skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Deep state communist for sure.
Deep state communist for sure.They must be communists!
just watched an interview with Laura Piddock who said Corbyn had agreed to the GE now no deal is off the table.
When the interviewer said it's not she said they classed the extension as no deal of the table because it meant we couldn't crash out on the 31st.
I don't think many people would class that as no deal off the table. Chance of no deal delayed but not off the table.
Well it’s off table until 31 Jan. the deal is there to be accepted as a back up...if it gets brought back before the Parliament (which it will if Johnson has campaigned on it and wins)
If there’s a hung parliament or Brexit party wins election then guess No Deal could be back on the table
But it’s off the table until after the election which is the important thing. The concern was an election would be called and we’d drop out on no deal before a new government was formed.exactly, I don't consider it to be off the table.
16 year olds would offer nothing except the opportunity for McDonnell to offer them the sweet shop for free - most when out of school are more interested in shagging than voting
I don't think there are any more dodgy sales reps in the US than in the UK targeting individual Drs/Prescribers. Their system allows promotion direct to the public. The public buy the promotional blurb as they might for a tube of toothpaste...& then demand a Prescriber gives them a prescription for it - then they seek the cheapest source (which might be illegal imports, with sub-standard manufacturing that results in the Pharma companies & the US health service getting a [sometimes] very bad press)It is no secret that the biggest pharmaceutical successes have not laid in infectious diseases but in cancer, anti-asthmatics, statins etc...the protein target won't change every 6 months. The further into clinical research a drug candidate goes the more invested in its success you become. Thankfully because we aren't quite at the stage of the American system we don't have pharmaceutical sales reps pushing dodgy products onto individual doctors. The government is also still yet to catch up with the fact that a complex compound can be given a miniscule tweak to circumnavigate existing regulations. But these are conversations for another day.
Working on the other side of this, it would be nice if people recognised the years and years of work we do as scientists to get these things right.
I don't think there are any more dodgy sales reps in the US than in the UK targeting individual Drs/Prescribers. Their system allows promotion direct to the public. The public buy the promotional blurb as they might for a tube of toothpaste...& then demand a Prescriber gives them a prescription for it - then they seek the cheapest source (which might be illegal imports, with sub-standard manufacturing that results in the Pharma companies & the US health service getting a [sometimes] very bad press)
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I don't think there are any more dodgy sales reps in the US than in the UK targeting individual Drs/Prescribers. Their system allows promotion direct to the public. The public buy the promotional blurb as they might for a tube of toothpaste...& then demand a Prescriber gives them a prescription for it - then they seek the cheapest source (which might be illegal imports, with sub-standard manufacturing that results in the Pharma companies & the US health service getting a [sometimes] very bad press)
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
That's what happens today but the direction of travel big US pharma wants is in the opposite direction, with unrestricted or even preferential access to the NHS.
There are generally no tariffs for imports of finished drugs under WTO rules, but the list of products in scope has not been updated for years, it is being held up by the USA for reasons unknown.
Im 38 and more interested in shagging than voting TBF
I don't think there are any more dodgy sales reps in the US than in the UK targeting individual Drs/Prescribers. Their system allows promotion direct to the public. The public buy the promotional blurb as they might for a tube of toothpaste...& then demand a Prescriber gives them a prescription for it - then they seek the cheapest source (which might be illegal imports, with sub-standard manufacturing that results in the Pharma companies & the US health service getting a [sometimes] very bad press)
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
You definitely get no birds
I don’t think my girlfriend would be too happy if I did.
Well the named drugs Lyrica & Viagra are available generically...so the big US Pharma can charge what they like & miss out on sales if priced too highly...an earlier post I mentioned Medicines Optimisation Pharmacists who are out there - employed by the NHS to identify patients who take stuff like these as brands & they counsel patients with view to getting them onto the cheaper generics.
That is the company's doing not the reps who just go out doing what they are asked to do by the said company. The bribery was at a much higher level in that case.I recall GSK getting a multi billion dollar fine for the doctor bribery scandal-must have missed the one here
I’m glad you make this point because the concern is that the American pharmaceutical industry aided by Trump will force the same pricing structure on the NHS as part of a trade agreement that the US currently “enjoys”. That would mean that that the NHS budget for drugs would have to rise based on the current budget from the 15% you highlighted to 33%. To put that into context the difference, that’s the difference, annually will be more than we send to the EU annually and by some distance. On that basis alone the single issue of the cost of drugs to the NHS leave doesn’t stack up. The side of the bus should have said we send £360M a week to the EU, lets gift it with interest to American pharmaceutical companies instead.Given the cost of drugs is less than 15% of the overall NHS budget - I often think successive governments have been barking up the wrong tree
That is the company's doing not the reps who just go out doing what they are asked to do by the said company. The bribery was at a much higher level in that case.
Preferential access here like I say I cannot state it as a fact, but GSK do seem to get to hold discussions with people that others cannot
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Are you suggesting that, for example, the Purdue opiate scandal, could have happened in this country?
I’m glad you make this point because the concern is that the American pharmaceutical industry aided by Trump will force the same pricing structure on the NHS as part of a trade agreement that the US currently “enjoys”. That would mean that that the NHS budget for drugs would have to rise based on the current budget from the 15% you highlighted to 33%. To put that into context the difference, that’s the difference, annually will be more than we send to the EU annually and by some distance. On that basis alone the single issue of the cost of drugs to the NHS leave doesn’t stack up. The side of the bus should have said we send £360M a week to the EU, lets gift it with interest to American pharmaceutical companies instead.
Well look at the Grenfell report. Who are you pointing the finger at for the initially reported failings? The fireman on the front line? The firechiefs that direct them on the ground? Or the Fire Commissioner who either couldn't present the case for enough funding or didn't use the funding appropriately?Dude...come on.
Key words you use - concern & force are exactly why I call it a scare story. The US can make a suggestion but to actually force us in some way to accept their pricing scheme is just so wide of the mark imo. Plus, if they changed it to the US scheme I think the Prescribers in the UK would be even more reticent to prescribe new medicines...except where evidence shows a major leap forward, & even more likely to prescribe cheap generics. And don't forget the rules would apply to UK & other country's Pharma who could compete with them...so the "gift" would most likely never materialise.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Well look at the Grenfell report. Who are you pointing the finger at for the initially reported failings? The fireman on the front line? The firechiefs that direct them on the ground? Or the Fire Commissioner who either couldn't present the case for enough funding or didn't use the funding appropriately?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Or the govt/parliament that ignored the requests for funding because it was too busy thinking about reducing spending everywhere than looking at why that spending is needed. They are always reactionary, not proactive. They only act WHEN the tragedy has occurred rather than heed the warnings beforehand. The old adage prepare for the worst and hope for the best doesn't seem to apply to them.
But more than this are those designing and constructing the building and those inspecting it IMO. They chose not to fit sprinklers. They chose to put cheaper cladding on than they specified leading to the fire service having incorrect information that led to them issuing the stay put advice (even though they probably could have changed this stance when the fire started to spread). Whether that cladding was specified as being more fireproof than it actually was also puts the manufacturers into the frame.
Key words you use - concern & force are exactly why I call it a scare story. The US can make a suggestion but to actually force us in some way to accept their pricing scheme is just so wide of the mark imo. Plus, if they changed it to the US scheme I think the Prescribers in the UK would be even more reticent to prescribe new medicines...except where evidence shows a major leap forward, & even more likely to prescribe cheap generics. And don't forget the rules would apply to UK & other country's Pharma who could compete with them...so the "gift" would most likely never materialise.
Well look at the Grenfell report. Who are you pointing the finger at for the initially reported failings? The fireman on the front line? The firechiefs that direct them on the ground? Or the Fire Commissioner who either couldn't present the case for enough funding or didn't use the funding appropriately?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Historically I had a very direct need to have a deep understanding of what happens & how the Pharma industry works globallyMight have missed this, but are you in the drugs industry Bazza? Your posts on this are a lot more lucid than on Brexit
Historically I had a very direct need to have a deep understanding of what happens & how the Pharma industry works globally
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Oh so what Trump wants he gets eh? There will be something involving NHS in a general sense...but there is no way it will be at the extreme end of what you are fearing imoIt’s Trumps policy to make the rest of the world pay the same as America for drugs rather than America pay the same as the rest of the world.
The pharmaceutical industry in America is a major lobbyist spending millions of dollars doing so and they’ve been lobbying for drug pricing to be part of any trade deal for the U.K.
British officials has had 5 official meetings with these lobbyists and numerous unofficial meetings and the details of these meetings aren’t being made public.
Corbyn asked Boris directly twice today in PMQ’s for comment on the findings of the C4 Despatches investigation aired on Monday night. Boris didn’t give a comment instead choosing to talk about something else in reply.
If you can’t smell the rat then vote Tory and enjoy the rewards.
I agree. Government is the equivalent of the FA in being ultimately responsible for setting the rules & goalposts down. And also the referee in the game making sure a goal is scored by fair means according to the rules. The Govt (no idea which specific one) of the time failed but ultimately the rules are set for some other bugger to (they hope) be the fall guy.Or the govt/parliament that ignored the requests for funding because it was too busy thinking about reducing spending everywhere than looking at why that spending is needed. They are always reactionary, not proactive. They only act WHEN the tragedy has occurred rather than heed the warnings beforehand. The old adage prepare for the worst and hope for the best doesn't seem to apply to them.
But more than this are those designing and constructing the building and those inspecting it IMO. They chose not to fit sprinklers. They chose to put cheaper cladding on than they specified leading to the fire service having incorrect information that led to them issuing the stay put advice (even though they probably could have changed this stance when the fire started to spread). Whether that cladding was specified as being more fireproof than it actually was also puts the manufacturers into the frame.
Struth, how ridiculous. You appear to be advocating mutiny on the job in the fire service...expecting them to go against what they have been trained & ordered to do in an emergency situation.Comparing apples and oranges there. 'I was just following orders' has never been an excuse.
Well, no in short - I don't trust them to not loosen things up in a small but significant way. However, it will be part of a dea in which we too will gain. We aren't as stupid as people sometimes imply.Indeed the use of words like force etc does make it sound like a scare story.
For me the point is do you trust or expect our government to stand up to the demands of the US, of which this is very likely to be one? On the whole I don't. On major stuff like this they'll nod their heads and dutifully agree because they'll agree to buy a few pork pies. I especially believe this would happen with a Tory govt given that some prominent members of it have written books/papers on moving to a more US oriented system.
Oh so what Trump wants he gets eh? There will be something involving NHS in a general sense...but there is no way it will be at the extreme end of what you are fearing imo
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?