[Politics] The Return Of Palin Derangement Syndrome
David Loewe, Jr.
----------
Slate magazine is just one of the countless media outlets convulsing
with St. Vitus� Dance over that demonic succubus Sarah Palin. In its
reader forum, The Fray, one supposed Palinophobe took dead aim at the
former Alaska governor�s writing chops, excerpting the following
sentence from her book:
�The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a
buzzer downstairs that didn�t work, so that visitors had to call ahead
from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the
size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws
clamped around an empty beer bottle.�
Other readers pounced like wolf-sized Dobermans on an intruder. One
guffawed, �That sentence by Sarah Palin could be entered into the annual
Bulwer-Lytton bad writing contest. It could have a chance at winning a
(sic) honorable mention, at any rate.�
But soon, the original contributor confessed: �I probably should have
mentioned that the sentence quoted above was not written by Sarah Palin.
It�s taken from the first paragraph of �Dreams From My Father,� written
by Barack Obama.�
The ruse should have been allowed to fester longer, but the point was
made nonetheless: Some people hate Palin first and ask questions later.
----------
Heh...
--
"It is necessary to get behind someone before you can stab
them in the back."
- Sir Humphrey Appleby, "Yes Prime Minister"
T Guy
> Slate magazine is just one of the countless media outlets convulsing
> with St. Vitus’ Dance over that demonic succubus Sarah Palin. In its
> reader forum, The Fray, one supposed Palinophobe took dead aim at the
> former Alaska governor’s writing chops, excerpting the following
> sentence from her book:
>
> “The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a
> buzzer downstairs that didn’t work, so that visitors had to call ahead
> from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the
> size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws
> clamped around an empty beer bottle.”
>
> Other readers pounced like wolf-sized Dobermans on an intruder. One
> guffawed, “That sentence by Sarah Palin could be entered into the annual
> Bulwer-Lytton bad writing contest. It could have a chance at winning a
> (sic) honorable mention, at any rate.”
>
> But soon, the original contributor confessed: “I probably should have
> mentioned that the sentence quoted above was not written by Sarah Palin.
> It’s taken from the first paragraph of ‘Dreams From My Father,’ written
> by Barack Obama.”
>
> The ruse should have been allowed to fester longer, but the point was
> made nonetheless: Some people hate Palin first and ask questions later.
(T Guy):
Yes, a fair enough point. However, I was going to comment that that's
a fairly decent piece of writing before you spilled the beans on it.
Mind you, had it been genuine Palin I'ld've got around to suggesting
that it was ghosted for her, which I'd put money on Obama not doing.
T Guy
Kevrob
>
> - Show quoted text -
I had a good chuckle @ the "2012" movie trailer parody Saturday Night
Live did this weekend just past.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUAfwBep1PA&feature=player_embedded OR
http://preview.tinyurl.com/P2a0l1i2n
When it comes to their memoirs, most of our solons ain't Churchill.
Kevin
William December Starr
"David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> said:
> http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NzdiYTliN2MwYmJiNWY4OWVlZTA4ZmIwYzJkMjFjOGI=
>
> ----------
[...]
> The ruse should have been allowed to fester longer, but the point was
> made nonetheless: Some people hate Palin first and ask questions later.
> ----------
>
> Heh...
You, and apprantly not only you, really need to learn to tell the
difference between "Damn, that Sarah Palin sure is one big joke" and
"I hate Sarah Palin."
(Palin Derangement Syndrome Derangement Syndrome, anyone?)
-- wds
David Harmon
(William December Starr) wrote,
>You, and apprantly not only you, really need to learn to tell the
>difference between "Damn, that Sarah Palin sure is one big joke" and
Since the quote turns out to be from Obama, are you saying "Damn, that
Barack Obama sure is one big joke"?
David V. Loewe, Jr
Starr) wrote:
When you reflexively apply either one of those to Palin, you are
suffering from PDS.
--
"I would take even money that England will not exist in
the year 2000."
Paul Ehrlich 1969
Karl Johanson
> The ruse should have been allowed to fester longer, but the point was
> made nonetheless: Some people hate Palin first and ask questions later.
And some love her, but don't ask questions...
http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/11/23/this-summer-i-hear-the-drumming-brain-dead-in-o-hi-o/
William December Starr
David Harmon <sou...@netcom.com> said:
> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote,
>
>> You, and apprantly not only you, really need to learn to tell the
>> difference between "Damn, that Sarah Palin sure is one big joke"
>> and
>
> Since the quote turns out to be from Obama, are you saying "Damn,
> that Barack Obama sure is one big joke"?
No. (Well he is, but a completely _different_ kind of big joke.)
Palin's done a lot of things that mark her as a ha-ha joke; Obama
hasn't.
-- wds
David Friedman
wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
How about Biden?
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
David Loewe, Jr.
Starr) wrote:
Well, that's AN opinion...
--
"I love the smell of napalm in the morning. It smells like...
victory!"
- Apocalypse Now
William December Starr
"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> said:
> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>
>> You, and apprantly not only you, really need to learn to tell the
>> difference between "Damn, that Sarah Palin sure is one big joke"
>> and "I hate Sarah Palin."
>>
>> (Palin Derangement Syndrome Derangement Syndrome, anyone?)
>
> When you reflexively apply either one of those to Palin, you are
> suffering from PDS.
"Canada needs to dismantle its public health-care system and
allow private enterprise to get involved and turn a profit."
When a person is prone to saying things like that, I don't know that
it's a derangement syndrome to accept on face value reports of more
of the same.
-- wds
William December Starr
David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> said:
> How about Biden?
Honestly, I haven't paid much attention to him. Mostly because (a)
the recent Secret Service screwup notwithstanding I don't think of
him as having a significant likelihood of becoming president and
(b) he doesn't seem to be a Dick Cheney as vice president. Also, I
suppose, because (c) he seems to keep a fairly low profile, unlike
Sarah Palin, so if/when he does say or do something bizarre or dumb
it doesn't get much notice.
-- wds
David Friedman
wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
> In article <ddfr-EA7E76.2...@newsfarm.phx.highwinds-media.com>,
> David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> said:
>
> > How about Biden?
>
> Honestly, I haven't paid much attention to him. Mostly because (a)
> the recent Secret Service screwup notwithstanding I don't think of
> him as having a significant likelihood of becoming president and
> (b) he doesn't seem to be a Dick Cheney as vice president.
Agreed.
> Also, I
> suppose, because (c) he seems to keep a fairly low profile, unlike
> Sarah Palin, so if/when he does say or do something bizarre or dumb
> it doesn't get much notice.
For instance, when he said that FDR responded to the stock market crash
by going on television to reassure the nation? It got some response from
Biden--but imagine if Palin had said it.
And during the VP debate he managed, with utter confidence, to
demonstrate his ignorance of both the Constitution and the history of
the office he was running for.
I should probably add that, although I take the difference between the
response to statements by Palin and more egregious statements by Biden,
as some evidence of media bias, I'm not at all sure that being
strikingly ignorant of the history of the U.S.--and technology--is a
serious disqualification for the office of either President or VP.
David Loewe, Jr.
Starr) wrote:
>"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> said:
>> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>>
>>> You, and apprantly not only you, really need to learn to tell the
>>> difference between "Damn, that Sarah Palin sure is one big joke"
>>> and "I hate Sarah Palin."
>>>
>>> (Palin Derangement Syndrome Derangement Syndrome, anyone?)
>>
>> When you reflexively apply either one of those to Palin, you are
>> suffering from PDS.
>
> "Canada needs to dismantle its public health-care system and
> allow private enterprise to get involved and turn a profit."
>
>When a person is prone to saying things like that, I don't know that
>it's a derangement syndrome to accept on face value reports of more
>of the same.
How is that a big joke?
You have a better chance as a leukemia patient in need of a bone marrow
transplant in the US than you do in Ontario. This is despite the
supposedly high percentage of uninsured in America and the complete
coverage supposedly available in Canada.
--
"Always look a gift horse in the mouth."
- Milton Friedman
Karl Johanson
Better chance of what? Getting a transplant, or surviving 5 years?
The Canadian Cancer society puts the 5 year survival rate for all types of
leukemia at 51%. I don't know if the figure is lower or higher for Ontario.
None of these stats show a survival rate that high in the US:
http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/l/leukemia/prognosis.htm
a.. 48% of white people survive 5 years for leukemia in the US 1992-99
(Cancer Facts and Figures, American Cancer Society, 2004)
a.. 39% of African American people survive 5 years for leukemia in the US
1992-99 (Cancer Facts and Figures, American Cancer Society, 2004)
a.. 46% survive 5 years for leukemia in the US 1992-99 (Cancer Facts and
Figures, American Cancer Society, 2004)
a.. 38.3% of people with Leukemia survive after 5 years in the US 1983-90
(SEER)
a.. 5-year survival rate for black people with leukaemia is 30.8% in the US
1983-90 (SEER)
a.. 5-year survival rate for people with leukaemia is 38.3% in the US
1983-90 (SEER)
a.. 5-year survival rate for white people with leukaemia is 39.5% in the US
1983-90 (SEER)
What stats were you using?
Karl Johanson
David V. Loewe, Jr
<karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>"David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote
>> On 28 Nov 2009 04:34:00 -0500, wds...@panix.com (William December
>> Starr) wrote:
>>>"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> said:
>>>> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You, and apprantly not only you, really need to learn to tell the
>>>>> difference between "Damn, that Sarah Palin sure is one big joke"
>>>>> and "I hate Sarah Palin."
>>>>>
>>>>> (Palin Derangement Syndrome Derangement Syndrome, anyone?)
>>>>
>>>> When you reflexively apply either one of those to Palin, you are
>>>> suffering from PDS.
>>>
>>> "Canada needs to dismantle its public health-care system and
>>> allow private enterprise to get involved and turn a profit."
>>>
>>>When a person is prone to saying things like that, I don't know that
>>>it's a derangement syndrome to accept on face value reports of more
>>>of the same.
>>
>> How is that a big joke?
>>
>> You have a better chance as a leukemia patient in need of a bone marrow
>> transplant in the US than you do in Ontario. This is despite the
>> supposedly high percentage of uninsured in America and the complete
>> coverage supposedly available in Canada.
>
>Better chance of what? Getting a transplant, or surviving 5 years?
Getting a bone marrow transplant, obviously.
I would not have specified one needing a bone marrow transplant if I
weren't talking about those in need of such.
>The Canadian Cancer society puts the 5 year survival rate for all types of
>leukemia at 51%. I don't know if the figure is lower or higher for Ontario.
Looking at the data you present below, I'd be curious to know when this
data concerning Canadian survival rates was obtained.
>None of these stats show a survival rate that high in the US:
>http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/l/leukemia/prognosis.htm
>
>a.. 48% of white people survive 5 years for leukemia in the US 1992-99
>(Cancer Facts and Figures, American Cancer Society, 2004)
>a.. 39% of African American people survive 5 years for leukemia in the US
>1992-99 (Cancer Facts and Figures, American Cancer Society, 2004)
>a.. 46% survive 5 years for leukemia in the US 1992-99 (Cancer Facts and
>Figures, American Cancer Society, 2004)
>a.. 38.3% of people with Leukemia survive after 5 years in the US 1983-90
>(SEER)
>a.. 5-year survival rate for black people with leukaemia is 30.8% in the US
>1983-90 (SEER)
>a.. 5-year survival rate for people with leukaemia is 38.3% in the US
>1983-90 (SEER)
>a.. 5-year survival rate for white people with leukaemia is 39.5% in the US
>1983-90 (SEER)
You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long way
in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug, Sutent,
that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago. Gleevec, one of
*the* drugs of choice for leukemia, wasn't developed until the late 90s
- and, thus, would not have affected five year survival rates for the
period ending 1999.
>What stats were you using?
You know, I've posted this a number of times now.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2009/08/04/10353906-sun.html
"Last year, there were 296 bone marrow transplants performed in Canada.
The head of Canada's best stem cell transplant program is calling on the
Ontario government for increased funding to perform more bone marrow
transplants.
Dr. Ahmed Galal, of Princess Margaret Hospital/Ontario Cancer Institute,
said he's managed to secure funding for five more transplants for a
total of 70 this year, but seven years ago, the hospital performed 120
each year.
"Each transplant costs between $150,000 to $200,000. Our population
needs about 100 to 110 transplants a year," Galal said.
"There are people dying while waiting because they can't get a
transplant and people who go to the U.S for transplants," Galal said.
His centre only performs 100% genetic bone marrow matches, but he says
if he had more provincial funding, his team would be able to perform
higher risk transplants for patients who can only find partially matched
bone marrow donors."
70/105 is 66.67%. And, of course, if you can't find a perfect match
donor, then your chances go down, as you have to get special approval to
go to the US, where they actually perform partial match transplants, and
get it done there.
84.7% of Americans have health care coverage. And, of course, from my
own personal experience, it is possible to get care in the US without
having any coverage whatsoever.
--
"Senator, America has the best health care in the world, but people
still die from cancer and heart disease. The best isn't always
good enough, is it?"
Secretary of Defense designee Tony Bretano in Executive Orders
Paul Ciszek
In article <di55h59lcbdt03e7b...@4ax.com>,
David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long way
>in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug, Sutent,
>that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system (combination
of VA and medicaid), not the unfettered free market.
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
David Loewe, Jr.
Ciszek) wrote:
>David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long way
>>in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug, Sutent,
>>that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
>
>And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system (combination
>of VA and medicaid),
Actually, NO.
I get that drug courtesy of Pfizer.
>not the unfettered free market.
--
"My carriers will stay here if we have to row back."
Admiral Vian replying to General Clark's request
for extended support at Salerno
Jette Goldie
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul
> Ciszek) wrote:
>
>> David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>> You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long way
>>> in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug, Sutent,
>>> that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
>> And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system (combination
>> of VA and medicaid),
>
> Actually, NO.
>
> I get that drug courtesy of Pfizer.
>
Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs for
free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need for them
to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want of said drugs.
--
Jette Goldie
jette....@gmail.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wolfette/
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://wolfette.livejournal.com/
("reply to" is spamblocked - use the email addy in sig)
David Friedman
Jette Goldie <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> David Loewe, Jr. wrote:
> > On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul
> > Ciszek) wrote:
> >
> >> David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> >>> You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long way
> >>> in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug, Sutent,
> >>> that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
> >> And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system (combination
> >> of VA and medicaid),
> >
> > Actually, NO.
> >
> > I get that drug courtesy of Pfizer.
> >
>
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs for
> free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need for them
> to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want of said drugs.
Drugs that would not exist if the drug companies had no source of
revenue to pay for researching, testing, and producing them.
Presumably the people you work for would also find it convenient if you
were willing to work for them for free.
Jette Goldie
> In article <heupca$fd7$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Jette Goldie <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> David Loewe, Jr. wrote:
>>> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul
>>> Ciszek) wrote:
>>>
>>>> David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>> You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long way
>>>>> in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug, Sutent,
>>>>> that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
>>>> And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system (combination
>>>> of VA and medicaid),
>>> Actually, NO.
>>>
>>> I get that drug courtesy of Pfizer.
>>>
>>
>> Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs for
>> free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need for them
>> to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want of said drugs.
>
> Drugs that would not exist if the drug companies had no source of
> revenue to pay for researching, testing, and producing them.
>
> Presumably the people you work for would also find it convenient if you
> were willing to work for them for free.
>
David has his medical treatment all sorted out, so why should anyone
else want to be able to afford health care?
David V. Loewe, Jr
<jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>David Loewe, Jr. wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul
>> Ciszek) wrote:
>>> David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>> You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long way
>>>> in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug, Sutent,
>>>> that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
>>> And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system (combination
>>> of VA and medicaid),
>>
>> Actually, NO.
>>
>> I get that drug courtesy of Pfizer.
>Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs for
>free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need for them
>to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want of said drugs.
Are they willing to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial?
--
"The greatest happiness is to scatter your enemy, to drive him before
you, to see his cities reduced to ashes, to see those who love him
shrouded in tears, and to gather into your bosom his wives and
daughters.
- Genghis Khan, 1226
Karl Johanson
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:33:38 +0000, Jette Goldie
> <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>David Loewe, Jr. wrote:
>>> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul
>>> Ciszek) wrote:
>>>> David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long
>>>>> way
>>>>> in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug,
>>>>> Sutent,
>>>>> that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
>>>> And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system
>>>> (combination
>>>> of VA and medicaid),
>>>
>>> Actually, NO.
>>>
>>> I get that drug courtesy of Pfizer.
>
>>Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs for
>>free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need for them
>>to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want of said drugs.
>
> Are they willing to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial?
I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical trials.
Karl Johanson
David Loewe, Jr.
<karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote
>> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:33:38 +0000, Jette Goldie
>> <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>David Loewe, Jr. wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul
>>>> Ciszek) wrote:
>>>>> David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> You know, that is *very* old data. Cancer treatment has come a long
>>>>>> way in the 10 to 20 years since that data was collected. The drug,
>>>>>> Sutent, that I take for my cancer didn't exist 10 years ago.
>>>>> And you get that drug thanks to a *public* health care system
>>>>> (combination of VA and medicaid),
>>>>
>>>> Actually, NO.
>>>>
>>>> I get that drug courtesy of Pfizer.
>>
>>>Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs for
>>>free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need for them
>>>to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want of said drugs.
>>
>> Are they willing to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial?
>
>I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical trials.
As Professor Friedman asks, how would the development costs be paid?
--
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend
Do it in the name of heaven and you can justify it in the end
There won't be any trumpets blowing come the Judgement Day
And on the bloody morning after....One Tin Soldier rides away."
One Tin Soldier - The Legend Of Billy Jack
David Friedman
"David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> Are they willing to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial?
> >
> >I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical trials.
>
> As Professor Friedman asks, how would the development costs be paid?
On the other hand, if the regulatory restrictions were less, drug
companies could lower their testing costs by making a "probably but not
certainly good" drug more widely available at a relatively low cost, on
condition that the users arrange to have what happens to them kept track
of. That's a particularly attractive option when the potential customers
are likely to die without the drug, hence the downside risk if the drug
turns out to have unknown adverse side effects isn't very large.
Keith F. Lynch
> I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical
> trials.
Including the use of long-established drugs?
Will you volunteer to have an even chance of being given a worthless
placebo instead of the real drug?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Keith F. Lynch
> Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs
> for free courtesy of a drug company?
It would also be nice if I could get my apartment for free courtesy
of my landlord. And if I could ride Metro for free. And if grocery
stores gave me free food just for being a nice guy, and if that food
was delicious and filling but not at all fattening.
> then there would be no need for them to have medical insurance or
> medicaid.
Unfortunately, cancer treatment consists of much more than just drugs.
And it often doesn't work.
Karl Johanson
news:hevdgi$a49$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical
>> trials.
>
> Including the use of long-established drugs?
>
> Will you volunteer to have an even chance of being given a worthless
> placebo instead of the real drug?
I should have gone into more detail. I assumed non-placebo controlled trails
after release. Less likely to produce useful data than placebo controlled
studies, but still might produce some useful data. A more controlled
tracking of the effects of Thalidomide, post release, might have lead to its
use being discontinued faster, for example.
Among the problems with the idea are costs & co-ordination.
Karl Johanson
Sean O'Hara
>
[...]
>>
>> �The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a
>> buzzer downstairs that didn�t work, so that visitors had to call ahead
>> from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the
>> size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws
>> clamped around an empty beer bottle.�
>>
[...]
> Yes, a fair enough point. However, I was going to comment that that's
> a fairly decent piece of writing before you spilled the beans on it.
>
Really? Tell me, is the wolf-sized Doberman in the apartment or at
the gas station?
--
Sean O'Hara <http://www.diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
New audio book: As Long as You Wish by John O'Keefe
<http://librivox.org/short-science-fiction-collection-010/>
William December Starr
"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> said:
> Jette Goldie <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs
>> for free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need
>> for them to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want
>> of said drugs.
>
> Are they willing to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial?
Serious question: in your case, what -- and how favorable -- were
the alternatives available to you?
-- wds
Carol Hague
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful T Guy declared:
> >
> [...]
> >>
> >> "The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a
> >> buzzer downstairs that didn't work, so that visitors had to call ahead
> >> from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the
> >> size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws
> >> clamped around an empty beer bottle."
> >>
>
> [...]
>
> > Yes, a fair enough point. However, I was going to comment that that's
> > a fairly decent piece of writing before you spilled the beans on it.
> >
>
> Really? Tell me, is the wolf-sized Doberman in the apartment or at
> the gas station?
It's seems clear enough to me that the dog is at the gas station. I
agree that it could probably have been put *better*, but it seems quite
adequate as it stands, regardless of who wrote it.
--
Carol. www.mullimages.com
"This might as well say "bing tiddle tiddle bong".
It's complete gibberish," - Rodney McKay, Stargate: Atlantis
Paul Ciszek
In article <hevs0q$cno$1...@panix1.panix.com>,
And does Mr. Loewe know for certain that he is in fact receiving a
drug and not a placebo?
David Loewe, Jr.
Starr) wrote:
1) Hepatic arterial chemoembolization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroendocrine_tumor#Hepatic_artery-delivered_therapies
2) Regular chemotherapy.
3) Nexavar.
4) Do nothing.
The results for 1) are very good. It is one of the next logical bullets
to use if the tumors quit responding to Sutent [1].
Results for 2) are middling.
Results for 3) are good to middling. Performance is better than
straight chemo, but the side-effects can be worse than Sutent.
Results for 4) are poor in the long term [2].
[1] Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percutaneous_hepatic_perfusion - also a
trial therapy - has probably overtaken it as the next option, but it was
not on the table when I went on Sutent.
[2] I was told that it would take a couple to a few years for it to kill
me if I did nothing. Later scans revealed that it would likely have
been a couple.
--
"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough
to take it all away."
- Barry Goldwater
David Loewe, Jr.
Ciszek) wrote:
>William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>>"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> said:
>>> Jette Goldie <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wouldn't it be nice if every cancer patient could get their drugs
>>>> for free courtesy of a drug company? then there would be no need
>>>> for them to have medical insurance or medicaid. Or die for want
>>>> of said drugs.
>>>
>>> Are they willing to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial?
>>
>>Serious question: in your case, what -- and how favorable -- were
>>the alternatives available to you?
>
>And does Mr. Loewe know for certain that he is in fact receiving a
>drug and not a placebo?
Yes, I do know.
And when they took it off blind they confirmed (the hair turning white
previously was kind of a give-away) that I had always been on the study
medication and not the placebo.
--
"We all grew up on Mickey Mouse and hula-hoops
Then we all bought BMW's and brand new pickup trucks
And we watched John Kennedy die one afternoon
Kids of the baby boom."
- David Bellamy
Kip Williams
> Sean O'Hara<sean...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful T Guy declared:
>>>
>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> "The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a
>>>> buzzer downstairs that didn't work, so that visitors had to call ahead
>>>> from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the
>>>> size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws
>>>> clamped around an empty beer bottle."
>>>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Yes, a fair enough point. However, I was going to comment that that's
>>> a fairly decent piece of writing before you spilled the beans on it.
>>
>> Really? Tell me, is the wolf-sized Doberman in the apartment or at
>> the gas station?
>
> It's seems clear enough to me that the dog is at the gas station. I
> agree that it could probably have been put *better*, but it seems quite
> adequate as it stands, regardless of who wrote it.
That's certainly how I read it. Though, of course, if Sarah Palin really
had written it, I'd be obliged to misunderstand, because of my seething
personal hatred.
Kip W
home on derange
Kip Williams
> And does Mr. Loewe know for certain that he is in fact receiving a
> drug and not a placebo?
Pretty colors?
Kip W
Carol Hague
I don't have a seething personal hatred for SP, just a degree of
open-mouthed astonishment :-)
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams<k...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> That's certainly how I read it. Though, of course, if Sarah Palin really
>> had written it, I'd be obliged to misunderstand, because of my seething
>> personal hatred.
>
> I don't have a seething personal hatred for SP, just a degree of
> open-mouthed astonishment :-)
That's how it feels to me, but I've been told firmly that I (along with
anybody who votes like me) have a fulminating hate-on for her. It would
be rude of me to suggest that anyone is projecting there.
Kip W
Carol Hague
So not voting for someone means you hate them? You learn something new
every day... :-)
David Friedman
ca...@wrhpv.com (Carol Hague) wrote:
> Kip Williams <k...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Carol Hague wrote:
> > > Kip Williams<k...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> That's certainly how I read it. Though, of course, if Sarah Palin really
> > >> had written it, I'd be obliged to misunderstand, because of my seething
> > >> personal hatred.
> > >
> > > I don't have a seething personal hatred for SP, just a degree of
> > > open-mouthed astonishment :-)
> >
> > That's how it feels to me, but I've been told firmly that I (along with
> > anybody who votes like me) have a fulminating hate-on for her. It would
> > be rude of me to suggest that anyone is projecting there.
>
> So not voting for someone means you hate them? You learn something new
> every day... :-)
It might even mean that you don't hate them, depending on how you feel
about the job of an elected politician.
But the basis for accusing people of hating Palin isn't that they didn't
vote for her, it's the general tone of a lot of the attacks on her.
"Hate" oversimplified the matter, but it's at least one element, along
with contempt.
Sean O'Hara
declared:
> Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful T Guy declared:
>> [...]
>>>> "The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a
>>>> buzzer downstairs that didn't work, so that visitors had to call ahead
>>>> from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the
>>>> size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws
>>>> clamped around an empty beer bottle."
>>>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Yes, a fair enough point. However, I was going to comment that that's
>>> a fairly decent piece of writing before you spilled the beans on it.
>>>
>> Really? Tell me, is the wolf-sized Doberman in the apartment or at
>> the gas station?
>
> It's seems clear enough to me that the dog is at the gas station. I
> agree that it could probably have been put *better*, but it seems quite
> adequate as it stands, regardless of who wrote it.
>
If there are two ways to construe the sentence, it's not clear. You
may be able to surmise the intended meaning, but that doesn't make
it clear.
And the problem could be fixed simply by removing the comma after
"gas station".
Carol Hague
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Carol Hague
> declared:
> > Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful T Guy declared:
> >> [...]
> >>>> "The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a
> >>>> buzzer downstairs that didn't work, so that visitors had to call ahead
> >>>> from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the
> >>>> size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws
> >>>> clamped around an empty beer bottle."
> >>>>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>> Yes, a fair enough point. However, I was going to comment that that's
> >>> a fairly decent piece of writing before you spilled the beans on it.
> >>>
> >> Really? Tell me, is the wolf-sized Doberman in the apartment or at
> >> the gas station?
> >
> > It's seems clear enough to me that the dog is at the gas station. I
> > agree that it could probably have been put *better*, but it seems quite
> > adequate as it stands, regardless of who wrote it.
> >
>
> If there are two ways to construe the sentence, it's not clear. You
> may be able to surmise the intended meaning, but that doesn't make
> it clear.
What I said was "clear enough" which is a slightly different thing - I
could see there was another possible way to read the sentence, but I
could also see that it made less sense than the gas station construction
so I discounted it. I should think that most people who read any
significant amount are used to making that sort of mental shift without
even thinking about it, so that while it may not be 100% unambiguous,
it's still "clear enough" unless you really want to misread it.
Carol Hague
> But the basis for accusing people of hating Palin isn't that they didn't
> vote for her, it's the general tone of a lot of the attacks on her.
> "Hate" oversimplified the matter, but it's at least one element, along
> with contempt.
I don't hate Palin, but I'm extremely relieved that she's not now one
step away from the US Presidency, because I don't think she has nearly
enough brains to cope with it. And I'm not even American.
And no, I don't think Obama is perfect - he's human, so he can't be.
But I'm a lot happier to see him in the job than the alternative.
Andre Lieven
> David Friedman <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> > But the basis for accusing people of hating Palin isn't that they didn't
> > vote for her, it's the general tone of a lot of the attacks on her.
> > "Hate" oversimplified the matter, but it's at least one element, along
> > with contempt.
>
> I don't hate Palin, but I'm extremely relieved that she's not now one
> step away from the US Presidency, because I don't think she has nearly
> enough brains to cope with it. And I'm not even American.
>
> And no, I don't think Obama is perfect - he's human, so he can't be.
> But I'm a lot happier to see him in the job than the alternative.
The extremely silly notion that people who, rightly, see Palin as a
willful moron, somehow "hate" her, only exposes the lunacy of
those hate claimers.
Face it, kiddies, Sarah Palin IS a major thicky:
http://the-reaction.blogspot.com/2009/11/sarah-palin-attacks-canadas-health-care.html
Sarah Palin attacks Canada's health-care system, exposes
bottomless well of ignorance and stupidity
By Michael J.W. Stickings 25 Nov 09
I'm sorry, I just can't put this delicately. I'm a Canadian, after
all,
and our universal health-care system is a key component of our
national identity, of our just society, and of what makes this
country great.
Sarah Palin, spewing bullshit (as usual) as she promotes her
book, should just shut the fuck up. Because she hasn't got a
fucking clue. All she's got is her right-wing propaganda, the
nonsense she passes off as common sense, and an
astonishing capacity to expose her ignorance at every turn.
Confronted by Mary Walsh (playing "Marg Delahunty"), a
Canadian comedian from the popular show This Hour Has 22
Minutes, who asked if she had "any words of encouragement
for the Canadian conservatives who have worked so hard to
try to diminish that kind of socialized medicine we have up
there," Palin issued this nugget of anti-wisdom:
Well, my answer was too keep the faith. My answer was to
keep the faith. Cause that common sense conservatism can
be plugged-in there in Canada too. In fact Canada needs to
reform its health care system and let the private sector take
over some of what the government has absorbed. So thank
you, keep the faith.
As I have noted here before, our single-payer public system is
supplemented by extensive private coverage and care. What
the public system -- the government -- provides is basic
coverage for all Canadians. This is actually done on a
province-by-province basis. Many Canadians then either get
additional coverage through their employer (as I do) or buy
supplemental private insurance, which is generally affordable.
This additional coverage reduces out-of-pocket costs and
secures access to more substantial care. For example,
what I get through work covers almost the full cost of
prescription drugs and provides me (and my dependents)
access to extensive eye and dental care, among other
things. And there is choice. I chose my family doctor, and
the government does not restrict my access to the
excellent care we have, contrary to what dishonest
American conservatives would have everyone believe.
------------------------
Calling an actual moron a moron *isn't* "hate". Duh.
Andre
Joy Beeson
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> But the basis for accusing people of hating Palin isn't that they didn't
> vote for her, it's the general tone of a lot of the attacks on her.
> "Hate" oversimplified the matter, but it's at least one element, along
> with contempt.
The people obsessed with Palin bear a striking resemblance to the
people who were obsessed with Martha Stewart. I would have remained
blissfully unaware of Martha Stewart's existence were it not for the
people who made a cottage industry out of vilifying her.
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
Kip Williams
> The people obsessed with Palin bear a striking resemblance to the
> people who were obsessed with Martha Stewart. I would have remained
> blissfully unaware of Martha Stewart's existence were it not for the
> people who made a cottage industry out of vilifying her.
I had to acquire some interest in Palin because there was some danger
she might be put in a position of some power, unlike Stewart. At the
moment, I have some freedom to ignore her (Palin) a bit, and I'm using
that freedom.
Kip W
Seth
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical
>> trials.
>
>Including the use of long-established drugs?
Long-established drugs don't need clinical trials, but they also tend
to drop in price.
>Will you volunteer to have an even chance of being given a worthless
>placebo instead of the real drug?
How about the new drug instead of the old, best available approved
drug?
Seth
Karl Johanson
news:hh1et8$hko$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> In article <hevdgi$a49$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>> I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical
>>> trials.
>>
>>Including the use of long-established drugs?
>
> Long-established drugs don't need clinical trials,
Long established drugs might have interactions with newer drugs.
>but they also tend to drop in price.
Karl Johanson
Seth
Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>"Seth" <se...@panix.com> wrote in message
>news:hh1et8$hko$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>> In article <hevdgi$a49$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
>> Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>>> I think it would be good if all drug use could be part of clinical
>>>> trials.
>>>
>>>Including the use of long-established drugs?
>>
>> Long-established drugs don't need clinical trials,
>
>Long established drugs might have interactions with newer drugs.
Those are (or should be) part of the testing of the newer drugs.
Seth
Keith F. Lynch
> Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> Long established drugs might have interactions with newer drugs.
> Those are (or should be) part of the testing of the newer drugs.
It's not practical to test every new drug against every old drug. If
there are 10,000 old drugs in use, do you get 1000 people for each of
them to be given both drugs, and another 1000 people for each of them
to be given a placebo instead of the new drug? What would this cost?
And what about all possible combinations of three drugs? And what
about interactions with foods? Or with genetic variations?
That's one advantage of generic drugs -- by the time the patent
expires, there have been 20 years of real-world testing. Rich people
who can afford non-generics act as guinea pigs for these new drugs,
and actually *pay* for the privilege.
This won't catch all possible adverse interactions, of course, but it
will catch whatever is most likely to occur in real life. Just as
we know how safe air travel is, not from testing or from theoretical
calculations, but from years of real-world air travel.
Seth
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>> Long established drugs might have interactions with newer drugs.
>
>> Those are (or should be) part of the testing of the newer drugs.
>
>It's not practical to test every new drug against every old drug.
I was arguing against a claim that old drugs have to be re-tested
against new drugs. To whatever extent such multi-drug testing is
done, it should be charged to the new drug.
Seth