The shit that doesn't merit its own thread (the resurrection)

Is it still in one piece this morning?

Stiff 'pecker in the morningā€¦

igmc

2 Likes

Maybe not - if itā€™s been submerged in the yellow submarine all night, it could be limp & soggy. :wink:

2 Likes

Beautiful plumage

Itā€™s just resting :+1:

2 Likes

Its stunned, or just pining for the fjords.

1 Like

1 Like

That would be lobster pot.

15 Likes

1 Like

'member when celebrity had an air of mystique about it? For sure, there were B and C listers, but at least they had to do something to earn notoriety besides letting the world know about ones newest (free) $3,000 handbag. I 'member that.
Famous for being famous . . . fuck this ghey world.

1 Like

Sometimes Iā€™m concerned that, as a Guardian-reading person who only watches BBC4 on live TV, Iā€™m out of touch with much of society.

Then someone posts things kind of thing, about someone Iā€™ve never heard of, and I realise Iā€™m actually quite happy with the situation.

4 Likes

:grinning:

2 Likes

image

4 Likes

Would be a better logo for them

http://www.soundbysinger.com/

About bloody time - Iā€™ve spent the last 2 years trying to force this at various commissioners and pharmacy committees.

If ever thereā€™s a classic case of NHS bureaucracy and its love of process and governance get in the way of just doing the right thing, its this, a fucking no brainer from the start.

2 Likes

You do wonder why it is the drug companiesā€™ responsibility to apply for licences. It makes no sense.

I agree. What the drugs companies will say though is that they did have to put the drug through the trials for eye treatment and then the licensing process (it was already approved but only as a cancer drug) and that that cost them money. The only way for them to recover that money was by selling the drug under a patent with a reasonable lifetime. The original drug was close to coming off patent. So they tweaked the molecule slightly (and wholly insigificantly, I believe) which allowed them to take out a new long-lived patent. Where they went wrong was to try to charge a ridiculous price for it when there was a very cheap and equally effective, but unlicensed, alternative. I fear that in the longer term the drugs companies simply wonā€™t do any work to extend the applications of existing compounds. Theyā€™re in business to make money, not to help people. Itā€™s charities that do the latter.

VB

I have the letter from Jeremy Hunt (2 years ago) in which he hid behind the fact that Avastin although licensed in many other countries to treat WMD, was not licensed in the UK. This, whilst Hunt oversaw real terms reductions in commissioning budgets and employed bullying tactics to enforce cuts to budgets and services. He offered no route to getting Avastin licensed so that clinicians could choose. Wanker.

If youā€™ve not seen him yet then Dr Phil Hammondā€™s show is an amusing evening out http://www.drphilhammond.com/blog/events/. We saw him while Hunt was still Health Sec. Heā€™d been in a running battle with Hunt for some time and ended his show by getting us all to shout out that we were mad about the way the NHS was going while he videoed us for a few seconds and sent the video to Hunt via Twitter. At an earlier stage in the evening he had summed the Health Sec up in the pithy phrase ā€œThe thing you have to remember about Jeremy Hunt is that heā€™s a TWAT !ā€.

VB

4 Likes