[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Trump - BlueHeronDruid - Jan 25, 2020 - 12:50am
 
Trump Lies - R_P - Jan 25, 2020 - 12:09am
 
Impeachment Time: - steeler - Jan 24, 2020 - 9:27pm
 
Name My Band - Red_Dragon - Jan 24, 2020 - 7:46pm
 
Ask the Libertarian - Red_Dragon - Jan 24, 2020 - 7:32pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Coaxial - Jan 24, 2020 - 7:29pm
 
RP Windows Desktop Notification Applet - gvajda - Jan 24, 2020 - 5:54pm
 
Way Cool Video - Red_Dragon - Jan 24, 2020 - 5:22pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - jarro - Jan 24, 2020 - 5:17pm
 
Automotive Lust - Red_Dragon - Jan 24, 2020 - 5:09pm
 
We need some new car names - jahgirl8 - Jan 24, 2020 - 4:00pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jan 24, 2020 - 3:11pm
 
how do you feel right now? - Antigone - Jan 24, 2020 - 2:38pm
 
Iran - jahgirl8 - Jan 24, 2020 - 2:32pm
 
THREE WORDS - jahgirl8 - Jan 24, 2020 - 2:27pm
 
A motivational quote - jahgirl8 - Jan 24, 2020 - 2:23pm
 
Interesting Art - Proclivities - Jan 24, 2020 - 1:36pm
 
Things that make you cautiously optimistic - Proclivities - Jan 24, 2020 - 1:30pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - SeriousLee - Jan 24, 2020 - 1:04pm
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - Jan 24, 2020 - 11:23am
 
Economix - R_P - Jan 24, 2020 - 10:49am
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - Red_Dragon - Jan 24, 2020 - 10:10am
 
Acting - R_P - Jan 24, 2020 - 9:55am
 
Graphs, Charts & Maps - black321 - Jan 24, 2020 - 9:44am
 
Strange & Cool Music - Proclivities - Jan 24, 2020 - 9:32am
 
Animal Resistance - cc_rider - Jan 24, 2020 - 9:15am
 
Recommended documentaries - cc_rider - Jan 24, 2020 - 9:05am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jan 24, 2020 - 8:45am
 
What are you listening to now? - sirdroseph - Jan 24, 2020 - 7:18am
 
Documentaries - Proclivities - Jan 24, 2020 - 6:39am
 
Florida - miamizsun - Jan 24, 2020 - 5:31am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - sirdroseph - Jan 24, 2020 - 2:48am
 
Croatia - EdSe - Jan 24, 2020 - 12:06am
 
Bad News / Good News - haresfur - Jan 23, 2020 - 4:11pm
 
Music News - miamizsun - Jan 23, 2020 - 3:28pm
 
WTF??!! - Antigone - Jan 23, 2020 - 3:04pm
 
The war on funk is over! - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2020 - 12:59pm
 
Jazz - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2020 - 12:41pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2020 - 12:23pm
 
punk? hip-hop? metal? noise? garage? - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2020 - 12:21pm
 
SFW & Gluttony Pants - Proclivities - Jan 23, 2020 - 9:23am
 
songs that ROCK! - sirdroseph - Jan 23, 2020 - 7:05am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - Jan 23, 2020 - 3:53am
 
Your app for Mac needs an update - gtufano - Jan 22, 2020 - 11:36pm
 
RP and Sonos - jarro - Jan 22, 2020 - 5:04pm
 
The Obituary Page - buddy - Jan 22, 2020 - 2:56pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - buddy - Jan 22, 2020 - 2:55pm
 
What Do You Want From RP? - buddy - Jan 22, 2020 - 2:53pm
 
Movie Quote - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 22, 2020 - 10:32am
 
A Sad Day, Indeed - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 22, 2020 - 7:09am
 
Goodnight everyone! - Proclivities - Jan 22, 2020 - 4:06am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - Egctheow - Jan 22, 2020 - 1:14am
 
Is there any DOG news out there? - BlueHeronDruid - Jan 21, 2020 - 11:33pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Jan 21, 2020 - 10:37pm
 
ONE WORD - buddy - Jan 21, 2020 - 9:24pm
 
Democratic Party - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 21, 2020 - 9:07pm
 
Internet Addict?? - BlueHeronDruid - Jan 21, 2020 - 7:09pm
 
The Global War on Terror - R_P - Jan 21, 2020 - 3:54pm
 
What Did You See Today? - oldviolin - Jan 21, 2020 - 2:34pm
 
Tech & Science - R_P - Jan 21, 2020 - 2:26pm
 
A History of Violence - R_P - Jan 21, 2020 - 12:09pm
 
TWO WORDS - oldviolin - Jan 21, 2020 - 10:51am
 
Baseball, anyone? - kcar - Jan 21, 2020 - 7:52am
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - buddy - Jan 21, 2020 - 7:38am
 
Classical Music - R_P - Jan 21, 2020 - 12:07am
 
Poetry Forum - ScottN - Jan 20, 2020 - 7:41pm
 
HALF A WORLD - oldviolin - Jan 20, 2020 - 6:34pm
 
Get the Quote - oldviolin - Jan 20, 2020 - 6:00pm
 
FOUR WORDS - oldviolin - Jan 20, 2020 - 5:06pm
 
Live Music - R_P - Jan 20, 2020 - 4:55pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jan 20, 2020 - 3:01pm
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - oldviolin - Jan 20, 2020 - 2:56pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Jan 20, 2020 - 2:46pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Coaxial - Jan 20, 2020 - 11:45am
 
Surfing! - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 20, 2020 - 9:21am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Business as Usual Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Post to this Topic
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 14, 2014 - 10:19am

 RichardPrins wrote:
Medicine is just for those who can afford it
Why don't pharmaceutical companies develop drugs for the poor?
 
 

Now this is the type of thing that needs to be addressed in healthcare reform.  As long as healthcare cost are astronomical, it doesn't even matter who is covered by what, the premiums or bill for subsidies are going to always be outrageous.


R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Mar 14, 2014 - 9:33am

Medicine is just for those who can afford it
Why don't pharmaceutical companies develop drugs for the poor?

Medicine is expensive, sure, but have you ever asked yourself why? The pharmaceutical industry will have you believe that without high prices, we don't get new drugs. The reality is, with high prices we don't always get new drugs we need either. If a new drug is developed and nobody can afford it, where is the benefit from it?

Limiting access to the products of pharmaceutical innovation is nothing new to me. I've seen it for the last 15 years as a doctor with Medecins Sans Frontieres. In one of my first field missions in Uganda, I watched young children with malaria die because the best treatment to give them - artemisinin - was not available and I was forced to use less effective drugs. It was tragic to witness.

I was outraged at remarks made in December, but widely reported only in late January, by the CEO of German pharmaceutical company Bayer, on one of the company's cancer drugs. CEO Marijn Dekkers said that Bayer "didn't develop this product for the Indian market; we developed it for Western patients who could afford it." I was shocked at his candour: Dekkers' comments sum up everything that is wrong with the pharmaceutical research and development (R&D) industry today.

As it currently stands, patents create long monopolies, which allow pharmaceutical companies to charge the maximum price they can without fear of competition. Patients and health providers are put in a near-impossible predicament: Either they pay the market rate, or they wait until the maximum profits have been squeezed out of a drug and its patent expires. Waiting in many cases means dying.

The current system also means some drugs just don't get developed at all; there are some diseases for which there have been no new drugs developed for half a century or more. It's because - while the need is there - these drugs just aren't profitable for the pharmaceutical companies to do research on them. (...)


R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Mar 4, 2014 - 9:16am

 RichardPrins wrote: 

via
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Feb 20, 2014 - 8:21pm


Mugro

Mugro Avatar

Location: 1,000 shades of green (Ireland)


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 4:30pm

 RichardPrins wrote:
Journalism Fail: All the Sources in Stealth Jet Story Are PAID to Praise the Plane
The only people ‘60 Minutes’ bothered to ask about a HUGE government program are—wait for it—government employees

 
{#Lol}
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 4:27pm

Journalism Fail: All the Sources in Stealth Jet Story Are PAID to Praise the Plane
The only people ‘60 Minutes’ bothered to ask about a HUGE government program are—wait for it—government employees
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 11:50am

 RichardPrins wrote:

There are other meanings of fyt. {#Mrgreen}

 

Flaming Youth Tutorial?
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 11:35am

 RichardPrins wrote:

There are other meanings of fyt. {#Mrgreen}

 
Fine Young Tannables. I loved that band.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 9:17am

 Proclivities wrote:

I thought you would've written "CYFC"  (changed your font color)

 
You're right, but I was doing it on the cheap.

Aye, we all get what we pay for  ... {#Wink}
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 9:09am

 kurtster wrote:

My bad.  Shouda used fyf ... fixed your font ...

but I made my point.  Carry on.

 
I thought you would've written "CYFC"  (changed your font color)
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 8:27am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

fyt: Fixed Your Typo. I got that you were attacking the messenger by making the type green, but fyt (to me) means you've creatively edited the post to add some wry humor. I couldn't find any edits. That is all.

 
My bad.  Shouda used fyf ... fixed your font ...

but I made my point.  Carry on.
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 7:27am

 RichardPrins wrote:

There are other meanings of fyt. {#Mrgreen}

 
...as well. Also.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 7:25am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
fyt: Fixed Your Typo. I got that you were attacking the messenger by making the type green, but fyt (to me) means you've creatively edited the post to add some wry humor. I couldn't find any edits. That is all.
 
There are other meanings of fyt. {#Mrgreen}
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 7:21am

 kurtster wrote:

Just my opinion.  Was it offensive to you ?

 
fyt: Fixed Your Typo. I got that you were attacking the messenger by making the type green, but fyt (to me) means you've creatively edited the post to add some wry humor. I couldn't find any edits. That is all.


aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 19, 2014 - 7:00am

Somebody apparently doesn't understand the concept of Content Curation.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 18, 2014 - 6:22pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

wtf

 
Just my opinion.  Was it offensive to you ?

seems to be endless / relentless cutting and pasting with little or no comment, not unlike another who did much the same.  Maybe more diverse in subject matter and with respectful font, but endless.

and this thread seemed to present the opportunity to point out an irony.  Business as usual indeed.  Much of it pointless.

Maybe I should have responded with this, but it would be shot down as a rightwing political reaction, and then it could be interpreted as if I was defending the program in his post that he was illustrating.  Which would not be the case.

When all one does is cut and paste, it has to be assumed at some point the poster believes in and agrees with what they are pasting.  And that is because there is no accompanying comments, almost exclusively.  So I will put up my c / p response to his c / p.  But remember, I am not defending the program, I have to assume he is attacking, because he says nothing.




ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 18, 2014 - 9:29am

 kurtster wrote:


fyt

 
wtf
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 18, 2014 - 9:24am

 RichardPrins wrote:
(...)

The F-35, given the amount of money thrown at it, doubtless has some improvements over planes such as the F-15 and F-18. But at a price tag of at least $400 billion to purchase the F-35, and $1.45 trillion over the life of the program to operate and maintain them, it has simply become far too prohibitive for the United State to afford, especially in a climate of fiscal austerity.

 

fyt
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Feb 18, 2014 - 9:07am

(...)

The F-35, given the amount of money thrown at it, doubtless has some improvements over planes such as the F-15 and F-18. But at a price tag of at least $400 billion to purchase the F-35, and $1.45 trillion over the life of the program to operate and maintain them, it has simply become far too prohibitive for the United State to afford, especially in a climate of fiscal austerity.

Based on its track record, it’s probably safe to say that the F-35 will soon be a decade behind schedule and $200 billion over budget, even as it’s increasingly rendered irrelevant by improvements in drone technologies. So why are we buying it? Simply because the program is too big to fail. The Air Force, Navy, and Marines are all counting on it. Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin has distributed its subcontractors across the USA, making it exceedingly difficult for Congress to cut the program without hurting jobs in virtually every Congressional district. Indeed, in an awesome display of chutzpah, you can go to the Lockheed Martin website to see how much your state is involved in building the F-35. Clicking on the “economic impact map,” I see that for the State of Pennsylvania, for example, the F-35 creates 759 jobs and an economic impact of nearly $51 million.

For the DoD, the F-35 may have ridden off the rails, but for Lockheed Martin the F-35 will continue to soar into the stratosphere as a major money-maker for decades to come. In the battle between DoD program managers and Lockheed Martin, the winner and “top gun” is as obvious as it is depressing. Score another victory for Lockheed Martin!  But please avert your eyes as America itself goes down in flames.


helenofjoy

helenofjoy Avatar

Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Gender: Female


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 - 5:28am

 RichardPrins wrote:
Rachel Aviv: The Scientist Who Took on a Leading Herbicide Manufacturer : The New Yorker

(...) Syngenta denied repeated requests for interviews, but Ann Bryan, its senior manager for external communications, told me in an e-mail that some of the studies I was citing were unreliable or unsound. When I mentioned a recent paper in the American Journal of Medical Genetics, which showed associations between a mother’s exposure to atrazine and the likelihood that her son will have an abnormally small penis, undescended testes, or a deformity of the urethra—defects that have increased in the past several decades—she said that the study had been “reviewed by independent scientists, who found numerous flaws.” She recommended that I speak with the author of the review, David Schwartz, a neuroscientist, who works for Innovative Science Solutions, a consulting firm that specializes in “product defense” and strategies that “give you the power to put your best data forward.” Schwartz told me that epidemiological studies can’t eliminate confounding variables or make claims about causation. “We’ve been incredibly misled by this type of study,” he said.

In 2012, in its settlement of the class-action suits, Syngenta agreed to pay a hundred and five million dollars to reimburse more than a thousand water systems for the cost of filtering atrazine from drinking water, but the company denies all wrongdoing. Bryan told me that “atrazine does not and, in fact, cannot cause adverse health effects at any level that people would ever be exposed to in the real-world environment.” She wrote that she was “troubled by a suggestion that we have ever tried to discredit anyone. Our focus has always been on communicating the science and setting the record straight.” She noted that “virtually every well-known brand, or even well-known issue, has a communications program behind it. Atrazine’s no different.”

Last August, Hayes put his experiments on hold. He said that his fees for animal care had risen eightfold in a decade, and that he couldn’t afford to maintain his research program. He accused the university of charging him more than other researchers in his department; in response, the director of the office of laboratory-animal care sent detailed charts illustrating that he is charged according to standard campus-wide rates, which have increased for most researchers in recent years. In an online Forbes op-ed, Jon Entine, a journalist who is listed in Syngenta’s records as a supportive “third party,” accused Hayes of being attached to conspiracy theories, and of leading the “international regulatory community on a wild goose chase,” which “borders on criminal.”

By late November, Hayes’s lab had resumed work. He was using private grants to support his students rather than to pay outstanding fees, and the lab was accumulating debt. Two days before Thanksgiving, Hayes and his students discussed their holiday plans. He was wearing an oversized orange sweatshirt, gym shorts, and running shoes, and a former student, Diana Salazar Guerrero, was eating fries that another student had left on the table. Hayes encouraged her to come to his Thanksgiving dinner and to move into the bedroom of his son, who is now a student at Oberlin. Guerrero had just put down half the deposit on a new apartment, but Hayes was disturbed by her description of her new roommate. “Are you sure you can trust him?” he asked.

Hayes had just returned from Mar del Plata, Argentina. He had flown fifteen hours and driven two hundred and fifty miles to give a thirty-minute lecture on atrazine. Guerrero said, “Sometimes I’m just, like, ‘Why don’t you let it go, Tyrone? It’s been fifteen years! How do you have the energy for this?’ ” With more scientists documenting the risks of atrazine, she assumed he’d be inclined to move on. “Originally, it was just this crazy guy at Berkeley, and you can throw the Berserkley thing at anyone,” she said. “But now the tide is turning.”

In a recent paper in the Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Hayes and twenty-one other scientists applied the criteria of Sir Austin Bradford Hill, who, in 1965, outlined the conditions necessary for a causal relationship, to atrazine studies across different vertebrate classes. They argued that independent lines of evidence consistently showed that atrazine disrupts male reproductive development. Hayes’s lab was working on two more studies that explore how atrazine affects the sexual behavior of frogs. When I asked him what he would do if the E.P.A., which is conducting another review of the safety of atrazine this year, were to ban the herbicide, he joked, “I’d probably get depressed again.”

Not long ago, Hayes saw a description of himself on Wikipedia that he found disrespectful, and he wasn’t sure whether it was an attack by Syngenta or whether there were simply members of the public who thought poorly of him. He felt deflated when he remembered the arguments he’d had with Syngenta-funded pundits. “It’s one thing if you go after me because you have a philosophical disagreement with my science or if you think I’m raising alarm where there shouldn’t be any,” he said. “But they didn’t even have their own opinions. Someone was paying them to take a position.” He wondered if there was something inherently insane about the act of whistle-blowing; maybe only crazy people persisted. He was ready for a fight, but he seemed to be searching for his opponent.

One of his first graduate students, Nigel Noriega, who runs an organization devoted to conserving tropical forests, told me that he was still recovering from the experience of his atrazine research, a decade before. He had come to see science as a rigid culture, “its own club, an élite society,” Noriega said. “And Tyrone didn’t conform to the social aspects of being a scientist.” Noriega worried that the public had little understanding of the context that gives rise to scientific findings. “It is not helpful to anyone to assume that scientists are authoritative,” he said. “A good scientist spends his whole career questioning his own facts. One of the most dangerous things you can do is believe.”



 
I listened to this piece too and was appalled but not surprised.  Do we honestly thing anyone out to make the big bucks - the really big bucks -  gives a damn about truth?
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next