- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Obama signs 21st Century Cures Act
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:29 pm
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:29 pm
Accelerates efforts on cancer research.
WTF?
You mean they've been dragging their feet on cancer research?
Don't understand this. Why doesn't government do everything they can now, why wait for a photo op and a pat on the back?
WTF?
You mean they've been dragging their feet on cancer research?
Don't understand this. Why doesn't government do everything they can now, why wait for a photo op and a pat on the back?
This post was edited on 12/13/16 at 2:31 pm
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:30 pm to Cadello
Now it will take forever.
Does this bill get rid of red tape? I doubt it.
Does this bill get rid of red tape? I doubt it.
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:31 pm to Cadello
How much more of our money gets pumped into 3rd world countries now because of this. He's desperate for a legacy...
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:31 pm to Cadello
He waited until the 11th month of his 8th year!!!
He should have declared day one.
He should have declared day one.
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:32 pm to SoulGlo
Obama shamelessly trying to pass at least one positive piece of legislation to be remembered by
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:32 pm to Cadello
quote:
You mean they've been dragging their feet on cancer research?
Wasn't Biden supposed to be handling this (curing cancer)?
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:33 pm to Cadello
As a cancer patient, this act sounds great on the surface. My concern, as usual, is will the money go to the right places? The bill passed the Senate 94-5-1 (Not voting). Here are the Senators who did not vote Yea.
NAYs ---5
Lee (R-UT)
Merkley (D-OR)
Sanders (I-VT)
Warren (D-MA)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 1
Cotton (R-AR)
NAYs ---5
Lee (R-UT)
Merkley (D-OR)
Sanders (I-VT)
Warren (D-MA)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 1
Cotton (R-AR)
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:33 pm to Cadello
Didn't he say Biden would cure cancer at his last state of the Union?
Biden was like "wtf? I had no idea he'd say that"
Thanks, Obama
Biden was like "wtf? I had no idea he'd say that"
Thanks, Obama
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:33 pm to Cadello
quote:
Accelerates efforts on cancer research.
That's simply code for spending more money.
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:35 pm to Cadello
quote:
Today, at 2 p.m. Eastern, the President will sign the 21st Century Cures Act—approved by the Senate on Dec. 7 by a vote of 94-to-5, overwhelmingly passed by the House the week before, and seemingly supported by every pharma company, medical institution, healthcare advocate and their mothers. And why not? “21 st Century Cures” is the legislative equivalent of the Pee Wee League: In the end, there’s an award for everybody. (My colleague Sy Mukherjee has been all over the generous grab bag of provisions—here, here, and here—so I won’t go into the details now.)
But while this much-ballyhooed behemoth of a bill (nearly 1,000 pages) has been praised for being bipartisan, it’s also binomial: Technically speaking, "H.R. 34: the 21 st Century Cures Act" is a "re-texted" version of "H.R. 34: the Tsunami Warning, Education, and Research Act of 2015," which is intended to enhance and modernize the existing United States Tsunami Warning System. And the former isn’t exactly a “bill,” but rather an amendment to the latter—or, well, a House amendment to a Senate Amendment to the re-texted tsunami bill.
This procedural silliness, of course, is simply that: It’s just a little Congressional fun with words. But then, importantly, so is much of the 21 st Century Cures Act.
quote:
In 1980, new investigators got their first major NIH grant, on average, at age 36; today, the average age is 42. Back then, more than 40% of research project grants went to principal investigators (PIs) under 40; the share in 2016 is less than 10%. We now have more PIs age 66 and older than we do 36 and younger—and with this aging of America’s biomedical research force, we have put "a generation of science at risk."
If all this sounds familiar, that’s because we’ve been singing this tune for a generation. In 1998, a distinguished committee led by Princeton University’s Shirley Tilghman warned that too many early-career life scientists faced diminishing and discouraging professional prospects. In 2005, another blue-ribbon committee—this one led by Nobel laureate Thomas Cech—said the situation was so dire for young American researchers that the U.S. was in danger of losing its "preeminent leadership position" in science. Three years later, another report, called ARISE, once again shouted the need to invest in early-career scientists.
All were substantive, well-researched reports that recommended substantive, well-researched fixes. So what does the 21 st Century Cures bill do to implement them? It establishes the "Next Generation of Researchers Initiative" within the office of NIH Director to "promote policies and programs" that help young scientists. Gotcha.Congrats, Congress—Collect your trophy after the game.
LINK / - Fortune
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:36 pm to Cadello
quote:
Accelerates efforts on cancer research.
WTF?
You mean they've been dragging their feet on cancer research?
Don't understand this. Why doesn't government do everything they can now, why wait for a photo op and a pat on the back?
It turns out Lib tears are a crucial ingredient to the cure for cancer. They were just waiting for an adequate supply to begin Phase III clinical trials.
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:36 pm to AthensTiger
quote:
Warren (D-MA)
quote:
But there’s a complication: Instead of cracking down on the pharmaceutical companies that fueled the boom in opioid abuse, lawmakers rewarded the industry. No health care-related bill of this size could move through Congress without the support of Big Pharma. The authors of the 21st Century Cures Act earned the industry’s support by including regulatory rollbacks that drugmakers have long sought and creating cheaper and quicker paths for drug approval by reducing safeguards. It’s as if the fire department had to pay off the arsonist to get permission to put out a fire.
Lawmakers were left with a Hobson’s choice. The bill would make billions of dollars available for medical research. It would fund lofty goals, such as precision medicine, a White House initiative to map the human brain and Vice President Joe Biden’s “Cancer Moonshot.” It would save lives. But it would also undermine regulations that patient advocacy groups say are essential for making sure medical and drug research is conducted ethically and safely — meaning it could cost lives, too.
Some politicians thought the choice was clear. On Nov. 28, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) denounced the measure in aggressive terms, calling it the result of “corruption” — fighting words on the Senate floor — and singling out Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for taking millions from a donor with an interest in the bill’s passage. Warren was hoping to make a battle around the Cures Act the moment that Democrats announced, in the wake of Donald Trump’s election, that they were standing up and fighting against a broken and corrupt system.
“The American people didn’t give Democrats majority support so we could come back to Washington and play dead,” she said on the floor. “They didn’t send us here to whimper, whine, or grovel. Now they are watching, waiting and hoping ? hoping we show some spine and start fighting back when Congress completely ignores the message of the American people and returns to all its same old ways.”
Others read the politics around the bill differently. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), one of the bill’s supporters, called Warren’s floor speech “the most irresponsible statement anybody can possibly make,” adding: “She pontificates as if she knows everything, when in fact she knows nothing.”
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:37 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:Yes, yes he was.
Wasn't Biden supposed to be handling this (curing cancer)?
Posted on 12/13/16 at 2:59 pm to Cadello
Oh NOW Obama decides to do something about funding the sciences. The last time funding was "great" was early in the Bush years. He hasn't done shite in helping the NIH and NSF.
Posted on 12/13/16 at 3:47 pm to Cadello
Do you really think these people care about cancer? Like everything else coming from Washington its a fraud.
The 996 page Act has been promoted by Congress as a consumer friendly bill to fund medical research and make new prescription drugs and medical devices more quickly available in the U.S., but it also lowers licensing standards used by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to fast track experimental vaccines to market that will be federally recommended and state mandated for use by all children and many adults in America.
Trojan horse
The 996 page Act has been promoted by Congress as a consumer friendly bill to fund medical research and make new prescription drugs and medical devices more quickly available in the U.S., but it also lowers licensing standards used by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to fast track experimental vaccines to market that will be federally recommended and state mandated for use by all children and many adults in America.
Trojan horse
Posted on 12/13/16 at 3:56 pm to Cadello
There will never be a cure for cancer because cancer is profitable.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News