In my opinion it would be a good idea when the different regulating authorities would acknowledge approvals of other agencies* - the standards between, say, FDA and EMA are not identical but similar enough to allow an extremly shortened approval procedure.
A buy-everwhere-doctrine is probably risky, a CRO working under Indian regulation rules took some shortcuts too many and the EMA approval for dozens of generic drugs had to be revoked.
* I’m not generally against treaties like the TTIP, I “only” strongly disagree with the intransparent process excluding way too many stakeholders
I think we agree on (at least) one point: The approval process for medicaments is too slow, the bureaucratic overhead needs to be lowered (nothing is done except paper pushing). We’re in disagreement about the best solution, I don’t believe that a free market will solve all problems.
Because unfortunately, we all profit off the backs of the third world…maybe not as much as the corporations…but it is undisputably to our advantage that we do. Don;t worry…corps are still trying to take advantage of you! Just a LITTLE less when they have others to take advantage of!
Still not buying your rather veiled apologist’s defense of what is clearly a wretched (for ordinary people everywhere) trade deal. Is someone paying you to do that?
One thing I keep hearing about the TPP is that American workers will be put into direct competition with those in other countries that are paid tens of times less. Also that the deal will send thousands MORE American jobs overseas.
Overall, as one study warns:
The TPP would lead to higher inequality, with a lower labor share of national income. We expect competitive pressures on labor incomes, combined with employment losses, to push labor shares of national income further down, redistributing income from labor to capital in all countries. In the USA, this would exacerbate a multi-decade trend.
This deal was drafted and signed in secret by corporate and government elites because they knew that ordinary people won’t like what it has to say. I’m not liking what you’ve had to say in defense of it either.
If they could share details with corporate partners during negotiation, then they could share them with the public. They didn’t; there is no way we should trust the content.
Wait? Are you really this contrarian to believe that ANYONE that says anything that isn’t 100% to your talking points must be an apologist…I mean ‘veiled apologist’. Shall I shriek while stating I think it is bad? Will that make it any easier to understand I don’t like it? I’m sorry that I take measured approaches to things. The deal should not have been ratified, it is bad all the way around, it will be bad for everyone, HOWEVER…much the same way that conflict minerals and blood diamonds actually benefit those of us in the western world unfairly…the TPP is heavily weighted to be far more beneficial to the US than anyone else. If you have a retirement fund? You have enriched yourself with the TPP.
if you think ANY of this is in defense of this, I’m sorry that your comprehension skills are one sided. Again HORRIBLE DEAL THAT WE SHOULDN’T HAVE SIGNED. God fucking dammit…why can’t people have a conversation without folks calling each other names. Signed the veiled apologist.
Thanks for the clarification. Just a bit more seems in order:
[quote=“clifyt, post:108, topic:73228”]
the TPP is heavily weighted to be far more beneficial to the US than anyone else.[/quote]
Again, as I understand it, surely not everyone in the U.S. – only its elites. A group that doesn’t include me, nor the rest of the 99%.
If you have a retirement fund? You have enriched yourself with the TPP.
What? It hasn’t even passed approval in its various signatory countries yet, let alone been enacted. How could I possibly have already enriched myself with it?
ETA: you said above that I shouldn’t worry (gee, thanks), “corps are still trying to take advantage of you! Just a LITTLE less when they have others to take advantage of!”
Er, no. The TPP will clearly erode the standard of living for most Americans at a rate that’s even faster than the current erosion.
He committed the sin of robbing wealthy investors. If he would have just stuck to grifting the middle and lower class consumers he could have made a lifelong career as a “successful job creator”.
I think its fair to challenge this. Punching someone and taking their wallet is one way I might enrich myself, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to say I’d be worse off having done it. I’d be better off relative to the person I assaulted and stole from, but not better off. And signing an agreement that I have to continue to earn punch-related income as part of a deal to get to punch someone would full out crazy-stupid.
The US has terrible copyright laws (I’m just using this as an example I’m familiar with, but the treaty must cover a large number of reas.). Ratifying a treaty that makes others have the same terrible copyright laws is bad for the US because it supports the US continuing to have terrible copyright laws.
Many, many observers have noticed that the risk assessment process within the FDA is something like this:
15,000 people die of a disease while a treatment is in the paper pushing process - “well, good science takes time, don’t you know? You’ll just have to be understanding.”
15 people die of an unexpected reaction to a treatment while 14,985 have their lives saved - “OMGWTFBBQ, someone did not review this thoroughly enough, heads must roll!!!”
What’s so dumbfounding is how gratuitous his arrogance is. Yes, the Representatives interviewing him are, by and large, nitwits. (These are people who bring snowballs into Congress to disprove climate change. And, Gowdy-- Jesus that guy looks/is dense.)
But the smirking? The looking away/distracted? The chinraising? The impatient sighing? Who does that? 12 year-olds do that. Even if you are that arrogant, you know that there’s a high social cost to showing that arrogance. You learn early on to hide that arrogance and only show it with your elite peers. (Unless you’re Donald Trump, who gets away with it by “sharing” it such that it becomes a “group arrogance.”)
And doesn’t his company have any control of him? Don’t they hire PR firms that would tell him to “Shut up– Shut up now”? Isn’t his own lawyer telling him to “Shut up– Shut up now”? What about his parents, ex-friends, ex-girlfriends?
This is all so baffling. I don’t understand how a cancerous personality like his is allowed to survive in the corporate community…
Biased reporting in the extreme. Sidelines aside, he was playing by the rules. That little “people are dying” trick has never worked when we tried to use it against big pharma, he’s a scapegoat.
Turing Pharmaceuticals already dumped him from the board in December after the securities fraud arrest. You’d think someone would be coaching him on how to be at least a little sympathetic, but apparently either he’s ignoring them or nobody wants to try.
