Found an interesting little article on the BBC site. Here's a link. I love articles that excuse my sloppiness and blame it on my "creative" mind....^_^.
Also..any comments on this? (Especially you Anagen.)
Remember, the cartoons can be seen at a larger size by clicking on them...
Yes..it's the consumers fault. How dare they take cheap home loans and credit and then cry for help and talk about bankruptcy. You won't catch America's bank and industrial leaders behaving that way......^_^. What's that you say? They are? Are what they want is lower interest rates so they can borrow more? Funny...that's not what they say is right for consumers. For them they want higher interest rates and harder bankruptcy rules. Wonder why what works for them is no good for us?
It's an easy cartoon. "It's the governments fault" cry the poor industrialists. I wonder why the non big 3 automakers were able to live with the same rules? Maybe they got some special advantages....like....competent management? A product line that is more varied and flexible?
Posts
3 comments:
ok-- I'll send you a picture of my current desk
ie dinning room shared with one of the offspring -- and yes
organization is rather a difficult thing - but I do think I'm fairly productive anyway --
but periodically, before big writing tasks I actually clean a lot -- clearing the dust ends up giving me time to ponder thoughts and let the brain think while hands are busy
then when there is nothing left to clean - I start to write
the new drug - I need to reseach before answering - will look it up. I keep open mind on such stuff, but I also shy away from testamonials - brain is so easily confused by stuff -- if it works for you great - but physicians want predictablilty for all patients (or at least most of them) - hence they rely on statistical significance.
ps - the picture of my "desk" has a glass containing dregs of my nephew's home made beer - yum, better than pills
and thanks for the reminder about clicking on comic, I was getting tired of poking my nose on the screen.
Ah...I wasn't being clear. I don't care if it works...I was more interested in the establishment reaction...falling pretty neatly into 2 groups.
1. "ah..the drug has been around for a while now treating disease X with little to no side effect. Nothing else has worked for patient Y so far, why not give it a go.."
2. "This has not been given an ok by a bureaucrat, so we don't care to know if it works, we have way to much invested in the "years of therapy" business to actually believe our own blather over the years that "this is a disease, not a weakness of will". We can't have someone coming along and actually treating it like a disease and curing it's worst side effects with a simple pill.
Here is the section that caught my eye...
However, many specialists fear that media excitement over Dr Ameisen's theory is obscuring the complex nature of alcoholism.
[Maybe it's not as complex as the people who have made an industry out of it's treatment would like to think?]
"Encouraging people to think that there is a miracle molecule is to completely misunderstand the nature of alcoholism, and is extremely irresponsible, " says Dr Michel Reynaud of Paul-Brousse hospital in Paris.
[That nature being what keeps me in my Mercedes..and I don't need anyone cropping up with a simple cure..]
"We need comprehensive tests to determine how this drug acts, if it is effective and at what dosage, and if it is genuinely harmless in the longer term, " says Alain Rigaud, president of the National Association for the Prevention of Alcoholism and Addiction.
[Meanwhile, f*** anyone who could be helped by it now...and it had better not work, or I'm out of a job... How is irrelevant. You can get your funding for studying the how mechanism while people are being treated..you don't have to know how first. You still don't know how aspirin works, should we all stop using it?]
"But even if it turns out to work, that does not mean a drug alone is the solution."
[I wonder if he'd say the same about other diseases. Like say..cancer. If someone found a pill that cured oh..say even 70% of cancer...would he be saying "a drug alone isn't the solution"? These people are only showing that they don't believe the argument that they have been trying to foist on the public for the last 50 years...that it's a disease. A wonderful joke on them if it turns out that it actually is...^_^]
actually -- I am on the fence about this kind of issue
the homeopathic type folks try to make a buck
the md's try to make a buck
the researchers (esp in our country where they have to act like used car salesment to get funding) try to make a buck
If MD's notice a drug is working for something else they often do network among specialty groups and ask each other -- but they do also worry about "self report" testimonials from patients as they get a lot of side effect reports that never do amount to anything that is a general population effect.
so if the MDs suspect something is working for a diff disease, it usually needs more study to really make sure it works, and above all, does no harm. A real "approval" for a drug to be marketed for that particular reason requires both effectivness and safety to shown in blinded trials. Why? -- because there are so many folks out to swindle the consumer/patient. It is a protection....but it is a slow process and
can slow things down so much that it by itself causes harm...
we need balance -- so often such potential uses get put into faster tract "clinical trials" to be tested....
and I do think the pill and the mind can be effective -- so it aint all black and white in the case of medicines.
Post a Comment