TOPIC:

dointime wrote:

splitdog wrote: This whole thread should be deleted. All it will do is divide us, just as politics is doing in the US right now.

I think that if something is censored then the reasons for this should be clear and the rules on censorship should be made known. This is in fact exactly the case here on fixhepC where the Doc has made his rules clear. Just having an opinion which is divisive is not one of the reasons which would justify deleting a whole thread.

The right to free speech (in general, not on this site) has been much in the limelight this week with the 3 hour debate in the UK parliament on whether Trump should be banned from the UK. Many powerful arguments were made on both sides concerning his divisive rhetoric. For those who are interested, here's just one report on that debate.
www.vox.com/2016/1/20/10799886/uk-trump-visa

My point is that we should be very careful indeed about what is censored if we don't want a site where everybody has to sing the same tune to be here.

dt

I agree. Just having a point which may be divisive is no reason to 'Ban' Trump. Well said. Either you have free speech, or you don't.

Emilio, I totally agree but 200K vets x 90K is 18 billion! That buys a lot of private jets and hookers! GREEDIAD!!!!

Would it be technically possible to have a little button next to each post that says something like "Hide/Unhide" or "Shrink/Enlarge"? This would then minimise the message to show only the first line or two, for example?

At the moment I don't think that exists. It probably could. I guess you had something in mind for the readmore like this spoiler where it is collapsed until you open it. The technical problem is that this won't speed download times because it's still there (downloaded), it's just being hidden.

Hi Vororo,

"Would it be technically possible to have a little button next to each post that says something like "Hide/Unhide" or "Shrink/Enlarge"? This would then minimise the message to show only the first line or two, for example?

I ask only because there are more and more one-liners on the forum like "Great news!", "Glad you are doing so well!", etc, which are great to see for the first time (especially for the intended recipient) but which become a bit heavy to scroll through when trying to follow the original topic of the thread on a slow connection."

I think this forum is now has grown so much because of its own success. It is now a lot to wade through and while it is all important, being able to get the gist of a thread would help me manage getting through it.

Dr Freeman's suggestion about an expanding facility would be great.

The one liners would still be visible and other stuff that has fallen off the radar for the time being could be sifted through.

Maybe suggesting work for others, but it is growing and one wonders how things will be in another month or so.

yours


J.

splitdog wrote: This whole thread should be deleted. All it will do is divide us, just as politics is doing in the US right now.

This comment is in error on a number of levels. Firstly, most of my opinions are shared by most posters here, that is, that Gilead have been greedy and that FixHepC and its team are doing a fantastic job. I'm pretty sure that this is a common understanding. Secondly, there is nothing divisive at all about discussing the complexity of an issue rather than turning it into a black-and-white hate festival. From my point of view, the truly divisive comments are by people that express very aggressive hatred toward Gilead while at the same time buying that company's products that have been produced under licence. Criticism here is one thing, but if one truly hates the company, then one shouldn't be using its products.

I agree that politics is divided in the US, but the main reason for this is that voters are encouraged to think in simplified, childish terms that sees the difference between parties as choices between Good and Evil. And this is a result of shutting down debate when faced with an point of view you disagree with.

By considering both sides of the argument, I am encouraging readers to think about the issue, not to divide them. If they see my behaviour as being divisive, then maybe it is the education they received that needs to be looked at.

Screaming abuse, blocking ones ears, and calling for censorship is not useful behaviour in a complex and emotional debate..

Free speech-can't have democracy without it. Calling for censorship is fine. Getting yor wish is not.
Mike

Greedfighter wrote: Emilio, I totally agree but 200K vets x 90K is 18 billion! That buys a lot of private jets and hookers! GREEDIAD!!!!

Gilead did not factor in community outrage when pricing its goods in the US and this let them express their greed. After all, they are a business playing by the rules, not a charity.

But they changed their tunes and have responded in a number of other countries with a licensing compromise. You might even have bought their good through such channels. That they are playing hardball in the United States possibly tells us more about what sort of behaviour is permissible there, but I'm sure that intelligent lobbying will bring them around to a more acceptable pricing strategy in other countries (hopefully including the US).

mgalbrai wrote: ...Calling for censorship is fine. ...
Mike

No, it isn't.

Unless there has been a serious violation of community guidelines, calling for censorship is ignorant, vexatious and counterproductive.

Free speech-you can call for anything you like. If you can't, then there is not free speech.
M

A.L. wrote:
But they changed their tunes and have responded in a number of other countries with a licensing compromise.

Hi A.L.,

Thanks for your comments in your last post (#9202), I agree that we need to discuss both sides and understand where you are coming from on that.

Regarding your comment above, my understanding of the situation with the licensed Indian companies is that Gilead only went down this path when it became apparent to them that they would not be granted patent in India. At that point they approached the Indian pharma companies with licensing agreements in exchange for technical knowledge. This knowledge was not strictly required by the Indian companies but did allow fast tracking for sales into many potential markets of these companies. i.e. They could piggyback their products on Gilead testing and approvals and so only require minimal extra proof on their part.

Gilead were not doing this out of the goodness of their heart or to develop a generics market, it was done purely to salvage some return via licensing fees and in the hope of retaining some control of distribution.

I also don't have an issue with providing fair and reasonable reward for investment, either intellectual property or financial under patent laws. However, Gilead's excessive greed in this instance was part of my decision process to source my meds via the FixHepC Buyers Club which used non patent APIs from China.

A.L. wrote:

splitdog wrote: This whole thread should be deleted. All it will do is divide us, just as politics is doing in the US right now.

This comment is in error on a number of levels. Firstly, most of my opinions are shared by most posters here, that is, that Gilead have been greedy and that FixHepC and its team are doing a fantastic job. I'm pretty sure that this is a common understanding. Secondly, there is nothing divisive at all about discussing the complexity of an issue rather than turning it into a black-and-white hate festival. From my point of view, the truly divisive comments are by people that express very aggressive hatred toward Gilead while at the same time buying that company's products that have been produced under licence. Criticism here is one thing, but if one truly hates the company, then one shouldn't be using its products.

I agree that politics is divided in the US, but the main reason for this is that voters are encouraged to think in simplified, childish terms that sees the difference between parties as choices between Good and Evil. And this is a result of shutting down debate when faced with an point of view you disagree with.

By considering both sides of the argument, I am encouraging readers to think about the issue, not to divide them. If they see my behaviour as being divisive, then maybe it is the education they received that needs to be looked at.

Screaming abuse, blocking ones ears, and calling for censorship is not useful behaviour in a complex and emotional debate..

What I meant was, we have a loving, mutual, trusting relationship here with everybody helping everybody. We are all after the same thing. But when you start putting politics in, lots of other things come into play. People's feelings can get hurt, and bonds can be broken fast. I have seen it countless times. I love to debate politics as much as the next guy, but at the end of the day, it would be counterproductive to our camaraderie and Hep C. Been there, done that. The internet is famous for 2 people liking the same 10 or 15 things in common, and all it takes is 1 thing to break that all up. It's not worth it to me. But by all means, continue. As an Independent, I am for freedom as long as it doesn't hurt anybody. And that doesn't include feelings.

Gilead's price gouging presents a conundrum of sorts; Do we limit the amount someone can charge for a product? If so, it fast becomes a slippery slope. Where do we stop? I agree that something should be done, but it needs to be done carefully, and right. I am in no way sticking up for Gilead, read my sig.

Gilead is getting away with this because HCV sufferers are stigmatized as doped up, inked up, locked up or screwed up in their youth. Many people think we somehow deserve this as punishment for past deviant behavior.
So, the rich can easily pay $100,000. The poor qualify for all sorts of patient assistance programs. The people in the middle, they are always getting screwed. Gilead based its price on what the market would bear, not research or healthcare savings. Yes, I could have bought Harvoni, but I would have had to sell or refinance our home on the verge of retirement and work until I was 77. But if you are dead or your quality of life sucks, why worry about retirement.
Imagine, Gilead comes up with a vaccine that will prevent breast cancer. It must be administered before age 10 to effective. They price the shot at $100,000, stating research costs and potential health care savings as justification.

How long would that fly?
The CEO would be drawn and quartered, probably within hours.
The Board would be crucified.

Mike

Gilead is getting away with this because HCV sufferers are stigmatized as doped up, inked up, locked up or screwed up in their youth. Many people think we somehow deserve this as punishment for past deviant behavior.

Sadly, I believe this to be true.