This is small fry.. What about the dead whales? or should I rephrase that as zombie monsters?

the irony of increased life expectancies from inexpensive public health measures (vaccines, drinking water, etc) is that we get to die from much more costly diseases.

"the irony of increased life expectancies from inexpensive public health measures (vaccines, drinking water, etc) is that we get to die from much more costly diseases."

I think that some day we are going to have to address whether we should spend money on prolonging lives. I suppose it boils down to who is paying. Until health insurance, which is a recent phenomenon, considering how long humans have lived, life was a genetic lottery. Only those able to pay for their own care could hope to extend their lives.

It is costly only because we have

1. private for-profit insurance companies. (billing, coverage, dumping on the public system)
2. A risk averse FDA. (drug trials are unneccesarily expensive- we could have a system of conditional approval of drugs).
3. Drug companies run by MBAs (Risk averse, shareholder value c**p, inhumane management techniques, no respect for innovators, no understanding of the history of drug discovery)
4. Greedy and arrogant doctors. (I am god and I deserve half a million, even though I depend on a indoctrinated short-skirted ex-cheerleader for keeping up with new drugs)

//the irony of increased life expectancies from inexpensive public health measures (vaccines, drinking water, etc) is that we get to die from much more costly diseases.//

Slavery, f**king boys, public executions, plagues and healthy people dying from ordinary infections was also once considered an inevitable part of human history. Why not go back to that 'golden age'?

//I think that some day we are going to have to address whether we should spend money on prolonging lives. I suppose it boils down to who is paying. Until health insurance, which is a recent phenomenon, considering how long humans have lived, life was a genetic lottery. Only those able to pay for their own care could hope to extend their lives.//

Medical treatments before the 1930s had no significant impact on life expectancy. Indeed, going to a doctor helped you die more quickly and painfully.

Read some good and varied medical history!

//Only those able to pay for their own care could hope to extend their lives//

Based on the FDIC website, this bank actually had negative Tier 1 capital. They had non-performing loans of about $12mm and OREO of $7mm.

No kidding.. Until the 1930s.. going to hospitals was a bad idea.. period. Exceptions- accidents, fractures and basic surgeries.

After the 1930s, things became better.. however it was only after the 1960s that going to the hospital was a good option for older people. (many antibacterial drugs + other drugs were discovered from 1930 to 1970s)

//When I was a kid, the old folks never wanted to go to the hospital, since most folks they knew that went there didn't come back, or at least that's what they recalled from the '40s&'50s.//

" Lucifer (member) wrote on Fri, 04/17/2009 - 8:18pm.

No kidding.. Until the 1930s.. going to hospitals was a bad idea.. period. Exceptions- accidents, fractures and basic surgeries."

We lived in Alabama, so the 40s and 50s were kinda' like the 30s elsewhere

Cinco-X (member) wrote

Cinco-X, Those people were right.

Before antibiotics you had to rely on your own immune system. If you were lucky, it still worked, or at least you died quickly.

Sulfanilamide was the first big breakthrough--around the mid-30s, I believe. It wasn't until late in WWII penicillin could be made on a large scale.

It was a BIG one.

Now doctors could treat most common pneumonias, most urinary infections, kidney infections, some types of meningitis, gonorrhea, dysentery, typhoids, genital chancres.

They could also use it to treat post-surgical infections, the early stages of sepsis, nasty post-birth infections in women, prevent infections in wounded soldiers and motorists... It changed the world

AND stimulated investment in drug discovery.

//Sulfanilamide was the first big breakthrough--around the mid-30s, I believe. It wasn't until late in WWII penicillin could be made on a large scale.//

The development of penicillins was funded due to WW2.

The antibiotic development program started in WW2 (and continued till the early 1960s) gave us almost all of our current anti-bacterial drugs.

Now that is money well spent!

If I keep drinking wine for BFF I'm going to need a new liver, too.

My occupation involves new drug development. I know the history of that area very well. A bit too well..

//L, how do you know so much about medicine?//

L - Great career field. My dr. relative says the AIDS research has landed a lot of beneficial drugs for other issues.

Yes.. many of the techniques used in designing HIV protease inhibitors have produced some good kinase inhibitor-type drugs for Cancers (like Imatinib, Sunitinib).

One of best anti-Hepatitis B drug ( tenofovir) was developed for AIDS. Infact, all anti-HBV drugs ( lamivudine, adefovir , tenofovir , telbivudine and entecavir) started out as anti-HIV drugs.

//My dr. relative says the AIDS research has landed a lot of beneficial drugs for other issues.//

Nope..

//Your best friend wouldn't work at Jones Day, would he?//

So I go to my bank website (small community bank in Georgia) and I see the following message:

******* is participating in the FDIC's Transaction Account Guarantee Program. Under that program, through December 31, 2009, all noninterest-bearing transaction accounts are fully guaranteed by the FDIC for the entire amount in the account. In addition all interest bearing checking accounts with ******* are fully guaranteed by the FDIC. Coverage under the Transaction Account Guarantee Program is in addition to and separate from the coverage available under the FDIC's general deposit insurance rules. If you have questions regarding your FDIC insurance coverage, you may contact a Customer Service Representative for details.

and then this is in the local paper:
*******'s parent company, *******, has received $2.644 million under the U.S. Treasury Department's Capital Purchase Plan, a division of the Troubled Asset Protection Program.

A locally-owned community bank, ******* Bank was one of 13 Georgia banks to receive TARP funds. Of the 13, ******* Bank was one of six in the state that turned a profit last year and the smallest in the state to get funds.

So is this cause for alarm?

Oh, buy guns! No, don't buy guns. Wait, what is this voice I hear in my head. The gov loves me and you. They have only our best interests at ...NO! Stop! Buy Guns!

This is idiocy!!! Water vapor is the most important greenhouse "gas".. they should ban water vapor.. or even better water.

____________
April 18, 2009
E.P.A. Clears the Way for Regulation of Warming Gases
(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/science/earth/18endanger.html?_r=1&hp=...)

By JOHN M. BRODER
WASHINGTON - The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday formally declared carbon dioxide and five other heat-trapping gases to be pollutants that threaten public health and welfare, setting in motion a process that for the first time in the United States will regulate the gases blamed for global warming.

The E.P.A. said the science supporting its so-called endangerment finding was "compelling and overwhelming." The ruling triggers a 60-day comment period before any proposed regulations governing emissions of greenhouse gases are published.

Lisa P. Jackson, the E.P.A. administrator, said: "This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations. Fortunately, it follows President Obama's call for a low-carbon economy and strong leadership in Congress on clean energy and climate legislation."

er, make that "dehumidifier" ...

Anonymous,

What are you talking about ... fly-over country mailed him the darn brown recluse!

my comment above about dying from more expensive illnesses was literal, at least in America, where we can't die from old age, but from some "treatable" condition, which inevitably has to be treated, especially if the patient has insurance.

there's actually an increasing body of literature arguing that obesity and smoking would have the positive effects on long term health care costs, primarily because the patients die earlier and because the "system" generally doesn't "mind" when a smoker or an overweight person is suffering from terminal conditions. Contrast that to breast cancer or leukemia, where the system has no compunction about spending gobs of resources, even when the prognosis is near nil.

Yes, a lot of the cost is not about doing a good thorough trial. It is about covering your ass legally, bribing and lobbying.

Let me explain.. Let us say you have developed a new drug to treat a form of cancer. Asking for a good number of patients in each arm of the trial, due diligence, oversight, data auditing etc is fine with me. Say your drug is more effective than existing drugs and is much less toxic than currently used drugs, but you have not done the "right" studies (according to the bureaucrats). Think you can get approved without bribes and high powered lawyers, lobbyists? (Provenge)

Now take another case.. say you have an old antidepressant (Doxepin) .. you want to use it at 1/10th the old approved dose to treat sleep disorders. Think you can get it approved without retesting everything once gain.. Dream on!

The most effective treatment for premature ejaculation in young men is low dose (Sildenafil-Viagra) or any other pde5 inhibitor. These drugs reduce premature ejaculation as well as allow multiple shots. Think the FDA will approve that use.. hahaha

Let us say that an older drug (Methylphenidate-Ritalin) speeds up recovery from stroke in older people. Think the FDA will ever officially approve it? Sure.. pigs can fly!

"Was that a snark , lucifer? Please try the chemicals out on some rats first, and let the FDA do the trials. Reagan really screwed up by letting the drug makers test their own drugs. BTW, I avoid hospitals unless I am bleeding uncontrollably"

I am anti-doctor. They are technicians at best.

//. I have a nephew in CA, and though he's insured, doctors have turned him down twice for antibiotics. //

The FDA has no problems with approving-

Vioxx- increases mortality by over 3 times in older people.

Plavix- causes more bleeding and prevents fewer clots than low dose aspirin.

Antipsychotics in depression - This is so bad an idea, that I will not even bother. to explain. Except for concurrent PTSD and really bad OCD, these drugs do not add to conventional anti-depressant drugs

No cholesterol lowering drug except 'Statins' have EVER shown any measurable and meaningful reduction in mortality/ morbidity or even in the risk of getting a heart attack in large clinical trials.

No anti-diabetic drug has ever been shown to reduce the substantially increased risk of heart attacks and strokes in type 2 diabetics.

I have much more ammo.

I am anti-doctor. They are technicians at best.

Actually, my MD relative is an ER dr. I wouldn't call that a technician.

Thank you for the info. It has all been very informative & interesting. If I had had the proper career guidance, I would have had your job.

We will know in a few years. At least, it does not make heart attacks worser like some older anti-diabetics.

//Byetta?//

Yogi - that is eerily like Natasha Richardson's story. Which I guess isn't so terribly uncommon.

Thanks. There is a bunch of natural stuff, like cinnamon which has been shown to help with blood sugar. Is someone gonna tell me cinnamon is bad?

Oh, and turmeric. Every diet should include, if the stomach can handle it. Indian food is delicious, so that's no trouble.