Notices
The Basement Non-Honda/Acura discussion. Content should be tasteful and "primetime" safe.

Nice penor tops there

Thread Tools
 
Old Aug 8, 2007 | 03:44 PM
  #11  
DakarM's Avatar
DakarM
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 44,908
Likes: 0
From: Location Location
Default

Originally Posted by aux
if im dying and want experimental shit i should be able to have em. close thread. any other opinion = stupid.
then get out of the country to get the drug. case closed :closed:
__________________
'00 Dakar Bus CRS Edition
LCD Squad #0001
Originally Posted by WiLL
...I really wanna get out and shoot people.
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2007 | 03:56 PM
  #12  
sherwood's Avatar
sherwood
I missed Sean
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,285
Likes: 1
From: Fairfield/Bridgeport CT
Default

Originally Posted by aux
if im dying and want experimental shit i should be able to have em. close thread. any other opinion = stupid.
good. but with the people in this country it's going to turn from a dying person, into a severe case, into every doctor giving out experimental scripts.

And while drugs may take a long time to improve there are very few who will benefit from this due to the FDA's accelerated approval process. Drugs for life threatening diseases are already put through a 'fast track' esp if there are no other treatments available.

You guys are just quick to bitch at the government and I'm sick of it, yeah it's fucked up, and the reasons for not supporting cell stem research is completely bogus and all about semantics, but they are not out to kill people, at least not registered voters.
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2007 | 06:18 PM
  #13  
ShaolinLueb's Avatar
ShaolinLueb
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,544
Likes: 0
From: Holyoke, MA
Default

great, the FDA is backed up with like 2000 drugs waiting approval. compared to the 750 it was in 90's
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2007 | 06:32 PM
  #14  
sherwood's Avatar
sherwood
I missed Sean
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,285
Likes: 1
From: Fairfield/Bridgeport CT
Default

Originally Posted by Lueb
great, the FDA is backed up with like 2000 drugs waiting approval. compared to the 750 it was in 90's
That doesn't mean shit. Processing power and the amount of drugs seeking approval could have both grown exponentially. In that case the pool of drugs awaiting approval would have increased as well.

Not to mention that half of them are probably for weight loss, acne, and other superficial concerns.
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2007 | 11:03 PM
  #15  
canada's Avatar
canada
514.315.407.405
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 23,370
Likes: 0
From: Syracuse, NY... again.
Default

It'll probably prevent frivolous lawsuits of people suing for reactions to experimental drugs that they knew full well might fuck them up worse or not work at all in teh first place.
Reply
Old Aug 9, 2007 | 02:37 AM
  #16  
spanky's Avatar
spanky
I go duffy on dem bitches
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 28,248
Likes: 0
From: Gonzales, Louisiana
Default

Originally Posted by canada
It'll probably prevent frivolous lawsuits of people suing for reactions to experimental drugs that they knew full well might fuck them up worse or not work at all in teh first place.
/thread
Reply
Old Aug 9, 2007 | 07:56 AM
  #17  
Fire's Avatar
Fire
Thread Starter
wanna run
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,561
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by sherwood
These treatments need to be tested. There is historical evidence of treatments and drugs being very fatal and dangerous. Just look at the Merck scandal from a few years back, now imagine if it were an untested drug, and it killed 100 times as many people, or the long term effects caused cancer.

Theres a reason these drugs need to be tested and it's just not a logical decision to bypass the whole system just to get to the end faster.

If nitrous wasn't tested and I strapped a 250 shot on my car just to pump it up because the inital results were positive do you think it would be a wise decision?

now. talk about improving the testing procedures, or combined government funding for drugs instead of requiring extensive lobbying and advertisement after the fact and I will agree with you. But I'm not one to RUSH A LIFE DECISION.

you live in a dream world where none of these drugs can do harm. I don't.

:edit:
I'm against the fact that you seem to be missing the point. Allowing people access to these drugs before they're aproved means that the approval process is more of a certification than a safeguard. There will be large numbers of people vieing for drugs which are unapproved and getting them, and DYING unnatural deaths.

IMPROVE THE TESTING SYSTEM, don't go all lord of the flies.
You are an arrogant little fuck. Im not missing your point, I just think its not valid. I didnt say near terminal or life threatening.

If someone is GOING to die, there is no reason why something shouldnt be tried. If it fucks them up, the drug companies learn from it. No greater loss to the patient than before. If they live, great. Period. Everything else can be worked out on paper. Life is more important than that.
Reply
Old Aug 9, 2007 | 08:07 AM
  #18  
sherwood's Avatar
sherwood
I missed Sean
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,285
Likes: 1
From: Fairfield/Bridgeport CT
Default

Originally Posted by firefastsi
You are an arrogant little fuck. Im not missing your point, I just think its not valid. I didnt say near terminal or life threatening.

If someone is GOING to die, there is no reason why something shouldnt be tried. If it fucks them up, the drug companies learn from it. No greater loss to the patient than before. If they live, great. Period. Everything else can be worked out on paper. Life is more important than that.
I understand if a person is on their death bed, about to die of some crazy disease that might have a cure, then yes. I do believe they should try it.

The problem is that once you open the gates for those who need it those who don't will step through. The valves of the government have never worked liked they were supposed to and legally we would have to allow other patients to try things because here in the US we're a bunch of whiny bastards and they won't stop until they've killed themselves.

:edit:
and what you're talking about here, refuting is exactly what i was referring to. If you wanted a reformation to the testing system, this isn't the way to go.
Reply
Old Aug 9, 2007 | 09:40 AM
  #19  
Fire's Avatar
Fire
Thread Starter
wanna run
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,561
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by sherwood
I understand if a person is on their death bed, about to die of some crazy disease that might have a cure, then yes. I do believe they should try it.

The problem is that once you open the gates for those who need it those who don't will step through. The valves of the government have never worked liked they were supposed to and legally we would have to allow other patients to try things because here in the US we're a bunch of whiny bastards and they won't stop until they've killed themselves.

:edit:
and what you're talking about here, refuting is exactly what i was referring to. If you wanted a reformation to the testing system, this isn't the way to go.
I was not trying to suggest the way to reform the system, just that it should be done. It would be nice if they could be introduced as "test subjects" to create a loophole. Then the requirements for the "test" would have to be someone who qualified. Im not a lawyer though so I can not say whether or not that is possible without some research.

I agree completely that the way things work here is totally fucked. Too much of society is raised to expect everything and earn nothing. We have a chip on our shoulder that is ridiculous-and yes I agree that with the way things are structured, this particular subject would be taken advantage of. But what isnt.

Dont take me wrong because of this particular argument. I despise with a loathing passion the exact circumstance you described above. People suck. The lawsuit BS, I personally have been in some horrible accidents and never (at the horror of my attorneys) sued for more than medical and time lost from work (and I always went back to work before I should have)-so I live what I preach. 3 times thats happened. The whining and crying and selfish crap is everywhere and eats at me everyday. I can not begin to describe how frustrated I feel at our world. However, I was stating what I think is right as a bottom line matter. Its not my personal fight. With all the time in the world it would be an interesting one to chase. I focus my cares and time on a different matter.

Fuck it, maybe I shouldnt even give a shit. People are a virus (haha matrix but its true) and WAY WAY over-populated.

I dont particularly like human beings very much but I do try to respect life. If it were me Id want any chance I could have.
Reply
Old Aug 9, 2007 | 11:13 AM
  #20  
jconeab's Avatar
jconeab
got the nuts
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,939
Likes: 0
From: emerald city
Default

hmmmm. i can see valid points to both sides of the argument. i choose to remain neutral.
Reply




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:35 PM.