FYI at least some state Medicaid programs do infact negotiate drug prices, unlike Medicare.
7,879 karma · joined December 3, 2012
Why would Medicare negotiate rates for a therapy for infants/children (even if they had the legal right)?
Regardless of the location, a conversation is protected from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment if it is made with a "reasonable expectation of privacy".
The law is not and never was:
>When through the normal course of using a technology you reveal information to the government (in this case the military) they can use that information against you.
That’s not the legal standard for searches and seizures under the 4th amendment.
It’s about the reasonable expectation of privacy, and when a defense attorney emails their client the client has a reasonable expectation of privacy. A reasonable person doesn’t think the prosecutor has embedded tracking into emails sent to their attorney which will relay information back to the prosecutor when shared forwarded to the client by the defense attorney.
It certainly does if both auto pilot Tesla’s and standard vehicles are resulting in death, but the law will provide a remedy to your survivors and heirs in one instance and actually turn around and hold you liable in another instance.
After all the post was about liability and clearly nothing to do with how the poster prefers to die, which you somehow read into it.
They don’t make fraudulent misrepresentations to the public regarding their technological capabilities to self-drive which people rely on leading to fatal accidents.
But when those car manufacturers are at fault for the accidents vis-a-vis some manufacturing defect...they or their suppliers are liable.
All those Walmart store managers make 6 figures as you say, some as much as $250k, but the one thing they can always fall back on is they all started out as a low paid Walmart employee as well.
It doesn’t change the inequality dynamics but it’s better than something like this story of the healthcare execs making $300k+ bonuses compared to their minimum wage coworkers, where the execs never started out making min wage with the company...or consider the horror story’s of those certain tech companies who don’t even treat low wage employees as regular workers and encourage regular high wage workers not to socialize with the low wage workers.
You do know Morgan Stanley was fined $4.4B for their roll in selling toxic assets to their investor clients while internally selling off the same securities, which they knew were toxic.
Morgan Stanley’s reputation is they will sell their clients shit that they know is shit, and if they own the shit themselves they will also sell it off further driving down the price of the shit you bought from them. They will happily pay the fines because they make more money than the fines. They don’t care about their reputation because they don’t have one and their track record shows they can commit any abuse they want and moron investors will still give them their business.
Mob rule? It’s the judicial system, one of 3 branches of government designed specifically to place checks and balances on the other branches, it’s the exact opposite of mob rule.
Mob rule would be the EPA deciding for everyone what the science is and not allowing any due process or acces to the courts to challenge the same.
You do know it came out at trial how Monsanto was able to influence the EPA including delaying the re-review of roundup ingredients , which was required by federal law, to allow their acquisition to go through?
Do you think it’s just coincidence 13,000 plaintiffs were diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma that worked with roundup for years even though those statistics are inconsistent with the general population?
So let me get this right...you don’t think a jury can comprehend and understand the facts being presented to them through experts, yet without hearing any facts or experts you can confirm these juries “made the right choice”?
As I said before there will be educated people in this thread who down play a juries ability to make a accurate finding of fact and yet be all to happy to make their own findings without any knowledge of the facts of a given case or expert testimony, just as you did.
Do you have any evidence or studies to suggest juries can’t determine credibility of expert testimony?
The tobacco cases come to mind.
They may be laymen on the subject, but they heard the evidence and expert testimony...that makes them more knowledgeable about the facts than anyone in this thread, and yet you’ll see many educated people here with opinions without any facts (beyond newspaper articles).
And while they may be better equipped to make a finding of fact of a criminal case (did person x do y), but often it’s still just a chance they get it right, plus those criminal cases have a much higher standard than a civil case.
So it’s important to keep in mind what is being asked of the jury here. They aren’t asking if roundup cause cancer, not even asking did roundup cause cancer beyond a reasonable doubt, but simply based on the expert testimony and facts presented is it more likely than not (>50% chance) Roundup caused cancer.
Except you want to remove those regulations that include training and licensure requirements.
Rules already exist to penalize CDl holders for poor driving and they are a higher standard/increased penalties compared to none CDl drivers...what we don’t need is allowing untrained and unlicensed commercial drivers, that in no way will improve driver safety.
I believe with less training and lower standards there will be more accidents?
Historically there were less regulations and more accidents. Licensing is only one component of the safety regulations enacted, but again historically yes without these regulations truckers engaged in more risky driving behaviors.
Again it sounds like you are unfamiliar with the industry.
So you want to deregulate commercial truck drivers because you feel costs of getting/maintaining a CDl outweigh the safety issues?
Do you have any insight on this at all? Have you ever driven a commercial truck for a living? Do you even know the cost of obtain/maintain a CDL? The average cost of a commercial trucking accident? The average decrease in commercial truck accidents via-a-vis trucking school?
How about commercial pilots? Should we do away with pilot license because the liensure increases business costs notwithstanding increase in safety failures?
No, not a majority, every single patient with T2D has consumed them, whereas a majority could reverse diabeties by cutting them.
Medically it is undisputed T2D could have been avoided in 100% of cases through diet and exercise. Do other factors contribute (obesity, genetics, etc...)? Yes, but notwithstanding those issues still 100% of T2D cases could have been avoided (unfortunately not 100% can be reversed).
Sure people can consume high carb diets live long healthy lives, no one is saying 100% of people who eat carbs/sugar get diabetes, but 100% of patients that get T2D consumed sugar/carbs.
It’s not like ACA or even Medicare covers all Rx...hence Medicare Part D (ie drug coverage) which was done under GW Bush, at the time the GOP distanced themselves and later Obama tried to dismantle Medicare part D, but the dems has to pull him back (politically dems couldn’t gut drug coverage for Medicare patients).
I think you should reframe this...and ask if anyone can link evidence of a case of type 2 diabeties or non alcoholic fatty liver disease where the patient didn’t consume sugar/carbs (those cases don’t exist).
I think historically type 2 diabeties being called adult onset diabeties shows that even life long moderate consumption of carbs/sugars leads to type 2 in many individuals who were “healthy” in their younger years. Moreover, for many people type 2 was just a natural progression, it’s not like historically everyone with type 2 began over consuming carbs/sugar later in life.
It’s probably the single most extreme example but consider the US drone bombing in Yemen to kill a US citizen...while we don’t know the basis of the decision, because the kill list and threshold to get put on said list is not disclosed, most legal scholars believe the basis for this incident are the deceased’s YouTube videos.
How do you think the 1st Amendment is interpreted that they don’t regulate speech of all kinds?
Defamatory speech, libelous speech, commercial speech, noise ordinances, permitting/zoning to limit when and where protests can be held, copyrights/trademarks, speech that interferes with government functions (ie burning drafts cards), advertising restrictions (no advertising tobacco/alcohol to children), regulation of speech of minors by schools and even child pornography are all government regulations of speech.
It’s probably very useful to measure what spikes ones insulin so the individual can avoid those foods.
For example I know whey, a protein powder with zero carbs/sugars will spike my insulin (because it knocks me out of ketosis). Probably not a bad idea for a body builder who wants to replinish their muscle glycogen stores after a hard workout, but not going to be necessary and over long term even harmful to someone who isn’t depleting their muscle glucose/glycogen stores. In fact protein that can’t be used is generally converted into glucose which when not used is store in fat cells.
However, I do believe they legitimately have the most centurions and I have read about autopsies on centurions which found they showed no signs of chronic disease. Of course that is surviorship bias, but assuming the total number of centurions is true, especially given the small population, I think there is more there there.
Since the introduction of “western diet” post WW2 the majority of their diet is still carbs and yet they now show significant increase of Chronic disease (obesity, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, fatty liver disease and kidney disease) and lowered life expectancy.
Generally people discussing “low carb diets” really mean managing blood glucose/insulin spikes. So high glycemic carbs, refined sugars, refined carbs.
Not all carbs are created equal when we talk about impacts on blood glucose and/or the liver.