I asked in Word Link Discussion and I'll ask here: since Word Link is approaching 1,000 posts, is it about time to start a new one? I just realized this board system doesn't have the preference you can set for X many posts per page.
David
Miserable old git
Patiently waiting for the asteroid with my name on it.
I asked in Word Link Discussion and I'll ask here: since Word Link is approaching 1,000 posts, is it about time to start a new one? I just realized this board system doesn't have the preference you can set for X many posts per page.
Start the new one... As you stated in another thread, Erik seems to have abandoned his post, his RAC is 0.10; so, go for it.
Ebola : As the Africans are dying, the audit begins. It turns out that Glaxo Smith Kline ( GSK ) contacted the WHO six months ago to liase with vaccine production but was told : no thanks, we'll get back to you ....
Fortunately GSK proceeded with development anyway, notably in the absence of any outside funding or even promise thereof, and so much so that clinical trials began about 2 weeks ago. GSK have an animal model which shows good prospects, as it turns out that even a modest antibody response from their vaccine is quite protective for the worst mechanisms the virus uses ie. the hemorrhaging. If they can prove/deduce the 'master seed' from this then arrangements are already in place to rapidly rev-up for distributed volume production also involving about half a dozen other suitable manufacturers ( some of them normally commercial competitors of GSK ). I say this quite earnestly : technically this is an amazing piece of work. Normally I'm pretty suspect on Big Pharma but I'll admit their brilliance on this one.
The WHO is now eager to assist GSK. No doubt. They are facing some sharp questioning upon the relevance of their alleged in-house expertise, and they are very keen to dampen any implication that may flow toward UN committees on other topics too .... I think the spin is bound to go relativistic ! They haven't yet found scapegoats that seem to be requisite for this type of stuff up, but it's good to see them working so diligently on something.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Normally I'm pretty suspect on Big Pharma but I'll admit their brilliance on this one.
I'm just cynical enough about large corporations to believe this was only done out of someone perceiving the chance for a public relations coup.
I also believe that in this case it may not matter. Regardless of the motivation, the winners in this case might just end up being the victims of a horrible disease. I'm sure any victim of Ebola would appreciate the effort, regardless of why it was done.
I've been to 23 countries around this world of ours and those of us in "advanced" societies sometimes forget that not everyone has it as good as we do.
Those doctors at the WHO or whatever organization failed on this, whatever happened to "do no harm"? Turning your back on those victims is just as bad as injecting the virus yourself.
I'm just cynical enough about large corporations to believe this was only done out of someone perceiving the chance for a public relations coup.
I also believe that in this case it may not matter. Regardless of the motivation, the winners in this case might just end up being the victims of a horrible disease. I'm sure any victim of Ebola would appreciate the effort, regardless of why it was done.
Agreed, I'm quite happy to grant them the kudos for the result.
Quote:
Those doctors at the WHO or whatever organization failed on this, whatever happened to "do no harm"? Turning your back on those victims is just as bad as injecting the virus yourself.
This is pretty well the flavor of the queries. No doubt there will be opportunistic politicking all round, including those with pre-existing axes to grind against the U.N. I personally don't hold out much for material change within WHO though, as anyone in WHO that breaks rank would be crucified quick slick. Whistleblowing is never rewarding in such groupthink entities. In the presence of such vested interests the likelihood of effective change borders on the fantastic.
[ The reason why I am so harsh here is simple : in the milieu that I have worked for 30 years there is precisely no latitude for displacing responsibility. Which is a good thing. But the sort of behaviours exhibited as discussed are totally foreign to me, and I have no tolerance.]
End of Rant. :-)
Cheers, Mike.
( edit ) To be exact : the Reston subtype in primates ( eg. see here ) was known for several years to be some 50% lethal with a three week incubation, compared with 90% lethal with a three day incubation for prior outbreaks. That game changer was totally missed by the WHO, they thought it would fizzle quickly as per prior experience ie. say 1996 and before. But everyone else picked up on the crucial points, which is why we now have this week's options.
( edit ) The UN spin & dry image washing machine is already up and whirring, the WHO has said that 'the Ebola outbreak has been underestimated', neatly leaving out the 'by us' bit thus hoping to imply they are merely one of many who have blown the call. The trouble here for them is the metric ton of stuff on public record for this year to date indicating precisely that they were the ones out of step. Perversely this 'news' has been forwarded with a request to give them more money .... that's what I call cute.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
I'm just cynical enough about large corporations to believe this was only done out of someone perceiving the chance for a public relations coup.
I also believe that in this case it may not matter. Regardless of the motivation, the winners in this case might just end up being the victims of a horrible disease. I'm sure any victim of Ebola would appreciate the effort, regardless of why it was done.
Agreed, I'm quite happy to grant them the kudos for the result.
Quote:
Those doctors at the WHO or whatever organization failed on this, whatever happened to "do no harm"? Turning your back on those victims is just as bad as injecting the virus yourself.
This is pretty well the flavor of the queries. No doubt there will be opportunistic politicking all round, including those with pre-existing axes to grind against the U.N. I personally don't hold out much for material change within WHO though, as anyone in WHO that breaks rank would be crucified quick slick. Whistleblowing is never rewarding in such groupthink entities. In the presence of such vested interests the likelihood of effective change borders on the fantastic.
[ The reason why I am so harsh here is simple : in the milieu that I have worked for 30 years there is precisely no latitude for displacing responsibility. Which is a good thing. But the sort of behaviours exhibited as discussed are totally foreign to me, and I have no tolerance.]
End of Rant. :-)
Cheers, Mike.
( edit ) To be exact : the Reston subtype in primates ( eg. see here ) was known for several years to be some 50% lethal with a three week incubation, compared with 90% lethal with a three day incubation for prior outbreaks. That game changer was totally missed by the WHO, they thought it would fizzle quickly as per prior experience ie. say 1996 and before. But everyone else picked up on the crucial points, which is why we now have this week's options.
( edit ) The UN spin & dry image washing machine is already up and whirring, the WHO has said that 'the Ebola outbreak has been underestimated', neatly leaving out the 'by us' bit thus hoping to imply they are merely one of many who have blown the call. The trouble here for them is the metric ton of stuff on public record for this year to date indicating precisely that they were the ones out of step. Perversely this 'news' has been forwarded with a request to give them more money .... that's what I call cute.
That still doesn't explain why the WHO wouldn't partner with GSK to work on a vaccine when they had the chance! Even if the current outbreak could have been contained you WILL need it at some point again in the future. To be able to then pop in and say 'we have a vaccine' would have been a PR coup of unimaginable proportions for BOTH!!
To not pursue every available avenue to solve this sort of problem defies explanation. Sure, it takes money, and lots of it, to develop a vaccine. Every person involved has to make a living and feed a family. This includes everybody from the guy making beakers to the guy sitting there on a computer analyzing proteins.
But...
There are more than enough people willing to donate money to pay for such endeavors. The stuffed shirts just need to forego the self-important bs and get on with it. Fulfill the name of their organization.
Good morning everyone. :-)
Good morning everyone. :-)
TimeLord04
Have TARDIS, will travel...
Come along K-9!
Join SETI Refugees
I asked in Word Link
I asked in Word Link Discussion and I'll ask here: since Word Link is approaching 1,000 posts, is it about time to start a new one? I just realized this board system doesn't have the preference you can set for X many posts per page.
David
Miserable old git
Patiently waiting for the asteroid with my name on it.
Good evening everyone :-)
Good evening everyone :-) Hearty greetings from my vacation residence in Brussels
Love, Michi
RE: I asked in Word Link
Start the new one... As you stated in another thread, Erik seems to have abandoned his post, his RAC is 0.10; so, go for it.
Posting before dinner. :-)
Back at the top, and WINNING!!!!! :-)
TimeLord04
Have TARDIS, will travel...
Come along K-9!
Join SETI Refugees
Ebola : As the Africans are
Ebola : As the Africans are dying, the audit begins. It turns out that Glaxo Smith Kline ( GSK ) contacted the WHO six months ago to liase with vaccine production but was told : no thanks, we'll get back to you ....
Fortunately GSK proceeded with development anyway, notably in the absence of any outside funding or even promise thereof, and so much so that clinical trials began about 2 weeks ago. GSK have an animal model which shows good prospects, as it turns out that even a modest antibody response from their vaccine is quite protective for the worst mechanisms the virus uses ie. the hemorrhaging. If they can prove/deduce the 'master seed' from this then arrangements are already in place to rapidly rev-up for distributed volume production also involving about half a dozen other suitable manufacturers ( some of them normally commercial competitors of GSK ). I say this quite earnestly : technically this is an amazing piece of work. Normally I'm pretty suspect on Big Pharma but I'll admit their brilliance on this one.
The WHO is now eager to assist GSK. No doubt. They are facing some sharp questioning upon the relevance of their alleged in-house expertise, and they are very keen to dampen any implication that may flow toward UN committees on other topics too .... I think the spin is bound to go relativistic ! They haven't yet found scapegoats that seem to be requisite for this type of stuff up, but it's good to see them working so diligently on something.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: Normally I'm pretty
I'm just cynical enough about large corporations to believe this was only done out of someone perceiving the chance for a public relations coup.
I also believe that in this case it may not matter. Regardless of the motivation, the winners in this case might just end up being the victims of a horrible disease. I'm sure any victim of Ebola would appreciate the effort, regardless of why it was done.
I've been to 23 countries around this world of ours and those of us in "advanced" societies sometimes forget that not everyone has it as good as we do.
Those doctors at the WHO or whatever organization failed on this, whatever happened to "do no harm"? Turning your back on those victims is just as bad as injecting the virus yourself.
End of rant.
Phil
Goodnight everyone. :-)
Goodnight everyone. :-)
TimeLord04
Have TARDIS, will travel...
Come along K-9!
Join SETI Refugees
RE: I'm just cynical enough
Agreed, I'm quite happy to grant them the kudos for the result.
This is pretty well the flavor of the queries. No doubt there will be opportunistic politicking all round, including those with pre-existing axes to grind against the U.N. I personally don't hold out much for material change within WHO though, as anyone in WHO that breaks rank would be crucified quick slick. Whistleblowing is never rewarding in such groupthink entities. In the presence of such vested interests the likelihood of effective change borders on the fantastic.
[ The reason why I am so harsh here is simple : in the milieu that I have worked for 30 years there is precisely no latitude for displacing responsibility. Which is a good thing. But the sort of behaviours exhibited as discussed are totally foreign to me, and I have no tolerance.]
End of Rant. :-)
Cheers, Mike.
( edit ) To be exact : the Reston subtype in primates ( eg. see here ) was known for several years to be some 50% lethal with a three week incubation, compared with 90% lethal with a three day incubation for prior outbreaks. That game changer was totally missed by the WHO, they thought it would fizzle quickly as per prior experience ie. say 1996 and before. But everyone else picked up on the crucial points, which is why we now have this week's options.
( edit ) The UN spin & dry image washing machine is already up and whirring, the WHO has said that 'the Ebola outbreak has been underestimated', neatly leaving out the 'by us' bit thus hoping to imply they are merely one of many who have blown the call. The trouble here for them is the metric ton of stuff on public record for this year to date indicating precisely that they were the ones out of step. Perversely this 'news' has been forwarded with a request to give them more money .... that's what I call cute.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: RE: I'm just cynical
That still doesn't explain why the WHO wouldn't partner with GSK to work on a vaccine when they had the chance! Even if the current outbreak could have been contained you WILL need it at some point again in the future. To be able to then pop in and say 'we have a vaccine' would have been a PR coup of unimaginable proportions for BOTH!!
To not pursue every available
To not pursue every available avenue to solve this sort of problem defies explanation. Sure, it takes money, and lots of it, to develop a vaccine. Every person involved has to make a living and feed a family. This includes everybody from the guy making beakers to the guy sitting there on a computer analyzing proteins.
But...
There are more than enough people willing to donate money to pay for such endeavors. The stuffed shirts just need to forego the self-important bs and get on with it. Fulfill the name of their organization.
Phil