Author Topic: The President Trump Thread  (Read 91059 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #825 on: March 18, 2017, 11:19:44 AM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3784
  • Tommy Points: 692
I am not losing sleep over a pharma compant investing big money and not getting back what they put in. Its called risk in business. Also, when pharma companies hit on a drug, regardless of investment, they rake in the profits. Just not a lot of pharma companies going out of business these days and most have huge profits. There has to be something that can be done where meds can be made less expensive and pharma companies can still make huge profits, though not the absolutely ridiculous ones they are now.

Exactly. Plus, the fact that these companies use price-gouging of American people and insurance companies while providing drugs at a fraction of that price to citizens in other countries is disgusting. Our government subsidizes these companies to the tune of billions of dollars, and then we get gouged when a drug comes to market.

I hate quoting from sites I'm not familiar with, but is this true?

Quote
But less understood is the fact that, as Mariana Mazzucato observed in the Los Angeles Times late last year, taxpayers also happen to fund the development of these same drugs.

"Big Pharma, while of course contributing to innovation, has increasingly decommitted itself from the high-risk side of research and development, often letting small biotech companies and the NIH do most of the hard work," Mazzucato notes. In other words, the costly side of business has been pushed onto the lap of the public while the profits remain private.

An instructive case is that of the cancer drug Taxol, which was developed using taxpayer money and then handed over to the pharmaceutical giant Bristol-Myers Squibb, which sold $9 billion worth of the drug worldwide. Medicare then proceeded to pay "nearly $700 million over a five-year period, to buy a drug the government helped develop," according to a report by the General Accounting Office.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/19/big-pharma-lavished-subsidies-congress-takes-stingy-approach-opioid-epidemic

The author makes a good point that big pharma , Merck, Pfizer etc has largely stepped out of innovation and basically let smaller companies do R&D and then buy the company or buy the rights to that drug in certain territories

I think the statement that big pharma is passing costs onto the public is highly irresponsible.  I work for a company that spends over 450M per year on R&D and the only credit we get is from the state which is based on the number of jobs we add to the economy. 

Again, my company has no sales revenue, and our net loss since inception is in the multiple billions of dollars
I am also in pharma/biotech but not one of the 'big pharma'.  We get a bad rap based on a few high profile cases that are justifiably due to bad guys.

Regarding gov't funding of R&D, there are many cases of this.  I would not single out BMS for taxol.  The bottom line is that this has been a practice for a long time with NIH, NSF and other government bodies.  The fact that successful products come out of this research is in fact, the whole point, and is a good thing.

I know the govt funding happens, for instance there was a big push for Ebola drugs funded by the govt.  but the way the article made it sound is that govt funding is the primary source, which isn't accurate IMO

Often not the primary source, but the return on investment is terrible from the NIH/public health perspective. It's a bit of a hostage situation, where there is a strong desire to continue to develop new treatments and medicines, but due to the nature of politics, such research will only get funded if it helps the "private sector," so all the profits get funneled into private enterprises. It would make a lot more sense for the gov't to also own patents on unversity and NIH developed products, and to also get into the production business.


THere is much broken about the current pharmaceutical industry. My biggest fear is that the Trump team sees getting rid of oversight as the main way to fix it, as if ensuring that drugs are safe and do what they supposed to is a bad barrier to overcome.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #826 on: March 18, 2017, 11:23:37 AM »

Offline hpantazo

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15910
  • Tommy Points: 2370
I am not losing sleep over a pharma compant investing big money and not getting back what they put in. Its called risk in business. Also, when pharma companies hit on a drug, regardless of investment, they rake in the profits. Just not a lot of pharma companies going out of business these days and most have huge profits. There has to be something that can be done where meds can be made less expensive and pharma companies can still make huge profits, though not the absolutely ridiculous ones they are now.

Exactly. Plus, the fact that these companies use price-gouging of American people and insurance companies while providing drugs at a fraction of that price to citizens in other countries is disgusting. Our government subsidizes these companies to the tune of billions of dollars, and then we get gouged when a drug comes to market.

I hate quoting from sites I'm not familiar with, but is this true?

Quote
But less understood is the fact that, as Mariana Mazzucato observed in the Los Angeles Times late last year, taxpayers also happen to fund the development of these same drugs.

"Big Pharma, while of course contributing to innovation, has increasingly decommitted itself from the high-risk side of research and development, often letting small biotech companies and the NIH do most of the hard work," Mazzucato notes. In other words, the costly side of business has been pushed onto the lap of the public while the profits remain private.

An instructive case is that of the cancer drug Taxol, which was developed using taxpayer money and then handed over to the pharmaceutical giant Bristol-Myers Squibb, which sold $9 billion worth of the drug worldwide. Medicare then proceeded to pay "nearly $700 million over a five-year period, to buy a drug the government helped develop," according to a report by the General Accounting Office.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/19/big-pharma-lavished-subsidies-congress-takes-stingy-approach-opioid-epidemic

The author makes a good point that big pharma , Merck, Pfizer etc has largely stepped out of innovation and basically let smaller companies do R&D and then buy the company or buy the rights to that drug in certain territories

I think the statement that big pharma is passing costs onto the public is highly irresponsible.  I work for a company that spends over 450M per year on R&D and the only credit we get is from the state which is based on the number of jobs we add to the economy. 

Again, my company has no sales revenue, and our net loss since inception is in the multiple billions of dollars
I am also in pharma/biotech but not one of the 'big pharma'.  We get a bad rap based on a few high profile cases that are justifiably due to bad guys.

Regarding gov't funding of R&D, there are many cases of this.  I would not single out BMS for taxol.  The bottom line is that this has been a practice for a long time with NIH, NSF and other government bodies.  The fact that successful products come out of this research is in fact, the whole point, and is a good thing.

I know the govt funding happens, for instance there was a big push for Ebola drugs funded by the govt.  but the way the article made it sound is that govt funding is the primary source, which isn't accurate IMO

Often not the primary source, but the return on investment is terrible from the NIH/public health perspective. It's a bit of a hostage situation, where there is a strong desire to continue to develop new treatments and medicines, but due to the nature of politics, such research will only get funded if it helps the "private sector," so all the profits get funneled into private enterprises. It would make a lot more sense for the gov't to also own patents on unversity and NIH developed products, and to also get into the production business.


THere is much broken about the current pharmaceutical industry. My biggest fear is that the Trump team sees getting rid of oversight as the main way to fix it, as if ensuring that drugs are safe and do what they supposed to is a bad barrier to overcome.

Easing FDA approval regulations is very dangerous. Also, the proposed massive cuts to NIH funding would basically kill academic research for decades, and also greatly impact the pharma industry, as the foundation for a lot of the pharma drug developments come from basic research findings.

Ed Markey had a great analyst of how the proposed Trump budget would kill the Mass state economy, as it is a direct hit at all of our core values that our economy is built on.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/03/17/trump-budget-would-strip-billion-from-massachusetts-says-report-from-senator-markey/NwcTWLGpUrVcCq0NPuQOfK/story.html
« Last Edit: March 18, 2017, 11:31:05 AM by hpantazo »

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #827 on: March 18, 2017, 12:28:19 PM »

Offline BDeCosta26

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1312
  • Tommy Points: 229
I am not losing sleep over a pharma compant investing big money and not getting back what they put in. Its called risk in business. Also, when pharma companies hit on a drug, regardless of investment, they rake in the profits. Just not a lot of pharma companies going out of business these days and most have huge profits. There has to be something that can be done where meds can be made less expensive and pharma companies can still make huge profits, though not the absolutely ridiculous ones they are now.

I get 700 mg of Remicade infused into my blood every 8 weeks.  Wanna guess the over the counter cost of one treatment?

Where would you be health wise if the company decide not to pursue the drug because it didn't make sense from a risk reward standpoint?

True. That's why our government should have the ability to negotiate prices. It's a fact that drug companies spend huge sums of money to develop new drugs, and it's also a fact that large pharma companies are some of the highest profit margin companies in the country, and are known for setting insanely high prices on numerous drugs. Their CEO's make tens of millions of dollars and regular people get stuck paying 500$ for an EpiPen. If we had negotiating power we could allow the pharma industry to make healthy profits while keeping prices at a more reasonable rate.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #828 on: March 18, 2017, 06:42:48 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31968
  • Tommy Points: -28090
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
What was Trump's problem with Merkel? She's an enormous liberal but it looked like he was being a **** on purpose. Simply ignored her when she said they asked for a handshake. Really dude?
She is a guest of the American people, not Casa del Trump.

He's a pompous ass but he did shake her hand several times. He was probably being petulant about the press demanding another photo op.







Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #829 on: March 18, 2017, 09:40:39 PM »

Offline wiley

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3166
  • Tommy Points: 225
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-right-wing-media-foreign-allies-republicans-236193

any doubt after reading the whole article that Fox "news" is currently doing damage to the standing of the United States.  Of course, many Fox viewers could give a crap about the standing of America in the world...(that's almost the point in a sad way)

The fact that Trump is the one going to to town with the "info" does not excuse Fox from putting it out there...

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #830 on: March 18, 2017, 10:25:25 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12212
  • Tommy Points: 342
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-right-wing-media-foreign-allies-republicans-236193

any doubt after reading the whole article that Fox "news" is currently doing damage to the standing of the United States.  Of course, many Fox viewers could give a crap about the standing of America in the world...(that's almost the point in a sad way)

The fact that Trump is the one going to to town with the "info" does not excuse Fox from putting it out there...

Sorry but I can't blame national failures on a media outlet. So I won't blame Fox anymore than I'll blame it's left wing counterpart MSNBC.

I just blame Trump.

 He's been incredibly incompetent as President of our great country. Sad!
Celtics fan for life.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #831 on: March 18, 2017, 10:42:20 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31968
  • Tommy Points: -28090
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-right-wing-media-foreign-allies-republicans-236193

any doubt after reading the whole article that Fox "news" is currently doing damage to the standing of the United States.  Of course, many Fox viewers could give a crap about the standing of America in the world...(that's almost the point in a sad way)

The fact that Trump is the one going to to town with the "info" does not excuse Fox from putting it out there...

Sorry but I can't blame national failures on a media outlet. So I won't blame Fox anymore than I'll blame it's left wing counterpart MSNBC.

I just blame Trump.

 He's been incredibly incompetent as President of our great country. Sad!

It's amazing to me that a man who has access to maybe more top secret info than any person on Earth relies upon media and blogs for his information.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #832 on: March 20, 2017, 04:58:17 PM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41327
  • Tommy Points: 2269
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
So anyone watch any of the hearing today? I listened to a few hours and for a while there I was just basically praying for the nuclear Apocalypse because any people who would create what amounted to a public hearing on two people who were not allowed to answer any of the questions deserved its own destruction.

Oh my God and the media grandstanding. Sheesh. You're asking a QUESTION, Devin Nunes. How many times can you say you support the troops when asking someone a direct question? The answer, it turns out, is like 5. 

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #833 on: March 21, 2017, 10:48:59 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15803
  • Tommy Points: 1100
What was Trump's problem with Merkel? She's an enormous liberal but it looked like he was being a **** on purpose. Simply ignored her when she said they asked for a handshake. Really dude?
She is a guest of the American people, not Casa del Trump.

He's a pompous ass but he did shake her hand several times. He was probably being petulant about the press demanding another photo op.
This is almost certainly the case -- but it doesn't make the fact that he left Merkel hanging look any better.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #834 on: March 21, 2017, 10:52:26 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15803
  • Tommy Points: 1100
So anyone watch any of the hearing today? I listened to a few hours and for a while there I was just basically praying for the nuclear Apocalypse because any people who would create what amounted to a public hearing on two people who were not allowed to answer any of the questions deserved its own destruction.

Oh my God and the media grandstanding. Sheesh. You're asking a QUESTION, Devin Nunes. How many times can you say you support the troops when asking someone a direct question? The answer, it turns out, is like 5.
I didn't watch the hearing, but I heard Gorsuch thinks that America needs protections against predator women looking to get pregnant on corporate dime. Here goes the hope that Trump accidentally nominated someone who isn't a creep.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #835 on: March 21, 2017, 11:03:07 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31968
  • Tommy Points: -28090
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
What was Trump's problem with Merkel? She's an enormous liberal but it looked like he was being a **** on purpose. Simply ignored her when she said they asked for a handshake. Really dude?
She is a guest of the American people, not Casa del Trump.

He's a pompous ass but he did shake her hand several times. He was probably being petulant about the press demanding another photo op.
This is almost certainly the case -- but it doesn't make the fact that he left Merkel hanging look any better.

Oh, I agree. Rather than being rude to Merkel due to personal animosity, he was rude to her as a biproduct of being stand-offish with the press. Both make him look immature and undignified.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #836 on: March 21, 2017, 11:18:12 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31968
  • Tommy Points: -28090
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
So anyone watch any of the hearing today? I listened to a few hours and for a while there I was just basically praying for the nuclear Apocalypse because any people who would create what amounted to a public hearing on two people who were not allowed to answer any of the questions deserved its own destruction.

Oh my God and the media grandstanding. Sheesh. You're asking a QUESTION, Devin Nunes. How many times can you say you support the troops when asking someone a direct question? The answer, it turns out, is like 5.
I didn't watch the hearing, but I heard Gorsuch thinks that America needs protections against predator women looking to get pregnant on corporate dime. Here goes the hope that Trump accidentally nominated someone who isn't a creep.

http://www.redstate.com/tony-sarc/2017/03/21/gorsuch-hearing-former-student-makes-stunning-allegation-media-ignores-important-facts/?utm_content=buffer930d5&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #837 on: March 21, 2017, 11:28:41 AM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9219
  • Tommy Points: 1006
So anyone watch any of the hearing today? I listened to a few hours and for a while there I was just basically praying for the nuclear Apocalypse because any people who would create what amounted to a public hearing on two people who were not allowed to answer any of the questions deserved its own destruction.

Oh my God and the media grandstanding. Sheesh. You're asking a QUESTION, Devin Nunes. How many times can you say you support the troops when asking someone a direct question? The answer, it turns out, is like 5.
I didn't watch the hearing, but I heard Gorsuch thinks that America needs protections against predator women looking to get pregnant on corporate dime. Here goes the hope that Trump accidentally nominated someone who isn't a creep.

http://www.redstate.com/tony-sarc/2017/03/21/gorsuch-hearing-former-student-makes-stunning-allegation-media-ignores-important-facts/?utm_content=buffer930d5&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Busted!

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #838 on: March 21, 2017, 12:12:44 PM »

Offline rondohondo

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10455
  • Tommy Points: 1068
So anyone watch any of the hearing today? I listened to a few hours and for a while there I was just basically praying for the nuclear Apocalypse because any people who would create what amounted to a public hearing on two people who were not allowed to answer any of the questions deserved its own destruction.

Oh my God and the media grandstanding. Sheesh. You're asking a QUESTION, Devin Nunes. How many times can you say you support the troops when asking someone a direct question? The answer, it turns out, is like 5.
I didn't watch the hearing, but I heard Gorsuch thinks that America needs protections against predator women looking to get pregnant on corporate dime. Here goes the hope that Trump accidentally nominated someone who isn't a creep.

http://www.redstate.com/tony-sarc/2017/03/21/gorsuch-hearing-former-student-makes-stunning-allegation-media-ignores-important-facts/?utm_content=buffer930d5&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Busted!

And Ruth Bater Ginsburg wants the age of consent to be 12 years old, hmmm...
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 01:18:26 PM by rondohondo »

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #839 on: March 21, 2017, 01:04:19 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15803
  • Tommy Points: 1100
So anyone watch any of the hearing today? I listened to a few hours and for a while there I was just basically praying for the nuclear Apocalypse because any people who would create what amounted to a public hearing on two people who were not allowed to answer any of the questions deserved its own destruction.

Oh my God and the media grandstanding. Sheesh. You're asking a QUESTION, Devin Nunes. How many times can you say you support the troops when asking someone a direct question? The answer, it turns out, is like 5.
I didn't watch the hearing, but I heard Gorsuch thinks that America needs protections against predator women looking to get pregnant on corporate dime. Here goes the hope that Trump accidentally nominated someone who isn't a creep.

http://www.redstate.com/tony-sarc/2017/03/21/gorsuch-hearing-former-student-makes-stunning-allegation-media-ignores-important-facts/?utm_content=buffer930d5&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Fantastic. It's a RedState piece that only went into character assassination mode once we were one screen down the text :) I guess that counts for highly objective in their book.

In any case, if this is what it was it should be an easy defense to make during the hearings. The letter is on file, so there's that.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com