<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who&#8217;s Gonna Make Our Drugs!?!?!</title>
	<link>http://www.themannings.org/soapbox/2006/12/26/whos-gonna-make-our-drugs/</link>
	<description>Pragmatic Libertarianism</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:07:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Sare</title>
		<link>http://www.themannings.org/soapbox/2006/12/26/whos-gonna-make-our-drugs/#comment-2447</link>
		<author>Sare</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 04:53:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.themannings.org/soapbox/2006/12/26/whos-gonna-make-our-drugs/#comment-2447</guid>
		<description>"Nearly every new useful drug patent is developed in America or by an American drug company."

Ex-act-ly.

I just listened to an NPR discussion of the studies that show that research by drug companies is statistically biased in favor of whatever drug company is conducting the study.

Seems like a no-brainer, but not a lot of people see it that way.  They say that they follow the best practices of scientific method, yada yada.  The problem is, we're all human.  And so we're all gonna make mistakes in our favor.

As for the socialized medicine bit-- I personally think that our current system is incredibly inefficient because it combines governmental funding/oversight with private ownership (insurance companies).  We need it to be one or the other, or else a lotta money is going to keep getting wasted.  

Personally, I don't see what's so wrong with the Massachusets system of mandated healthcare, or with Arnold's new plan to promulgate it in CA.  I think that it's a good in-between-- some government funding, but definitely no more than we were spending before in order to take care of those with NO insurance who ended up in emergency care and such.

And the other plus is, it will be an oversight of insurance providers to make sure they practice fair policy as regards acceptance of clients and amount of premiums, as well as the amount they pay back to the insuree.

I mean, if we let insurance companies operate like a corporation, they WILL operate like a corporation-- provide as little as possible and gain as much as they can from the 'consumer'.  I personally don't think that access to healthcare should fall under that sort of umbrella.  Health is one of those things that you can't restore to someone once it's gone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Nearly every new useful drug patent is developed in America or by an American drug company.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ex-act-ly.</p>
<p>I just listened to an NPR discussion of the studies that show that research by drug companies is statistically biased in favor of whatever drug company is conducting the study.</p>
<p>Seems like a no-brainer, but not a lot of people see it that way.  They say that they follow the best practices of scientific method, yada yada.  The problem is, we&#8217;re all human.  And so we&#8217;re all gonna make mistakes in our favor.</p>
<p>As for the socialized medicine bit&#8211; I personally think that our current system is incredibly inefficient because it combines governmental funding/oversight with private ownership (insurance companies).  We need it to be one or the other, or else a lotta money is going to keep getting wasted.  </p>
<p>Personally, I don&#8217;t see what&#8217;s so wrong with the Massachusets system of mandated healthcare, or with Arnold&#8217;s new plan to promulgate it in CA.  I think that it&#8217;s a good in-between&#8211; some government funding, but definitely no more than we were spending before in order to take care of those with NO insurance who ended up in emergency care and such.</p>
<p>And the other plus is, it will be an oversight of insurance providers to make sure they practice fair policy as regards acceptance of clients and amount of premiums, as well as the amount they pay back to the insuree.</p>
<p>I mean, if we let insurance companies operate like a corporation, they WILL operate like a corporation&#8211; provide as little as possible and gain as much as they can from the &#8216;consumer&#8217;.  I personally don&#8217;t think that access to healthcare should fall under that sort of umbrella.  Health is one of those things that you can&#8217;t restore to someone once it&#8217;s gone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate Jones</title>
		<link>http://www.themannings.org/soapbox/2006/12/26/whos-gonna-make-our-drugs/#comment-2441</link>
		<author>Nate Jones</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:17:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.themannings.org/soapbox/2006/12/26/whos-gonna-make-our-drugs/#comment-2441</guid>
		<description>Ok, this is all fine and good, but what I really want to read is a good post on the US "war on drugs" in light of the details of Rhenquist's not so little problem with prescription painkillers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, this is all fine and good, but what I really want to read is a good post on the US &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; in light of the details of Rhenquist&#8217;s not so little problem with prescription painkillers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reach Upward</title>
		<link>http://www.themannings.org/soapbox/2006/12/26/whos-gonna-make-our-drugs/#comment-2425</link>
		<author>Reach Upward</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2007 20:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.themannings.org/soapbox/2006/12/26/whos-gonna-make-our-drugs/#comment-2425</guid>
		<description>Very good observations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good observations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
