Virginia Libertarian

AMA Wants Regulation of ‘Bioidenticals’

Landmark government research linking conventional hormone pills with health risks led many women to quit taking them.But there’s no evidence that bioidenticals are any safer and they may even have other risks, Dr. Robert Vigersky, a member of the Endocrine Society delegation to the AMA, said Wednesday. The society represents doctors who specialize in hormone-related disorders.

“This is a safety issue, there’s no question about it,” said Dr. Ardis Hoven, an AMA board member.

The products, sometimes called “natural” hormones, are compounds that have the same chemical and molecular structure as hormones that are produced in the human body. They are custom-mixed by special pharmacies according to a doctor’s prescription.

Promoters say they are plant-based, but Vigersky said some contain synthetic products and their exact ingredients aren’t always known because they are not FDA-approved.

“We think that people are being misled into thinking that they are safer and we’re worried that they may be inappropriately prescribed,” said Vigersky, an endocrinologist at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. He said he has no financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that produce hormone pills.

“Oh, do it for the children, they can’t protect themselves!”  This is basically the adult version of “do it for the children”.  The AMA is worried about one of their more lucrative monopolies on treatments, and wants the government to step in and enforce it for them.  Look, we don’t need to be protected from snake-oil salesmen by the government.  We are adults, we can think for ourselves and judge risks for ourselves, and if someone is committing fraud, gee, it’s not real hard to find a lawyer.  What we don’t need is the AMA stifling any potential innovation, because there could be something to this.  They aren’t worried about our health, they are worried about their pocketbooks, and are willing to use unfair tactics to protect them.

The News Leader - www.newsleader.com - Staunton, Va.

With $100,000 to give away and six months to do it, Shenandoah Valley Social Services is in the unusual predicament of having more money than it has demand for child care subsidies.

Here’s an idea, give the money back to taxpayers.  I know, radical.

Dems to target political ‘robo calls’ - USATODAY.com

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has proposed a separate measure that would make it a crime to give voters misleading election information. Violators would be subject to fines of up to $100,000 or one-year’s imprisonment or both. It would require the attorney general and federal election agencies to distribute accurate information in areas where deceptive practices were found.

This is just stupid.  Can you really see this being enforced consistently?   If it could just eliminate all those mud-slinging ads though… Hmmm, I can see that now, you put out a misleading ad about your opponent, and you go to jail.

Wired News: Second Life Will Save Copyright

Take the fashion industry. As law professors Chris Sprigman and Kal Raustiala write in their paper on the subject, neither copyright nor patent law prohibit copying fashion designs. There is some protection for the brand associated with the apparel, but no law prohibits a knock-off Chanel suit, peasant skirt or narrow lapel. And yet fashion is highly innovative, with new styles several times a year, despite low IP protection.Similarly, professors Emmanuelle Fauchart and Eric von Hippel write that haute French cuisine (.pdf) is another area with low IP protection, yet high levels of innovation and creativity. No law prevents copying recipes. Instead, French chefs have developed social norms, much like those Linden Labs seeks to empower, against exact copying, dissemination of tricks of the trade and adopting significant innovations without crediting the chef responsible.

Failure to follow these norms results in reputation harm, including ostracism.

I will be interested to see how this little experiment works out, and more interested to see if we in the “real” world learn anything from it.  At this point, I am skeptical that we will change anything with our copyright laws.  The judicial system in the U.S. has too much inertia to change something like that.

http://www.qando.net/ - Iraq Options

Secondly, the militias must be disarmed. Period. Governments can’t afford to share power like that and expect to have their authority respected. Right now there are alternative governments functioning within Iraq and Iraqi’s loyalties are divided. It is critical that be eliminated as a part of the problem. Of course, that means making hard decisions, acting on them and acting forcefully and with no exceptions. Unfortunately I’ve seen little indication to this point the government of Iraq is up to that task.

I truly don’t think this is the way to go. Why is this any different than the Democrats plans in the U.S. for disarming the populace. These people have to be able to defend themselves as well. What’s true here, that the government is unable to take the guns away from the bad guys, is also true over there. So the only people who would be giving up their guns would be the ones that need them most to defend themselves. I think that what really needs to happen is that we need to get these different groups together and ask them, “What do they want for Iraq?” If they can all agree on something, great, there you go. If they can’t let them create their own state/country/whatever. If we don’t like the government they come up with, too bad, they’re not governing us. We need to let these people come up with their own solutions, not force ours down their throat. I think that is what is causing the insurgency as much as anything else.  I think Jon Henke puts it well:

Get over the chest-thumping rhetoric, and recognize that the time for tanks has passed and the time for clear-headed consideration of ’what’s still possible’ is at hand. Republicans used to understand that there were a lot of things that the government just can’t do well, no matter how much money it threw at the problem.

Nation-building in a society that doesn’t like our social architecture is probably one of those things.

In the meantime, if we have the chance to reduce our exposure in Iraq while still guiding them towards an optimal state of affairs, then we should take it and be glad it’s available before distaste for the situation leads us to abandon another potential ally altogether.

The time for blowing stuff up is over.  We need to bring people to the table, and try our best for an outcome that we can stomach.  We need to realize that this is not our society, and that they don’t follow our customs.  We may not like it, but it is not our country.