Obamacare...(new title): GOP DEATH PLAN: Don-Ryan's Express

[Going Commando]

The GoP doesn't want to do away with the filibuster for legislation.  That's a very consequential bridge to cross.  The Senate majorities are dynamic and small enough to make reciprocity a deterrent on the issue.

 

But I'm not sure the GoP conference in the Senate is cohesive and stable enough to resist ending the filibuster if they run into a Democratic filibuster on a major legislative goal.

[FanboyOf91]

 

[skinsmarydu]

On 8/3/2017 at 6:15 PM, nonniey said:

Oh it is dead all right can you point out one instance of a filibuster being used to stop the majority party since 2013?

 

No, just threatening one brought down the Senate.  I wanna see 'em actually do it.  With "Green Eggs & Ham" again.  Go ahead and tell the folks who have given it a try and shown benefits in their health care that "tryin' new **** is BBBAAAADDDD".  They're showing up at your town halls and screaming down the "We'll repeal the ACA".

 

Wendy showed 'em how, and what shoes to wear...get some diapers and a nanny...but you R ninnies will hang onto your bull**** in your own pissing contest.  First, you're gonna have to realize it was never about you, it's about your inability to have a heart or a conscience.  People like being just on the upside of OK...and they like being informed on such an important issue.  Trust me.

 

[Riggo-toni]

GOP Sen. Ron Johnson: McCain's brain tumor might have been factor in no vote on health care

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/09/politics/kfile-ron-johnson-john-mccain/index.html

 

"Again, I'm not gonna speak for John McCain -- he has a brain tumor right now -- that vote occurred at 1:30 in the morning, some of that might have factored in," Johnson said.

"I really thought he was going to vote yes to send that to conference at 10:30 at night. By about 1, 1:30, he voted no," Johnson added.

[visionary]

 

[FanboyOf91]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[LadySkinsFan]

Assholes.

[LD0506]

Thiel needs to be the first guy on Mars

[Weganator]

Quote

Other researchers said they feared that desperate herpes patients would seek to be test participants or get the vaccine without being informed properly of the risk. 

 

This is pretty much the only thing holding me back from being entirely indifferent regarding this type of testing. The key is needing to guarantee informed consent, maybe some sort of 3rd party needing to be there to help clarify the risks. It would be pretty despicable if proven that people were being tricked / mislead into this.

 

Quote

But other researchers said they were appalled by what they described as the university’s complicity in ignoring more than 70 years of safety protocols. Scientists called for more rigorous clinical trial oversight in the wake of Nazi atrocities involving human experiments in the 1940s. 

 

“You can’t just ignore human-subject protections that have evolved since the end of the Second World War,” said Zenilman, who served as a technical consultant to the presidential commission on bioethical issues during the Obama administration.

 

Zenilman, an expert on sexually transmitted diseases, cited U.S. government research in the late 1940s that deliberately infected study participants in Guatemala with sexually transmitted diseases without their consent.

 

In 1974, Congress passed sweeping regulations aimed at protecting human subjects, requiring IRBs in government-funded research. Later, an advisory committee to the U.S. government wrote of the need for safety review committees to ensure that “basic ethical principles” were in place to protect human subjects from harm. The 1979 Belmont Report also urged researchers to balance the risk to the human subject against the benefit of any breakthrough in medicine.

 

They had to get the Nazi jab in.... I think we can all agree that compulsory, coerced, or deceived human testing is wrong and a violation of basic human rights. Outside of the context for how the laws were initially created, this portion reeks of a hit piece.

 

Quote

Yet some herpes patients, who are part of a tight-knit online community, have followed the project with hope and enthusiasm.

 

One American participant said he decided to go public with his experience despite the condition’s stigma. Richard Mancuso said he was recruited for the trial on Facebook and grew to be friends with Halford, whom he described as a “hero.”

 

Mancuso said the vaccine has stopped his severe outbreaks. “This has saved my life,” he said.  

 

This person does not sound like he has been forced into this, none of us were at the meetings involving the discussions of these risks. Assuming we take them at face value and it doesn't later come to light that the risks were downplayed (the lack of a negative result doesn't preclude deception from being unethical) then this is a non issue.

Edited August 28, 2017 by Weganator

[LadySkinsFan]

These laws were put in place to ensure that we don't ever repeat Nazi atrocities. 

 

Of course the reference to Nazis is appropriate. We must never forget. 

 

Especially since we have an active, vocal, and violent growth of Nazism right now. 

 

If the shoe fits.  Conducting trials outside of the legal framework opens others to do so, and maybe this group has good intentions, another might not. And that's what these laws guard against. 

 

But we don't know about this trial, because it's outside our laws. Outlaw. 

 

If you are for law and order, we should be against this.

[Weganator]

36 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

These laws were put in place to ensure that we don't ever repeat Nazi atrocities. 

 

Of course the reference to Nazis is appropriate. We must never forget. 

 

Especially since we have an active, vocal, and violent growth of Nazism right now. 

 

If the shoe fits.  Conducting trials outside of the legal framework opens others to do so, and maybe this group has good intentions, another might not. And that's what these laws guard against. 

 

But we don't know about this trial, because it's outside our laws. Outlaw. 

 

If you are for law and order, we should be against this.

 

I can see where you are coming from on this, but the acts that made those experiments evil were the crimes committed against the individuals. The kidnapping, the assault (non voluntary injection of needle, non voluntary ingestion of chemicals), and any sort of deceptions against the subjects themselves.

 

Informed people who choose to be a part of these experiments should be able to volunteer.

 

I wholeheartedly agree about the "Outlaw" portion as well, its a shame it has resorted to this. I think the solution there is more common sense FDA regulations that allow people to volunteer for experiments while guaranteeing informed consent. If these experiments were conducted on US soil, our citizens would be protected from kidnapping, assault, and criminal fraud by the basis of being within our jurisdiction and would be able to take people to court if it is deemed that they were wronged.

 

Edit: Speaking from the privilege of not having herpes, it seems silly to me to risk your life to suppress the symptoms. Especially if you have to do all of this outside of the United States where you will have no recourse. However, if I were to wake up with some life threatening disease tomorrow with no cure and you tried to get in the way of me pursuing a cure I'd be furious

Edited August 28, 2017 by Weganator

[visionary]

I have definitely noticed some problems with FDA regulations recently having to deal with some health stuff and get multiple medicines.  It seems they need to be better refined and more accurate, instead of just lumping things together.

Edited August 28, 2017 by visionary

[LadySkinsFan]

But Congress has been passing laws protecting drug companies from lawsuits, so your last sentence is moot.

[Weganator]

13 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

But Congress has been passing laws protecting drug companies from lawsuits, so your last sentence is moot.

 

We also don't currently allow this early stage human testing in the United States. I would have to assume a change to allow it would consist of more than just 'go for it'

 

Also, kidnapping and assault are criminal acts, not civil ones. Any added protections against lawsuits are irrelevant to your concerns. There would need to be a creation of a system of requiring informed consent, guaranteeing it occurs, enforcing it, and providing a means for restitution though, you are correct.

Edited August 28, 2017 by Weganator

[Weganator]

But I don't want to get too bogged down on defense and structuring of a potential human experimentation code. My bigger point was to draw clear delineations between the acts of the Nazis and this research.

 

I would like to believe that if I was standing at Mr Thiel's mansions gate while the mob of TheDailyBeast commenters and ES users who reacted to this article approached with pitchforks (and tiki torches?) that I could rationalize this to the point where I could save him from exile / execution without trial... possibly by being sent to Mars if the means were available. 

[Bozo the kKklown]

The Tuskegee experiments took place in the USA.

 

 

 

And before and after the Nazis were in power and defeated.

[Weganator]

2 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

The Tuskegee experiments took place in the USA.

 

 

 

And before and after the Nazis were in power and defeated.

Wow, I hadn't heard about that before, thanks for mentioning it. Seems like a real tragedy akin to Nazi experiments and the types mentioned in that article.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm

 

Reading about it, it seems like informed consent is still the fundamental sticking point. Whether or not we trust that an individual can ever possibly be informed enough to choose to do something like this in their own interest.

[LadySkinsFan]

5 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

The Tuskegee experiments took place in the USA.

 

 

 

And before and after the Nazis were in power and defeated.

 

All true, our country doesn't get a pass for these past experiments.

That's why these laws were passed, to ensure these kinds of experiments/trials are outlawed.

[Weganator]

53 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

All true, our country doesn't get a pass for these past experiments.

That's why these laws were passed, to ensure these kinds of experiments/trials are outlawed.

 

The problem is that its a blanket ban on all early stage human research without trying to reasonably discuss what the actual crimes were as opposed to saying 'all human experimentation outside of FDA guidelines is evil'. Its disingenuous to the victims who were deprived of their basic human rights to say that it was solely because of early stage human medical research.

 

The role of government is to protect individual rights. While banning this research protects individuals from the possibility of being wronged by governments (Public Health Service in the case of Tuskeegee, Nazis, US Government research in Guatamala that Zenilman referenced in thedailybeast article)  or corporations (possibly Mr Thiel's if informed consent wasn't ensured).. it eliminates the ability of an individual to leverage informed consent to pursue a cure (the pursuit of happiness).

 

If you told the now cured Richard Mancuso that you wanted to lock up Peter Thiel and his researchers for curing him of herpes because of the Nazis and some atrocities of the US Government 50+ years ago I'd hope that he would laugh in your face. If his junk falls off next year as a result of this, he might change his mind, but if he is cured.. who is harmed?

[Larry]

Seems to me like there's a simple solution for this dilema.  

 

Any product that results from unethical (as defined by "wouldn't have been legal in the US") testing, can't be sold in the US.  Ever.  

 

Wanna test your experimental drug in Guatemala?  Go ahead.  If it works, your company is entitled to all the profit you can get, from selling it in Guatemala.  

Edited August 29, 2017 by Larry

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

12 minutes ago, Larry said:

Seems to me like there's a simple solution for this dilema.  Any product that results from unethical (as defined by "wouldn't have been legal in the US") testing, can't be sold in the US.  Ever.   

Unless it actually ends up curing herpes. I'm going to be pretty pissed if there's a herpes cure out there and the government tells me I can't have it.

[Larry]

19 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Unless it actually ends up curing herpes. I'm going to be pretty pissed if there's a herpes cure out there and the government tells me I can't have it.

 

The alternative is "If you perform illegal unethical human experimentation outside our jurisdiction, and it works, then we'll let you have billions in profit, anyway."  

 

[Weganator]

21 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

The alternative is "If you perform illegal unethical human experimentation outside our jurisdiction, and it works, then we'll let you have billions in profit, anyway."  

 

Or you can create a system in the US that works to try and guarantee informed consent for patients while also protecting their human rights.