11–20 of 101 posts
I'm curious about this "pay later" arrangement - does it simply mean they'll invoice you on 30 day terms, or something else?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought this is paraphrased, but this is lifted straight from the article. This is so incredibly wrong I simply couldn't get past this statement.
Out of context, it sounds awful. But having read the whole article, he doesn't seem like a monster at all. If it works as planned it'll really help some cats.
Easier regulatory environments. Not only do you not need to talk to the FDA before testing your drug in animals, cats are way less likely to sue you if they get sick from your drug. Of course, we’d still do our best to make sure they didn’t, but it’s less likely to sink the entire company if they do.
Unfortunately, the reality of trying to cure animals is that sometimes you accidentally hurt animals. That's also the reality of trying to cure humans. This is the exact same issue vets face when they perform surgery on your cat, and it's the exact same issue that surgeons face when they perform surgery on you. The difference is that vets don't have to pay tons of money for malpractice insurance in case they get sued…
..."in the USA". At a guess, I'd say it's the complete opposite in Europe with it's pesky human healthcare systems.
I loved that cat, she got me through grad school, and losing her was miserable. My gratitude to anyone working on stomatitis treatments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of context, it sounds awful. But having read the whole article, he doesn't seem like a monster at all. If it works as planned it'll really help some cats.
Quoted post unavailable.
Animal models are used in biomedical research all the time, and yet they account for a tiny fraction of the animals we kill for arguably less useful purposes (meat production). Provided steps are taken to minimize any unnecessary suffering (which should be relatively minimal in a drug trial), I find conducting research on animal models far more justifiable than even just eating meat - there's an alternative to the latter (vegetarianism), there aren't good alternatives to the former.
My beloved calico who passed away near the beginning of the pandemic suffered from stomatitis. I opted for full dental extraction after pharmaceutical intervention proved ineffective. She eventually passed away from an aggressive mouth cancer, which is not uncommon in cats with stomatitis. I loved that cat, she got me through grad school, and losing her was miserable. My gratitude to anyone working on stomatitis trea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the real world for you. Sometimes companies end up seeing success after long diversions from real goals, because the world throws obstacles at them that require them to adapt. Seems like the alternative here is to do nothing, so finding a productive but realistic path forward is a better alternative. I think it's clearly wrong to call running studies in animals "pushing it" on anyone.
Yea, isn't that how Viagra came about - "Well it doesn't the blood vessels quite like we wanted, but .... well it does this!"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, the reality of trying to cure animals is that sometimes you accidentally hurt animals. That's also the reality of trying to cure humans. This is the exact same issue vets face when they perform surgery on your cat, and it's the exact same issue that surgeons face when they perform surgery on you. The difference is that vets don't have to pay tons of money for malpractice insurance in case they get sued…
>veterinary surgery is so much cheaper (i.e. affordable to ordinary people) than human surgery.... ..."in the USA". At a guess, I'd say it's the complete opposite in Europe with it's pesky human healthcare systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of context, it sounds awful. But having read the whole article, he doesn't seem like a monster at all. If it works as planned it'll really help some cats.
Quoted post unavailable.
Compare that to e.g. malaria trials where they buy mice, infect them with malaria, and then see if the malaria responds.
I’m a vegetarian because once I made the leap that animals probably have an internal experience, torturing and slaughtering them so my mouth can feel a certain way strikes me as not personally justifiable. How much worse is that? Should I go around calling everyone a monster? Hardly.
Animal testing at least has some meaningful rationale, and testing treatments for diseases animals actually have seems solidly in the realm of ethically justifiable
Easier regulatory environments. Not only do you not need to talk to the FDA before testing your drug in animals, cats are way less likely to sue you if they get sick from your drug. Of course, we’d still do our best to make sure they didn’t, but it’s less likely to sink the entire company if they do.
I suppose this sentence is meant to be a little tongue in cheek, but a few of us at least do not find it funny.