| Just Answers |
Hubs | Hubbers | Topics | Request |
| #1 in Business | Subscribe Email Print |
|
You are here: Home > News and Society > Politics > Who's Stronger in National Security: Republicans or Democrats? |
|
Just Answers - Who's Stronger in National Security: Republicans or Democrats?
One of C-SPAN’s questions for “open lines” recently was “who’s stronger in National Security, Republicans or Democrats” (i.e., who will keep us safer). Callers weighed in on three different telephone lines (i.e., Republican, Democrat, and Independent). The host picked up calls in rotation, each According to USFDA, a combination product is one composed of any combination of a drug and device; biological product and device; drug and biological product line getting its turn; very democratic quite honestly. It’s what C-SPAN does best to the unbridled joy and wild accolades of its small but loyal audience. As far as the responses were concerned, they were predictable. Republicans said they are better because we haven’t been attacked since 9/1 ; or drug, device, and biological product and fixed dose combination would include two or more combinations of drug. Examples of combination products may in 1. Democrats said they are better because we were attacked on 9/11. Independents claimed neither one is very effective because of conspiracy theory de jour. At the end of the hour segment, I am willing to bet not one listener had a sudden shift in thought, an epiphany of enlightenment, or a fre lude drug-coated devices, drugs packaged with delivery devices in medical kits, and drugs and devices packaged separately but intended to be used together. sh point of view. Of course the question itself is a bellow, used to fire up the dormant coals of minds made up, flaring in sparks of party rhetoric, embers that cool as quickly as they burst. So I listened to the crackling callers, mesmerized by the dancing flames of the unthinking faithful, here is enormous increase in the number of combination products entering the market in the recent years. Combination products have proven advantages but fixe and I thought about the question and wondered if the question itself was the answer. “Who’s stronger in National Security, Republicans or Democrats?” There is an implied measure to the success of a National Security policy—the number of terrorist attacks on American soil, of which there are on d dose combinations are still in the process of convincing regulatory authority on their advantages over the single ingredient formulations. Combination pro ly two ever mentioned, the two WTC attacks. However, there have been others. I reference the definition of terrorism as declared by the CIA: the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine age ucts have become life saving products for the pharmaceutical companies who doesn’t have many innovative molecules in their product pipeline and have been inc nts, usually intended to influence an audience. Based on that definition, I’d have to classify the abortion clinic bombings, Atlanta Olympic Park bombing, and Oklahoma City bombing as terrorist attacks. I’m not sure how one could dismiss them as something other than terrorism. It is important easingly used in the product life cycle management. Even the companies having product patents are trying to extend their product life cycle through the combi to include these attacks in the context of the larger question on National Security. Regardless of whether terrorist agents are home grown or imported, they have a few things in common. They are convinced 1) some egregious assault has been perpetrated by the U.S. government on their rights or nation products and maximize the revenues. But the companies involved in this practice are overlooking that they are burdening the patients both economically their beliefs or their faith, and 2) killing people is the only option available to them to make their point. In short, they live in a David and Goliath fantasy with one significant difference. David is capable of slinging stones of mass destruction now. Given our porous borders, given our fre and physically. They need to rightly judge the benefits of the combination products and they have to even look at the risks involved when combining the produ edoms, given our diversity in people, given our wealth, given our impatience, given our unrivaled position of power in the world, given our addiction-like dependence upon the resources of troubled countries, given the mountains of Pakistan or the vast wilderness of the Northwest, given cell pho ts. Some of the combination products were well accepted by physicians while others suffered. Companies involved in development of combination products are fi nes and wireless internet access, given all of this, short of locking everyone up, National Security can only do so much. Yes, tighter security along all our borders is a wise venture. Yes, tighter security at airports is an important pursuit. Yes, sharing information among our various nationa ding difficulty in defining their combination products and facing various challenges from selecting a combination to marketing it. Following aspects would a l security agencies is critical. Yes, chasing and disrupting Bin Laden in the rugged terrain of Pakistan is an important undertaking. Yes, surveillance of hate groups and extremists within the U.S. is a useful tool. Yes, a refreshed Patriot Act is an important instrument. Yes all these things a dd to the challenges in developing combination products: Which markets to tap where the combination products can do fairly well? Which combination prod re critical to uprooting future dangers. On the other hand, the faulty reasoned Iraq War and our contrived policy of building an island of democracy in the Middle East is both American arrogance at its na?ve worst and detrimental to any honest attempt to draw hearts and minds towards loftier h cts are meaningful and rational? Which therapeutic categories to select? Which Combinations can address unmet needs of the patients? Do combin eights. And let’s not underestimate the contention the war has created at home, slowing progress on many of the more important fronts. In addition to the misguided Iraq policy, using the increasingly meaningless words “war on terror” as a drumbeat to over-extend the power of the President or t tions increase the patient compliance? What would be the developing cost? How to tackle the risks encountered during combination product developmen o rein in certain freedoms or to give fodder to Howard Dean’s latest diatribe or to open up the Alaskan wilderness to oil drilling for that matter, is another hindrance in protecting our homeland. “War on terror” has become about as definitive as “Threat Level Orange”. Who cares anymore? The f t? As combination products don't fit into the traditional categories of drugs, medical devices, or biological products, the USFDA is in the process of devel act is we are doing some smart things and some dumb things. But even if we did all the right things the right way at the right time, attacks still might occur. And the timing won’t be determined by who is wearing the watch. Asking a question like “who’s better at National Security” or “are we ping new procedures for reviewing their safety, efficacy and quality. Professional from academic institutions, pharmaceutical industries, health care indust safer” and expecting an actual answer, reveal a country that is deeply delusional by thinking it can prevent something that is a part of the fabric of a changed world—a world in which radical ideologies are not conveniently contained within physical borders but quietly networked through website y and representatives from various regulatory agencies are working out to design the regulatory requirements for manufacture and sale of combination products s, discreetly funded electronically, and silently called to action by emails or cell phones. It is a world in which smaller is more nimble, more elusive, more dangerous. To put it another way, a handful disenfranchised people with an irrational beef in possession of significant weapons can caus . As there is an increasing trend of the combination products companies manufacturing such products should be able to tackle the problems involved in the de e a lot of damage. And there ain’t much we can do about it. To endlessly debate whether one political party can protect us more than another is a pointless exchange. No one has an answer that is factual or means much. All we do is incessantly spew our opinions as if they were truths, while our elopment. They need to be wiser in analyzing the market trends and the regulatory requirements. Companies that provide selfless information through particip national arrogance continues to miss one opportunity after another to sway hearts and minds, possibly reducing the number of small people with big complaints and bigger weapons. The answer to the question is who the hell knows and who the hell cares. Now let's get back to the business at hand tion in industry events and feedback to regulatory authorities would be able to face the challenges and will be successful in developing combination products
HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
Related Articles:Is Your Bank Overcharging You For Your Overdraft? Read This Before You Buy a Condo!
|