Parkinson's Disease Tulip


advertisement
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-09-2008, 09:05 PM #1
lou_lou's Avatar
lou_lou lou_lou is offline
In Remembrance
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: about 45 minutes to anywhere!
Posts: 3,086
15 yr Member
lou_lou lou_lou is offline
In Remembrance
lou_lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: about 45 minutes to anywhere!
Posts: 3,086
15 yr Member
Arrow The Supreme Court Betrays the Public on Medtronic Preemption Case

The Supreme Court Betrays the Public on Medtronic Preemption Case (transcript)
Thursday, November 06, 2008 by: Mike Adams (see all articles by this author)
Key concepts: Corporations, The FDA and Supreme Court

transcript
http://www.naturalnews.com/024727.html

podcast
http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Podcasts.html
__________________
with much love,
lou_lou


.


.
by
.
, on Flickr
pd documentary - part 2 and 3

.


.


Resolve to be tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving, and tolerant with the weak and the wrong. Sometime in your life you will have been all of these.
lou_lou is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
"Thanks for this!" says:
Shake 'Em Up (11-10-2008)

advertisement
Old 11-10-2008, 11:30 AM #2
lurkingforacure lurkingforacure is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,485
15 yr Member
lurkingforacure lurkingforacure is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,485
15 yr Member
Smile devil's advocate

Just playing devil's advocate...what if the Supremes allowed litigation in these cases? What incentive would anyone have then for going through all the R/D and FDA approval process if it meant all they could do was sell the product? No one would risk developing anything new because they would just be another target for a lawsuit (and a class-action one, at that...) Keep in mind our ridiculously litigious society...

Besides, and this is big, there would be no need for the FDA at all if there "stamp of approval" meant nothing! You would have these scenarious:

1. FDA approval means nothing: company expends tremendous capital researching and developing new drug...spends additional millions getting FDA approval...begins selling new drug and gets hit with lawsuits....goes bankrupt, or at a minimum, it severely curtails new developments....other companies watching from the sidelines are discouraged from developing new drugs....not good for anyone ill with anything...

2. FDA approval means protection: company expends tremendous capital researching and developing new drug...spends additional millions getting FDA approval...begins selling new drug and gets hit with lawsuits....uses FDA approval as a defense and wins, does not go bankrupt...other companies watching from the sidelines are NOT discouraged from developing new drugs....this could be good for those ill with anything....


Don't get me wrong, I think there is a middle ground here. There should be some exceptions/carve outs to the immunity, but given our litigious society, which is already stifiling R/D and incredibly expensive to boot, they would need to be narrowly drawn.

A side point: if we had a loser-pay system, like Germany does, this issue might not ever come up. But then, if we had a loser-pay system, that would make it much harder on lawyers filing such claims, and we can't have that, can we?
lurkingforacure is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Supreme Court Rules For Medimmune lou_lou Parkinson's Disease 0 02-03-2007 09:51 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin • Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.7.1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
 

NeuroTalk Forums

Helping support those with neurological and related conditions.

 

The material on this site is for informational purposes only,
and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment
provided by a qualified health care provider.


Always consult your doctor before trying anything you read here.