNET:
National Solar Observatory/Sac. Peak PHONE: (575) 434-7065
Sunspot, NM 88349 USA FAX: (575) 434-7029

OT - when politics gets personal
 

On Mar 1, 10:38*am, (Craig Gullixson) wrote:


Yes, developing drugs is expensive

For a multitude of reasons, not least of which (by any means) is that
big pharma has, for the past century or so, deliberately made it
so.....but that's a discussion for another time and audience.

(although much of the R&D is done
at universities using NIH funding).

True, bearing in mind that in this context, "universities" should be
understood to include medical schools, teaching hospitals, and a host
of other public and private educational institutions, as well as
public and private NON-educational institutions, corporations, etc.
all of which spend and/or receive the bulk of their costs/revenues/
expenditures/donations/outflow/inflow or what have you, on or from one
or another thing or entity with an uncomfortably incestuous
relationship with......wait for it!......NIH......and/or big
pharma.....same thing, actually.

Fisher? VWR? Labconco? Bio-Rad? Kimex? Coors? Santa Cruz?
Millipore? (a few thousand others?) All the same thing. Where does
the money come from and where does it go?

However, the amount pharma spends
on advertizing greatly dwarfs that actually spent on drug development.

True. Without qualification.

The financial risks is start-ups, as appears to be this case, is almost
certainly no worse than that of hi-tech companies. *So cry me no
crocodile tears on how cutting pharma profits will hurt drug development.

You will never make the self-described erstwhile capitalists believe
it, but the first best thing to do in promoting drug development is
gutting big pharma profits.

__________________________________________________ ______________________
Craig A. Gullixson
Technical Support Manager * * * * * * * INTERNET:
National Solar Observatory/Sac. Peak * *PHONE: (575) 434-7065
Sunspot, NM 88349 USA * * * * * * * * * FAX: (575) 434-7029- Hide quoted text -

Um......hm.....
__________________________________________________ _______________________
giles
Astrolabialist (fourth degree).
Wetspot, Curdistan, I****younot.