Hi Charlie,
Well, it looks like the illegal importation of pharmaceuticals might
actually be a dangerous idea (what a surprise!). And the FDA (not any
pharmaceutical company, and if you think the FDA is PHrMA's friend you need
to really get some new information sources) is who did this study.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/09/30/drug.imports.ap/index.html
Anyway, it shouldn't be too tough to see how bad things could happen to
people if they choose to go this route.
Mike
--
There are no stupid questions.
There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
David Chamberlain wrote:
>
> The quickest way to end all of these suits is to cap the lawyer fees. The
> maximum amount that a lawyer could make on ANY case is his hourly rate times
> the # of hours worked on the case.
> In the tobacco case, I saw some stats that were something like: One of
> the lawyers involved belonged to a large firm with over 120 partners. If
> they took everyone who worked at the firm from the janitor to the partners
> and assumed that every single person worked on only the tobacco case and did
> no other work, the contingency fee amount to several thousand dollars per
> hour for every hour that passed from when the case was filed until the case
> was settled.
>
And some of the states tried to weasel out of the deals they had made.
Poor, ignorant governments.
--
Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)
Some of the animal drugs that were imported may have been for animals.
Although, I wouldn't trust any drugs imported from third world countries
such as India, etc. which shows it is important to know where one is
importing drugs from.
"Rico" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mike in Mystic wrote:
> > Hi Charlie,
> >
> > Well, it looks like the illegal importation of pharmaceuticals might
> > actually be a dangerous idea (what a surprise!). And the FDA (not any
> > pharmaceutical company, and if you think the FDA is PHrMA's friend you
need
> > to really get some new information sources) is who did this study.
> >
> > http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/09/30/drug.imports.ap/index.html
> >
> > Anyway, it shouldn't be too tough to see how bad things could happen to
> > people if they choose to go this route.
> >
> > Mike
>
> "WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nearly 90 percent of the imported mail-
> order drugs stopped at the borders in a special crackdown by
> government agents were potentially dangerous, the Food and
> Drug Administration reported"
>
> Well duh, that's why they are "prescription" drugs. If drugs
> aren't potentially dangerous they aren't required to be
> prescription drugs :)
>
> I know that's not what the reporter meant, but it's
> indicative of what a poorly researched and written article
> it was. The boy doesn't have a clue when it comes to
> interpreting poorly reported statistics.
>
> Two appropriate questions would be:
>
> What percentage of valid prescription filled by licensed
> mail order pharmacies in Canada for export to US citizens
> were filled incorrectly?
>
> What percentage of valid prescriptions from licensed
> pharmacies in the US are filled incorrectly?
>
> I would be very surprised if there is a significant
> difference.
>
> The fact that the FDA lumped drugs from all sources,
> prescription and non-prescription drugs drugs together shows
> that they are using scare tactics. You figure out why.
>
> Dick
>
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Au contraire, the biggest problem is a scumbag lawyer willing to take such a
case.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03
"Lawrence A. Ramsey" wrote in message
> Biggest problem I see around my town is that doctors are afraid to
> prescribe some medicicnes-especially when you have just moved into an
> area and they don't know you. We had one doctor here that prescribed a
> reasonable amount or anti-depressants and some pain killers. Not an
> unreasonable amount mind you. She deliberately overdosed and he family
> is suing the doctor so now all the doctors are scared stiff to
> prescribe anythingin that area. It was my next door neighbors neice
> who took them so that is how I knew about it.
> That along with price would be a powerful incenitive to do business
> with companies oversea.
In article <[email protected]>, "George" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Have to wonder if they wouldn't ooze sleaze even after drying, though.
>
Doubtless.
Did you hear that some research laboratories have stopped using rats as test
subjects, and switched to lawyers instead? They've found several advantages:
- animal rights groups don't object
- the staff don't become emotionally attached to the subjects
- there are some things even a rat won't do
And didja know there are only three lawyer jokes?
All the rest are true stories.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:16:44 GMT, "Mike in Mystic"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi Charlie,
>
>Well, it looks like the illegal importation of pharmaceuticals might
>actually be a dangerous idea (what a surprise!). And the FDA (not any
>pharmaceutical company, and if you think the FDA is PHrMA's friend you need
>to really get some new information sources) is who did this study.
>
>http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/09/30/drug.imports.ap/index.html
>
>Anyway, it shouldn't be too tough to see how bad things could happen to
>people if they choose to go this route.
What I wonder is how many people in Canada and Mexico die from these
dangerous drugs? The drugs being exported are the same ones the people
in those countries are taking. Are they only dangerous when imported?
If they are dangerous in the country of origin as well then the whole
thing smacks of American arrogance and unconcern for the people in
other countries.
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
"George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Saving you money overall, given the propensity of juries to give large
> awards even in meritless cases.
>
> Tort reform would be nice.
Agree on the tort reform.
As for the money savings, that may have been OK years ago, now the lawyers
know they can get money just by bringing suit, no fighting involved. A few
tough cases would make them re-think their methods.
Ed
Mike in Mystic wrote:
> Hi Charlie,
>
> Well, it looks like the illegal importation of pharmaceuticals might
> actually be a dangerous idea (what a surprise!). And the FDA (not any
> pharmaceutical company, and if you think the FDA is PHrMA's friend you need
> to really get some new information sources) is who did this study.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/09/30/drug.imports.ap/index.html
>
> Anyway, it shouldn't be too tough to see how bad things could happen to
> people if they choose to go this route.
>
> Mike
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nearly 90 percent of the imported mail-
order drugs stopped at the borders in a special crackdown by
government agents were potentially dangerous, the Food and
Drug Administration reported"
Well duh, that's why they are "prescription" drugs. If drugs
aren't potentially dangerous they aren't required to be
prescription drugs :)
I know that's not what the reporter meant, but it's
indicative of what a poorly researched and written article
it was. The boy doesn't have a clue when it comes to
interpreting poorly reported statistics.
Two appropriate questions would be:
What percentage of valid prescription filled by licensed
mail order pharmacies in Canada for export to US citizens
were filled incorrectly?
What percentage of valid prescriptions from licensed
pharmacies in the US are filled incorrectly?
I would be very surprised if there is a significant
difference.
The fact that the FDA lumped drugs from all sources,
prescription and non-prescription drugs drugs together shows
that they are using scare tactics. You figure out why.
Dick
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Eric Tonks wrote:
> Some of the animal drugs that were imported may have been for animals.
>
> Although, I wouldn't trust any drugs imported from third world countries
> such as India, etc. which shows it is important to know where one is
> importing drugs from.
>
Nor should I, however if I didn't have good health insurance
I wouldn't hesitate for a second to use a reputable Canadian
source.
The article, and the FDA press release it was based on were
so obviously blatant scare tactics with no useful
information that it was obvious what they were up to.
Had the article listed by country which drugs that had valid
prescriptions were problematic, then it would have been a
useful article. My guess is that the reason they didn't do
that was that it would have shown Canada to be a safe source
for prescription drugs.
Rico
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> "George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Tort reform would be nice.
>
> Agree on the tort reform.
>
Thirded ...
Maybe we could re-use the "three-strikes-and-you're-out" stuff that was
so popular in the legislatures a few years back? Only instead of felons
we will focus on lawyers and judges.
- For lawyers, if you loose three cases, you're disbarred.
- For judges, if you have three decisions ultimately overturned on
appeal then you retire.
Of course something like that might make the Ninth Circuit into a real
short-timers shop.
--
http://www.frii.com/~charlesj/woodworking
==============================================================
Not an HP spokesman | Business email: [email protected]
Hewlett-Packard Company | Personal email: [email protected]
Loveland, Colorado, USA | ICQ: 29610755 AIM: LovelandCharles
Tim Douglass wrote:
> What I wonder is how many people in Canada and Mexico die from these
> dangerous drugs? The drugs being exported are the same ones the people
> in those countries are taking. Are they only dangerous when imported?
> If they are dangerous in the country of origin as well then the whole
> thing smacks of American arrogance and unconcern for the people in
> other countries.
>
> Tim Douglass
>
>
Smacks more of the gummnt and drug companies protecting the
US drug companies right to shear their US sheep anyway they
want.
Had the article compared drugs with legitimate prescriptions
by country, it could have had some validity. I'll bet the
reason they didn't do that was because drugs from legitimate
sources in Canada are safe and an honest full review of the
results would have shown that.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> In article <[email protected]>, Charles Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> > - For lawyers, if you loose three cases, you're disbarred.
>
> That would lead rapidly to a large surplus of unemployed disbarred lawyers.
> (Consider that there is a losing side in *every* court case.)
Okay, I'll be charitable. The strikes will only count when a lawyer is
bringing suit, not when acting as defense; and I'll up the number of
strikes to ten.
> What are we gonna do with 'em all? They're too big to use as push sticks.
I don't know what you do with *your* garbage, but mine goes to the dump.
:-)
> Requiring the losing party to pay the winner's legal fees would go a long way
> toward eliminating frivolous, baseless lawsuits such as the recent one in
> which some lard-butt claimed it was McDonald's fault that he is a lard-butt.
*Nods head vigorously*
--
http://www.frii.com/~charlesj/woodworking
==============================================================
Not an HP spokesman | Business email: [email protected]
Hewlett-Packard Company | Personal email: [email protected]
Loveland, Colorado, USA | ICQ: 29610755 AIM: LovelandCharles
Have to wonder if they wouldn't ooze sleaze even after drying, though.
"Joe Gorman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Mark & Juanita wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >
> >>... snip
> >>
> >>>- For lawyers, if you loose three cases, you're disbarred.
> >>
> >>That would lead rapidly to a large surplus of unemployed disbarred
lawyers.
> >>(Consider that there is a losing side in *every* court case.) What are
we
> >>gonna do with 'em all? They're too big to use as push sticks.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, but one can dream, can't they? :-)
>
> Would they make good stickers for air drying lumber? After slicing them
> into the proper sixe and drying them with stickers. I wonder if we could
> make the stickers out of hemp plywood?
Mark & Juanita wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>... snip
>>
>>>- For lawyers, if you loose three cases, you're disbarred.
>>
>>That would lead rapidly to a large surplus of unemployed disbarred lawyers.
>>(Consider that there is a losing side in *every* court case.) What are we
>>gonna do with 'em all? They're too big to use as push sticks.
>
>
> Yeah, but one can dream, can't they? :-)
Would they make good stickers for air drying lumber? After slicing them
into the proper sixe and drying them with stickers. I wonder if we could
make the stickers out of hemp plywood?
Joe
>
>
>>Requiring the losing party to pay the winner's legal fees would go a long way
>>toward eliminating frivolous, baseless lawsuits such as the recent one in
>>which some lard-butt claimed it was McDonald's fault that he is a lard-butt.
>>
>
>
> Saw a comic strip about a month ago in which an obviously obese woman
> walks into a fast-food place and in the first panel orders a large
> burger, large order of fries, large Coke and super-size it. In the
> second panel, she asks for it to go as she is going to eat it on the way
> to her lawyer's who is going working to sue the fast food place for
> making her fat. In the third panel, as she is heading out the door,
> order in hand, a thought bubble over one of the main characters in the
> comic asks, "Yeah, but who are you going to sue for making you stupid?"
>
>
>
>>>- For judges, if you have three decisions ultimately overturned on
>>>appeal then you retire.
>>>
>>>Of course something like that might make the Ninth Circuit into a real
>>>short-timers shop.
>>>
>>
>>Works for me.
>>
>>--
>>Regards,
>> Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
>>
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> ... snip
> > - For lawyers, if you loose three cases, you're disbarred.
>
> That would lead rapidly to a large surplus of unemployed disbarred lawyers.
> (Consider that there is a losing side in *every* court case.) What are we
> gonna do with 'em all? They're too big to use as push sticks.
Yeah, but one can dream, can't they? :-)
>
> Requiring the losing party to pay the winner's legal fees would go a long way
> toward eliminating frivolous, baseless lawsuits such as the recent one in
> which some lard-butt claimed it was McDonald's fault that he is a lard-butt.
>
Saw a comic strip about a month ago in which an obviously obese woman
walks into a fast-food place and in the first panel orders a large
burger, large order of fries, large Coke and super-size it. In the
second panel, she asks for it to go as she is going to eat it on the way
to her lawyer's who is going working to sue the fast food place for
making her fat. In the third panel, as she is heading out the door,
order in hand, a thought bubble over one of the main characters in the
comic asks, "Yeah, but who are you going to sue for making you stupid?"
> > - For judges, if you have three decisions ultimately overturned on
> >appeal then you retire.
> >
> >Of course something like that might make the Ninth Circuit into a real
> >short-timers shop.
> >
> Works for me.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
>
Biggest problem I see around my town is that doctors are afraid to
prescribe some medicicnes-especially when you have just moved into an
area and they don't know you. We had one doctor here that prescribed a
reasonable amount or anti-depressants and some pain killers. Not an
unreasonable amount mind you. She deliberately overdosed and he family
is suing the doctor so now all the doctors are scared stiff to
prescribe anythingin that area. It was my next door neighbors neice
who took them so that is how I knew about it.
That along with price would be a powerful incenitive to do business
with companies oversea.
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:10:37 -0700, Rico <[email protected]> wrote:
>Eric Tonks wrote:
>> Some of the animal drugs that were imported may have been for animals.
>>
>> Although, I wouldn't trust any drugs imported from third world countries
>> such as India, etc. which shows it is important to know where one is
>> importing drugs from.
>>
>
>Nor should I, however if I didn't have good health insurance
>I wouldn't hesitate for a second to use a reputable Canadian
>source.
>
>The article, and the FDA press release it was based on were
>so obviously blatant scare tactics with no useful
>information that it was obvious what they were up to.
>
>Had the article listed by country which drugs that had valid
>prescriptions were problematic, then it would have been a
>useful article. My guess is that the reason they didn't do
>that was that it would have shown Canada to be a safe source
>for prescription drugs.
>
>Rico
>
>
>-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
>http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
In article <[email protected]>, Charles Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>says...
>>
>> "George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > Tort reform would be nice.
>>
>> Agree on the tort reform.
>>
>Thirded ...
>
>Maybe we could re-use the "three-strikes-and-you're-out" stuff that was
>so popular in the legislatures a few years back? Only instead of felons
>we will focus on lawyers and judges.
>
> - For lawyers, if you loose three cases, you're disbarred.
That would lead rapidly to a large surplus of unemployed disbarred lawyers.
(Consider that there is a losing side in *every* court case.) What are we
gonna do with 'em all? They're too big to use as push sticks.
Requiring the losing party to pay the winner's legal fees would go a long way
toward eliminating frivolous, baseless lawsuits such as the recent one in
which some lard-butt claimed it was McDonald's fault that he is a lard-butt.
> - For judges, if you have three decisions ultimately overturned on
>appeal then you retire.
>
>Of course something like that might make the Ninth Circuit into a real
>short-timers shop.
>
Works for me.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:13:19 -0700, Tim Douglass
<[email protected]> wrote:
>What I wonder is how many people in Canada and Mexico die from these
>dangerous drugs?
CEO's of US pharm companies are starving on street corners, owing to
cheap imports of these Dangerous _DRUGS_ from 3rd world countries like
Canada.
Remember - Osama bin Laden owned a pharmaceutical company.
When you import cheap Zantac, you're importing terrorism.
--
Smert' spamionam
Saving you money overall, given the propensity of juries to give large
awards even in meritless cases.
Tort reform would be nice.
"Pete Becker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Swingman wrote:
> >
> > Au contraire, the biggest problem is a scumbag lawyer willing to take
such a
> > case.
> >
>
> Combined with a scumbag insurance company that settles meritless cases
> rather than litigate. You get more of whatever you reward.
>
The quickest way to end all of these suits is to cap the lawyer fees. The
maximum amount that a lawyer could make on ANY case is his hourly rate times
the # of hours worked on the case.
In the tobacco case, I saw some stats that were something like: One of
the lawyers involved belonged to a large firm with over 120 partners. If
they took everyone who worked at the firm from the janitor to the partners
and assumed that every single person worked on only the tobacco case and did
no other work, the contingency fee amount to several thousand dollars per
hour for every hour that passed from when the case was filed until the case
was settled.
--
dbchamber at hotmail spam dot com
Remove the spam to reach me
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Charles Jones
<[email protected]> wrote:
> >In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> >says...
> >>
> >> "George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> > Tort reform would be nice.
> >>
> >> Agree on the tort reform.
> >>
> >Thirded ...
> >
> >Maybe we could re-use the "three-strikes-and-you're-out" stuff that was
> >so popular in the legislatures a few years back? Only instead of felons
> >we will focus on lawyers and judges.
> >
> > - For lawyers, if you loose three cases, you're disbarred.
>
> That would lead rapidly to a large surplus of unemployed disbarred
lawyers.
> (Consider that there is a losing side in *every* court case.) What are we
> gonna do with 'em all? They're too big to use as push sticks.
>
> Requiring the losing party to pay the winner's legal fees would go a long
way
> toward eliminating frivolous, baseless lawsuits such as the recent one in
> which some lard-butt claimed it was McDonald's fault that he is a
lard-butt.
>
> > - For judges, if you have three decisions ultimately overturned on
> >appeal then you retire.
> >
> >Of course something like that might make the Ninth Circuit into a real
> >short-timers shop.
> >
> Works for me.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
"Doug Miller"
> Did you hear that some research laboratories have stopped using rats as test
> subjects, and switched to lawyers instead? They've found several advantages:
> - animal rights groups don't object
> - the staff don't become emotionally attached to the subjects
> - there are some things even a rat won't do
And don't forget : they more closely resemble human beings.
> And didja know there are only three lawyer jokes?
> All the rest are true stories.
That's so unfair. 99% percent of them give the rest a
bad name..