201–210 of 237 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So much blatant homophobia in this thread wrapped up as concern for side effects.
Yeah, this dog-whistling act is getting pretty tiring.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> During the quarter [2019 Q2], Gilead generated $2.2 billion in operating cash flow, repaid $500 million of debt, made dividend payout of $800 million and spent $588 million on share buybacks. > Adjusted product gross margin was 87.3% compared with 84.2% in the year-ago period. Research & development (R&D) expenses were relatively flat at $916 million. Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses increased 20…
You're basing your argument on cherrypicking one single pharmaceutical company that is doing exceptionally well recently because it had the second best selling drug of 2018, Harvoni, a drug to treat Hep C. What about when you take all the pharma companies and average how well they do over several years? The average net profit margin for the industry is 14.05% according to a January 2018 study by New York University’s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sad that you're downvoted for stating the truth.
No, he's being downvoted for dog-whistle homophobia.
Also, you do realize that absolutely all that I said, applies exactly the same to any sexual preference, right?
But of course, at the lack of any real argument against what I said, all that people like you can do, is to pull out some imaginary victim card.
Here is an idea for you, stop playing the victim and take some responsibility for your actions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's a matter of having some sense of personal responsibility really. This exact phrase was used to spin the deaths of thousands of gay men as a personal failing not many years ago. Stop doing it.
If anyone, regardless of their sexual orientation, in this day and age and in a developed country, catches an STD for not using condoms when they should, you can be certain it's their lack of personal responsibility.
In the real world, people are exposed to various risks. It is a risk to drive a car. It is a risk to play a sport. It is a risk to drink alcohol. Every time you eat, there is a risk that you choke and die.
Solving public health problems by saying “you should have take more responsibility” is not effective. But the goal is to reduce negative outcomes. We can regulate cars to make them safer. We can provide free programs to stop people smoking. And yes, we can provide alternative HIV prevention methods to people who aren’t reliably using condoms.
Anyway, your underlying point is wrong in any case, for two reasons - first, PrEP is more effective at HIV prevention than condom use, which would presumably mean in your view that not using is would be irresponsible. Second, there are obvious cases when people contracting STDs because they didn’t use condoms for sex do not bear personal responsibility, such as when one of a long-term supposedly-monogamous couple contracts a STD without informing the other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. Condoms break 2. Some people are allergic to them 3. There are some activities that you really don't want to do with a condom 4. How about we just don't fucking shame people for not wanting to use a condom as long as both (or all) parties agree. Especially when there is a drug like prep.
HIV has already mutated to bypass prep. There was a case in SF about 8 months ago in the local news. Wear condoms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
then get a new doctor. there is no medical rationale behind this, and they are letting irrational personal feelings get in the way of your good health
No that's not the case, the side effects of PrEP aren't minor. PrEP should not be prescribed so lightly.
Well, PrEP is a miracle drug that has gone criminally underutilized in the fight to eradicate HIV. It would be nice to see governments really push it hard for a change.
Unless PrEP succeeds in eradicating HIV (which might be possible if enough people are on it to limit the spread of the virus), it seems tailor-made to breed resistance. We don't generally give antibiotics prophylactically. Using anti-retrovirals this way seems like a bad idea from a drug resistance perspective.
If someone is using PrEP and is exposed to HIV, then either the drug works and they avoid infection (in which case there is obviously no impact on drug resistance) or they become HIV+. But in that case, they were either exposed to an already-resistant variant, or they were astonishingly unlucky and the drug failed to prevent infection - in which case, resistance is a moot point.
A person needs to develop an active HIV infection in order to communicate the disease to another. PrEP prevents this from happening in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> During the quarter [2019 Q2], Gilead generated $2.2 billion in operating cash flow, repaid $500 million of debt, made dividend payout of $800 million and spent $588 million on share buybacks. > Adjusted product gross margin was 87.3% compared with 84.2% in the year-ago period. Research & development (R&D) expenses were relatively flat at $916 million. Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses increased 20…
You're basing your argument on cherrypicking one single pharmaceutical company that is doing exceptionally well recently because it had the second best selling drug of 2018, Harvoni, a drug to treat Hep C. What about when you take all the pharma companies and average how well they do over several years? The average net profit margin for the industry is 14.05% according to a January 2018 study by New York University’s…
Well, the discussion was about the atrocious cost of HIV medication, and Gilead is the company that holds the patent on Truvada. You didn't provide a link, but http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/... suggests it's actually lower in 2019 at 10.94%.
From the linked Excel sheet there, there are 28 industries with higher net margins, and 65 with lower net margins. They're still doing just fine :).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If anyone, regardless of their sexual orientation, in this day and age and in a developed country, catches an STD for not using condoms when they should, you can be certain it's their lack of personal responsibility.
This is a useless attitude that causes people to die. In the real world, people are exposed to various risks. It is a risk to drive a car. It is a risk to play a sport. It is a risk to drink alcohol. Every time you eat, there is a risk that you choke and die. Solving public health problems by saying “you should have take more responsibility” is not effective. But the goal is to reduce negative outcomes. We can regula…
1st) PrEP solely protects against HIV. It doesn't protect against any other kind of STDs whatsoever. What is your solution here really?
2nd) Has it was clearly stated, I claimed it was your personal responsibility if you contracted STDs for not using protection "when you should". In case it's not clear, example of situations where you should use condoms: When you pick up someone for a one night stand in a bar for instance. Yet you decided to construct a strawmen of marital infidelity to go on with your point.