Diabetes Talking

Question:

It is wise to be cynical re lily et al in the UK and Australia we have converted to having only human insulin available from the NHS in England and medicare in Australia.. (Medicare and NHS are sensible systems for reducing the cost of drugs and distributing the costs of drugs over the taxpayers in order to group purchanse and force a discount from drug cos.. hence not in the us yet/ever)… Anyway the removal of porcine and bovine based insulin caused 10 proven fatalities (economist magazine) in the UK but a number of suspicious deaths which did no have sufficient forensic evidence to identify the cause though there were suggestions of hypoglaecemic reaction… Why was this done? Well Novo found that negotiating ith pig farmers was expensive and hen they had genetically engineered human insulin produced in a test tube costs more to make… The onset of human insulin is significantly steeper than porcine and bovine so where advice had formerly been to take insulin 30 mins + before a meal it was found the human onset could be very rapid… people died here is Aus too…… So lets play spot the benevolent corporation…… Comment re NHS et al are of relevance to USA.. If insurers force a move from one medication to another in the US the possibility of suit being brought is perhaps a better protection for a US diabetic. or cynics why are ulers still being treated ith bizarre chemicals on an ongoing basis in the USA where they are mostly simply infections which can be treated with antibiotics and fixed completely this research  has existed for several years but has been slow to make progress into medical establishments and treatment.. A similar situation to insulin in that case perhaps..

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [snip] OK…call me uninformed or naieve, but please tell me how it is in the best interests of a company that is in the business to make money, to DELAY the implementation of something else that would make it money? I am making, say, $100,000,000 a year on my insulin products. I have contracts, factories, etc. that have to be paid for and which I will pay for by mortgage and retirement benefits even if I close. Let us call these $50,000,000 a year for ten years when I quit, and can continue making this much money indefinitely. I now have a product that will make me $500,000,000 a year for one years, that I can release at any time to make the money, but will obsolete my other endeavor entirely. Do I release my cure now? Or wait until I have to release it, to squeeze the last of the profit out of my current finances? [snip] Above is a disturbing scenario. But when you come to think of it you realize: – Lilly has other business as well, yielding more profits than insulin sales – Lilly has competition Now let’s suppose Lilly was to deliberately delay the cure in order to make most of insulin sales. Unfortunately "the genie is out of the bottle" and word will leak out of schemes like that. Who would want to buy Lilly products after that? Novo Nordisk would gladly take Lilly’s business. Others will gladly consume Lilly’s other business. Extremely bad reputation can bring down anysize corporation. On the other hand since the cure is gene-based other labs can make inroads to what’s going on. Patents nonwithstanding others could make similar cures. No. I think Lilly will be release the cure as soon as all the wrinkles have been ironed out. Sooner the better. Besides, which, there are at LEAST 6 other diabetic cure research groups working elsewhere to affect a cure in roughly the same fashion. The INGAP gene is patented, but the Ilotropin gene group it was developed from is NOT patentable, since it occurs naturally. I haven’t followed the development of gene patenting law closely, but

my understanding is that Craig Venter’s company is patenting thousands of naturally occuring DNA sequences of unknown function and that these patents will apparently stand, at least in the U.S.  Be interested to hear from anyone who knows exactly what that situation is, but as far as I know, you CAN patent a naturally occurring gene.  Would that it weren’t so, but the Patent Office didn’t ask me. John Carroll

Response:

—–BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE—– Well, yeah. I was just explaining why Lilly *might* slow things down. I expect them to spend extra time triple checking for safety and efficacy, taking advantage of a more cautious approach to protect their bottom line in the short run. This is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. And yes, as others said, there is competitive pressure to create a cure themselves. My numbers were also completely fictitious, of course: it was merely a thought experiment to understand why some people would be concerned about Lilly buying the patents.                                 Nico Garcia <PGP is obviously a good idea: look at who objects to it. —–BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE—– Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBM2+QPo8iAxVuL9qBAQH3qAP+IEUC+SkiXPQ8DLTqYqDD8Fs5cRPWFdGt y1eDDt6jnzTf3mr1pmllnS84SyCkO7N25pLrhQvOE2ojKnq0FHle1yKJRH2k9LgV pujuKsaHcuqAS3VXv6WrHUo2wBsO46QyH7E1CljPgg0XEoU41+jff4s/kUQie/Yw Th8Kj/lW41E= =zXWq —–END PGP SIGNATURE—–

Response:

[snippo] – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Above is a disturbing scenario. But when you come to think of it you realize: – Lilly has other business as well, yielding more profits than insulin sales – Lilly has competition Now let’s suppose Lilly was to deliberately delay the cure in order to make most of insulin sales. Unfortunately "the genie is out of the bottle" and word will leak out of schemes like that. Who would want to buy Lilly products after that? Novo Nordisk would gladly take Lilly’s business. Others will gladly consume Lilly’s other business. Extremely bad reputation can bring down anysize corporation. On the other hand since the cure is gene-based other labs can make inroads to what’s going on. Patents nonwithstanding others could make similar cures. No. I think Lilly will be release the cure as soon as all the wrinkles have been ironed out. Sooner the better.

I’m no Lilly-lover (liver?), but it occurs to me that any snags that occur in the development of this gene-based cure will likely bring some public accusation of Lilly’s "intentionally delaying" its release.  I hope this doesn’t happen, because if people accuse the company of doing something immoral that in fact it isn’t, it may just cause them to say to themselves, "if we’re being falsely accused of delay tactics, and we have no way of proving otherwise, we may as well Just my $.02. DanO

Response:

—–BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE—–    Newsgroups: misc.health.diabetes    How much do you want to bet that this is just another way of    controlling the market?  Who in their right minds would give up $1    billion in gross profit?  My personal opinion is that we just saw a    cure put back at least 20 years. OK…call me uninformed or naieve, but please tell me how it is in the best interests of a company that is in the business to make money, to DELAY the implementation of something else that would make it money?

I am making, say, $100,000,000 a year on my insulin products. I have contracts, factories, etc. that have to be paid for and which I will pay for by mortgage and retirement benefits even if I close. Let us call these $50,000,000 a year for ten years when I quit, and can continue making this much money indefinitely. I now have a product that will make me $500,000,000 a year for one years, that I can release at any time to make the money, but will obsolete my other endeavor entirely. Do I release my cure now? Or wait until I have to release it, to squeeze the last of the profit out of my current finances? – —                                 Nico Garcia <PGP is obviously a good idea: look at who objects to it. —–BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE—– Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBM20Xh48iAxVuL9qBAQG40QQAk8m4vEho/sNpPTb8SmHAP09Ls+kZtVOB PYU9X0Pla1wFp0i65wg+wAobHHHkeBoSyRfizDykHfcPaZ7Lh77SxzMlF7zZ1Vs3 BQ/2EI1BEKLpanxFaj5HCW78Ru0imK2JxbGoXw8H1YSidaEVM1b0fIy61FqywB44 nMdSshLccJ8= =H0Ww —–END PGP SIGNATURE—–

Response:

[snip] – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – OK…call me uninformed or naieve, but please tell me how it is in the best interests of a company that is in the business to make money, to DELAY the implementation of something else that would make it money? I am making, say, $100,000,000 a year on my insulin products. I have contracts, factories, etc. that have to be paid for and which I will pay for by mortgage and retirement benefits even if I close. Let us call these $50,000,000 a year for ten years when I quit, and can continue making this much money indefinitely. I now have a product that will make me $500,000,000 a year for one years, that I can release at any time to make the money, but will obsolete my other endeavor entirely. Do I release my cure now? Or wait until I have to release it, to squeeze the last of the profit out of my current finances?

[snip] Above is a disturbing scenario. But when you come to think of it you realize: – Lilly has other business as well, yielding more profits than insulin sales – Lilly has competition Now let’s suppose Lilly was to deliberately delay the cure in order to make most of insulin sales. Unfortunately "the genie is out of the bottle" and word will leak out of schemes like that. Who would want to buy Lilly products after that? Novo Nordisk would gladly take Lilly’s business. Others will gladly consume Lilly’s other business. Extremely bad reputation can bring down anysize corporation. On the other hand since the cure is gene-based other labs can make inroads to what’s going on. Patents nonwithstanding others could make similar cures. No. I think Lilly will be release the cure as soon as all the wrinkles have been ironed out. Sooner the better.

Response:

   Newsgroups: misc.health.diabetes    How much do you want to bet that this is just another way of    controlling the market?  Who in their right minds would give up $1    billion in gross profit?  My personal opinion is that we just saw a    cure put back at least 20 years. OK…call me uninformed or naieve, but please tell me how it is in the best interests of a company that is in the business to make money, to DELAY the implementation of something else that would make it money? Joe Burnham Net-Tamer V 1.08X – Registered

Response: