I have repeatedly made the point that there are hundreds of thousands of people who are looking for a picture of a starving child or a violation of Political Correctness with all the desperation Americans used to reserve for finding gold ore. This is of enormous, immediate,and practical importance.
In the 1950s when my brother was an intern it was well known that clinics for the poor got better drugs than the rich people did. The reason for this was well-known, one of those Public Secrets I talk about. Poor clinics could use new drugs, whereas drugs used in regular hospitals had to go through the whole many-years-long end of clearance process with the FDA.
Please note that what was universally known was that poor patients were getting BETTER drugs. If you needed a drug that was still going through the final stages of FDA approval, you got them if you were poor, you couldn’t get them for love nor money in a regular clinic or hospital.
Needless to say, even back then, organizations saw a gold mine. A major campaign exposed the outrageous fact that drugs that were not ready for prime time were OK to be used on poor people. Lots of people made lots of money pushing this cause.
So by the 1960s the poor people were only getting drugs which had gone through the WHOLE clearance process. So they got the same outdated stuff the rich did.
Even today it is well known that “all new drugs are nonaddictive.” Valium was approved by the FDA as nonaddictive. So was just about every other addictive drug now on Schedule 2 (Schedule 1 drugs are illegal, like heroine. There is Schedules 3 and 4, going down the count to over the counter).
My point is that even the endless regulatory process used by the FDA does not really make drugs safer. In fact, until equality raised its ugly head, it was well known that, on average, early approval for the poor made their drugs famously more modern and better.
The regulation is not to make things safer. Regulation depends on how much money can be raised on an issue.
If you had looked at the facts, this was a clear conclusion sixty years ago with the Public Secret that poor folks got better drugs than the rich did.
But no one looks at the basics.
There’s gold in them thar hills! There is MONEY in a Conspiracy Theory where the Rich and Powerful (says the left) or the Establishment (says the right}, secretly plot Evil.
There is not a dime to be made by explaining reality as I just have.
#1 by GregP on 10/19/2013 - 12:08 pm
There’s no money in DEregulation? Really?
As much as I despise over-regulation and the need to control every little thing, there is something to be said for drugs needing to be checked out as safe before human consumption. China is a perfect example. LEAD has been found so many times in their products it’s insanity. Someone needs to be paid to check this stuff out, otherwise the majority of people will just assume it’s safe and ingest even more poisons then they already do.
That said, the FDA is extremely corrupt and I don’t trust them as far as I can spit. I’m not saying they’re good, but I don’t think deregulation is any better. I want something that WORKS, not that poisons us. I’m only seeing Poison from “both sides.” I’d love to see some more options on the table.
But I think we’ll probably have to wait until White Genocide ends at least in some portion of the planet for that…so I better get back to spreading the Mantra.
#2 by Bob on 10/25/2013 - 5:41 pm
There’s money in regulation,and there is money in respectable conservatism, which is against regulation. You reelly ought to read some of my articles sometime.
#3 by The Beef on 11/06/2013 - 4:40 pm
Same as there is power to be had in Proclaiming a villain, and then going to war against it.
The failure of the War on Drugs is a perfect example.
Its the ultimate LOSER. You turn something into the forbidden fruit, and it simply IMPOSSIBLE to win. Just a tremendous amount of human suffering, and still more drug use than ever.
Claiming to be tougher on the enemy in order to look strong, even if in practice its been a disaster.
#4 by The Beef on 11/06/2013 - 4:46 pm
Damnit I posted that before I was done typing and I cannot get the comment editor to work right!
The same respectable conservative that tell you they “support a limited government with personal responsibility and freedoms”, ALSO are the same jackass crusaders against the enemy of narcotics.
They are supporting the opposite of what the claim to.
#5 by BGLass on 11/11/2013 - 12:22 pm
Talked to a cop once. He said the big difference between cops and the rest of humanity was that, while most have one answer for everything, a cops one-answer was “It Depends.”