Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Tim N Taylor's avatar

Mike, I'm sorry. I know you like to slice and dice every concept that hits your desk until one can read 6-font type through it. But, in the face of environmental catastrophe, you've got problems with the difficulties of counting up the victims, EXACTLY?? In the moment??

You think the public would be happier with the media saying, "Gosh folks, but we have absolutely NO idea how many folks are in the middle of this god-awful situation."

Expand full comment
Shelli Koszdin's avatar

Re: Animal testing. That 90 % of drugs tested on animals tells you nothing about the superiority or inferiority of NAMS without knowing how many drugs fail with NAMS testing. It likely tells you nothing other than 90 % of candidate drugs won’t be approved. I guess the reasoning could be that if 90 % of these things are going to fail might as well not hurt animals.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts