Slashdot Mirror

Organs can not be harvested unless dead. Otherwise the surgery team would be murderers. They are not. A patient have to be declared dead before anything related to organ donation will begin. Properly dead: brain dead.

The family of donors doesn't get to pay for the donation. That is conspiracy theory crazy.

Well, take it up with these people: http://www.lifenews.com/2013/0... http://ahrp.org/us-organ-harve...

You are correct about the patient having to be declared brain dead. The question is does the heart stopping beating equal brain death. This is not terribly surprising, that doctors are in a hurry to remove body parts. given that a lot of people want a lot of body parts, and ther fresher the better, so tear 'em up.

But that this is some sort of conspiracy theory for kooks? Perhaps not.

You've spent a lifetime debunking claims of the paranormal, and for that we thank you.

In your opinion, are there areas in modern society which are not identified as paranormal that should be investigated? If you were addressing a cadre of young scientists willing to make efforts into verifying or debunking things, are there important social issues which should be examined? Which issues would those be?

To frame the question in context, here are examples of the types of issues I am referring to:

1) Economic opinions and "schools of thought", "a little inflation is good" even though no one can state what the best value is, or come up with an analytical way of measuring it

2) Antidepressants have no effect, 90 percent of cancer studies can't be reproduced. The peer review process and scientific publishing in general.

3) Most soft science papers are confident to 95%, implying that on average the results of 1 out of 20 scientific papers arose due to chance.

Todays drugs are FAR closer to the 7 million mark..

My wife works in regulatory affairs for a biotech. After a large-scale trial for a specific drug currently in development, FDA panel was split and ordered another trial. Cost just for the trial is expected to top $15 million. Further, the link you cite indicates median cost is closer to $60 million PLUS "discovery" costs, whatever that is.

A billion was spent researching a drug 20 years ago. Todays drugs are FAR closer to the 7 million mark.. It's been a rumor for a long time that drug research is amazingly expensive. It isn't.

1) MOST the problem people for children are FRIENDS AND FAMILY! This fact can not be stated enough. Obviously, tracking does little good.

2) The majority strangers are good people and will help / watch out for kids; well, not in lawsuit crazy countries or ones were the culture of fear makes everybody a threat; even the child who needs your help or supervision. Parents today seem over protective, possibly because they are so much more negligent than previous generations? (its not their fault they are this way)

3) Teenagers will not wear such a watch, outsmart it etc. Teens get themselves into trouble; much of it not requiring tracking-- knowing where they are being foolish is not that useful. Its primary use here would be kidnapping into the sex trade which is much higher in some areas and at certain ages and genders. This is still quite a low percentage even in relative bad areas.

4) Young "adults" would be better suited to a cell phone. Lots of ideas possible here. Ideally, something that was set it off with you yelling help... Your phone tracks you ALREADY to a general area if not precisely by this point-- no gps required. Eventually most children will have a cell phone too.

5) Drug sex offenders to kill their sex drive. Similar to drugging the mental cases as we do now (both are mental problems.) This would possibly even help with the #1 cause of the problems. Makes more sense to have the sick people pay to treat themselves than everybody else pay to see where their kid was before / during victimization.

6) How about we put the tracking devices ON THE OFFENDERS instead of all the kids? (which wouldn't help with biggest group-- friends and family.) This is a lot like house arrest bracelets.
Seriously, somebody who preys on unknown kids/teens has a mental problem not a criminal problem-- punishment doesn't work; they only learn how not to get caught next time or go after safer targets (friends/family) or kill the victims. It requires life-long treatment, not temporary punishment. Its just as foolish as punishing gay people for being gay and thinking it will fix the situation. Legalized prostitution would also cut down the numbers- hey its a fact - prohibitions never work.

7) Bad Behavior / Drugs: Knowing where the child is will not help a whole lot; most the drug users I've known did it around friends, at home, or even at school.

8) Parents: Do you want to have data that could be used to prosecute your child?? In the USA, we prosecute children for stupid shit and are quite foolish about punishing them (in some areas even corrupt about it... http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/519/150)

9) Clever hacker types (who could be kids) will combine with the power of the internet to provide less talented people easy ways to hack the watches so they don't work as planned

10) What about bad coverage areas? GPS doesn't work in all places and sending the data back is even more troublesome. Should a parent call 911 because the child disappears near some kids basement? Would wrapping foil over it cause it to do the same thing?

Now, you need to learn some history, and from people who were there, such as me, and there are plenty of other boomers here who can tell you similar.. All this one quarter or one third of young males were not "diseased" back then like they are termed now back when I was a kid. It didn't exist, this was known as normal childhood stuff and they get over it given a chance. This is a *new* thing they thought up for profit, it is just reclassified as a disease where they force addict them to *speed* for a *cure* and the poor little dude's brains get permanently warped from the drugging during their critical development stage, and they grow up thinking they are sick when all they are is just being normal little boys. Same as a lot of adults now are finally faked out into taking prozac and similar because of "stress". Geez loweez, how did humans we ever make it to the late twentieth century without this crap.

Now I'll be the first to admit that *some* people really need the chemical help, I will not dispute that at all, but such a HUGE proportion of the children, and now the adults? No freekin way, not even close, it's a scam, and the more they inflict it on people the more "normal" it gets to think of your child as "diseased" because some expert claims they are, said expert profiting handsomely from the diagnosis, then some big pharmco for "the cure", same as they will tell YOU that.

We managed hundreds of millions of kids to get through school, starting with our first schools way back when the nation was first established, going all the way until the very late twentieth century, without the state and state approved for profit medical industrial establishment forcing them to become addicted to drugs..how did we do that then? The answer is obvious, this is a newly created mostly scam "disease".

BTW, please, you just never know, run to see your doctor right now, throw gobs of cash on the counter, and in a trembling shaky desperate and hysterical voice beg them to RIGHT NOW see if the purple pill with chartreuse polka dots is *right for you*! Hurry up, you might have it! Whatever *it* is! Look out, it's spreading, why half your neighbors might have *it* already! And rest assured, these esteemed professionals would never abuse a position of trust and "scientific studies" for mere money in the tens of billions, that's just a *coincidence*.

If there's HUGE money and power involved, corruption occurs, it just happens. No one class of employment or guild or profession is "immune" to that corruption either, we are all human. A lot of modern medical stuff is just great, a lot of it is a scam and just designed to separate you from your cash. Same as any other stockholder driven, for-profit, nothing matters but seeing bigger numbers on your quarterly reports industry. Just is, is all. Get your swine flu shot, the one where they got a special law passed so they aren't responsible and you can't sue them for anything bad happening down the road. Ya, that shot. More billion$.

Sorry, I am just jaded, after decades of seeing corrupt industry and government and them working hand in glove...you get jaded. And it has only gotten worse over the years, not better, despite every election cycle liar A or liar B says vote for them and things will get better. Bah, and humbug

Psychopharmacology in Turmoil: an ethical or scientific crisis? - David Healy
http://google.com/search?q=traci+johnson

I can't think of better hands to handle GM: Bayer!

They're socially conscious ...
http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/05/01/27a.php

They provide health-care products to the world ...
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=hea lth&res=9B0DE7D91239F93BA25750C0A961948260

We should probably turn over the nuclear arsenal to them while we're at it.

Simply the most evil company on the planet.

http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/05/01/27a.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_AG#Controversy

They "bought" concentration camp prisoners and performed tests on them... and killed all of them. They had their own concentration camp during WWII.

They knowingly sold factor (for hemophiliacs) that was not properly screened and infected untold numbers of hemophiliacs with HIV and other bloodborne diseases.

The list of atrocities goes on and on.

The biggest problem with genetically altered anything is that there is no way to truly determine how it affect the environment in which it is introduced until it's too late to do anything about it.

First, the rate of usage is about 100 per 1000 people, in the US.

Second, anti-depressants do not prevent suicide and in some cases appear to even increase suicide rates.

Third, anti-depressants are a major money earner for drugs companies, who continously need to develop new drugs as older ones become commoditized.

That is what this study is about... setting the stage for new anti-SAD drugs. This is big pharma marketing.

What's the point here? Perhaps that a huge majority of people who take anti-depressants are actually being abused. I hardly think this is a radical statement: it's just valium all over again.

For many people, their drug is their problem.

My list of cures basically comes down to "get a life" and although I've every faith that drugs can solve some problems, they should be the last solution, not the first.

But the problem with the old people having sex is that they are becoming the fastest growing population with the HIV Virus. *boo*

So what can we do about it all? I would like to see a law enacted that would prevent the phama companies from holding back 'cures' and vaccines. I really would. But ... they are lining our politicians pockets, so we get to be screwed.
Note: Health Insurance companies do not cover 'lifestyle drugs' - Aetna and Cigna do not. I had to prove that I have a disability to get a stinkin' bottle of Vioxx. Boy do I regret that now. :P But, Medicare and Medical do! WTF? Sex offending welfare recipients can get viagra, but um, hello... I can't get the drugs I need to allow me to breathe or move? We seriously need to hold the companies responsible.

And to that end... I have already started boycotting Bayer for selling tainted blood overseas and contributing to the death of thousands.

Jho

And when this "cures" the patient's symptoms of cyberchondria, s/he won't do the internet research required to turn up the link between Prozac and the new symptoms of depression and suicidal thoughts s/he is experiencing.