RFK Impact on FDA & MNKD?

[prcgorman2]

RFK's comments are hard to understand because they're so broad (which is a little scary - I'm ok with change but not upheaval).

My thought in answer to the question which started this thread is that the FDA is widely recognized as being less effective than its regulatory counterparts in other countries and an administration that sought a better balance could be good.

A weird statistic I remember from my youth (and told to me by a nurse working on her RN, BSN) was that the US had a higher infant mortality rate than some 3rd world countries. US medical treatment isn't always the best in the world. I've known people who were going to or did actually travel to unusual places to get treatments that were unavailable in the US because of the FDA. (I've heard the same from people in countries like Canada too, but not sure whether that's a regulatory issue or a socialized medicine issue or both.)

[peppy]

Nov 12, 2024 11:57:09 GMT -5 prcgorman2 said:

RFK's comments are hard to understand because they're so broad (which is a little scary - I'm ok with change but not upheaval).

My thought in answer to the question which started this thread is that the FDA is widely recognized as being less effective than its regulatory counterparts in other countries and an administration that sought a better balance could be good.

A weird statistic I remember from my youth (and told to me by a nurse working on her RN, BSN) was that the US had a higher infant mortality rate than some 3rd world countries. US medical treatment isn't always the best in the world. I've known people who were going to or did actually travel to unusual places to get treatments that were unavailable in the US because of the FDA. (I've heard the same from people in countries like Canada too, but not sure whether that's a regulatory issue or a socialized medicine issue or both.)

United States: 5.4 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2021, ranking 33rd out of 38 OECD countries

January 31, 2023
US Has Highest Infant, Maternal Mortality Rates Despite the Most Health Care Spending
www.ajmc.com/view/us-has-highest-infant-maternal-mortality-rates-despite-the-most-health-care-spending#

US maternal mortality in 2020 was over 3 times the rate in most of the other high-income countries, with almost 24 (23.8) maternal deaths for every 100,000 live births.

[Chris-C]

PRC and Peppy: Agreed 100% that US healthcare needs a shakeup so that outcomes are the reimbursement multiplier rather than episodes of service. I'm not sure that RFKJr is the one I feel most comfortable to do it, but they are not asking my opinion. The basic issue with the cost of delivery in the US is the burden of administrative costs and the expectation of profit (notwithstanding the moral and ethical problems) because a heart attack victim cannot shop around, so there is not the truly competitive marketplace required in free market capitalism. Marketing costs also drive up the cost of care and drugs. Professional sports on television are bombarded with direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical ads. We using the drugs are paying for those.

One comment that needs to be clarified for the record concerns Canada. Canada spends less than half (about 42%) for health care and covers all of its citizens, achieving better outcomes in infant mortality, preventable illnesses, and life expectancy. It should not be described as having socialized medicine, however (any more than Medicare and Medicaid are socialized in the US). Canada rather has a single-payer healthcare insurance system, which works like private insurance in the US but is funded by the federal and provincial governments. The providers work for chartered hospitals or are in private practices and clinics that the government does NOT operate. When I lived there, in each province, a resident was given a provincial care card that functioned like a Blue Cross/Blue shield card in the US. Regardless of the provincial issuer, that card was good throughout the country. Their national publicly funded system is called Medicare, and no co-pays or out-of-pocket expenses apply for essential (versus elective) healthcare services. For elective services, Canadians can opt for private insurance to help cover any costs and co-pays for elective care and pharmaceuticals.

When the system was first developed at a conference in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1957, there was considerable public opposition to the idea. Now, like Medicare and Social Security in the USA, Canadians would fight like hell if anyone suggested taking it away (despite the exaggerated tales of long waits and dissatisfaction promulgated in the US- primarily by the health insurance industry).

[notamnkdmillionaire]

Nov 17, 2024 22:59:19 GMT -5 Chris-C said:

PRC and Peppy: Agreed 100% that US healthcare needs a shakeup so that outcomes are the reimbursement multiplier rather than episodes of service. I'm not sure that RFKJr is the one I feel most comfortable to do it, but they are not asking my opinion. The basic issue with the cost of delivery in the US is the burden of administrative costs and the expectation of profit (notwithstanding the moral and ethical problems) because a heart attack victim cannot shop around, so there is not the truly competitive marketplace required in free market capitalism. Marketing costs also drive up the cost of care and drugs. Professional sports on television are bombarded with direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical ads. We using the drugs are paying for those.

One comment that needs to be clarified for the record concerns Canada. Canada spends less than half (about 42%) for health care and covers all of its citizens, achieving better outcomes in infant mortality, preventable illnesses, and life expectancy. It should not be described as having socialized medicine, however (any more than Medicare and Medicaid are socialized in the US). Canada rather has a single-payer healthcare insurance system, which works like private insurance in the US but is funded by the federal and provincial governments. The providers work for chartered hospitals or are in private practices and clinics that the government does NOT operate. When I lived there, in each province, a resident was given a provincial care card that functioned like a Blue Cross/Blue shield card in the US. Regardless of the provincial issuer, that card was good throughout the country. Their national publicly funded system is called Medicare, and no co-pays or out-of-pocket expenses apply for essential (versus elective) healthcare services. For elective services, Canadians can opt for private insurance to help cover any costs and co-pays for elective care and pharmaceuticals.

When the system was first developed at a conference in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1957, there was considerable public opposition to the idea. Now, like Medicare and Social Security in the USA, Canadians would fight like hell if anyone suggested taking it away (despite the exaggerated tales of long waits and dissatisfaction promulgated in the US- primarily by the health insurance industry).

Not sure if Canadians would still fight like hell for it now. There comes a point to where national health care can no longer fund itself and attract doctors. Canada is learning that lesson now. 

www.cbc.ca/news/politics/primary-care-canada-10-000-canadians-report-1.7125990

[Chris-C]

Nov 7, 2024 19:31:01 GMT -5 runner said:

Treadmill or bike works for me too!

The song used in the Ozempic TV commercial was originally a UK hit song in the mid 70s called "Magic" by a Scottish band named Pilot. The song is one of my all time favs though I don't like that the lyrics were changed for a TV ad now.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZCZ1pl37Ag

Totally agree, Runner!  It was one of those songs that sticks in your head and you end up humming it all day long. I'm not thrilled by Ozempic appropriating it either. But here is what ChatGPT provided to enlighten me about the Novo royalties paid to the band:

Magic," the 1974 hit by Scottish band Pilot, was co-written by band members David Paton and Billy Lyall. The song's copyright is managed by Sony Publishing, which administers Paton's songwriting catalog. When pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk used "Magic" in their Ozempic commercials, they compensated both Paton and the estate of the late Billy Lyall, as well as Sony Publishing. While the exact financial details are confidential, industry estimates suggest that the campaign was "most likely worth seven figures to Paton."

GLTAL
Chris C

[sayhey24]

Nov 18, 2024 0:03:09 GMT -5 notamnkdmillionaire said:

Nov 17, 2024 22:59:19 GMT -5 Chris-C said:

PRC and Peppy: Agreed 100% that US healthcare needs a shakeup so that outcomes are the reimbursement multiplier rather than episodes of service. I'm not sure that RFKJr is the one I feel most comfortable to do it, but they are not asking my opinion. The basic issue with the cost of delivery in the US is the burden of administrative costs and the expectation of profit (notwithstanding the moral and ethical problems) because a heart attack victim cannot shop around, so there is not the truly competitive marketplace required in free market capitalism. Marketing costs also drive up the cost of care and drugs. Professional sports on television are bombarded with direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical ads. We using the drugs are paying for those.

One comment that needs to be clarified for the record concerns Canada. Canada spends less than half (about 42%) for health care and covers all of its citizens, achieving better outcomes in infant mortality, preventable illnesses, and life expectancy. It should not be described as having socialized medicine, however (any more than Medicare and Medicaid are socialized in the US). Canada rather has a single-payer healthcare insurance system, which works like private insurance in the US but is funded by the federal and provincial governments. The providers work for chartered hospitals or are in private practices and clinics that the government does NOT operate. When I lived there, in each province, a resident was given a provincial care card that functioned like a Blue Cross/Blue shield card in the US. Regardless of the provincial issuer, that card was good throughout the country. Their national publicly funded system is called Medicare, and no co-pays or out-of-pocket expenses apply for essential (versus elective) healthcare services. For elective services, Canadians can opt for private insurance to help cover any costs and co-pays for elective care and pharmaceuticals.

When the system was first developed at a conference in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1957, there was considerable public opposition to the idea. Now, like Medicare and Social Security in the USA, Canadians would fight like hell if anyone suggested taking it away (despite the exaggerated tales of long waits and dissatisfaction promulgated in the US- primarily by the health insurance industry).

Not sure if Canadians would still fight like hell for it now. There comes a point to where national health care can no longer fund itself and attract doctors. Canada is learning that lesson now. 

www.cbc.ca/news/politics/primary-care-canada-10-000-canadians-report-1.7125990

I worked up at Toronto Hospital for awhile.  At the time their socialized system was still holding up and the hospital was beautiful.  I see it is still ranked #3 in the world.

The problem with all socialized services is once they are done spending other peoples money they end up going down the tubes.  Medicare is a little different.  Its leveraging the infrastructure of the private medical system but it could never survive on its own in a "medicare for all" scheme.  Without the private infrastructure, Medicare would collapse but IMO the current Medicare coverage may not be perfect but it may be the one thing the government has gotten right.  However, if it were expanded it would collapse.

The problem we now face is we are in a transitional period.  Obamacare mandated electronic medical records which forced the individual doctors to sell out to large corporations and most of the non-profit hospitals which were originally church based also sold out to large corporations.  The problem with corporations is they want to make money so their primary focus is not patient care but rather billing and making a profit.  This usually does not end well and I know around me numerous hospitals have been closed in recent years.  There is a fictional series on Netflix I rather like telling this story called "The Resident".

[sportsrancho]

I love that show …so realistic!

[phantomfj]

Nov 17, 2024 22:59:19 GMT -5 Chris-C said:

PRC and Peppy: Agreed 100% that US healthcare needs a shakeup so that outcomes are the reimbursement multiplier rather than episodes of service. I'm not sure that RFKJr is the one I feel most comfortable to do it, but they are not asking my opinion. The basic issue with the cost of delivery in the US is the burden of administrative costs and the expectation of profit (notwithstanding the moral and ethical problems) because a heart attack victim cannot shop around, so there is not the truly competitive marketplace required in free market capitalism. Marketing costs also drive up the cost of care and drugs. Professional sports on television are bombarded with direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical ads. We using the drugs are paying for those.

One comment that needs to be clarified for the record concerns Canada. Canada spends less than half (about 42%) for health care and covers all of its citizens, achieving better outcomes in infant mortality, preventable illnesses, and life expectancy. It should not be described as having socialized medicine, however (any more than Medicare and Medicaid are socialized in the US). Canada rather has a single-payer healthcare insurance system, which works like private insurance in the US but is funded by the federal and provincial governments. The providers work for chartered hospitals or are in private practices and clinics that the government does NOT operate. When I lived there, in each province, a resident was given a provincial care card that functioned like a Blue Cross/Blue shield card in the US. Regardless of the provincial issuer, that card was good throughout the country. Their national publicly funded system is called Medicare, and no co-pays or out-of-pocket expenses apply for essential (versus elective) healthcare services. For elective services, Canadians can opt for private insurance to help cover any costs and co-pays for elective care and pharmaceuticals.

When the system was first developed at a conference in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1957, there was considerable public opposition to the idea. Now, like Medicare and Social Security in the USA, Canadians would fight like hell if anyone suggested taking it away (despite the exaggerated tales of long waits and dissatisfaction promulgated in the US- primarily by the health insurance industry).

So how long is an exaggerated long wait time??? How about an MRI brain scan? One month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, a year? Tell that to me and my wife, she had to wait over a year for that scan!! I had to wait over 6 months for surgery to remove a cyst lump ( I forget how long it took to see a specialist, but it wasn't quick). That's my short personal story( I have been lucky enough to have very few medical issues so far), talk to anyone here and you will find plenty of delay woes.....it's not just fear mongering by the "right wing" press.

What about people being refused organ transplants by bureaucrats because they wouldn't get a covid shot?

People like you always seem to forget to mention that dental or glasses are not covered under our heathcare plan, you need separate insurance for that.

I just love it when people who have no relevant experiences spout on about how good some system is or is not......our system is better in some ways than the US, but sorely lacking in other aspects.

[cretin11]

Thanks for your thoughts phantom. I'm curious, in what ways do you think your system is better than in the US?

[runner]

Quote: "Magic," the 1974 hit by Scottish band Pilot, was co-written by band members David Paton and Billy Lyall. The song's copyright is managed by Sony Publishing, which administers Paton's songwriting catalog. When pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk used "Magic" in their Ozempic commercials, they compensated both Paton and the estate of the late Billy Lyall, as well as Sony Publishing. While the exact financial details are confidential, industry estimates suggest that the campaign was "most likely worth seven figures to Paton."


Yes, I knew that they had approved the use of the song. Also, for the TV commercial, David Paton of Pilot went into the studio with original song track and recorded "O-O-O-Ozempic", replacing the original lyric "O-O-O It's Magic".

[peppy]

Nov 17, 2024 22:59:19 GMT -5 Chris-C said:

PRC and Peppy: Agreed 100% that US healthcare needs a shakeup so that outcomes are the reimbursement multiplier rather than episodes of service. I'm not sure that RFKJr is the one I feel most comfortable to do it, but they are not asking my opinion. The basic issue with the cost of delivery in the US is the burden of administrative costs and the expectation of profit (notwithstanding the moral and ethical problems) because a heart attack victim cannot shop around, so there is not the truly competitive marketplace required in free market capitalism. Marketing costs also drive up the cost of care and drugs. Professional sports on television are bombarded with direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical ads. We using the drugs are paying for those.

One comment that needs to be clarified for the record concerns Canada. Canada spends less than half (about 42%) for health care and covers all of its citizens, achieving better outcomes in infant mortality, preventable illnesses, and life expectancy. It should not be described as having socialized medicine, however (any more than Medicare and Medicaid are socialized in the US). Canada rather has a single-payer healthcare insurance system, which works like private insurance in the US but is funded by the federal and provincial governments. The providers work for chartered hospitals or are in private practices and clinics that the government does NOT operate. When I lived there, in each province, a resident was given a provincial care card that functioned like a Blue Cross/Blue shield card in the US. Regardless of the provincial issuer, that card was good throughout the country. Their national publicly funded system is called Medicare, and no co-pays or out-of-pocket expenses apply for essential (versus elective) healthcare services. For elective services, Canadians can opt for private insurance to help cover any costs and co-pays for elective care and pharmaceuticals.

When the system was first developed at a conference in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1957, there was considerable public opposition to the idea. Now, like Medicare and Social Security in the USA, Canadians would fight like hell if anyone suggested taking it away (despite the exaggerated tales of long waits and dissatisfaction promulgated in the US- primarily by the health insurance industry).

I have a couple things to say of no use. 1st, "When the system was first developed at a conference in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1957, there was considerable public opposition to the idea.."

My understanding regarding the Affordable Care Act; when Mitt Romney was the 70th governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, "The Massachusetts health care reform, commonly referred to as Romneycare,[1] was a healthcare reform law passed in 2006 and signed into law by Governor Mitt Romney with the aim of providing health insurance to nearly all of the residents of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

The law mandated that nearly every resident of Massachusetts obtain a minimum level of insurance coverage, provided free and subsidized health care insurance for residents earning less than 150% and 300%, respectively, of the federal poverty level (FPL)[2] and mandated employers with more than 10 full-time employees provide healthcare insurance."

So dido.

2nd. A new hospital was built around the metro area here. I moved close to the new hospital.
You should see some of the new homes here. Someone somewhere is making money.






.



.

[hellodolly]

I'll go in another direction and suggest that Vivek Ramaswamy will take a very hard look at the FDA as part of DOGE. He loathes the FDA and the bureaucracy and makes the suggestion that they're the epitome of waste at the national level.

Paraphrasing the comments in this podcast, "With all of the advances in technology, science and medicine in the biotech sector, they're the very reason why people are dying because advisory committees are failing to approve drugs, regardless of trial outcomes...they collaborate with these biotechs and help them establish these trials...and, they masquerade under the guise of technocracy through scientific expertise...it's a validation, on a monthly basis with the FDA, that these unelected bureaucrats are impeding innovation and driving up health costs...it's in the details to see how corrupt the system is."

My point, if anything, we may see some indirect advances or improvement that could benefit MNKD.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvWMcRRkuak&t=336s