Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: unsettled on 2 Nov 2006 20:13 lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message > news:40570$454a2bd8$4fe71d7$24986(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... > >>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> >> >>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>news:d38ed$454a0d9f$49ecfab$24139(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>> >>> >>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:11089$45495c2e$4fe7052$20335(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Eeyore wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>unsettled wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>In article <4546F871.E7AD0EB5(a)hotmail.com>, >>>>>>>>>Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>unsettled wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Also compare the availability of goods and services in Europe >>>>>>>>>>>and other places in the world to ours. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>What !!!! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Are you being funny ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>No, he's not. There are a lot of Europeans who come to the US >>>>>>>>>to shop. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>There have been many flights bringing Europeans to shop at >>>>>>>>the Mall of America in Minnesota. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Cite ? >>>>>> >>>>>>Stuff it, fool. I've been there and talked with some of >>>>>>the people. I've also shopped at Gurnee Mills which is >>>>>>a one story affair with a mile long zig-zag mall under >>>>>>roof. I first ran into them there, later at Mall of >>>>>>America. >>>>>> >>>>>>Mall of America is so large, for your information, that >>>>>>there's an amusement park in the center, including a >>>>>>roller coaster. It set itself up to be an international >>>>>>destination. You don't suppose that a setup like that >>>>>>could be supported solely by sales to the Twin Cities >>>>>>and Minnesota folks within an easy drive, do you? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>And yet despite all that, you still only have a handful of anecdotes >>>> >>>>>from a few travellers who have done it. Useless. If you're going to >>>> >>>>>claim "there have been many flights...", you better supply data on it, >>>>>otherwise you're being hoodwinked by the very same thing you chastise >>>>>other people for--seeing only the evidence they want to see. >>>> >>>>Bwahahahaha. Trying to create a hard science where there is none? >>> >>>Hey, I wasn't the one that made the unsupportable claim, based on a few >>>anecdotes. >> >>BS, you do it constantly. > > > Cite three examples, please. Just read your article just prior to this one, and the two following it. They're full of unsupportable claims coming from you, most of them made-up by you to promote your anti-American views.
From: Eeyore on 2 Nov 2006 20:15 unsettled wrote: > You're making stuff up once again. I saw nothing made up. > Don't you ever get > tired of having to invent facts to support your anti- > American views? Are you saying it's anti-American to report that Iraqis want US troops to leave their country ? If so - why ? Graham
From: unsettled on 2 Nov 2006 20:37 Eeyore wrote: > > unsettled wrote: > > >>Eeyore wrote: >> >>>unsettled wrote: >>> >>>>Eeyore wrote: >>>> >>>>>MooseFET wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Eeyore wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "MooseFET" <kensmith(a)rahul.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>They seem to be doing better than the US with a lot less money for >>>>>>>>>health care. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Could it be the drug costs that make this difference? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Why do so may US medical practicioners prescibe expensive drugs when cheaper >>>>>>>generics are just as good for mnay things ? >>>>>> >>>>>>Imagine that a drug company comes up with a new drug called >>>>>>"Nopainatall". They send their field people out to talk to doctors an >>>>>>sell them on the advantages of Nopainatall. They have studies and >>>>>>graphs and all sorts of useful literature that calls the drug only by >>>>>>its brand name not the chemical name. This is where doctors get a lot >>>>>>of their information today. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>And of course some of these new drugs are just replacements for old one ( where a >>>>>patent has expired ) so a to get a new patent on the new ones and keep the prices >>>>>high. >>>> >>>>You obviously don't understand how patent applications work. >>> >>> >>>I understand perfectly. >> >>If you actually uunderstand then you knew you were lying when you >>called new drugs "just replacements for old one." >> >>You can't get a patent for a new widget that's simply a replacement >>for an old one. > > > This is *exactly* what they're doing by modifying the chemical formula when making 'Drug > B'.. Without a patented drug to treat condition X they'd suffer a loss of income when > Drug A's patent runs out. > > Drug B will of course be promoted as a 'better' version of Drug A. Review, for example, beta blockers, old and new. The high priced Coreg which is under patent does indeed outperform the older beta blockers by a country mile. In fact, it has been shown to sometimes reverse heart failure. That's something never before achieved. Compare Celebrex to other Cox II inhibitors, like Viox, for example. Progress is actually relentless. It isn't simply recycling variations on older themes. The drug manufacturers do have huge teams of researchers and expensive labs. Of course they have huge profits as well, more than they should if we lived in a reasonable world. But there's no simplistic rip off where the new patents are concerned.
From: unsettled on 2 Nov 2006 20:41 Eeyore wrote: > > unsettled wrote: > > >>You're making stuff up once again. > > > I saw nothing made up. You made up a "fact" that the poll was scientific. >>Don't you ever get >>tired of having to invent facts to support your anti- >>American views? > Are you saying it's anti-American to report that Iraqis want US troops to leave > their country ? > If so - why ? It is anti-American to keep claiming that when you have no facts to support the idea, only a "report" from suspect sources. It is the overall thrust of your posts that gives any reasonable reader the idea that you're anti-American.
From: MooseFET on 2 Nov 2006 21:23
unsettled wrote: > Eeyore wrote: > > [....] > > And of course some of these new drugs are just replacements for old one ( where a > > patent has expired ) so a to get a new patent on the new ones and keep the prices > > high. > > You obviously don't understand how patent applications work. He is right. The new drug can't be the exact same chemical as the old one but it needn't be better or significantly different in its mode of action. He did as "replacements". > > > >>After a rah-rah peptalk, the doctor is all fired up about the > >>advantages of the "new drug" > >>http://www.mindfully.org/Industry/2005/Cheerleader-Drug-Sales28nov05.htm > >> > >> > >>>It artificially inflates costs. That's not allowed in the NHS. > >> > >>My insurance company provides the doctors with a list of generics that > >>they suggest be substituted. My doctor (at least) puts words to the > >>effect of "or generic" into the computer when setting up a new drug for > >>me. As a result I have a lower co-pay on my drugs. > > > > > > Very sensible. > > > > Over here NICE specifies recommended treatments on the NHS. > > http://www.nice.org.uk/ > > > > Graham > > > > |