Dechristo Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 Hillary is proposing that health care be mandatory, like car insurance -- I believe car insurance is mandatory for liability only. Will this mean I will be allowed to sue the snot out of whoever gives me a cold? viral Quote
Fairweather Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 FW is an expert in a vast landscape of subjects about which he has no personal experience. It is his specialty, almost sixth sense really. From welfare to warfare, he is our own one stop go to guy for judgements by proxy on a universe of tough issues requiring a man with tough-love values. He is like a lone high beam piercing the fog of liberalism on the windy mountain road of our difficult times. He knows, instinctively, that the way back is the way foreward. ...and you are an expert on exactly what? Battery/transformer sales? Pot. Kettle. Black. Quote
JayB Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 The perils of fluoridation, for starters... Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2007 Author Posted September 19, 2007 It does matter quite a bit actually, since medical technologies and pharmaceuticals that were once exotic, extremely costly, and rare become far less so over time if they are effective and offer sufficient advantages over the alternatives that pre-dated them. The other trend is for a constant influx of new, expensive medications. Why can't the latest and greatest from 2-3 years ago be used to treat patients with less insurance? In many cases we're talking about marginal differences in efficacy, but a huge increase in cost. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2007 Author Posted September 19, 2007 FW is an expert in a vast landscape of subjects about which he has no personal experience. It is his specialty, almost sixth sense really. From welfare to warfare, he is our own one stop go to guy for judgements by proxy on a universe of tough issues requiring a man with tough-love values. He is like a lone high beam piercing the fog of liberalism on the windy mountain road of our difficult times. He knows, instinctively, that the way back is the way foreward. ...and you are an expert on exactly what? Battery/transformer sales? Pot. Kettle. Black. Trashtalkingcunt is a jack of no trades and jackass of all spray. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 (edited) ...and you are an expert on exactly what? Battery/transformer sales? I take that back. You're pretty good at 'random'. Edited September 19, 2007 by tvashtarkatena Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 Trashtalkingcunt is a jack of no trades and jackass of all spray. KKK, did you just attempt a play on words? Quote
mattp Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 It does matter quite a bit actually, since medical technologies and pharmaceuticals that were once exotic, extremely costly, and rare become far less so over time if they are effective and offer sufficient advantages over the alternatives that pre-dated them. Destroy the mechanisms responsible for bringing new medical technologies and pharmaceuticals to market and you eliminate not only the costly treatments available to the few in the near-term, but more importantly, to everyone else in the long-term. I think it is more accurate to say that most major advances in medicine have come from coodinated and mostly government efforts. Here is a relevant article in the Journal of the American Medical Association Medical Marvels: The 100 Greatest Advances in Medicine ... The authors assert that unbridled market forces restrict discovery and dissemination of knowledge I don't subsrcribe, so I cant actually call it up, but the synopsis sounds like it is consistent with other things I've read on this topic. Most advances in public health also come from government efforts. For example: who wiped out Polio or TB? Hint: not the free market. Market competition generates new medicine for erectile disfunction, or ever more clinics with MRI machines that are used over and over again when the result of the tests most often have no affect on the treatment prescribed but the tests cost thousands of dollars. Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 It does matter quite a bit actually, since medical technologies and pharmaceuticals that were once exotic, extremely costly, and rare become far less so over time if they are effective and offer sufficient advantages over the alternatives that pre-dated them. The other trend is for a constant influx of new, expensive medications. Why can't the latest and greatest from 2-3 years ago be used to treat patients with less insurance? In many cases we're talking about marginal differences in efficacy, but a huge increase in cost. This is a completely pragmatic approach. In essence, it is the rationing of available healthcare and make total sense. Quote
JayB Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 It does matter quite a bit actually, since medical technologies and pharmaceuticals that were once exotic, extremely costly, and rare become far less so over time if they are effective and offer sufficient advantages over the alternatives that pre-dated them. Destroy the mechanisms responsible for bringing new medical technologies and pharmaceuticals to market and you eliminate not only the costly treatments available to the few in the near-term, but more importantly, to everyone else in the long-term. I think it is more accurate to say that most major advances in medicine have come from coodinated and mostly government efforts. Here is a relevant article in the Journal of the American Medical Association Medical Marvels: The 100 Greatest Advances in Medicine ... The authors assert that unbridled market forces restrict discovery and dissemination of knowledge I don't subsrcribe, so I cant actually call it up, but the synopsis sounds like it is consistent with other things I've read on this topic. Most advances in public health also come from government efforts. For example: who wiped out Polio or TB? Hint: not the free market. Market competition generates new medicine for erectile disfunction, or ever more clinics with MRI machines that are used over and over again when the result of the tests most often have no affect on the treatment prescribed but the tests cost thousands of dollars. There's a one-page review of the book here: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1555657 Here's a list of new drugs approved for 2007: * Fenofibrate; For the treatment of hyperlipidemia, dyslipidemia and hypertriglyceridemia; LifeCycle Pharma; Approved August 2007 * Letairis (ambrisentan); For the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension; Gilead; Approved June 2007 * Soliris (eculizumab); For the treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria; Alexion Pharm; Approved March 2007 * Tekturna (aliskiren); For the treatment of hypertension; Novartis Pharms; Approved March 2007 Dental/Maxillofacial Surgery No approvals recorded to date in this area. Dermatology/Plastic Surgery * Altabax (retapamulin); For the treatment of impetigo due to Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes; Glaxo; Approved April 2007 * Extina (ketoconazole); For the treatment of seborrheic dermatitis; Stiefel; Approved June 2007 * Xyzal (levocetirizine dihydrochloride); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and urticaria; UCB Inc.; Approved May 2007 Endocrinology * Evamist (estradiol); For the treatment of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms due to menopause; Vivus; Approved July 2007 * Fenofibrate; For the treatment of hyperlipidemia, dyslipidemia and hypertriglyceridemia; LifeCycle Pharma; Approved August 2007 * Somatuline Depot (lanreotide acetate); For the treatment of acromegaly; Beaufour Ipsen; Approved August 2007[*] * Supprelin LA (histrelin acetate); For the treatment of central precocious puberty; Indevis Pharms; Approved May 2007 Gastroenterology No approvals recorded to date in this area. Hematology * Soliris (eculizumab); For the treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria; Alexion Pharm; Approved March 2007 Immunology/Infectious Diseases * Altabax (retapamulin); For the treatment of impetigo due to Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes; Glaxo; Approved April 2007 * AzaSite (azithromycin); For the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis; InSite Vision; Approved April 2007 * Extina (ketoconazole); For the treatment of seborrheic dermatitis; Stiefel; Approved June 2007 * Selzentry (maraviroc); For the treatment of CCR5-tropic HIV-1; Pfizer; Approved August 2007 * Veramyst (fluticasone furoate); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis; GlaxoSmithKline; Approved April 2007 * Xyzal (levocetirizine dihydrochloride); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and urticaria; UCB Inc.; Approved May 2007 Musculoskeletal * Evista (raloxifene hydrochloride); For the treatment/prevention of osteoporosis and reduction of breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women; Eli Lilly; Approved September 2007[*] * Reclast (zoledronic acid); For the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis; Novartis; Approved August 2007 * Reclast (zoledronic acid); For the treatment of Paget's disease; Novartis Pharms; Approved April 2007 * Somatuline Depot (lanreotide acetate); For the treatment of acromegaly; Beaufour Ipsen; Approved August 2007[*] Nephrology/Urology * Torisel (temsirolimus); For the treatment of renal cell carcinoma; Wyeth Pharms; Approved May 2007 Neurology * Exelon (rivastigmine tartrate); For the treatment of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease-related dementia; Novartis Pharms; Approved July 2007 * Neupro (rotigotine); For the treatment of Parkinson's disease; Schwarz; Approved May 2007 * Nuvigil (armodafinil); For the treatment of excessive sleepiness; Cephalon; Approved June 2007 * Vyvanse (Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate); For the treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; New River; Approved February 2007 Obstetrics/Gynecology * Evamist (estradiol); For the treatment of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms due to menopause; Vivus; Approved July 2007 * Evista (raloxifene hydrochloride); For the treatment/prevention of osteoporosis and reduction of breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women; Eli Lilly; Approved September 2007[*] * Reclast (zoledronic acid); For the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis; Novartis; Approved August 2007 Oncology * Evista (raloxifene hydrochloride); For the treatment/prevention of osteoporosis and reduction of breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women; Eli Lilly; Approved September 2007[*] * Torisel (temsirolimus); For the treatment of renal cell carcinoma; Wyeth Pharms; Approved May 2007 * Tykerb (lapatinib); For the treatment of breast cancer; GlaxoSmithKline; Approved March 2007 Ophthalmology * AzaSite (azithromycin); For the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis; InSite Vision; Approved April 2007 Otolaryngology * Veramyst (fluticasone furoate); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis; GlaxoSmithKline; Approved April 2007 * Xyzal (levocetirizine dihydrochloride); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and urticaria; UCB Inc.; Approved May 2007 Pediatrics/Neonatology * Altabax (retapamulin); For the treatment of impetigo due to Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes; Glaxo; Approved April 2007 * Supprelin LA (histrelin acetate); For the treatment of central precocious puberty; Indevis Pharms; Approved May 2007 * Veramyst (fluticasone furoate); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis; GlaxoSmithKline; Approved April 2007 * Vyvanse (Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate); For the treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; New River; Approved February 2007 * Xyzal (levocetirizine dihydrochloride); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and urticaria; UCB Inc.; Approved May 2007 * Zingo (lidocaine hydrochloride monohydrate); For local analgesia prior to venipuncture or peripheral intravenous cannulation, in children 3 to 18 years of age; Anesiva; Approved August 2007 Pharmacology/Toxicology No approvals recorded to date in this area. Psychiatry/Psychology * Vyvanse (Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate); For the treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; New River; Approved February 2007 Pulmonary/Respiratory Diseases * Letairis (ambrisentan); For the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension; Gilead; Approved June 2007 * Xyzal (levocetirizine dihydrochloride); For the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and urticaria; UCB Inc.; Approved May 2007 Rheumatology No approvals recorded to date in this area. Trauma/Emergency Medicine No approvals recorded to date in this area. 2006 Cardiology/Vascular Diseases * Ranexa (ranolazine); For the treatment of chronic angina in patients failing first-line therapy; CV Therapeutics; Approved January 2006 Dental/Maxillofacial Surgery No approvals recorded to date in this area. Dermatology/Plastic Surgery * Desonate (desonide); For the treatment of atopic dermatitis; Dow Pharm; Approved October 2006 * Verdeso (desonide); For the treatment of atopic dermatitis; Connetics; Approved September 2006 Endocrinology * Elestrin (estradiol gel); For the treatment of vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause; BioSante; Approved December 2006 * Januvia(sitagliptin phosphate); For the treatment of type II diabetes; Merck; Approved October 2006 Gastroenterology * Amitiza (lubiprostone); For the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation; Sucampo/Takeda; Approved January 2006 Hematology * Dacogen (decitabine); For the treatment of both treatment-na�ve and -experienced Myelodysplastic Syndromes; MGI Pharma; Approved May 2006 Immunology/Infectious Diseases * Eraxis (anidulafungin); For the treatment of Candida fungal infections; Pfizer; Approved February 2006 * Gardasil (quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, 18) recombinant vaccine); For the prevention of cervical cancer associated with human papillomavirus; Merck; Approved June 2006 * Noxafil (posaconazole); For the treatment of fungal infections; Schering; Approved in September 2006 * Prezista (darunavir); For the treatment of treatment-resistant HIV infections; Tibotec; Approved June 2006 * Rotateq (rotavirus vaccine, live oral pentavalent); For the prevention of gastroenteritis associated with rotavirus infections in infants; Merck; Approved February 2006 * Tyzeka (telbivudine); For the treatment of hepatitis B virus; Idenix Pharma; Approved October 2006 * Veregen (kunecatechins); For the treatment of external genital and perianal warts; Medigene; Approved October 2006 Musculoskeletal No approvals recorded to date in this area. Nephrology/Urology No approvals recorded to date in this area. Neurology * Invega (paliperidone); For the treatment of schizophrenia; Janssen LP; Approved December 2006 Obstetrics/Gynecology * Elestrin (estradiol gel); For the treatment of vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause; BioSante; Approved December 2006 Oncology * Gardasil (quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, 18) recombinant vaccine); For the prevention of cervical cancer associated with human papillomavirus; Merck; Approved June 2006 * Sprycel (dasatinib); For the treatment of imatinib-resistant chronic myeloid leukemia; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Approved June 2006 * Sutent (sunitinib); For the treatment of kidney cancer and gastrointestinal stromal tumors; Pfizer; Approved January 2006 * Vectibix (panitumumab); For the treatment of colorectal cancer; Amgen; Approved September 2006 Ophthalmology * Lucentis (ranibizumab); For the treatment of neovascular (wet) age related macular degeneration; Genentech; Approved June 2006 Otolaryngology No approvals recorded to date in this area. Pediatrics/Neonatology * Desonate (desonide); For the treatment of atopic dermatitis; Dow Pharm; Approved October 2006 * Elaprase (idursulfase); For the treatmenr of mucopolysaccharidosis II (Hunter Syndrome); Shire Pharmaceuticals; Approved July 2006 * Myozyme (alglucosidase alfa); For the treatment of Pompe disease (glycogen storage disease type II); Genzyme; Approved April 2006 Pharmacology/Toxicology No approvals recorded to date in this area. Psychiatry/Psychology * Chantix (varenicline); For the treatment of nicotine addiction; Pfizer; Approved May 2006 * Invega (paliperidone); For the treatment of schizophrenia; Janssen LP; Approved December 2006 Pulmonary/Respiratory Diseases * Brovana (arformoterol tartrate); For the treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease; Sepracor; Approved in October 2006 Rheumatology * Elaprase (idursulfase); For the treatmenr of mucopolysaccharidosis II (Hunter Syndrome); Shire Pharmaceuticals; Approved July 2006 Trauma/Emergency Medicine No approvals recorded to date in this area. " http://www.centerwatch.com/patient/drugs/druglist.html Scroll through the list of approved drugs for each of the last 10 years and let me know how well it validates your thesis that the market has hopelessly compromised the process of drug discovery to favor "lifestyle" drugs to the detriment of those suffering from more grave afflictions. I'd be willing to bet that you understand even less about what drives medical innovation in general, and drug discovery in particular - than you do about economics, which is quite something. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 Um...JayB...just provide the link next time so the rest of us don't have to scroll down yet another tome we're never going to bother to wade through. Common courtesy. Jesus. Quote
underworld Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 yes...tons of advancements in all technologies come from government spending. typically millitary spending... Quote
cj001f Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 yeah, because the NIH has nothing to do with funding advancements........ Quote
underworld Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 i don't care what your 'national institute of homos' contributes Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2007 Author Posted September 19, 2007 Yeah, the gov't is responsible for all advances in medicine. Government is the solution to everything! The only, most-efficient, bestest way to get things done, ever!! Quote
cj001f Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 Yeah, the gov't is responsible for all advances in medicine. Government is the solution to everything! The only, most-efficient, bestest way to get things done, ever!! Find me a medical research scientist who received their degree from a school which does not receive substantial federal research grants. The free-market is excells at producing commercial solutions of basic research. Rarely does it produce any of it's own basic research (perhaps the biggest "Private" producer of basic research this century was Bell Labs, the product of a government sanctioned monopoly and the pricing power it had) Quote
Mal_Con Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 A large portion of drug company research is oriented toward making variants of preexisting drugs which can either be patented or which avoid other companies patents. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2007 Author Posted September 19, 2007 A large portion of drug company research is oriented toward making variants of preexisting drugs which can either be patented or which avoid other companies patents. and which have marginal improvements in efficacy or reduced side-effects. which brings back my point about using older drugs when possible as cost-effective alternatives. Quote
cj001f Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 A large portion of drug company research is oriented toward making variants of preexisting drugs which can either be patented or which avoid other companies patents. Goretex ProShell vs. Goretex XCR vs. Goretex keep changing it a little as the patent expires.... Quote
mattp Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Um...JayB...just provide the link next time so the rest of us don't have to scroll down yet another tome we're never going to bother to wade through. Common courtesy. Jesus. Not only that, but he fails to address any of my arguments while calling me ignorant. Does a list of patents refute even the last of at least four basic points I made? No. He doesn't state that those patents, or which ones, were obtained by private companies not funded by government grants. I'd be the first one to admit that I am no expert in this area, but the inept attempt to "rebut" my statements makes me wonder just how much of an expert JayB is, too. Quote
JayB Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Um...JayB...just provide the link next time so the rest of us don't have to scroll down yet another tome we're never going to bother to wade through. Common courtesy. Jesus. Not only that, but he fails to address any of my arguments while calling me ignorant. Does a list of patents refute even the last of at least four basic points I made? No. He doesn't state that those patents, or which ones, were obtained by private companies not funded by government grants. I'd be the first one to admit that I am no expert in this area, but the inept attempt to "rebut" my statements makes me wonder just how much of an expert JayB is, too. Here's the "argument" that I was rebutting: "Market competition generates new medicine for erectile disfunction..." How well does the list of drugs brought to market between 1995-2007 actually jive with the claim that in the absence of government compulsion, the pharmaceutical industry will fritter away valuable research money on trivial maladies and ignore serious diseases? With regards to Viagra, were you aware of the fact that the drug in question - sildenafil - was actually developed to treat hypertension and angina - and the effect on impotence was only discovered as a side effect during trials? Or that minoxidil was developed to treat high blood pressue, and that it's effect on male pattern baldness was a side effect that they discovered during clinical trials? That finasteride/propecia was developed to treat enlarged prostates and...you get the idea, I hope. You also seem to have little appreciation for the difference between identifying a potential therapeutic target in a lab undertaking basic research, and translating that discovery into a drug that exploits that target. The process is neither automatic, nor trivial, and both this process and bringing the drug to market require a set of capacities and involves a set of challenges quite different from those associated with administering an academic laboratory. Ditto for the role that the profits, personnel, facilities, equipment maintained by some of the drugs that you deride play in supporting research into diseases that the unaflicted deem worthy of consideration. Ditto for the role that profits play in attracting the capital necessary to finance the development of new drugs. Has basic research conducted in non-commercial settings been necessary for the discovery and development of new drugs and devices been necessary? Absolutely. Sufficient? No way. I wouldn't consider myself an expert on these matters by any means, but I'm pretty confident that I'm way more qualified to comment on them than you are. Quote
mattp Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Jay, your slipping here. First of all, market competition HAS generated new medicines for erectile disfunction. More than one. I have more than one friend who has worked for Icos, and they have told me they made more money on ED than anything else - and that was their business plan. Perhaps they are disgruntled employees? Second, I didn't say that there is or should be "government compulsion" but I DID say there was and should be government and other "coordinated" funding and this has proven central to most pharmaceutical research that actually produces real breakthroughs. (I could be wrong, as I acknowledged, but I have read this steadily for many years and I believe it is likely true.) I DID say that public health advances have come about in large part through government-directed programs. You have not even tried to refute that. I did suggest that many of the "services" offered in modern American medical practice are not really linked to any "therapeutic target" as you say, and you didn't refute this. You and I can differ as to whether private insurance companies and the research department at Pfizer are more likely to be looking out for yours and my interests in living healthy lives than might be the National Institute of Health or whatever but, if you want to "debate," please answer the argument. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.