h a l f b a k e r yNice swing,
no follow-through.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This service crawls the international press pages hosted on the interweb, logs all the mentions of diseases and transforms the results into a worrying real-time graph showing which pandemic is currently creating the most concern. These results are then cross-referenced with reliable (hah!) medical web
sites to create a drilldown feature that shows you the likelihood of contagion, of permanent disfigurement, disablement or death.
Registering for this service is free and members can also receive free SMS messages to their mobile so that they know, from moment to moment, whether they should be heading to the drugstore, the doctor or the undertakers.
The site would be funded by taking advertising from leading pharmaceutical & healthcare companies.
Of course, if no-one got sick, there'd be no need for it.
All_20in_20One_20Cold_20Jab
(See last comment, Nov 02 2001) [angel, Nov 17 2005]
Promed
http://www.promedmail.org/
Sorry it took me 6 years to provide this for you, DrBob. Hopefully you have not come down with bacterial wilt while waiting. [bungston, Jan 23 2012]
"Is curing patients a sustainable business model?"
https://www.cnbc.co...business-model.html
14 years on from this idea & finally someone, Goldman Sachs to be precise, is coming round to my viewpoint (sort of). It is much more profitable, in the long run, to treat healthy people rather than sick ones.
"...the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients," [DrBob, Feb 18 2019]
[link]
|
| |
Ooh... can you add some mapping
functionality? |
|
| |
Like a spreading red patch on GoogleEarth? |
|
| |
scaremonger.org?
chickenlittle.net?
cnn.com? |
|
| |
You should worry when your neighbors are drumming and chanting all evening to keep the sun up. |
|
| |
It's called the mainsteam media. If I could just my hands around one of their executives necks... |
|
| |
... I believe the maintstream media, and television is largely responsible for ALOT of today's problems. The economy might pick up if the media didn't constantly inform us about how bad it's doing! Women everywhere might feel good about themselves, instead of puking away their dinner, and buying more make-up than you could ever use! I am all for freedom, freedom of speeach, freedom of expression, but I believe media corporations should not be allowed to have an opinion! The media helps the petrol industry, they 'predicted' that the gas prices would go up after Hurricane Katrina hit, yet these massive corporations have been insured, and their operations down south would definitely have been reinforced to withstand Hurricanes. Yet, the prices DID go up, and the oil companies are publishing RECORD PROFITS. I heard that a senator or someone in my state was subpoenaing the oil executives to explain WHY they are publishing record profits! |
|
| |
The media provides us with distractions, AKA celebrities and movies, which are the standard in this country, but are largely a multi million dollar steaming pile of shit! |
|
| |
The reporters reported 'rape' and murder, down in NO after the hurricane, yet not even a single reporter has seen such an act! |
|
| |
CNN executive 1: "Let's see, there is a destroyed city, with no law enforcement, and criminals loose throughout the city, what can we do to 'enhance' this story?" |
|
| |
CNN executive 2: "logic pursuades that there must be illegal stuff happening! Like Rape! And Torture! And looting! And all kinds of bad things the masses GUSH over!" |
|
| |
CNN executive 1: "Brilliant! Secretary! Get me the chief editor for Yahoo news!" |
|
| |
I could go on for a veeery long time, but I've lost my track on what I was abou to say. |
|
| |
Ah, but in this case Mr Pickels, the scaremongering media is a good thing. This is an advertising service for those who stand to benefit from health scares not a public information booth.
I like st3f/angel's map tie-in. Perhaps with the sound of a beating heart added in. As the red rash spreads the heart beat can speed up just to engender a little extra feeling of panic into the proceedings. |
|
| |
Excellent thinking.
Also, I've just realised that if I use an 's' word to replace 'Alerts' in the title, it can be called GPS, giving it some totally unwarranted credibility by false association with, well, GPS. |
|
| |
I was thinking of something with some gravitas but still likely to induce undue panic. 'Alert' is a good word for that sort of thing. 'Siren' would be good in that respect but 'Global Pandemic Siren' doesn't quite sound right. Although I like the idea of an air-raid siren sounding whenever you open up the site. Air-raid sirens never fail to induce panic. |
|
| |
*shouts* as in the way the emergency services would use the word, I thought. |
|
| |
not having lived through the 2nd world war, the all-clear always scared me stiff as well. |
|
| |
I assume chickenlittle is the same as ChickenLicken in the UK? The sky is falling down etc? Then I vote for chickenlicken.co.uk for us Brits. |
|
| |
Regarding angel's link, I would argue that quite the opposite is true. We're in the business of convincing perfectly healthy people that they need to introduce copious quantities of high profit margin substances into their bodies in order to maintain their health.
After all. why limit the market for drugs to just sick people? There are a limited number of them and, given their state of health, they're not likely to be either wealthy or long term consumers. There are lots more healthy earners out there that you can sell stuff to and, if you can convince them that it's in their own interest, they're likely to provide you with a lifetime of sales opportunities.
The whole idea has more in common with FoxyLoxy than ChickenLicken. |
|
| |
[DrBob]: You're saying that if no-one got ill there'd be *more* need for this, because people would need something other than genuine illness as a reason to buy medication? |
|
| |
Absolutely. I refer you to the idea category, m'ludd.
//It would only serve to cause panic and the advertising would let pharmacutical companies raise prices due to higher demand//
And your point is? |
|
| |
Chicken Licken: how avian flu is transmitted to humans. |
|
| |
The intention of the idea (to prevent
people from deadly diseases) is good,
but I think the news already do that,
plus, I'm on EvilPickels' side about the
impact of the media. |
|
| |
Having //A service to let you know what
you should be worrying about// is
exactly what the world's governments
-particularly the american- are doing. |
|
| |
I think we have already worried too
much about things that are out of our
control. We shouldn't give the
"leaders" more tools to terrorize and
manipulate us while pretending they're
informing us. |
|
| |
Remember the american "Patriot Act" (or
something like that, I don't remember
the name) after 9/11; people giving up
their rights because they were induced
to panic by the media. |
|
| |
We don't need that, and I think this idea
here is the perfect tool to continue with
it. Fish, sorry. |
|
| |
Ah, Pericles, I guess DrBob's sarcasm didn't make it through the language barrier. |
|
| |
Oh, sorry. No, it didn't make it through.
Fish removed, sorry :) |
|
| |
Where any confusion occurs, the fault is with the writer not the reader.
(Obviously I don't believe that for a minute but it nevers hurts to be polite!) |
|
| |
Is it just me, or is it that the human race should've died out ages ago because of the 'epidemic/pandemic' that is 'long due'? Every year the news brings in some 'expert' who claims that we're all due for another black death or something like that. |
|
| |
I'm waiting for an expert to claim that we could have all died in a pandemic which is long overdue, were it not for the fact that statistically speaking we were all wiped out when Mt St Helens erupted and clothed the Earth in nuclear winter several hundred years ago. Incidentally, I haven't been keeping track, but anyone know the current ratio of deaths due to Tamiflu vs deaths due to H5N1? Read an article saying 13 Japanese kids had died from the drug. |
|
| |
This may create unwanted spurts of petty mass hysteria from time to time... but otherwise helpful. [+] |
|
| |
Woohoo! The random button spews up one of my own ideas for the first time ever. Just saying. Not bumping at all. Honest! |
|
| |
//nevers hurts to be polite// Sez you. Were you
never obliged to treat politely someone who
deserved the opposite? Was it not painful? |
|
| |
Nah! That's just called Taking the Moral High Ground. |
|
| |
You're a better man than I am Gunga-Bob. |
|
| |
Self-delusion is the best way to navigate through life, I find. |
|
| |
just one of the reasons the cost of the drug had to be
high, [DrBob] (the other being it's a cure) |
|
| |
I understand the despair of needing medication you can't
afford -- who wouldn't. But I've never understood the
complaint about the cost of medicine, drugs in particular.
How many people would give everything away to live
another 20 years? And yet they have a problem paying for
a cholesterol or blood pressure drug that would achieve
same? (much less a cancer cure or other incurable disease
cure) |
|
| |
It's like it's ok to pay for miracles, but science should be
free. |
|
| |
//How many people would give everything away to
live another 20 years? And yet they have a problem
paying for a cholesterol or blood pressure drug that
would achieve same?\\ |
|
| |
There's no way, on average, blood
pressure/cholesterol drugs are getting people 20
years. I can't think of much that could, outside of
preventing acute death. Insulin maybe? |
|
| |
//It's like it's ok to pay for miracles, but science
should be free.\\ |
|
| |
Science IS practically free. Pharma companies don't
do a lot of it though. Most are 50% or more
marketing/advertising. Drug "discovery" can be
putting 2 well know drugs in one "Rapid action liqui-
tab" and running a tedious and predictible trial. |
|
| |
//Most are 50% or more marketing/advertising.// |
|
| |
I'd slightly disagree. For every 200 "interesting" findings in
basic research, maybe 50 will make it as far as animal
testing (cost: maybe £0.2M each). Maybe 15 will go into
human
Phase I trials (cost: £2-5M each); maybe 8 will go on to
Phase II
(cost: £10-15M each); and with luck just one will go on
through
Phase III trials and be marketed. Even ignoring the cost of
the initial research, that's quite a spend. And by then
you're 10 years into a 25 year patent lifespan, giving you 15
years to recover your costs. Reformulations and new uses
are additional revenue, but again have the cost of trials to
offset. |
|
| |
The truth is that being big pharma is no more profitable
than being a big publisher or a big restaurant chain. |
|
| |
For small companies, the numbers are different because
they're typically gambling on one or a few compounds which
they'll eventually sell or licence to big pharma. So,
successful small biotechs make large (percentage) returns,
but the overwhelming majority fail and just pour £5-50M
directly down the drain. |
|
| |
Sounds like a great problem for a hyper-advanced
neuro-net type of machine. Or as I like to call it, a not
terribly expensive machine that goes bing a lot of
times until it finds a cure for cancer, given amazingly
sophisticated modeling. |
|
| |
I wonder if the modeling part could be done with a
learning neuro-net as well, until the output
comparator could say "that reasonably resembles
human cellular / physiological behavior as near as I
can tell?" |
|
| |
//I understand the despair of needing medication you can't afford//
I understand the need for a return on investment but if I turn the point around & point out that you (the generic you, that is, not specifically you tc) possess a drug that could save someone's life but refuse to do so because they can't pay your price, then what sort of morality is that? |
|
| |
the sort of morality that makes it possible to create the
drug in the first place. |
|
| |
there has to be drive so long as humans are involved. It
does not have to be only money, but the drive has to be
there. |
|
| |
The reason profit is such a big component is primarily
that
govt. regulation shepherded medical research towards
higher and higher costs. Otherwise mad professors all
over
the world would be generating quack cures at a fraction
of
the cost and testing them on the more than willing
population |
|
| |
So finding the cure for cancer is motivation enough -- sure
-- but getting it to market as a cure would cost billions
even if it was some stupid berry extract (for example) |
|
| |
//but refuse to do so because they can't pay your price// In
fact, if you go to the drug company with that sort of situation,
there's a good chance they will give you the drug. It happens
quite often (at least in the UK), although usually it's doctors
who make the approach, to obtain a drug that isn't supported
by NICE (the body that decides which drugs the NHS uses). |
|
| |
it in fact happens in the US as well. In addition, the new
extra high price drug -- like the Hepatitis C drug linked --
are being charged primarily on success -- i.e. if there's no
cure no payment. |
|
| |
Costs will anyway start getting squeezed out of the
system as AI takes a bigger role. I've long supposed that
presuming AIs can be non-selfish, they should finally
enable a sort of communism across a spectrum of
domains, including medicine. |
|
| |
Of course a big supposition is that AIs can ever reach the
necessary levels without being selfish -- is being self-
aware necessarily being selfish to a human-like degree --
if that's the case, the AIs will still want to be paid :) |
|
| |
//govt. regulation shepherded medical research towards
higher and higher costs// now _that_ is certainly true. And
it's a time factor as well as a cost factor. A drug which is not
used chronically, or a drug which can potentially save a life,
should be able to go through clinical trials in a year.
Admittedly, some patients get on PhaseII or III trials, but the
whole process should be a lot faster, and can still be safe
enough. One problem is that the system is predicated on the
assumption that it's worse to lose 100 lives waiting for a new
drug than it is to lose 1 through over-hasty approval. |
|
| |
exactly. Our current FDA guy has started to make some real
progress on this, hope it continues |
|
| |
Sure, I get all that &, in a capitalist economy, I agree that getting something to market requires a company to make a return on it's investment otherwise it will not get funding for the next project & so on. There are other economic models but let's not get into that debate because I doubt that any of us going to be persuaded over.
No, the reason I was tweaking your tail a bit was because the declaration in my link above comes not from a drug company but from a company of bankers. The same company of bankers who deliberately de-frauded their customers out of billions of dollars, pounds & euro's & created a financial collapse 10+ years ago from which economies still haven't recovered & which ruined a lot of lives. When they are proposing to a drug company that curing patients may not be a sustainable business model, I think we need to all start worrying, regardless of our political or economic perspective. Set pandemic alert to maximum! |
|
| |
//not from a drug company but from a company of
bankers// Well, there ya go, [Bob]. Believe me, the drug
companies that are developing genomic-led and potentially
curative treatments are well aware of the financial
implications of a "one-shot treatment", yet they are all (at
least all the major ones and hundreds of startups) pursuing
those treatments. |
|
| |
Small biotechs (and I know, coz I are one) are piling into the
genome editing field, often with a view to developing one-
shot treatments. In part this is because they (we) are still
dewey-eyed and want to save the world. But it's also
because they have a chance to win an otherwise closed
market. And the big pharmas, if they're not pursuing
genomic treatments themselves, are buying up the smaller
companies and their tech, because they know that a one-
shot treatment will always take precedence over long-term
disease management, and they'd rather get in on that
market than have the market disappear from under them. |
|
| |
But, to return briefly to the idea, I for one would like to see
disease maps on TV like weather forecasts. "And this week we
expect to see a wave of colds from the Echo35 strain that's
come down from Finland. Expect high infection rates amongst
pre-school children, excepting those who had December's
Parr17 sniffles virus - they'll be enjoying some crossover
immune protection. Meanwhile, a plume of Norovirus 17 is
reaching up from the south coast and is expected in northern
England over the next couple of weeks..." |
|
| |
You could always sneeze on it. |
|
| |
That's not at issue, shirley ? |
|
| |
// the AIs will still want to be paid :) // |
|
| |
The problem may well be not that the AIs want to be "paid", but what they may want as "payment". It may not be financial; it may be something that humans consider socially or morally unacceptable. |
|
| |
"We will design a medication to cure this child's terminal disease if, and only if, <insert name here> performs <degrading and humiliating but not illegal act> on live broadcast TV" ... |
|
| |
Regarding the actual idea, Google apparently predicts the
spread of seasonal illnesses by analyzing web search queries
(that don't necessarily mention anything to do with the
illness). |
|
| |
That's even better. By seeding a few search queries you can create a virtual pandemic panic. |
|
| |