Has the thought of going vegetarian ever crossed your mind?

[azn_knives_4l]

a point without a reference makes no sense IMHO, women and all races are a part of all studiesdone in the US (but a few where it makes sense) these days, but I agree to move on !

It doesn't need to 'make sense'. People died and it's because of poor testing. There is no 'sense'. It is just bad science for profit, racism, ableism, and misogyny. Eugenics is American and so is lobotomy.

Edit: Yeh... This actually was me pretty angry. To anybody reading, remember that regulations are written in blood. That is all.

 

[DitmasPork]

I am eating veggies more. I feel better.

Maybe some small piece of fish, but very veggie heavy.

I admit it feel better afterwards. Across the board.

But meat is YUM! Not sure I could abandon meat. You?

Forgot to ask, had you ever considered becoming a vegetarian?
IMHO, it's probably easier for some, more than others to be vegetarian—depending on where they live, what culinary traditions they're familiar with. For me, for the last 30 years I've lived in neighborhoods with large South Asian, where vegetarian fare is familiar stuff and easier to find than hamburgers. With my family growing up, tofu was revered as much as meat on the table—I get annoyed when people call tofu a 'meat substitute.' Being an urban dweller, good non-meat dishes isn't too hard to find—especially in diverse cities like NYC/LA.
I'm unlikely to become vegetarian, but wouldn't have difficulties becoming one.

 

[MarcelNL]

one of my fave dishes is Tofu curd sticks with peanuts AKA fake chicken, another few are Indian veggie dishes. Would I become a vegetarian? Not likely but I'd happily survive when I would have to...

My youngest sun is what we have begun to call an 'opportunarier', he chooses the veg or meat dish we serve at dinner that he likes best....

 

[aporigine]

It doesn't need to 'make sense'. People died and it's because of poor testing. There is no 'sense'. It is just bad science for profit, racism, ableism, and misogyny. Eugenics is American and so is lobotomy.

Edit: Yeh... This actually was me pretty angry. To anybody reading, remember that regulations are written in blood. That is all.

As someone who worked in the science end of a tier-1 pharma firm, I can tell you that, to a person, we lab wonks believed in and busted our bottoms to the benefit “of all mankind”. When we had opportunities to compare notes with our opposite numbers in other firms, we encountered the same commitment to sound science and the search for drugs that addressed real needs. (Though I was there to watch the fierce competition to get boner pills on the market, perhaps the most profit-driven frivolity of our/my time.) We did get our marching orders from the suits. That is where to look for biases, bigotries, and cold calculations of the danger of a market-ready product vs. its profit potential.

The science is generally solid and done with integrity. “I know; I was there.” Dealing with the evils you list is ime an emergent phenomenon, and it takes time for that sort of self-evaluation to filter through the “eye of the needle” of executive oversight.

 

[MarcelNL]

As someone who worked in the science end of a tier-1 pharma firm, I can tell you that, to a person, we lab wonks believed in and busted our bottoms to the benefit “of all mankind”. When we had opportunities to compare notes with our opposite numbers in other firms, we encountered the same commitment to sound science and the search for drugs that addressed real needs. (Though I was there to watch the fierce competition to get boner pills on the market, perhaps the most profit-driven frivolity of our/my time.) We did get our marching orders from the suits. That is where to look for biases, bigotries, and cold calculations of the danger of a market-ready product vs. its profit potential.

The science is generally solid and done with integrity. “I know; I was there.” Dealing with the evils you list is ime an emergent phenomenon, and it takes time for that sort of self-evaluation to filter through the “eye of the needle” of executive oversight.

+1

working in ClinOps for tier 1 pharma for the last 25 years, I have only seen solid science with progress for patiens in mind and have not seen one intentional wrongdoing other than some questionable discussions at pricing.....which is done by 'the suits'

 

[Jovidah]

So we are back to economics trumping environment. Same reason factory farms, etc. exist. It's a big circle.

That why it's a bit of a joke to me when people opine what others should be eating, etc. In the end, for EVERYONE, it comes down to money over all else.

And I'm fine with that. I'm just not fine with the 'holier then thou' people.

Not that it's a issue here on KKF. We are largely about excessive consumption (way more knives, kitchen equipment, etc. than needed to survive). All of those products needed to be manufactured, and all had some impact on the environment. So at least here there is no room for the 'environment first' perspective without being a hypocrite.

When I pointed out the issue that shrinking populations has glaring issues, that doesn't mean I'm saying economics trump environment... but you simply can't completely ignore them either, especially when you're talking big picture. Shrinking populations is a viable option but you'd have to do it in a slow and controlled manner.

It's easy to just complain about 'sacrificing the environment for economy' when economy is held abstract... but 'economy' also means 'having the excess resources and production to take care of your elderly, your sick and your disabled people'. It means having the resources to actually innovate and do things better in the future.

I think there's plenty of people who try not to put money over all else (I don't, even though I'm poor), but it's simply a factor you cannot ignore when talking big picture. On a small scale everyone has to make their own choices, and no one says you have to go hardcore full spartan mode... but that doesn't mean you can't apply some moderation or take some sensible steps to do your part - whatever those steps may be.

Although I think in the short to mid term the bigger challenge is really that the world has basically gone back in cold war mode (or rather luke-warm war), and especially when it comes to the environment there's too many countries that have opposing interests - with some actually benefiting from global warming, and others basically facing potential economic collapse from defossilization.

Our own government has actually gone pretty hard on trying to force agricultural producers to prioritize the environment more, but it's actually backfiring pretty hard and it's starting to worry me because decision makers seem to completely forget about long-term food security - especailly when considering the changing world situation.
Admittedly nothing works better to limit population than food shortages; in that sense it's a self-solving problem.

 

[azn_knives_4l]

Hey, that's me! I am the suit on the pricing side It's *wonderful* that researchers act to the good of all. Less good is, say, the patient selection protocol that led to the approval of Chantix despite the numerous regulations in place to prevent such atrocities. I don't get the morality arguments here when bad stuff has happened, is still happening, and will continue to happen but it is what it is.

Edit: Maybe it's to separate researchers from profit motive? I get that but the mobile lobotomist received a Nobel Prize. And not all researchers act ethically in human or animal trials as Harlow and Mengele both existed.

Another edit: I really don't want to go any further with this conversation but I want to make it clear that I initially presented illustrative examples to support the notion that there are physiological differences over sex and ethnicitiy that strongly interact with modern medicine. I then presented various historical examples to further substantiate when questioned on the topic. I make no judgment towards the validity or intentions of the people involved and only state that these things happened. Ofc, public outrage and the resulting regulations speak for themselves.

 

[Jovidah]

I think the point Marcel was trying to make is that while certain screwups related to for example racial or genetic differences in the effects of medicine were certainly made, they weren't necessarily intentional; they were just the result of an 'unknown unknown', not intentionally ignoring or sacrificing the health of those people. It just didn't occur to people that such differences would occur.
Whether that does or doesn't make a difference depends mostly on what ethical framework you apply...

The reason we have ethical commissions and organizations like EMA, and FDA is exactly to try and prevent such situations as much as possible (whether intentional or deliberate). As the saying goes 'vertrouwen is goed, controle is beter!' - trust is good, verifying is better.

 

[azn_knives_4l]

I think the point Marcel was trying to make is that while certain screwups related to for example racial or genetic differences in the effects of medicine were certainly made, they weren't necessarily intentional; they were just the result of an 'unknown unknown', not intentionally ignoring or sacrificing the health of those people. It just didn't occur to people that such differences would occur.
Whether that does or doesn't make a difference depends mostly on what ethical framework you apply...

The reason we have ethical commissions and organizations like EMA, and FDA is exactly to try and prevent such situations as much as possible (whether intentional or deliberate). As the saying goes 'vertrouwen is goed, controle is beter!' - trust is good, verifying is better.

And I've already stated that intent does not matter. We say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and it is idiomatic but valid.

 

[aporigine]

Hey, that's me! I am the suit on the pricing side It's *wonderful* that researchers act to the good of all. Less good is, say, the patient selection protocol that led to the approval of Chantix despite the numerous regulations in place to prevent such atrocities. I don't get the morality arguments here when bad stuff has happened, is still happening, and will continue to happen but it is what it is.

Edit: Maybe it's to separate researchers from profit motive? I get that but the mobile lobotomist received a Nobel Prize. And not all researchers act ethically in human or animal trials as Harlow and Mengele both existed.

Chantix is a great example, one where the policymakers definitely put their collective thumb on the balance.

I know someone who took it. Scary adverse effects profile.

 

[Jovidah]

And I've already stated that intent does not matter. We say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and it is idiomatic but valid.

I think anyone with a background in legal affairs or ethics would strongly disagree with that statement.

 

[azn_knives_4l]

Chantix is a great example, one where the policymakers definitely put their collective thumb on the balance.

I know someone who took it. Scary adverse effects profile.

Who would have thought that excluding alcoholics and people with a history of mental health issues from clinical trials would lead to adverse effects when the drug approved under that testing protocol is prescribed to the population at large? Everybody? Everbody.

 

[azn_knives_4l]

I think anyone with a background in legal affairs or ethics would strongly disagree with that statement.

Think what you want in the morass of American law where corporations are people and fines are a cost of business. It does not matter to me.

 

[blokey]

Edit: Maybe it's to separate researchers from profit motive? I get that but the mobile lobotomist received a Nobel Prize. And not all researchers act ethically in human or animal trials as Harlow and Mengele both existed.

António Egas Moniz got a Nobel for his contribution to neurosurgery, the mobile lobotomist Walter Freeman didn’t get it

 

[azn_knives_4l]

António Egas Moniz got a Nobel for his contribution to neurosurgery, the mobile lobotomist Walter Freeman didn’t get it

Thanks for the correction. Since we're on it I guess this is the part where I point out such lobotomies were disproportionately performed on gay men and women.

 

[MarcelNL]

Who would have thought that excluding alcoholics and people with a history of mental health issues from clinical trials would lead to adverse effects when the drug approved under that testing protocol is prescribed to the population at large? Everybody? Everbody.

hindsight....is when you look the cow in the ass...as the saying goes where I live...

It's common practice in most studies to exclude anyone with an addiction ALSO because their (self) reported outcome is usually not THAT reliable and their body chemistry is pretty FU.
Mental health issues tend not to come alone, just the question of ethics is one to take into consideration....consenting to being part of a clinical trial is a serious thing these days.
There are so many more layers to this than what may be apparent to the innocent bystander.

yet becoming a vegetarian is less difficult as it only takes a single person making a decision....

 

[azn_knives_4l]

hindsight....is when you look the cow in the ass...as the saying goes where I live...

It's common practice in most studies to exclude anyone with an addiction ALSO because their (self) reported outcome is usually not THAT reliable and their body chemistry is pretty FU.
Mental health issues tend not to come alone, just the question of ethics is one to take into consideration....consenting to being part of a clinical trial is a serious thing these days.
There are so many more layers to this than what may be apparent to the innocent bystander.

yet becoming a vegetarian is less difficult as it only takes a single person making a decision....

Again, you're trying to insert morality where it has no place. I point out these examples as you requested substantiation and so have fulfilled my burden of proof. I make no judgment.

Edit: Your "It's common practice in most studies to exclude anyone with an addiction ALSO because their (self) reported outcome is usually not THAT reliable and their body chemistry is pretty FU." is the same argument that was used to historically exclude black Americans from such trials.

 

[DitmasPork]

I am eating veggies more. I feel better.

Maybe some small piece of fish, but very veggie heavy.

I admit it feel better afterwards. Across the board.

But meat is YUM! Not sure I could abandon meat. You?

If seriously curious, the Meat Free Mondays site is a good place. I believe it was started by Paul McCartney and his daughters.
https://meatfreemondays.com/

 

[Bert2368]

I am eating veggies more. I feel better.

Maybe some small piece of fish, but very veggie heavy.

I admit it feel better afterwards. Across the board.

But meat is YUM! Not sure I could abandon meat. You?

After I raised the second batch of (non big breasted, old fashioned) turkeys, I realized that dumb animals/sentient beings was not a binary thing but a continuous spectrum. I've been thinking HARD about it ever since, but dammit, we are SO tasty?