[ExI] ehhh, what? do explain please.

William Flynn Wallace foozler83 at gmail.com
Sat Jun 18 00:10:05 UTC 2022

I would guess that the members who approved the drugs did not make the
rules, making them blameless.  The drugs turned out to be somewhat
successful, I think we can all support that.  The side effects were fairly
rare.  All better than getting the virus for most people.  There is now
Long Covid and it is a terrible thing, and some people were protected from
that.  Change the committee rules, we are saying.  Good luck with dealing
with a bureaucracy and civil servants, who cannot easily be got rid of.
Way to do it:  getting on TV is essential, far better than writing to
someone.  Politicians take what's on TV very seriously.   bill w

On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 3:28 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> On Behalf Of
> BillK via extropy-chat
> ...
> > _______________________________________________
> >...I was also surprised at Spike's quaint surprise at the thought of
> government corruption.
> About half the funding of the FDA itself comes via 'fees' from Big Pharma.
> The FDA committee advisers are supposed to declare any conflict of
> interest.
> Royalty payments may be hidden, but there are ways round this declaration.
> Payments made AFTER the approval decision are not vetted. (Speaking fees,
> consultancy, research, expenses, etc.).
> See:
> <https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/02/opinion/fda-drug-approval-trust.html>
> and
> <
> https://www.science.org/content/article/hidden-conflicts-pharma-payments-fd
> a-advisers-after-drug-approvals-spark-ethical
> <https://www.science.org/content/article/hidden-conflicts-pharma-payments-fda-advisers-after-drug-approvals-spark-ethical>
> >
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> Hmmmm... most disconcerting is this.  We gradually found out that the
> vaccines had more risks than we were told about and were far less
> effective.
> Now we are finding out they were approved by a committee which could
> legally
> accept royalties.
> I did misunderstand.  I know the ethics rules for the little people (us.)
> We were told they get more strict as you go up, for obvious reasons: the
> payoff gets bigger.  Now it appears they allow something at the top levels
> that would get your ass fired down here.
> spike
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20220617/64835877/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list