• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Orange stain second term results thread

Page 278 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Brainonska511 said:
Doctors are not all knowing, and they may not be aware of when a new drug that could benefit their patients gets approval. Not every doctor has their finger on the pulse of the latest and greatest. I had this exact issue when my dad had metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer and I suggested a drug with a milder side effect profile that they could try. Doc told me it wasn't approved for that, not realizing it actually had been approved for that indication 4 months prior.

And patients may not always know that there could be genuinely better options for their condition out there (see point about doctors not always staying in the know). The doctors don't have to do what the patient says, and they can always talk to their patients about the risks and benefits of switching treatments.
Click to expand...
Talking mostly about endless GLP1 commercials. You live in a cave if you haven't heard about them.
 
hal2kilo said:
Talking mostly about endless GLP1 commercials. You live in a cave if you haven't heard about them.
Click to expand...
Yes, and GLP1s actually work. There are some issues with them, but they really are great for what they do and what they can offer people who have struggled with obesity. They're fighting against a huge dual societal stigma of obesity being a personal failing and requiring for weightlss as an additional sign of personal failure.

It's about normalizing these things.

I see plenty of HIV treatment ads on Hulu too. You have to be living under a rock if you haven't heard of HIV by this point too.

The point of the ads is multifold: help break down stigmas so doctors and patients aren't afraid to have these discussions and use these products, and to portray various patient profiles so that people might personally relate and have conversations with their doctor (or patient). (And it is also about selling a product that may actually help someone while making a company money)
 
Brainonska511 said:
Doctors are not all knowing, and they may not be aware of when a new drug that could benefit their patients gets approval. Not every doctor has their finger on the pulse of the latest and greatest. I had this exact issue when my dad had metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer and I suggested a drug with a milder side effect profile that they could try. Doc told me it wasn't approved for that, not realizing it actually had been approved for that indication 4 months prior.

And patients may not always know that there could be genuinely better options for their condition out there (see point about doctors not always staying in the know). The doctors don't have to do what the patient says, and they can always talk to their patients about the risks and benefits of switching treatments.
Click to expand...

This is by far the exception and not the norm. Speaking from decades of observing the absolute inundation of targeted marketing my wife gets just at home, not to mention at work. Granted, it used to be way worse when drug rep sponsored dinners/trips/conventions/etc were a constant.

And there is absolutely no reason why John Q Public should be telling their doctor that Azexylflomirlaxitab is "right for them". Period. Full stop. The general public is mostly of the drooling moron variety and has really no business making that kind of call.
 
Pens1566 said:
This is by far the exception and not the norm. Speaking from decades of observing the absolute inundation of targeted marketing my wife gets just at home, not to mention at work. Granted, it used to be way worse when drug rep sponsored dinners/trips/conventions/etc were a constant.

And there is absolutely no reason why John Q Public should be telling their doctor that Azexylflomirlaxitab is "right for them". Period. Full stop. The general public is mostly of the drooling moron variety and has really no business making that kind of call.
Click to expand...

My dad's doctor turned him down for GLP1 drugs twice even though he was obese, teetering right on the edge of being diabetic, and has a history of heart issues. I had to make him go back and advocate for himself to receive a medication he qualified for and that would improve/extend his life. Since he got it he's shed a lot of the weight and his blood sugar numbers have improved. He essentially had to make his MD get educated on one of the biggest breakthrough drugs in a generation at my prodding.
 
Last edited:
K1052 said:
My dad's doctor turned him down for GLP1 drugs twice even though he was obese, teetering right on the edge of being diabetic, and has a history of heart issues. I had to make him go back and advocate for himself to receive a medication he qualified for and that would improve/extend his life. Since he got it he's shed a lot of the weight and his blood sugar numbers have improved. He essentially had to make his MD get educated on one of the biggest breakthrough drugs in a generation at my prodding.
Click to expand...

That's just a bad doctor.
 
IronWing said:
The point isn’t to win these cases; it is to harass people Trump targets. Use the power of government to intimidate and possibly bankrupt the dictator’s perceived enemies.
Click to expand...
A judge with scruples and mettle may grant the defendant attorney's fees from a failed plaintiff.
 
Muse said:
A judge with scruples and mettle may grant the defendant attorney's fees from a failed plaintiff.
Click to expand...
In a criminal case, the defendant would have to prove malicious prosecution, a high bar. Though with Trump shooting off his mouth, probably not an insurmountable obstacle.
 
IronWing said:
In a criminal case, the defendant would have to prove malicious prosecution, a high bar. Though with Trump shooting off his mouth, probably not an insurmountable obstacle.
Click to expand...
To get a criminal case out of the investigative stage, the government still has to get a grand jury to return a true bill. They seem to be having trouble doing that, even when they have people on camera and confessing (see: the hoagie hero in DC).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top