720 karma · joined March 14, 2010
The new drug could be cheaper to manufacture, fewer side effects, a full cure in stead of a functional cure.
The lookup table would not work for that case
Most researchers likely would want to summarize these data in a similar way anyway, so this works out nicely.
The Netherlands has a system with both not-for-profit and for-profit insurers, that works reasonably well.
- Transparent, identical rules for minimum coverage and strict rules on minimum and maximum deductible for all insurers and insurees. - Mandatory coverage for everyone (just like liability insurance is mandatory for cars in the US) - Insurers do not have the right to refuse any applicants based on pre-existing conditions - Insurers directly negotiate with hospitals on rates. Emergency care has to be covered regardless of whether hospitals are in network or not.
If you can obtain an edge through a skill component (card counting in blackjack), some people wouldn't call this gambling anymore, but I would still call it gambling myself. Someone doing this for a living is a professional gambler.
What for me would be a sensible definition is that a bet/gamble has no other goals. Putting money in the bank/investing in a stock reallocates capital, which can be invested by someone. The fact that it is a risk-taking endeavor is merely a side effect. I would say the same goes for selling/buying insurance for your car.
So for me, the difference between betting and putting money in the bank/investing is that the primary goal is something different than the risk-taking activity.
Seasonal storage is a completely different story. For my own panels, production in Nov/Dec/Jan is about 20% of that in Apr/May/Jun, and this is typical. That means that you either need 15x solar capacity of what you need on a sunny day, or enough storage to bridge those 3 months, two orders of magnitude storage more than we would need to store electricity overnight.
It is of course possible that these chips enable analyses that are currently not possible/prohibited by cost, but at least for now, this will not be the limiting factor for genomics, but cost of sequencing (which is currently $400-500 per genome)
The FDA (and EMA in Europe) are the only thing that protects desperate patients from fraudsters, charlatans and pharma-companies just looking for a return on their investment.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/resea...
So, for some lifestyle change to reliably be reproduced by observational studies, it would have to be a 'true effect' of 4 years. I would say that 3 years, or even 1 year, is something to worry about.