Recent Posts

FWIW, Mannkind has attended previous editions of the Piper Jaffray Annual Health Care Conference already, several times in the past. 

At editions 20, 24, 25, and 26 (from a quick google search) anyway. Possibly others as well. 

Yeah, it has a long way to go, and odds are not in its favour.

www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/house-judiciary-commitee-marijuana-legalization-more-act-915369/

MORE Act clears Judiciary Committee, but will need to get through seven more groups before hitting House floor.

While the House Judiciary Committee vote marked a historic moment in the effort to legalize marijuana in the United States, the MORE Act faces a long road towards passage. Seven more House committees must approve or waive the bill before it gets a vote on the House floor, and while it’s possible the MORE Act could pass in the Democrat-controlled House, it’s fate in the Senate is far less certain.

“I don’t think a majority of the Republicans will support this bill,” said Colorado Republican and Committee member Ken Buck, per CNBC. “It is even less likely that the Senate would take it up. Therefore, I would just suggest that we deal with other bills that we can get a much larger bipartisan support from.”

From April until mid-October, Cipla had bigger worries. Over that period its share price lost about 30% (to 52 week lows), and the US FDA was on its back about failures at one of its plants.

From my point of view, and that of many and more and more experts who study constitutions and the structure of governments, it has been a while since your Constitution was viewed as one to follow. Sure, it had its time back in the day. But the international community has found better models to draw from. To put it another way, I believe its influence on the World has significantly waned over my lifetime and even before.

Lots of discussion on that topic exists, here is one article (with some excerpts):

www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/11/the-us-needs-a-new-constitution-heres-how-to-write-it/281090/

"Almost nobody uses the U.S. Constitution as a model—not even Americans. When 24 military officers and civilians were given a single week to craft a constitution for occupied Japan in 1946, they turned to England. The Westminster-style parliament they installed in Tokyo, like its British forebear, has two houses. But unlike Congress, one is clearly more powerful than the other and can override the less powerful one during an impasse."

"The story was largely the same in defeated Nazi Germany, and more recently in Iraq and Afghanistan, which all emerged from American occupation with constitutions that look little like the one Madison and the other framers wrote. They have the same democratic values, sure, but different ways of realizing them. According to researchers who analyzed all 729 constitutions adopted between 1946 and 2006, the U.S. Constitution is rarely used as a model. What's more, "the American example is being rejected to an even greater extent by America's allies than by the global community at large," write David Law of Washington University and Mila Versteeg of the University of Virginia."

"As the famed Spanish political scientist Juan Linz wrote in an influential 1990 essay, dysfunction, trending toward constitutional breakdown, is baked into our DNA. Any system that gives equally strong claims of democratic legitimacy to both the legislature and the president, while also allowing each to be controlled by people with fundamentally different agendas, is doomed to fail. America has muddled through thus far by compromise, but what happens when the sides no longer wish to compromise? "No democratic principle exists to resolve disputes between the executive and the legislature about which of the two actually represents the will of the people," Linz wrote."

"There are about 30 countries, mostly in Latin America, that have adopted American-style systems. All of them, without exception, have succumbed to the Linzian nightmare at one time or another, often repeatedly," according to Yale constitutional law professor Bruce Ackerman, who calls for a transition to a parliamentary system. By "Linzian nightmare," Ackerman means constitutional crisis—your full range of political violence, revolution, coup, and worse."

He mentioned and demonstrated inhaled insulin, but did not mention Afrezza by name; perhaps that is as far as he could go without paying for an ad spot?

And he also mentioned he was sticking his finger and that got painful over time. Not sure why he would be doing that as often as he did (does?) if he was not diabetic or seriously 'pre-diabetic'. IDK.

Maybe it is obvious and I am having an early senior moment, but what do UT and PE stand for in the text above?