mylynnside

Money Talks

2005-02-03T23:48:00.000-05:00

We all know how money talks. The big drug companies know how to make it work. We in the United States are paying far too much for the drugs we need to be able to live or function at an acceptable level. I have to take some very expensive drugs and, like many others in a similar situation, I have been ordering them from a reputable, licensed Canadian pharmacy and have saved a significant amount of money by doing this. I had read something about this so was not unaware of it, but I got a notice today that the new Canadian Health Minister may block mail order sales of prescription medicine to American citizens. It is my opinion, and I think I share that opinion with others, that the drug companies are pressuring the Canadian authorities to end the practice of selling to Americans because it has been cutting into their profits

Some of the large drug companies have been trying to choke off the supply of certain drugs to Canadian pharmacies by refusing to sell to the ones that supply American citizens. They explain their high prices by placing the blame on high R&D (research and development) costs. They don't mention the money spent on marketing and, especially, on lobbying government officials to maintain those high prices.

I support paying reasonable prices for research and development because we wouldn't have all these drugs without it, but I object to paying excessive marketing and lobbying costs. Why should we have to pay for lobbying that is only maintaining or increasing our costs and, to make matters even worse, denying us the opportunity to buy our drugs at significant savings. If the drug makers can make a profit ( even if it's smaller) by selling in Canada and other countries, why can't they sell at similar prices in this country? I think we're being ripped off and we don't have the financial means to fight for lower prices.

Tsunami, cataclysm of the century

2004-12-27T20:47:00.000-05:00

I have to admit I have done very little traveling in my life so I may be unaware of many things, but I could hardly believe that there's no system set up in many areas of the world to warn citizens of an impending disaster. The loss of life is incalculable and won't be known for some time. Any seismic event that, in effect, rocks the earth will be detected and a warning could have saved many lives. There was ample time for such a system to work. Since I have no experience in these matters and only have logic and common sense for guidance, it seems to me the cost of a fairly simple system could be manageable and could have saved much suffering and loss. There are more than ample resources lost to corruption and greed or wasted through carlessness or laziness throughout the world to install warning systems worldwide and keep them in operation. Priorities are all wrong when this is allowed to happen if, in fact, it could have been avoided or, at least, mitigated.

I beg to differ

2004-12-25T23:22:00.000-05:00

I just finished reading an article about the impact of depression and anxiety on the happiness level in a person's life. According to this article, depression has a definite impact on the level of a person's happiness and satisfaction with life, and anxiety has little negative impact. I don't agree with this conclusion, in spite of studies they may have done. Anxiety can definitely prevent you from reaching your potential, it prevents you from doing many things that you would ultimately enjoy but will shy away from because of anxiety about the situation. A prime example is social anxiety which will prevent you from making valuable business contacts or personal friendships. People sometimes avoid job changes or leaving home to find a job because of the anxiety such changes bring on. It is a very isolating and crippling disorder and is insufficiently recognized and treated.

Some thoughts

2004-12-24T22:03:00.000-05:00

I was thinking about a book I need and went to one of my favorite book sites. I had been getting most of my books at Amazon.com and could usually find what I wanted, in good condition, in the second-hand books. I mentioned this fact not long ago to a friend that had worked in a bookstore and she recommended Powells.com, an independent bookseller, so I went to their site and now it's one of my favorites. It's well-done and very informative, with interesting book reviews and commentary. I went there this evening and found this article taken from The Atlantic Monthly, discussing the fact that the exessive media coverage of the atrocities committed by the insurgents is only encouraging them to commit more and more of the same, or worse. The article can be found at: http://www.powells.com/portal/Politics.html
The terrorists know how to use the tendency toward more sensationalism in journalism to their advantage and are simply using more and more outrageous methods to grab attention to themselves and their agenda to rid the world of non-moslem influences. I think it would be wise for the media to use restraint when they are deciding what to publish and possibly re-think some priorities about what is and is not important and what effect it might have on someone that is considering how to put his agenda more in the spotlight.

Where has Common Sense Gone?

2004-12-16T01:14:00.000-05:00

I saw a segment on the news yesterday about an elephant that had lived in the zoo for around 40 years and she was having a lot of health problems, arthritis and other ills. Some animal rights people decided that the zoo was a poor place for the elephant since it had (supposedly) caused her problems and that she needed a better home. Now, I'm an animal lover too, having raised livestock and have several pets, so I don't like to see animals mistreated, either. Those people seemed to have missed something important, though. Notice that she had lived there for 40 years. It's obvious to me that the animal is getting old. Don't we have those sorts of problems when we get older? Well, today they said she had heart failure and she died in her sleep. She was OLD. It seemed pretty obvious to me but, evidently, not to everyone.

What's wrong with our medical system?

2004-12-08T23:11:00.000-05:00

According to a call-in guest on CNN-fn, many of the problems in our medical system are caused by the Pharmaceutical companies and the insurance system, that have brought ruin to medicine. The drug companies spend huge amounts of money on lobbyists to inflluence govermnent officials and politicians and spend large amounts on marketing, including direct marketing to consumers. This isn't right, most consumers aren't sufficiently educated about drugs to make a good decision about which drug they should be taking and are being influenced by the advertising by drug companies that aren't giving advice to consumers but are trying to get consumers to ask their doctors to prescribe whatever drug they're selling. It's not education or helping ill people but it's the old bottom line again. Something needs to be done before the medical system declines even further.

The Idea Police, Who decides what we're permitted to read(learn)?

2004-12-01T23:39:00.000-05:00

Re; post on Jettspen.blotspot.com about proposed Alabama book ban: who is to decide which books are to be read and which are to be banned, and how far are we going to go? Banning books or any other idea source is a ridiculous idea and most certainly goes against free expression of ideas. Ideas need to be out there for all to see so we can judge for ourselves which ones are deserving of acceptance and which are not. We, the people have the intellectual ability to decide for ourselves what to believe and don't need someone too tell us what to believe and to keep information from us, just as if we're "too young to understand", so to speak. Often, when someone proposes banning some idea or theory, they're afraid of that idea and I guess they're afraid of what will happen when others learn about it and might (heaven forbid) accept it as a truth. We need to let people make their own decisions based on all the information they have and it all needs to be available and not buried somewhere or, worse, burned.

Should We Allow Medical Use of Marijuana?

2004-11-30T01:12:00.000-05:00

I saw a segment on the news on NBC discussing the medical use of marijuana, mainly for pain control. It sounds like a good idea to permit doctors to write perscriptions for marijuana to be used medically for pain control or for other types of symptom relief, where there are few other alternatives. After all, we are able to buy cigarettes that have been proved to be a cause of lung cancer and we can buy alcohol, abuse it and kill or injure other people by driving while drinking. or kill ourselves with alcohol poisoning and liver disease. Marijuana could be listed as a controlled drug and used accordingly. There are many people in indescribable pain that could benefit and have a much-improved quality of life if this change were made. I can't see how this change would make it any more available to people that abuse other substances, and it would allow those that really need it to be able to get it legally and not be forced to choose between pain relief and going to prison.

Why Promote Hate

2004-11-26T22:09:00.000-05:00

I was watching the news on whatever channel my husband was watching, either CNN or NBC and they were describing a new game, supposedly for children, I guess, where the main character would blow himself up, expecting to get on the fast track to paradise. When you think about all the copy-cat crimes, activities, or whatever, you can imagine the impression this game can have on impressionable young minds. I didn't see what, if any, the story line is, but a game like this is highly likely to promote violence, if nothing else and it is saying that if you do damage to someone or something, destroying yourself in the process, you're guaranteed a place in paradise. What a message to send to children. I know we can find more positive and productive messages to emphasize. And, unfortunately, it isn't only children thatare affected by such "information".

Animals or People?

2004-11-21T01:23:00.000-05:00

According to a post by my cuz, Jett,jettstream.blogspot.com the EPA is soliciting information on the effects of toxic materials on infants and small children of low income families. I was under the apparantly mistaken impression that the EPA was supposed to protect us from toxic materials, not use the children of low income families as guinea pigs to study the effects of such toxic materials. There have been protests among animal rights organizations against animals being used for such purposes. Possibly, we need an organization for the ethical treatment of children .

2004-11-19T23:36:00.000-05:00

Here I am standing next to my 1937 Oldsmobile, holding a quilt of appliqued antique cars that I made .

mylynnside

2004-11-17T23:35:00.000-05:00