Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 58
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    32,768
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gophers_4life View Post
    Throw some molecules in a pill, see if they have some kind of effect that’s marketable, then cram it through approvals. Deal with side effects later.

    I think we can pass on those “treatments”.
    Doesn't work like that. Though you describe how it would work in 2-land, minus the "cram it through approvals" part. There are no approvals there.


  2. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gophers_4life View Post
    Throw some molecules in a pill, see if they have some kind of effect that’s marketable, then cram it through approvals. Deal with side effects later.

    I think we can pass on those “treatments”.
    Haha. I like the character you’ve created. How do you plan on developing your character? I’d suggest a twist like finding God or something.

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    Were you aiming that at S2? I know that you have developed yourself some S2DS. I am for less regulations- sensible ones.

    Care to comment on the idea or just taking pot shots?
    I did comment on your idea and I thought it was pretty clear what I was saying. But Iíll be more direct. I think itís an asinine idea coming from someone who likes to pretend heís anything other than a big government when I like the idea, small government when I donít, guy. That is you BGA.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    31,059
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    You donít know sh!t about pharmaceutical R&D
    bubbles could learn a few things from him. Went to a large hospital pharmacy yesterday to get a scrip from the pharmacist. Because of a large project I did for the CEO and knowing all the people in the pharmacy, I thought there would be no problem. bottled said so. Anyway, they said I had to have a scrip from a MD, that pharmacists can't write scrips. He also said, "you know that!" I silently agreed and smiled. So I gave him the scrip from the surgeon and he gladly filled it. Funny how that worked out. Oh, and I stopped by a Walmart and they wouldn't write a scrip for me either, but I already had the percocet from the hospital.
    Kingdom Warriors

  5. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by God View Post
    These companies have an obligation to maximize returns for their shareholders.....
    That's just fine ... if you're selling jetski's.

  6. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    Doesn't work like that.
    Doesn't it??? How many new drugs are actually helpful, when considering all the side effects??

    Most of the "engineered molecules" that humans have come up with, that were actually decently helpful to people, were discovered long ago. Those patents have run out, and they're generic or OTC at this point. But gotta keep feeding the beast .... so just start making s___ up and paying off doctors to prescribe it. That's my view of big pharma.

  7. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    You donít know sh!t about pharmaceutical R&D
    You do??? LOL

  8. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gophers_4life View Post
    Doesn't it??? How many new drugs are actually helpful, when considering all the side effects??

    Most of the "engineered molecules" that humans have come up with, that were actually decently helpful to people, were discovered long ago. Those patents have run out, and they're generic or OTC at this point. But gotta keep feeding the beast .... so just start making s___ up and paying off doctors to prescribe it. That's my view of big pharma.
    You really don't understand the biologics and pharam industries and the cutting edge therapies that have been invented and commercialized in the last 10 years for multiple sclerosis, oncology and numerous areas.

  9. #24

    Default

    Remember when the ACA was going to lower the cost of health insurance?

    Here's a great idea - we should let the same people that came up with that legislation figure out how to lower the price of prescription drugs...

  10. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Remember when the ACA was going to lower the cost of health insurance?
    It never was, not sure why you're making that up.

  11. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    You really don't understand the biologics and pharam industries and the cutting edge therapies that have been invented and commercialized in the last 10 years for multiple sclerosis, oncology and numerous areas.
    Yep, you see commercials on TV pushing pills of MS, oncology, etc. all the time. Those are the big sellers!

    That type of research easily can -- and should be -- left up to universities, funded by grants from the NIH.

  12. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GopherJake View Post
    I did comment on your idea and I thought it was pretty clear what I was saying. But I’ll be more direct. I think it’s an asinine idea coming from someone who likes to pretend he’s anything other than a big government when I like the idea, small government when I don’t, guy. That is you BGA.
    Big Government Addict is probably the funniest (and most spot-on) nickname ever created on this forum.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    32,768
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gophers_4life View Post
    Doesn't it??? How many new drugs are actually helpful, when considering all the side effects??

    Most of the "engineered molecules" that humans have come up with, that were actually decently helpful to people, were discovered long ago. Those patents have run out, and they're generic or OTC at this point. But gotta keep feeding the beast .... so just start making s___ up and paying off doctors to prescribe it. That's my view of big pharma.
    Most new drugs that actually make it to market have benefits that far outweigh their side effects. They undergo years of trials for safety and efficacy. They are not "thrown together." Obviously there are exceptions. And the above does not always mean that the prices they charge are justified.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    32,768
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gophers_4life View Post
    Yep, you see commercials on TV pushing pills of MS, oncology, etc. all the time. Those are the big sellers!

    That type of research easily can -- and should be -- left up to universities, funded by grants from the NIH.
    Nothing is stopping academic research in these areas. It's not a binary choice.

  15. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    Nothing is stopping academic research in these areas. It's not a binary choice.
    Come on now. You really believe that big pharma, with the gobs of money they spend for politician control, aren’t actively trying to reduce NIH funding for new drugs??? Please

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •