From: David Wright on
In article <1154350214.675358.43430(a)m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>
>David Wright wrote:
>> In article <1154004273.070302.243420(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >David Wright wrote:
>> >> In article <1153771951.383312.216980(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > vernon wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Sufficiently "excessive" to warrant government control.
>> >> >> Of course the other argument is "Who gave the government the right to
>> >> >> control how we treat ourselves?".
>> >>
>> >> We did -- by electing the people who put those rules in place.
>> >
>> >David never noticed that FDA is a bureacracy, and that we don't elect
>> >those guys.
>>
>> We elect the people who appoint them. Kindly avoid wilful stupidity,
>> assuming that to be within your limited capabilities.
>
>FDA has latitude to engage in its own rulemaking process, however. The
>fact the agency is subject to congressional overview doesn't change
>that, and people like David Graham do what they do because the process
>is broken. But personal attack noted.

FDA could always be revised by Congress into any form desired. But
given big pharm's heavy contributions to Congress, I don't expect any
changes any time soon. That abomination of a Medicare "drug benefit"
is sufficient evidence.

As for the "personal attack," you're just breaking my heart, you
hypocrite.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth
From: PeterB on

David Wright wrote:
> In article <1154350214.675358.43430(a)m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >David Wright wrote:
> >> In article <1154004273.070302.243420(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >David Wright wrote:
> >> >> In article <1153771951.383312.216980(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > vernon wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Sufficiently "excessive" to warrant government control.
> >> >> >> Of course the other argument is "Who gave the government the right to
> >> >> >> control how we treat ourselves?".
> >> >>
> >> >> We did -- by electing the people who put those rules in place.
> >> >
> >> >David never noticed that FDA is a bureacracy, and that we don't elect
> >> >those guys.
> >>
> >> We elect the people who appoint them. Kindly avoid wilful stupidity,
> >> assuming that to be within your limited capabilities.
> >
> >FDA has latitude to engage in its own rulemaking process, however. The
> >fact the agency is subject to congressional overview doesn't change
> >that, and people like David Graham do what they do because the process
> >is broken. But personal attack noted.
>
> FDA could always be revised by Congress into any form desired. But
> given big pharm's heavy contributions to Congress, I don't expect any
> changes any time soon. That abomination of a Medicare "drug benefit"
> is sufficient evidence.

It's so obvious that give a damn.

> As for the "personal attack," you're just breaking my heart, you
> hypocrite.

What heart?

From: David Wright on
In article <1154437312.860747.190700(a)75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>
>David Wright wrote:
>> In article <1154350214.675358.43430(a)m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
>> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >David Wright wrote:
>> >> In article <1154004273.070302.243420(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >David Wright wrote:
>> >> >> In article <1153771951.383312.216980(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > vernon wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Sufficiently "excessive" to warrant government control.
>> >> >> >> Of course the other argument is "Who gave the government the right to
>> >> >> >> control how we treat ourselves?".
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We did -- by electing the people who put those rules in place.
>> >> >
>> >> >David never noticed that FDA is a bureacracy, and that we don't elect
>> >> >those guys.
>> >>
>> >> We elect the people who appoint them. Kindly avoid wilful stupidity,
>> >> assuming that to be within your limited capabilities.
>> >
>> >FDA has latitude to engage in its own rulemaking process, however. The
>> >fact the agency is subject to congressional overview doesn't change
>> >that, and people like David Graham do what they do because the process
>> >is broken. But personal attack noted.
>>
>> FDA could always be revised by Congress into any form desired. But
>> given big pharm's heavy contributions to Congress, I don't expect any
>> changes any time soon. That abomination of a Medicare "drug benefit"
>> is sufficient evidence.
>
>It's so obvious that give a damn.

Hey, I'm a taxpayer. That alone would mean I'd give a damn. But what
the hell, you aren't going to believe me anyway, because you think I'm
a "pharma blogger." Ah well, your form of dementia is primarily your
own problem.

>> As for the "personal attack," you're just breaking my heart, you
>> hypocrite.
>
>What heart?

Personal attack noted, hypocrite.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth
From: PeterB on

David Wright wrote:
> In article <1154437312.860747.190700(a)75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >David Wright wrote:
> >> In article <1154350214.675358.43430(a)m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >David Wright wrote:
> >> >> In article <1154004273.070302.243420(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >David Wright wrote:
> >> >> >> In article <1153771951.383312.216980(a)b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >> >> >> PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > vernon wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> Sufficiently "excessive" to warrant government control.
> >> >> >> >> Of course the other argument is "Who gave the government the right to
> >> >> >> >> control how we treat ourselves?".
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> We did -- by electing the people who put those rules in place.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >David never noticed that FDA is a bureacracy, and that we don't elect
> >> >> >those guys.
> >> >>
> >> >> We elect the people who appoint them. Kindly avoid wilful stupidity,
> >> >> assuming that to be within your limited capabilities.
> >> >
> >> >FDA has latitude to engage in its own rulemaking process, however. The
> >> >fact the agency is subject to congressional overview doesn't change
> >> >that, and people like David Graham do what they do because the process
> >> >is broken. But personal attack noted.
> >>
> >> FDA could always be revised by Congress into any form desired. But
> >> given big pharm's heavy contributions to Congress, I don't expect any
> >> changes any time soon. That abomination of a Medicare "drug benefit"
> >> is sufficient evidence.
> >
> >It's so obvious that give a damn.
>
> Hey, I'm a taxpayer. That alone would mean I'd give a damn. But what
> the hell, you aren't going to believe me anyway, because you think I'm
> a "pharma blogger." Ah well, your form of dementia is primarily your
> own problem.

How amusing that you and those of your ilk use the term more often than
I. How telling.

> >> As for the "personal attack," you're just breaking my heart, you
> >> hypocrite.
> >
> >What heart?
>
> Personal attack noted, hypocrite.

No points for wit unless you actually demonstrate some. 22 years?
LOL.

From: Tim Campbell on

vernon wrote:

>
> So the "government" licenses drug companies to con people and Doctors into
> the use of dangerous drugs, called prescription, while at the same time
> insidiously rejecting safe solutions.
>

Well phrased Vernon...