Here You Go: Example #2034 Of ARMED THUGS
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives

Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2019-11-10 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Health Reform , 230 references Ignore this thread
Here You Go: Example #2034 Of ARMED THUGS
[Comments enabled]

This pair of thieves -- the adults -- ought to be in prison.

Right now.

They are stealing from you and I.  They demand to do so at gunpoint.

Trikafta took three decades to develop. Scientists first isolated the genetic defect that causes cystic fibrosis in 1989. Vertex, which developed the treatment, has set a high price tag for Trikafta, at $311,000. But a treatment that can extend life expectancy for cystic fibrosis patients by decades, while also improving the quality of life for my daughter and patients like her, is still worthwhile even at that price.

It's not $311,000 once, it's $311,000 per year, forever.

I assure you that neither she or her daughter have that kind of money.  Her daughter is five.  If she lives to 80 she will steal $23 million dollars from others in order to live to 80 and have this medication.  Of course that's pie-in-the-sky bull****; there are no long-term studies on any of these molecules, and while a 10-20% improvement in airflow into the lungs is very impressive whether that's permanent and what other bad things may come are both undetermined.

But let's assume the best, for the moment.

The bottom line remains simple: Nobody has the right to steal $23 million from anyone, ever, period, and those who do deserve prison, the gallows -- or both.

Those who try to steal $23 by force often discover, quite lawfully, that the answer to such a demand is "bang."

So why do we tolerate someone trying to steal $23 million by parading around cute children as their weapons that are shoved in your face.

Don't get me wrong -- I feel very badly for anyone with a chronic disease like this and there are, sometimes "treatments" developed.  We don't know what the long-term side effects are of them because they haven't been around long enough to know, but that they produce benefit right now isn't the question.

The question is whether the current model of medicine, which institutionalizes extortion and theft at gunpoint from others such that your health "insurance" costs $10,000+ a year can be defended or whether those who advocate for that level of theft from you, especially when they use cute children as props for their schemes, should be free to roam among us or ought to be charged with felony child abuse and locked up -- or simply told "No" or perhaps something even more-forceful -- like "**** you."

There are answers to these problems that don't involve such types of theft but notice how none of the cute children paraders are interested in those.  That's because they're thieves and don't give a wet crap about how they get what they want, just like any other thief.

One of those potential solutions is to publicly fund this sort of research instead of allowing people to do what they do now, which is to piggyback on NIH (publicly-funded) primary studies and then steal all the money from when they refine that primary work forward.

Global pharmaceutical R&D spending was roughly $200 billion last year.  Drugs discovered for one benefit all with the same condition, no matter where they live.  Therefore there is utterly no reason for the United States to spend one penny more than our ratable portion of this based on our population, since, we are all told, there is no person who is worth more than another.

We are about 5% of global population; 5% of $200 billion is $10 billion.

Fine.  Fund that out of the Federal Budget; it's about 2/3rds of 1% of Medicare and Medicaid spending today.

Every other nation is then expected to kick in their piece.  If they don't, no drugs for them -- at all.  This isn't a negotiation; fork it up or get nothing, ever, period, and we'll enforce that at gunpoint if we have to.  We spend $700 billion a year buying weapons, delivery systems and people -- you either pay your share or we'll blow up any attempt to circumvent the blackballing of your nation's access to pharmaceuticals.

The exchange on this is that by paying your fair share of R&D based on population there are no patents on pharmaceuticals anywhere in the world; all molecules are publicly published as are the trial results, anyone can make them and sell them, anyone can cross-ship them between nations as they wish, and now we have competition so the price falls to that of reproduction plus a modest profit around 10% since R&D has been publicly paid for and there is no reason to set prices like this.

I know, you'll claim I'm a communist.

Nope.

I simply refuse to let this evil bitch and her husband steal $23 million from Americans so the ****ing Chinese and Indians, along with damn near everyone else can have the ******n drug for nearly free, exactly as occurred with Sovaldi.

I'm willing to go to war over this right now and you should be too because if this crap is not stopped by 2024 the Federal Government's budget will collapse -- and that's a fact.

Go to responses (registration required to post)
 



 
Comments.......
User: Not logged on
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
User Info Here You Go: Example #2034 Of ARMED THUGS in forum [Market-Ticker]
Supertruckertom
Posts: 2914
Incept: 2010-11-07

USA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Pay for the R&D with a percentage of the profits from legalized, regulated, recreational drugs.

Get high with a purpose.

It is for the children.

----------
Preparing to go Hunting.
Augeries
Posts: 23
Incept: 2019-09-26

"North of Boston" whatever that means
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
So you're saying we should make a global initiative to fund medical research. Whoever pays in, gets the benefits. And if a country aquires/uses these benefits without paying in we should embargo/bomb them.

That is so over-the-top and crazy it will probably work. Count me in.

One question for you @Tickerguy, will private medical research be banned? How do we stop organizations from just funding themselves behind closed doors and then selling product. Just a flat ban on patents/copyrights for medical stuff?
Tickerguy
Posts: 160437
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Augeries -- You can't ban someone from cooking up **** in their kitchen. But you can refuse to recognize any patents or copyrights on medically-related things, which does the same thing effectively, since there is no profit motive.

And when I said "bomb", I meant it. And not just for new discoveries. If a nation doesn't put in their piece of it they literally cannot use ANY of the childhood vaccines or basic antibiotics -- if they do, they get NUKED.

If your spawn is so ******ned special that you deserve to be able to STEAL AT ANY LEVEL, TENS OF MILLIONS OVER SAID CHILD'S LIFE, AT GUNPOINT, then by God we're going to put a stop to that **** because that road is one we cannot travel as a civilized society without a whole lot of people deciding they're not going to allow it and then your cute little 5 year old is going to get cut up, shoved in the oven and the oven set to "CLEAN".

----------
Winding it down.

Thorvold
Posts: 268
Incept: 2013-09-12

NY
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
"Vertex...has set a high price..."

These are some of the people who set that high price and reported recent annual compensation from Vertex:

Jeffrey M. Leiden
Chairman, President & CEO
$18,799,147
Amit Sachdev
EVP & Chief Regulatory Officer
$5,678,261
Stuart A. Arbuckle
EVP & Chief Commercial Officer
$5,347,092

Poverty leads to stress and reduced life expectancy. Impoverishment of millions by the medical industry and our complicit government is particularly egregious.
Dji
Posts: 1360
Incept: 2009-04-21

Ponzi world 3rd rock from the sun
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I simply refuse to let this evil bitch and her husband steal $23 million from Americans

Kristan Hawkins has 2 kids with cystic fibrosis she wants to steal 46 million.

I say Hey Fat-ass Kristan GFY

----------
Don't be a bag holder-Me

What goes up Must come Down- Alan Parsons Project
Tickerguy
Posts: 160437
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Meh @Thorvold -- the idea of attacking executive compensation is standard leftist bull**** -- and it IS bull****, because even if you ended it tomorrow it would do nothing.

You can find the poster child right here. Take ALL of that compensation and you'd buy ONE kid's lifetime supply, plus about a quarter of another kid.

That's pointless. It's like confiscating ALL of WalMart CEO's pay and "giving" it to the employees. They'd wind up getting something like a dollar a week; it's ****ING POINTLESS.

I really, really tire of horse**** "answers" like this that do exactly ZERO to address the issue.

In the case of medically-related things such as this the pair of sperm spewer and cum dumpster ought to be HANGED for their public assertion that their spawn is ENTITLED to steal the cost of the treatment from others, and THE DECISION, WHICH WAS THEIRS ALONE, TO INJECT THEMSELVES INTO THE POLITICAL PROCESS.

Doing so for the purpose of theft to benefit said child is not only reprehensible it ought to be punished with public capital punishment and the desecration of their bodies afterward. This sort of horse**** is EXACTLY why we have the sort of problem we do in this regard when it comes to medical care and many other areas of the nation related to figuring out how to balance what people need with what we have available in resource.

Never mind intentionally producing children with this disorder, the risk of which CAN, today, be detected before two people decide to screw and reproduce, and the infliction of that sort of NASTY way to die on said kids. Those CHILDREN should EAT THEIR PARENTS for that ****.

The simple fact of the matter is that there are many conditions that affect a relatively small population of people. CF, for example, impacts about 1,000 new patients a year in the US. That's a tiny number; there are some 70,000 worldwide living with it right now. For reasons not well-understood genetically it is more-common (by about a factor of 3) in Caucasians than other races. It is genetic, which means that a woman and man CAN be tested for the genetic carrier of it. About 1 in 30 Caucasians carry the mutation. If you are heterozygote for it and mate with another person who also is the odds of your child winding up homozygotic for it, and thus being ****ed, are 1 in 4. But even if not, there's a 50% chance your children will be carriers. Only 1 in 4 is free of both copies of the bad gene.

What this means is that if you're a carrier that can be detected. If you choose to have sex with another carrier you are intentionally taking the risk of producing a child, at 1 in 4 odds, that will die from this.

If you intend to reproduce you CAN be tested for this and IF you are heterozygotic for it THEN ONLY **** THOSE WHO ARE NOT. Your risk of producing a CF child then becomes ZERO.

These two either knew or could have known. The specific gene was discovered in 1989. Today genetic testing is quite cheap, yet these two now have a FIVE YEAR OLD, which means they screwed and produced her roughly fifteen years after we knew what caused the disease and both of them were capable of discovering they were carriers and either didn't give a **** or knew and did it anyway.

Now, having done that, they demand that you and I pay $23 million over the space of a "normal life" for their decision to not spend a couple hundred bucks on a genetic test FIRST.

**** that **** -- that's armed robbery writ large and I'm tired of this crap.

----------
Winding it down.

Keenan
Posts: 358
Incept: 2013-01-11

Western PA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I know, you'll claim I'm a communist.

On the contrary, if, as so many trumpet that "healthcare is a human right", in this globalized world, your proposal is worthy of further discussion, and strikes me as a better use of power than regime change wars.

I know someone dealing with PPMS and, as with virtually all therapies a breakthrough funded publicly seems about to go private:

snip from: https://news.ohsu.edu/2019/04/18/study-s....

Researchers found that the treatment in mice not only triggered myelin repair, but they also measured substantial motor improvements in mice treated with the compound.

The mouse showed close to a full recovery, Scanlan said.

Scientists say they are confident that the compound will translate from mice to people. To that end, OHSU has licensed the technology to Llama Therapeutics Inc., a biotechnology company in San Carlos, California. Llama is working to advance these molecules toward human clinical trials in MS and other diseases.
Frat
Posts: 2089
Incept: 2009-07-15

NKY
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Karl, your feelings on this mirror mine, but in a more general sense: this is how I feel EVERY TIME I hear someone spewing bull**** about "Universal Health Care." So... you feel you're entitled to someone else's money? Whose labor/wealth do you feel it is OK to steal to cover YOUR health expenses?

Actually I expand this view to anyone screaming about cancelling all student debt. Yes, it was bull**** that you cannot discharge that debt via bankruptcy, and even more bull**** that you were led to believe your ****ty Art History major with Gender Studies minor would allow you to live the life of luxury you feel you're owed. Tough ****. Mrs. Frat and I are still paying on (thankfully, our LAST one) her student loan for her nursing degree... which she graduated with in *2004*! Unlike today's bull****, however, her student loans were taken out from a local bank, her grades examined, her life looked at, and she was determined to be worth the risk of that loan. And NOW you little bastards feel we should pay (because "discharging or cancelling" your debt means SOMEONE takes the hit, most likely taxpayers) for YOURS TOO? **** that noise.

It's the same with healthcare - I'm sorry if you lost the genetic lottery, and no, it's not fair. Know what else isn't fair? Forcing EVERYONE ELSE to pay for it. On that note, since we live in Kentucky, this same kind of thing is going to come up with the teachers' state pension plan. Bevin might be tone deaf when it comes to feelings (and does say some really, REALLY stupid ****), but he was trying to fix the problem that democrat governors have ignored for 40 years: teachers' pensions. Now that we've got the son of a previous crook governor, it's going to go back to "You'll get what you were promised!" How, precisely? Because if you think you're going to steal my retirement to fund theirs, well, I know which one I'm going to choose. Sigh, I've ranted enough - ALL of this crap is theft, and I'm sick of it.

----------
We're ****ed. Where's Henry Bowman when you need him?
Tsherry
Posts: 2210
Incept: 2008-12-09

Spokane WA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
So, is "The Purge", both movies and the TV series, a warning, or a how-to manual?

I'm coming to believe that it is the latter.


----------
Omne mendacium est.
Raftermanfmj
Posts: 4849
Incept: 2010-09-06

USA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
This BS is precisely why I'm downsizing to live in a van, and getting in better shape. Ran the Pittsburgh marathon this year, and am going for the ultra in Dallas in December.

I'm plugged in to the left perhaps more than most here, and I can assert with *certainty* there is, and will be, no reasoning with that mindset nor common ground. Was arguing about 'man made climate change' and was banned on several forums. When I brought up solar output variations, sunspot cycles, and past cooling/warming phases had people tell me that those didn't happen and had been disproven/were not scientific fact. I kid you not.

When you have half the population not able or willing to think in simple logic, and an elite that wants nothing more than to continue their skimming and extortion rackets the only conclusion is, collapse is on the menu.

Read 'Enjoy the Decline' years ago and still have it on the Kindle I think. Going to have to re-read it this week I think.

And now, off to the treadmill; Sunday runday!

----------
I have never wished to cater to the crowd; for what I know they do not approve, and what they approve I do not know. - Epicurus
Oderint dum metuant - Caligula & Police State USA
Amused
Posts: 417
Incept: 2019-04-22

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I would argue if we could have proper deflationary pressures in the medical cartel, none of these lifetime treatments that cost 23 million would remain that high for very long.

Industrialization, automation, mass production always drive the price of goods and services downward, the only exception to this is limited commodities where we just are not making any more of them be at land or gold.

I spoke of the Post Scarcity model before, it is not appealing to a lot of people because it means 99% of the current labor becomes surplus, but one of the side effects of the downward pressure on labor and supply is that when the robots finally take over, the prices of even these most expensive treatments should fall to nearly zero.
Bagbalm
Posts: 5860
Incept: 2009-03-19

Just North of Detroit
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
What would be an actual reasonable price for the treatment to cover production and eventually recover the research costs?
Elkad
Posts: 769
Incept: 2009-09-04

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
30,000 US CF patients.
90% respond to this new drug.
$311,000 a year each.
That's 8.397 BILLION a year.

How much did they spend researching it?
1 billion tops?
Tickerguy
Posts: 160437
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Amused -
Quote:
I would argue if we could have proper deflationary pressures in the medical cartel, none of these lifetime treatments that cost 23 million would remain that high for very long.

Well, no, not in cases like this.

If you don't force some sort of allocation mechanism then for things like CF, which impact only a few people but do so very severely, they never get developed at all.

If you have 30,000 people world-wide with a given condition and it costs a billion dollars to develop it, what's the price? Well, if it has a 10 year course of action then we've got $100 million a year that has to be allocated somehow. Patents eventually run out. Further, a very large percentage of attempts at a given therapy fail entirely and a good part (and sometimes all) of the spending is lost.

The problem is that this drug is ~3,000 a year per-sufferer, provided all 30,000 of them buy it. But if only 20% of the suffering people buy it then the price is 5x as high and if only 5% (e.g. US population percentage) then the price is astronomical; 30x as much. And this assumes the billion dollars is a win; you also have to absorb the losses.

Right now America buys ALL of this R&D, effectively, but everyone else uses it for free. 5% of the population results in more than 50% of the R&D spend, and the reason it is spent is because when you hit the big one here you can bilk everyone for $300,000 a year. If you couldn't force other people to pay NOBODY would have kind of ****ing money and nobody would spend it.

This is just like Provenge. It didn't cure anything. It gave you 4 months more of life, most of the time and cost $100 large. Well that's $300,000 per year of life extended. Except that damn near NOBODY would blow that $100,000 out of their own pocket for 4 months. Ever. And the drug companies know this.

Why should other nations kick in their piece of it? Why not bilk the American?

That's the problem to solve -- the treatment is globally relevant so everyone should have to pay, or nobody has to pay. Well if nobody has to pay then that's fine too except if nobody has to pay then you MUST shut off the cheating, at minimum, which means the price per-user has to be constant no matter where you are in the world. Otherwise you're FORCING one party to pay for someone else's ****.

----------
Winding it down.

Amused
Posts: 417
Incept: 2019-04-22

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Sure, I'm not disagreeing that initial CapEx we are eating the cost on due to our high prices and market manipulation.

I guess my answer to that to make all naions pay in their fair share, it's that we stop taxing ourselves. That solves 1/2 of the problem as far as the research costs, but not the cost of ongoing treatments.

When I can legally walk down to Mexico and buy whatever drug I want and bring them back in without having to lie to customs about what is in my bag, once the downward pressure is applied to the market here, those companies will start to raise their prices globally to account for the cost shift being eliminated.

I don't expect them to do any less R&D as a percentage of their global revenue, and I still expect those miracle million dollar drug may be discovered but you're right,for a while I expect they wouldn't be brought to market because there would be no way to eat the cost for ongoing production in a level world.

But

I think eventually if R&D is still going at the same rates, eventually new techniques for making the million-dollar treatments would cause the cost to fall, it is just there is no pressure to even look to do so now when your target market is only 300 people.

You've made the point before, why spend million researching ways to lower the prices for a drug that only 300 people in the world will ever need?

I think the answer is that it's on the research end if there is to be a tax and subsidy that that is where it should be applied, to bring those costs down, that pressure at National Labs and Universities, be brought to bare, so it's not spending 30 million a year to save one girls life, but it's spending that 30 million on Public R&D to find ways to bring it down because there is no market case or force that ever will.

Right now we are eating it at both ends, because we are overcharging ourselves for drugs and subsidizing the rest of the world's drug cost, and then on top of that, there is no downward pressure to encourage trying to innovative find ways to make them cheaper when they are discovered.

Markets are great things, but I've argued before there at cases where market forces just don't work, and you're right, the answer is not to steal from each other at gunpoint and give to some other guys daughter the 30 million a year in drugs just to keep her alive.

If we are going to accept that some 'socialization' is needed to improve the sectors of society where there can't be Market forces, if we are going to tax ourselves that 30 million it should go in to Public Funding of research for these explicit cases.
Jesjohn94
Posts: 9
Incept: 2019-05-07

Atlanta
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
What other options does this family have living in USA?
Tickerguy
Posts: 160437
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Was the sex involuntary ?

----------
Winding it down.
Ckaminski
Posts: 5675
Incept: 2011-04-08

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
it might not have been, but the birth sure was.
Tickerguy
Posts: 160437
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Ok but that doesn't change any of:

We know what gene it is.

Cheap genetic testing is now available and was before this girl was conceived.

You choose who you marry.

If you AND your partner are BOTH carriers the odds are 1 in 4. If not the odds are ZERO.

Therefore this either is culpable negligence OR they knew the risk and didn't give a ****.

So tell me why such a couple doesn't have to buy insurance against this OR THE KID, IF IT HAPPENS, GETS NOTHING AND THATS JUST TOUGH ****. When Junior turns 18 he or she can sue dear Mom and Dad for the ass****ing they took.

It's far LESS likely than 1 in 4 I will hurt someone if I drive drunk but they'll toss my ass in jail for it.

**** THESE TWO THIEVES.

----------
Winding it down.

Emg
Posts: 449
Incept: 2012-11-20

Canada
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I hate to say it, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that high infant mortality is a good thing. Nature has used it for a billion years to keep defective gene combinations out of the breeding pool, but in the last fifty or so we decided we had to spend vast amounts of money and effort to keep those gene combinations alive.

Yes, it sucks when your kid dies as a result. But if you live in a society where women start having kids in their teens or early twenties, there's plenty of time to have another kid to replace them.

It's only because we now live in a world where women are told they can start having kids in their mid-30s that it's become a potentially genetic-line-ending problem. When you have six kids, having four survive is fine. When you have two kids, having none survive is a big problem.

There was a sob-story in the British media a few months back. I forget the precise details, but there was some kid who had a problem where he'd get an allergic reaction if someone as much as looked at him.

So his parents sent him to school, and--shock!--he had an allergic reaction and died.

The only way that kid would ever have survived is if the entire world had been forced to wear NBC suits around him. The parents themselves would have been much better off if he'd died at two rather than at ten, and so would he. They could then have had another kid who hopefully didn't suffer from the same problem, rather than hope that he survived long enough to have kids of his own and didn't pass it on to them.

It's madness.

We seriously need to go back to the days when boys were sent out into the woods to kill a bear with a pointy stick, and told to either come back with the bear's head or not at all.
Jesjohn94
Posts: 9
Incept: 2019-05-07

Atlanta
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
These people arent the root cause of problems with medical costs. Solve the real problems and this wont matter. This family at least has real medical needs. How much of the trillions we spend is on medical care? We all know there is a risk of antibiotic resistant diseases but no one is trying to solve that problem as the medical scam in place today doesnt let drug companies charge billions. How about the billions charged for statins or the billions made to keep drugs on patent far beyond the original date for no good reason?
Tickerguy
Posts: 160437
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Jesjohn94 -
Quote:
This family at least has real medical needs.

This family has self-inflicted medical needs.

It was entirely possible for them to determine prior to getting pregnant with their daughter that they had a 1 in 4 chance of having a kid with CF.

They either didn't know or did know and didn't give a ****.

20+ years ago this was not true, but it's true today. We now KNOW what causes CF. We also can test for it. If both you and your spouse are carriers then it is 1 in 4. If EITHER of you are not carriers then the risk is ZERO.

A self-inflicted "need" is no different than a couple, where one is HIV+, deciding to butt**** and then expecting OTHERS to pay for the treatment for formerly non-HIV+ person.

That is the core issue here. We are being told we must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a VOLUNTARILY created condition. This didn't use to be the case 30+ years ago, but TODAY it IS the case.

----------
Winding it down.
Oliver1655
Posts: 212
Incept: 2012-08-02

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Spot on analysis and article.

The correct reply is .......

You win a Chrysler ! smiley

and

You win a Chrysler ! smiley

and

You win a Chrysler ! smiley


The tree of liberty has died and is being fed into the chipper on a daily basis.
Vernonb
Posts: 2449
Incept: 2009-06-03

East of Sheol
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Used to work for many of these orphan drug companies over 20 yrs ago. The only people benefiting financially are the execs with their fat salaries and stock bonus plans.

The real *******s turn themselves into a non-profit to really waste money. I can tell you funds for such research are not in the research.

Just got sick of it all and said no more. When you find out that people were being dosed with unknown levels of drugs and patient deaths are above the statical norm it is time to say no more. And the FDA really doesn't give a damn.

I left when they attempted to have me sign off and pretend to calculate dose amounts years after adminstration.

Being a study participant is putting your own life in the hands of incompetence.


Got to love how thieves say it's always worth it on someone
Else's dime.

----------
"Mass intelligence does not mean intelligent masses."
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ