i don't have anything remotely resembling a day job. i've been doing field research for the last four years while developing a new theory of the universe. also have been working hard on my guitar-playing and musical expression.

i've been fairly successful in setting up a johnny appleseed existence, relying on the kindness of friends & strangers for a meal and a place to lay my head. i try to bring news from neighboring villages, a good story or two, and a nursery that bears fruit every once in a while. :)

whats up bro

I just want to let you know that everything is all right - i am meeting Mark tommrow and will work out presentation with other Angels I think I was overbaring you with my Magical Experience- be well

think about how you might have contributed to what you perceived as NYC's toxicity.

Dear David,

I wanted to make a couple of observation about yesterday’s text messages.

Going back to DC, to your family, Kaisha, Pam and leaving the LES for a while was a good idea. You needed to get away from NYC, put some distance to gain perspective on the events that you reviewed the last day I saw you.

I disagree with you that NYC is toxic for nascent creators like you. Visionaries struggle all the time getting others to understand and accept their ideas and that’s part of the fun of being a visionary. And it takes a strong self to manage rejection which is a big part of the life of a visionary. But the toxicity you described while reviewing your life in NYC was not about your ideas but about your behavior.

You had a passionate relationship with Joel, JJ and many others and you expected a lot from them. You told me several times that you have high expectations of those you love.

But what about your expectations of yourself with respect to the people you love?

You love JJ but when he asked you to leave, you stayed and played music outside his store. You disrespected him and respect is one face of love. When your health advisor didn’t come to visit you at the hospital, you felt abandoned (and rightly so) and you came back to the bar and blasted her. But you didn’t give her a chance to explain herself. I bet her explanations would have been lame, but if you love her, you could have listened and help her realize that as a health advisor she had some work to do.

You expect unconditional love from JJ, Joel and others but that’s not realistic or fair to anyone, including you.

I know ideas are important to you but so is love. You love passionately.Take some time to think about your relationships in NYC and think about how you might have contributed to what you perceived as NYC's toxicity.

Your heart is generous and your mind is gorgeous. Make something beautiful of your life.

With love and admiration...

I miss both of you!
come see me sometime!
Kim/ I read your Balasia review whenever I’m feeling down… it really inspires me to keep going AND Hippie what can I say, during Balasia days your daily visits fueled my creativity and life…

you are either trying to be very cool or deep or you are cool and deep. In either case, you are way too cool for me.

Despite the fact you are terribly good looking, rich and living in the greatest city, it will never work out. One you are too far away. New York is great! You are lucky you can live there. But it is a few states away and I hardly ever get there. Two, people with money never advertise it. So therefore, you are not to be trusted. HA Or you are a braggart. In either case, despite how much money you have, or don’t have, it isn’t attractive. And I am never impressed with money anyway. Three, despite how I like you quoted CAKE lyrics and Hungarian Poerty, you are either trying to be very cool or deep or you are cool and deep. In either case, you are way too cool for me. I think despite how I can be witty and occassionally amiable, you will be quickly bored with me. I am just not that cool…. and I only appreciate “deepness.” And lastly, you are way too cute for me. I have curves. And cute cool, deep, possibly rich guys, never go for the nerdy smart girl in school, who lives on the other side of the tracks. Didn’t you even SEE Pretty In Pink?? John Hughes life lessons. And this redhead would always end up dating Ducky.

So these are the reasons, and there are many, why you are way too cool for my school, or Skool.

Have a wonderful life.

Historically, there's been huge cultural aversion to it, but that's evaporating.

Daiichi Sankyo's bid for control of Ranbaxy Laboratories shows that pharmaceutical companies have a major appetite for generic-drug makers despite concerns about differences in their business models.

Large pharmaceutical companies have encountered a wave of product setbacks and political uncertainty that have sent many of their stocks to multiyear lows.

Acquiring companies that specialize in manufacturing low-cost, off-patent generic drugs would allow large makers to diversify, and seize on international efforts by governments to promote generics to cut health-care expenses.

Novartis, which is based in Switzerland, is the only large brand-name drug manufacturer that has fully embraced generics through its unit Sandoz, which is among the world's largest generic makers.

But the move by Daiichi for Ranbaxy, a large Indian generic manufacturer, leads some analysts to believe that other brand companies may not be far behind.

"I think it's something that Big Pharma is going to take a hard look at, and you'll see more deals like this in the future," said David Webster, president of Webster Consulting Group. "Historically, there's been huge cultural aversion to it, but that's evaporating."

Large drug makers will see revenue from some of the world's most lucrative medicines plummet from 2010 through 2012 when patents expire and generic copies eat up market share.

Brand-name companies that stand to lose out because of impending patent expirations could be the most likely to acquire a generic manufacturer, Webster said.


Generic-drug makers appear to be attractive targets
By Lewis Krauskopf
June 12, 2008

Hope u,ll still work on ur helping us get kind-spirited minds who will make d burdens lighter.

So glad to hear from u my darling brother. How r u nd i ope u r hearing from ur daughter:)?. I must confess to u that i really missed u. I ope u avent given up on the orphanage assistance

I appreciate ur kind gestures nd every moment we shared chatting on moving things forward nd possible ways of making things happen. Thanks nd thanks.

Thanks for ur several pictures too. I,m in all very grateful.

Lastly, my kids graduated from d ict college. We did acknowledged u in d history of d kids nd d ict college. Hope u,ll still work on ur helping us get kind-spirited minds who will make d burdens lighter for us esp in helping us meet up with d pre requisites of d ict college. Our next batch of kids will soon commence their course by september 12. Ope u,ll still b there for us.

This is Dupsie, Nigeria.

So good! So good. On my way home on Saturday after 3 mos in Iceland. Am I gonna see your coffee drinking, guitar strumming self in the village?

It is not appropriate for me with my business and what I do.

Kahn,  Can you please remove my picture from your Facebook page both in the inset of you playing guitar and as your face shot.  It is not appropriate for me with my business and what I do.  Please take it off right away

Thanks

ok...i'll remove them from my fb entirely...

January 17, 2012

accept completely all that the life of the tropics can give, without preconceptions of aesthetic order, without consideration of tackiness or bad taste, solely living the tropical and the new universe it contains, still unknown.

Torquato Pereira de Araújo Neto

Prividence.

Hi Dave,

Regarding a visit here for stock puposes, that is not workable for several reasons. Most important, you were out of control when you visited last.  You verbally asaulted the people at the restaurant, you drank half a bottle of scotch by 9am Sunday and half of rum the night before. Its not about the scotch, it is abouf you and your getting in control so you can move in a positive direction.  My view is that you have pissed off all the people that are trying so hard to help you in NYC and now its time to change venue, continuing to delay treatment.  As someone  who has experienced depression, I know that a workable approach is to use medications to get in control and then transition to ways to avoid the triggers without or with greatly reduced meds.  You are a believer in science as I am and also know I care about you greatly.  You need  to step back and plan your recovery strategically and use all the resources at your disposal..  Particularly Dr. Hellerstein and the support network in NYC that off loads so many respobsibilities and daily minutia to allow you to do that.

The stock situation does not require anything more than you mailing in the lost certificates forms for now.

Running is just that, not an answer.

Nabil


thx 4 minus sidewayz eight, herbert :(

september 27, 2011

who the fuck is brian ermanski?

6 long years after a bouncer threw me down two flights of stairs strangled me unconscious kicked my head into the sidewalk 4-5 times and I woke up in the gutter after an indeterminate amount of time... an anterior spinal cord injury, 10 herniated discs, fractured shoulder and ankle, staples in the head, 40 different doctors almost every day for 5.5 years 250+ dental visits to nyu dental 14 crowns 4 of them were implants due to stress and grinding (bruxism) i thought i was finally at peace... until tonight the anniversary some food got lodged between my back tooth crown and gum and the pain is fucking excruciating but i can't go back on pain killers... time to walk somehow to get anbesol and wait until monday. #Fuckmylife #patience I should have been a millionaire from it but i couldn't help myself and no one helped me til it was too late. I will be a millionaire artist. maybe billionaire... let's see what i can do in the next 6 years...

a hellish experience involving arrest and a 12-hour shackled stint at Bellevue.

It gets much worse. One anonymous Boogie reader confronted the club with the audio problem a couple weeks ago and wound up with a hellish experience involving arrest and a 12-hour shackled stint at Bellevue. The subject, a resident within ear-shot, took it upon herself to enter the DL and requested a decibel decrease. That’s it. Here’s the account of what followed:

"A bouncer in an earpiece put his hand on my arm and told me to get out or he’d call the cops. I told him to call the f**king cops, thinking they would actually care about the millions of noise complaints the place has received. Instead, the cops took me into custody without reading me my rights (for what crime I don’t know), and abused me while the bouncers smirked. For real, I have dealt with many loud bars in this hood and this is the worst I have ever encountered."


DL on Delancey: Noisy Neighborhood Scourge
Posted on: July 26th, 2012 by Elie

u had the temerity to tell my daughter she should live in public housing.

u could give a fukk about my daughter niggah...
remember that bike she gave ian?

wait til i tell him how u got all the money to fund his dartmouth education.

u had the temerity to tell my daughter she should live in public housing.

ur dad hung the phone up on her while she (and i) were going homeless.

your son and daughter would be living in public housing if
you and your (ex) wife hadn't chiseled the U.S. government out of millions of dollars.

i'm going to tell her we were going broke because her father and her mother repeatedly were in full compliance with all federal, state, and local statutes. i.e. we declared our income and paid our taxes.

HUD hotline.
IRS hotline.

they can't wait to hear about chiselers like u and ur family.
your son will know the truth.

all ur henry webster dds clients in scarsdale ny will know the truth.

pratt street (baltimore) flip on a hud house (while you were attending umd dental school, ur {ex wife} was attending umd medical school, never declared your trust fund received from Harold T. White of White Weld & Co.

scarsdale dentist, declared approximately $40K in income per annum for more years than i care to imagine.

ur a chiseler bro.
ur namesake, henry deF. I used to lecture me about them.

he ain't nothin but a chump.
he may be phi beta kappa at amherst.
he might have studied greek
(and latin) at harvard.

but he missed the memo.
and u did too.
and ur (ex) wife did too.

hippocrates.
hippocratic oath.
do no harm.
m.d.|dds 101.

u niggahs got harm covered like a blanket.

everyone will know the truth.
study galatians 6:7, deacon.
study.


august 2, 2012

Who's Calling the Shots? A Hard-Boiled View of the Flu Vaccine Situation.

Widespread national reports of a flu vaccine shortage due to manufacturing problems and plant shutdowns are simply not true. The real cause of the shortage is the flu vaccine's low price.

The whole process of producing, selling and distributing flu vaccine is complicated. It not only involves manufacturers and distributors, but the World Health Organization who annually determines the formula. Manufacturers must wait for their recommendation to complete production of the vaccine. Most contracts for fall delivery of the vaccine are made early in the spring, long before the recommendation for the final strain has been announced.

Manufacturers begin producing vaccine in the winter with a limited amount of marketing and production data. At prices ranging from $2.00 to $3.00 per dose, quantities of vaccines that are not sold or returned at the end of the season can turn a manufacturer's annual profit into a loss. As a result each manufacturer produces only what they know they can sell.

Any negative variation in the actual production of the flu vaccine results in a market shortage during the critical months of September and October. By the time manufacturers learn their original projections are off, it is difficult to quickly make up the shortage. Chicken eggs are a critical component of the vaccine, and it is hard to make chickens lay several hundred thousand eggs on short notice.

No Financial Incentive for Manufacturers

There are also few financial incentives for manufacturers to produce more vaccine. Diverting resources away from vaccines with guaranteed sales of $7.00 to $60.00 per dose weakens their bottom line .

Two of the largest flu vaccine manufacturers have limited capacity and more profitable products to produce. Demand for Aventis Pasteur's Menomune, a vaccine for meningococcal meningitis, has increased significantly since the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended that college freshman residing in dorms consider vaccination as a strategy for reducing health risk. American Home Products has experienced a similar increase in demand for Prevnar , a new vaccine recently added to the infant immunization schedule for protection against streptococcus pneumoniae. Both vaccines sell for between $40 and $60 per dose.

The Human Cost

The impact of low pricing and resulting shortage of flu vaccine affects millions of Americans who need to be vaccinated. Vaccination rates are reported to have declined this year. The high-risk population, primarily senior citizens, has found it difficult to locate the vaccine. Many of these individuals who are traditionally vaccinated in their physician's office are now forced to wait in long lines at grocery stores and public health clinics, causing some to abandon their efforts.

While healthy adults want to be vaccinated, they are being denied that opportunity because the vaccine is only available to high-risk patients. Even if vaccine becomes available in late December and January, it is likely that immunization rates will not return to their historical norms. Many people will have already given up trying to get the vaccine or will surmise that it is too late to obtain full protection.

The vaccine shortage creates a variety of public health problems.

-In high-risk populations, the cost of flu is extreme. According to the CDC, flu results in 100,000 hospitalizations and 20,000 deaths per year. Dr. Steven Mostow of the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center predicts the shortage will contribute an additional 20,000 flu related deaths this year.

-In healthy adults, the cost of flu is significant. Dr. Kristin Nichol, chief of medicine service at Minneapolis Veterans Administration Medical Center, reported in a 1995 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine that the net benefit of vaccinating a healthy adult was $47.00 per individual. A primary benefit of flu vaccination for consumers and employers is reduction in lost workplace productivity.

-Flu is a primary contributing factor to otitis media. Annually otitis media is responsible for more than 31 million visits to doctor's offices. One-third of those visits are to pediatrician's offices. Treatment costs are in the 3 to 4 billion dollar range. According to a number of studies, vaccination of children reduces the transmission of the flu virus to adults residing in the same household.
There are also a number of indirect effects of low vaccination rates that have a direct impact on health care services. The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) anticipates a significant increase in the use of emergency rooms this winter, while hospitals are anticipating increased admissions and a shortage of beds.

-Allocation problems for manufacturers, distributors, and health care providers have increased. Current channels of distribution and sale do not lend themselves to neat segmentation of the high-risk population. Front line healthcare providers are faced with difficult allocation decisions, and increase their liability exposure.

-The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a committee that advises the CDC on matters of vaccine policy, will now be much more reluctant to expand flu vaccination recommendations because of manufacturers' repeated inability to supply the U.S. market during the September to October time period. Populations that are negatively impacted by lack of these recommendations include healthy adults ages 50 to 65 and infants and young children.

Other issues that have arisen with the shortage include:

-A rise in black market activity , where entrepreneurs with little concern for safe vaccine handling enter the market to capitalize on arbitrage opportunities.

-Less time for healthcare providers to spend on patient care. Providers spend a great deal of time trying to find available vaccine, while managing the fallout from canceled clinics. Additionally, they must spend time addressing concerned patients about the shortage and how it will affect their health.

-Physicians often use the flu vaccine office visit to perform tests, talk about preventive health measures, and catch other illnesses in their early stages. No flu shot, no office visit.

-Vaccine shortages create an atmosphere of panic and chaos. There have been reports of telephone con artists soliciting phony donations to buy high-priced flu vaccines for the elderly.

Lessons Learned

The current influenza vaccine shortage is replete with lessons for pharmaceutical companies, the pharmaceutical industry, policy-makers, payers, healthcare providers, and consumers.

Pharmaceutical Companies

-Pharmaceutical companies are facing increased pricing challenges. For obvious reasons, pharmaceutical companies are cautious about raising prices. In some cases, their hesitancy may cause more harm than good. Companies with mature products that haven't kept pace with increased marketplace valuation, increased production costs, or increasing costs of FDA compliance face major challenges. Companies need to

-increase reviews to ensure pricing is appropriate for market conditions

-reconsider standard "rate of inflation" price increases

-keep all parties informed on reasons for large one-time adjustments when they occur.
This year's vaccine shortage should serve as a wake-up call to pharmaceutical companies about the wisdom of using low prices to score public relations points. Although low pricing is appropriate in some cases, great care should be taken to ensure that it does not reduce customer satisfaction. If this happens, the company's reputation will suffer.

-Tangible illustrations of the negative impact of low pricing (i.e. pharmaceutical price regulation) are excellent complements to more abstract approaches. Key constituents may identify with the flu vaccine shortage more readily than they identify with futuristic drugs that won't come to market because of pricing and R&D cuts.

Policymakers and Payers

-Pharmaceutical price regulation, a seductive mechanism for improving the health of seniors, can actually end up doing more harm than good. Consider with caution.

-Low pricing does reduce direct expenditures on pharmaceuticals. As the influenza vaccine shortage illustrates, in some cases it increases total system costs and the costs of many industry stakeholders. Both public and private payers need to fully understand the relative costs and benefits of low pricing and price regulation.

-These indirect costs, because they are difficult to quantify, are often not captured in boilerplate pharmacoeconomic studies of societal benefits and costs currently in vogue in public health circles. That does not mean that they do not exist, are not real, and are not at times large.

-Recently, employers have taken the lead on demanding effective management of health care costs, and consequently a great deal of inefficiency has been eliminated. Indiscriminate cost control, particularly price regulation, often ends up increasing employer costs. Do employers want employee sick time going through the roof this year, while employees rack up significant costs staying at the local hospital or visiting the emergency room?

Healthcare Providers and Consumers

-Low pricing can impact healthcare providers in ways they never imagined. It can force them to make difficult allocation decisions, strain their already scarce resources, and take them away from quality patient care.

-Low pricing and pharmaceutical price regulation sound great, especially to senior citizens and baby boomers facing the prospect of ever-increasing out-of-pocket drug expenses on fixed incomes. Cases like this year's influenza vaccine shortage might give one pause. Would consumers rather pay a little more for the vaccine and be sure to have it, or be flat on their back during their week-long cruise in the Bahamas? Even worse, canceling the cruise to attend to a hospitalized family member?


David L. Webster
California Physician
Winter, 2001

Copyright © 2000
The Webster Consulting Group, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

If this mind is all you have, fuck rational, forget the boarder between the societal drag telling you the way be, and your own perception.

MIA

A year ago i was in New York. I spent a lot of  my time wondering the city alone, I loved every minute of it. I loved being unrecognizable and minuscule. Just a rat in a subway system.

It was late one night, on the L train back to Bushwick, when I met a life changing character. Looking back on the interaction, I wonder if it was all a figment, born from my lonely mind. How do people really judge the boundaries of their imagination, where memories meet perception? How can I speculate reality, when every second I live is processed and pasturized in my head?

He was standing outside a Pizza shop. His grown out bleach job exposed his gray roots, and his brown leather jacket was beaten baring creases of experience. He was old and dirty, and reeked of a crazed wisdom. Hippie Loo. I thought he was a bum.

I don’t know why, but I offered to buy him Pizza. He got plain cheese, and walked me to the station.

Long story short, Hippie Loo was no bum, he had a masters degree in economics and was living off the proceeds of a book he’d written years ago. For buying him his dinner, he insisted on taking me out the next night.

We hit every restaurant and lounge, bar and club in a six block radius in the Lower East Side. We ate dinner with practicing lawyer from the U.N. at Balthazar, where we were treated to dessert and introduced to the head chef. The night was unexpectedly perfect, layered with surprises.

Beyond the obvious lesson, never judge a book by its cover, Hippie Loo indirectly taught me to sacrifice the comforts of society’s plan for me, for a greater understanding.  Never stop learning, and never settle in a life that anchors you.  If this mind is all you have, fuck rational, forget the boarder between the societal drag telling you the way be, and your own perception. Live for yourself.

The last contact I had with Hippie Lou, he send me this story, I don’t know if he wrote it, but it reads the way he speaks.

“I’m in the Upper Bay swimming away from Manhattan I’m in my alpine star motorcycle suit and have four floats with me the kind we used to use to keep our sailboat from scraping against the dock. All of sudden I realize I’m down by the Narrows and it hits me. I got down here pretty quickly. I must have floated with the current.

I look back at Manhattan, and it just looks like a low ridge on the horizon. Then somehow I zoom in on it and I see the familiar shapes. I look out past the Narrows and I see, at first glance,what appears to be a similar construct. I think wow, this is a mirror image but on closer inspection, I realize it is not. There is a big white building in the middle. Then I say, my conscious mind says, there cannot be a city south of the Narrows. It’s the ocean out there. And if I don’t start swimming back towards Manhattan I’m going to be swept out to sea. The current that got me down here is strong. I might swim hard for an hour and not move. Maybe I can move toward the shore, where the current is weak.

Just then a nice looking sailboat cuts through the waterclose by. It has a strap hanging off the stern and it is heading for Manhattan. I grab it, and start being towed I am calling up to the sailor, trying to ask permission to be towed back, but he can’t hear me, or if he can hear me, he doesn’t answer. And he immediately changes his tack so he’s not heading to Manhattan anymore. There is a couple in the water, and the guy sees what happens to me and says he is going to Manhattan and offers to help. So, I hold the pontoons and start kicking. I look up and suddenly a big Chris Craft boat appears out of nowhere, diving towards the water, bow first it plunges into the water.

I say to the guy, I hope it doesn’t come up under us. I keep looking around, down, waiting for it to come up, but it never does. Then I think I’ve lost my floatsbut the guy shows me where they are. Next thing I know we’re close to Manhattan.

We seem to be out of the water, under some bleachers I’m asking the guy if I can walk out of the water on the southern tip, down near Battery Park. He is telling me some place on the island where I can walk out and he may be giving me directions to get there, but I’m not listening to him. I know I can handle it from here.”

Posted on December 30, 2010 by carmentalawton

I don't like the lifestyle you live at all!!

What don't u like about it?

Everything; I don't like how you dress I don't like it

How would u like me to dress?

Like you used to (a normal man)

Ok

I don't like it

If i dress like a normal man, will i be back in ur good graces?

Yea & act normal
But I know that a lot to ask for

You're sweet.  Thx for the feedback.

what you’re doing on fb is wrong engaged to a man kissing men biting their ears & everything wearing girl clothes & everything everyone is talking about you saying this & that its so embarrassing; EMBARRASSING is not even the word for it do you think that’s what I want in my life?!?! & I’m pissed & I would like it if you don’t talk to me.

they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

My favorite part is the title: you cannot bid the flower not bloom.

David,
I am so glad you wrote.  I couldn't sleep over the story you told me.  I have so many thoughts to share with you mainly to "save your soul", dear David, or help to make peace with life, and your parents as well.  I just would like to hug you, and hug your daughter too.

I haven't red this book, but you might want to find Kathy Marton's book too if you are interested about the subject.  She was Hollbruck's (?) I do not know the spelling, wife, and gave a talk at our club about her new book Enemies of the People.   She was raised as a catholic and found out her Jewish origin when she went back to Hungary finding her heritage - just like you.  She wrote a book about that too but I do not know the title of it.  Her parents were club members to and as I heard were devastated by the book.

Thanks for the Kornai info too.   The news are not very good about Hungary nowadays.

Do you understand the poem you sent me?  It is beautiful, Petofi Sandor wrote it when he was in Debrecen where I was born and raised.

I better go back to work, let me know when you come to Washington again, so I could see you.



thank you for your beautiful words and sentiments.  You were so sweet to my daughter, I really appreciate your kindness and look forward to discussing further your thoughts the next time we meet.

Yes, I do know the meaning of the poem.  My favorite part is the title:  you cannot bid the flower not bloom.  i think petofi intended it for a beautiful woman, because that is the content of the poem, but the title really captured my imagination and most of all my spirit when i first read it.

i took it as a liberating message, one i could (silently) deliver to my parents and all my detractors -- you cannot bid the flower (me) not bloom.  i felt free to pursue my destiny, and that no one's bidding or efforts could stand in my way.  petofi was a great person, i aspire to be like him.

look forward to seeing you soon!

with much love, david


David,

I immediately thought that the poem is about you and Petofi.  I do not think that it was for a woman at all.

 I have an extra copy the "Enemies of the People by K. Marton" would you like to have it?  Give me you address and I send it to you.


David,

When do you arrive on Wednesday?  I work at home that day I could meet you any time.  I am so glad you wrote, I have never found the book I promised, and I totally forgot your e-mail address.  I knew it was some crazy name did not include Webster.  Where is it coming from?
Hopefully see you soon.

I read the Awakening. I have never stopped rooting for you.


your email and words of encouragement could not have come at a better time.  i
have been working very hard, and you will be proud of me one day.  peace, dave


I am already proud of you. What you have attempted is very daring.

Hey Hippie Dave,

So, how've you been? It'll take me years to read all that you've written on here. Wow, so many spoken languages and man, conductivity officer at free space nation, awesome! What is that anyway? You look happy! That's what matters.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

the rules of the game are for other ppl.  why?  
because you are playing a different game entirely.

NY Post
Horoscope (Libra)
August 24, 2012

and to borrow your own expression, I thank you for moving me to the next lily pad.

Here is the first draft of your story.  It is an epic one and hard to

fit into two pages.  Let me know what you think.

xx Linda

this is so there u don't even know...it is a privilege and honor to

work with u...u told the story like no other could, not even me...

Thank you so much. That really means a lot to me and I thank you for

sharing your story with me and being a part of this project.

xxx

linda, is it ok if i post on my blog?  

Hi Hippie Lou, I would really rather that you didn't. This is part of

my message in a bottle project and the story should be seen there

first.  Also, I don't want the stories to be associated with any one

person so that they have a universal feel to them.  Thank you you for

asking and I hope you understand.

xx Linda

this is very discouraging news, Linda.  i will respect your wishes, but strongly disagree with your position and respectfully suggest that you make this explicit to everyone who takes time and energy out of their life to support you and your project.  

with kind regards, hl

Dear Hippie Lou,

Thank you for your e-mail.  I thought I had been clear and appreciate

seeing that I need to be even more clear in the future.  Each human

interaction is a learning experience and to borrow your own

expression, I thank you for moving me to the next lily pad.

I absolutely appreciate the time and energy you put into telling me

your story and the bravery of opening your heart. Your love story is a

special addition to my project and I imagine it will have an ever

widening ripple effect to all who read it.

in peace and love,

xx Linda

SOLVING THE R&D PRODUCTIVITY PROBLEM: CENTRAL PLANNING DOESN’T WORK FOR TOMATOES, SO WHY WOULD IT WORK FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS?

INTRODUCTION

Everyone thinks big pharmaceutical research and development organizations are dinosaurs.

We don’t. We think they have the potential to be far more productive than small biotech firms, if they are structured right.

Big pharma R&D operations are unproductive because they are set up like the centrally planned economy of the former Soviet Union, with similar bureaucracies, inefficiencies and disincentives. That’s tremendously frustrating for both managers and scientists.

There’s an alternative, however, and one that we’re all familiar with: the decentralized free market economy, which rewards innovation and efficiency.

Of course, big pharma R&D exists within a free market now. Yet because of big pharma’s centralized structure and unique challenges -- especially the time lag from the genesis of a drug to FDA approval – it is unable to take advantage of the vital and rapid feedback the free market offers.

Our solution: Transform the internal structure of big pharma R&D departments to resemble decentralized, free markets, with projects that can operate as nimbly as small start-up firms. Add the advantages bigger pharmaceutical firms already enjoy – especially abundant financial resources and insulation from public disclosure during the early stages of development -- and you have a formula for success.

Tinkering won’t do the trick, though. That’s been amply proven by experiments the biggest firms have undertaken in recent years on the advice of consultants and innovation-minded managers.
Those experiments have failed because the changes have addressed only one aspect of the problem – usually centralized planning -- without addressing other vital elements such as positive incentives, rapid feedback, and autonomy for scientists and support staff to work on projects they believe in.

For transformation to be successful, change must be radical and account for the interplay of many factors and groups. This is where the science of economics can provide a critical, “big picture” perspective.

First, we can use economics to understand all the elements of the problem and how they contribute to the drag on productivity. Then we can use economics to show how key changes in organization and incentives can eliminate that drag and stimulate development – without micromanagement. We also can use economics to figure out how best to make the transition.
But first, let’s dissect the problem.

FREE MARKETS 101, OR TOMATOES FOR MOSCOW

There are three key elements to the success of a free market and companies within that market: prices, incentives, and decentralized decision-making. In centralized economies, these elements are absent or distorted in such a way that producers cannot respond quickly to market demand and have no reason to do so.

Let’s use the hypothetical example of agriculture in the former Soviet Union. A planner in the Ministry of Agriculture in Leningrad tells a farmer in the Ukraine to grow 10,000 bushels of salad tomatoes this year and take a certain number each Friday in August and September to the local shipping depot. Truckers will carry the tomatoes to Moscow, where they will be stored in a warehouse, then distributed to government-run food stores.

The Ministry of Agriculture pays the farmer a fixed price – 50,000 rubles – for all the tomatoes he grows. Through the local agricultural collective, the government provides each farmer with seeds, fertilizer, pesticide, and the loan of machinery for plowing, planting, fertilizing and spraying. The farmer also is allotted a certain number of pickers each Thursday during harvest season.

In Moscow, prices for tomatoes are set by the government at 2 rubles apiece. There are about 30 salad tomatoes in a bushel. If everything works perfectly, this price gives the government enough money to pay the farmer, the trucker, the pickers, the people in the warehouse and the cost of seeds, tractors, trucks, fuel, etc. Meanwhile, Muscovites get all the fresh tomatoes they want, when they want them.

But farming is a risky business, and rarely does everything go perfectly. Some risks are inherent, such as the weather, which neither the farmer nor the government can control. Other problems are exacerbated by the centrally planned economy.

If the Ministry of Agriculture planner incorrectly estimates the demand for tomatoes in Moscow this year, there will be a shortage or a glut. Either way, the government will be unable to sell enough tomatoes to cover the cost of producing and shipping them. The same holds true if the planner overestimates or underestimates the number of tomatoes each farmer can grow.

If several farmers in one area have been assigned to grow salad tomatoes, they will all want to plow, plant, fertilize and harvest around the same time, leading to a shortage of equipment and workers at some times and idling these resources at others. Then there’s the weather: If the picking and trucking schedules cannot adapt to early or late harvests, spoilage will increase.

Now let’s look at this problem through the lens of the three factors discussed earlier: pricing, incentives and decentralized decision-making.

First, centralized planning is inefficient because the planner in Leningrad is distant from the farmers and the shopkeepers. The farmer knows more than the planner about which varieties of tomato grow well on his land, what he needs to grow them, how many he can produce during an average season and when they will be ready to ship. The shopkeeper in Moscow also knows more than the planner about what kinds of tomatoes her customers want and how much they are willing to pay for them.

But the farmer’s and shopkeeper’s expertise and knowledge of local conditions are not easily communicated to the central planner. If he hears from every farmer and shopkeeper, he will be overwhelmed with data he is unable to integrate. So he sets up a chain of communication that creates a bottleneck, with only the most important information getting through. This is extremely frustrating for the farmers and shopkeepers, and after a while they are likely to give up advocating for changes that would make them more productive or keep their customers happy. They become chronically demoralized.

Meanwhile, the central planner has worked out a detailed plan for this year’s tomato supply based on data from last year’s harvest and sales. But even the best planner cannot account for every happenstance. Eventually, word might trickle up to him that cold and rainy weather in the Ukraine will delay and decrease the tomato harvest, or that Muscovites want more tomatoes and residents of Leningrad want fewer.

But by the time he has figured out how to adapt his master plan and communicated the necessary changes back down the bureaucratic chain, it may be too late to deal with the problem effectively. And during that lag time, something else may have changed that, once again, throws all his careful calculations into disarray. This is a recipe for planner/manager failure and burnout.

Now imagine that the planner’s boss must integrate the tomato plan with the plans for wheat, spinach, peppers and melons. She must weigh and balance many more factors. With this greater complexity comes a greater likelihood of error and a greater potential for damage from even one miscalculation. This higher-level planner also is even further away from the farmers and shopkeepers. Information is less likely to get to her in a timely way, thus decreasing her chances of being able to respond effectively to changing circumstances.

Second, in this centrally planned economy, there are no real incentives for individuals to change their behavior, even if the tomato harvest is poor. The farmer who produces a bigger harvest by working harder or acquiring greater expertise gets paid no more than the farmer who fails to meet his quota through laziness or inefficiency. The farmer who knows that spinach grows well in cool, rainy weather has no ability or incentive to shift part of his acreage from tomatoes to spinach.

The shopkeeper who works hard to procure good tomatoes for her customers cannot raise her prices to compensate her for her efforts. The truckers, warehouse workers and pickers get paid to show up, whether or not they have work to do or goods to carry. There are no incentives for any of them to adapt, innovate, work harder, be more efficient, or help the central planner. In fact, there may be many disincentives for rocking the boat, not least of which is the central planner’s fear that suggested changes to his plan will hurt his standing with his boss.

Pricing, the third factor, is the most important, because it connects decision-making with incentives. Prices do two things in a free market. First, they provide rapid, concise feedback to everyone from the farmer to the shopkeeper about fluctuations in supply and demand. Looking at the range of prices for a single stock or commodity over several years also allows everyone to see long-term trends, such as a growing demand for tomatoes or for particular varieties of tomato.

Second, changes in price provide incentives for people to respond quickly, efficiently and innovatively. For example, if the tomato harvest is later and smaller than usual, shopkeepers who want to attract customers will pay a higher price per bushel. If there’s a shortage of tomatoes in Moscow, warehouse managers will pay a higher price per truckload, raising the average wholesale price enough to compensate most farmers adequately for their costs. In addition, those farmers who can harvest more or earlier will earn a premium, giving all farmers an incentive to diversify their crops, try new varieties and improve their growing techniques. Pickers who get paid by the bushel will go where there are tomatoes to pick. Trucking companies that get paid by how much product they deliver on time have an incentive to deploy their fleets efficiently.

Best of all, the central planner/manager does not need to be all-seeing and all-knowing. He does not need to micromanage everybody or solve everyone’s problems. He simply needs to ensure that everyone gets accurate, timely price information, that they are free to act on it as innovatively and efficiently as possible, and that everyone plays by the same rules (no bribes change hands for inefficient behavior, no one is allowed to fix prices, etc.).

Of course, free markets are not infallible and central planning is not a complete failure. There are plenty of uncontrolled risks in the free market, and people in the free market make mistakes. Also, an excellent central planner dealing with a small number of people and projects may do a good job. But when changes in conditions occur in a free market, people find out quickly through pricing and have incentives and the ability to respond appropriately, without the delay inherent in waiting for a central manager to process the information, make a decision, and communicate changes down the chain of command.

Some of the parallels between tomato farming and pharmaceutical R&D should be obvious by now. But pharmaceutical companies face unique challenges, and it is important to understand these before applying our analysis to this highly complex industry.

THE NATURE OF THE BEAST: FROM FARMING TO PHARMA

Unique characteristics of drug research, whether at a small biotech startup or a large traditional company, make it difficult for pharmaceutical companies to benefit from the pricing information and incentives offered by the free market.

First and foremost among these is the long timeline – 10 years on average -- between the genesis of a drug and its approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or other regulatory agency. This goes to the heart of the productivity problem, because managers and scientists who try new approaches must wait a decade or more for feedback in the form of market success and stock price. Few managers stay with a company that long. And few companies are willing to make big changes, then stay the course for a decade or more before seeing results.

At a small company with one or two drugs, eventually revenues and the stock price will have a clear and precise relationship to the drug’s success or failure, but in the meantime, investors may go on a roller-coaster ride of intermediary achievements and setbacks, with no guaranteed outcome. And even at small companies, the long development timeline makes it difficult to use revenues or stock price to judge the relative contributions of each scientist, team, manager or decision. This imprecision increases exponentially with the size of the company and the number of drugs it has in development or on the market, making stock price nearly useless as an internal feedback mechanism for the largest companies.

Second, the odds are very small that a given molecule will make it all the way to approval. Drug discovery is inherently risky because it is still very difficult to predict how drugs will act in the body until human trials. A molecule that seems safe all the way through animal trials might turn out to have unacceptable side effects in humans; other molecules that closely resemble toxic chemicals may turn out to be surprisingly safe and effective in clinical trials. Yet at every step of the development process, managers must make critical decisions about which drugs to pursue and which projects to drop.

The largest pharmaceutical companies are doing very well if they win approval for 3 or 4 new drugs a year, while start-ups may labor for years to bring a single drug to market. This means companies spend millions or billions of dollars and deploy thousands of scientists and support staff every year on projects that are destined to fail. Again, the larger the company, the harder it is for top managers to make rapid, informed decisions about allocating resources and for scientists to communicate their concerns about a project or switch to a different one.

Third, pharmaceutical research has entered an era of immense complexity. The rapid development of computers, combinatorial and computational chemistry techniques, and assay technology have led to an explosion of data. So have major scientific discoveries, such as the decoding of the human genome. This overwhelming complexity has been accompanied by increased scientific specialization. Two or three decades ago, one scientist could master most of the available information about a particular disease or biological pathway. Now managers must assemble numerous specialists and support staff in well-integrated research teams. The increase in the numbers and types of players and the greater complexity of R&D organizations increases the potential for mistakes _ and the potential ripple effects of each mistake. Again, all these difficulties increase with the size of the R&D organization.

Fourth, the nature of scientific discovery is very different from manufacturing, for example. Strong central management, strict standards and quality control and accountability at every level may work very well for manufacturers. But scientific research is a creative process that cannot be easily regulated or held to a strict timetable. Good scientists need enough independence, time, and support to play with ideas, experiment, learn from their mistakes and change their approaches. Often, the greatest ideas appear counter-intuitive initially, and these are often squashed or abandoned under a strong central authority. The more scientists are micromanaged, the fewer opportunities they have for the kind of creative problem-solving that leads to treatment breakthroughs. Yet as companies grow larger, managers often create more layers of bureaucracy and impose more accountability requirements as they try to get their arms around an increasingly unwieldy organization.

The problem has reached a crisis point for big pharma in the past few years, as serial mergers have created sprawling giants. Change has been rapid and much manager energy has been diverted from encouraging excellent research to reorganizing and meshing differing corporate cultures. Meanwhile, many scientists spend more time worrying about their jobs and personnel changes than pursuing ideas. Ironically, the faith in economies of scale that drove these mergers, while it works for pharmaceutical marketing, has created a greater drag on R&D productivity for all the reasons mentioned above.

Some managers at these large firms have given up entirely, scaling back their in-house R&D operations and focusing on acquiring or forming partnerships with smaller biotech firms. Others follow the latest management trends, such as reorganizing large R&D divisions into disease groups or biological systems groups. Some managers stick with what they know, relying on strategies that worked when they ran a smaller company. New managers brought in with “a mandate for change” are expected to make bold decisions, but may make cosmetic changes that don’t address the fundamental problems – or make rash decisions in the full expectation that they will be long gone before the consequences are clear.

Virtually all managers believe, privately or publicly, that small biotech firms are much more productive – and right now, they’re correct. Many promising young scientists are voting with their feet, shunning big pharma and taking lower-paying jobs at small firms. So what do the small firms have that big pharma doesn’t?

WHY SMALL FIRMS ARE BETTER, OR DAVID VS. GOLIATH

Let’s look at small vs. large firms through the lens of economics, focusing on the three key elements of a free market: pricing, appropriate incentives and decentralized decision-making.

First, small start-ups depend on funding from venture capitalists, hedge funds, big pharmaceutical companies or some other source. In this respect, they get much more frequent, immediate feedback from the market on how well or poorly they are doing than the Goliaths. When they get big enough to go public, they also get better feedback from stock prices. As we saw earlier, if a company has only one or two drugs in development, investor commitment and stock price will bear a much closer relationship to the success or failure of each drug than at a Goliath.

The free market, whether in the form of investment dollars or stock price, is a fairly neutral evaluator of companies and a disciplined allocator of capital. Investors who don’t make good bets most of the time go out of business. They rarely risk their capital or their reputations on personal relationships. They make it their business to know what’s going on at the companies they invest in and expect to see clear benchmarks of progress. When these are not met, they very quickly reduce or terminate funding, or sell their stock. Companies with projects that aren’t going anywhere quickly lose funding. Companies that can show progress draw more investment.

This means incentives for companies to work efficiently are appropriate. Good management and science are rewarded; poor management and science quickly lose support. Most start-ups and small firms also create appropriate internal incentives for good performance. Generally, they pay lower salaries than the Goliaths, but award bonuses based on the company’s ability to show progress and/or make stock options a significant part of compensation. That means everyone has incentives to help the company do well and no one has good reason to pursue research that looks like a dead end. Specialists and support staff have incentives to cooperate with each other and slackers are poorly tolerated.

Of course, money is not the primary motivating factor for some scientists. Many researchers are motivated by a strong desire to help people: They want to discover a better treatment or find a cure for a serious disease. Some are motivated by a desire to work in an environment where they can pursue their passions with a minimum of interference: They want the freedom to pursue new ideas, to be “in flow,” to create and discover without being micromanaged. Some want to work with a person or group that inspires them: They want to learn from a genius or mentor young scientists, they want to work in a collegial environment, or they want to collaborate with people whose talents complement their own. Some want to work for a company that tolerates unconventional personalities or methods: They do their best work at night, or solo, or with rock and roll blasting in the background. Small companies often give these scientists the autonomy to do what they want, how they want – as long as they are productive. That’s the bottom line.

Likewise, many managers are motivated by the desire to be a key contributor to a company’s success. Many prefer a challenging environment to a comfortable, predictable one. Some want to take risks, trying a new management strategy or approach. Some pride themselves on their ability to keep a diverse, temperamental group of geniuses working well together and communicating. Some scientist-managers want to feel like part of a team or keep close tabs on what’s going on in the lab. Many value the freedom to manage efficiently and change course quickly when a strategy isn’t working. Again, small companies offer these people opportunities they are not likely to find at a Goliath, even though Goliath might pay more.

As far as decentralized decision-making goes, small companies tend to be more collegial and less hierarchical, with ideas and concerns discussed informally among people at all levels. Often people wear several hats: a manager may also be a scientist who adds his ideas at meetings or works in the lab, and a scientist may take on some management duties, including explaining a project’s progress to investors. Even when small companies appear to have highly centralized decision-making, the lines of communication are much shorter. Scientists don’t have to wonder for long whether the CEO is a good listener: They’re probably talking with him often, so they can quickly judge whether their needs are being met and their concerns heard. Likewise, it’s hard for scientists to hide key information or a lack of progress from the CEO. This leads to “information symmetry,” another way of saying that in a 50-person firm, everyone knows everyone else and knows what they’re doing. Also, investors in start-ups may want to hear from the scientists, not just the managers – and that’s a great equalizer, even in nominally hierarchical firms.

Now let’s look at the Goliaths through the same lenses: prices, incentives and de-centralized decision-making.

We have already discussed the disjunction between stock price and the success or failure of individual drugs, decisions and people at the big firms. Big firms don’t have to disclose their progress until a drug reaches the human trials phase, and even then, public access to data may be poor. FDA approval is the next big public milestone, followed by the actual market performance of the drug, and savvy investors watch these closely. Still, when a company has dozens of drugs on the market and dozens more in development, the failure of one pharmaceutical in human trials is pretty much a blip on the stock market’s radar screen. Stock price trends over several years may tell investors a company is well-managed or in a slump, but that’s about it – it tells them little about particular individuals in management, except possibly the CEO. Meanwhile, the relative dearth of public information about these companies means their stock prices are more easily buffeted by rumors, speculation, and other factors beyond their control.

Internally, these companies usually pay very handsome salaries, but meager bonuses and no stock options. Inotherwords, salaries are not tied to company or individual performance. The scientist who discovers a blockbuster drug will certainly gain the esteem of his peers, but he is unlikely to get a bonus topping $25,000 or be holding stock options worth millions of dollars. He may get a salary increase, but his pay will remain only incrementally higher than that of other scientists with the same job description and experience. His reputation will soar within the company, but outside it he will probably remain obscure.

For some scientists, this may be enough – especially if their status wins them greater freedom to pursue new projects of their choosing. Without prices, however, companies do not have the tools they need to create appropriate financial incentives for scientists or managers.

This problem is aggravated by the “information asymmetry” that results from centralized decision-making in a big company. The head of R&D cannot possibly keep close tabs on the thousands of scientists and hundreds of projects she oversees. Some have recognized this and have tried decentralizing their organizations, breaking them up into divisions by disease or body system: There may be divisions for heart disease and cancer research, or divisions for drugs affecting the circulatory system and those acting on the nervous system.

By Dave Webster, with Katharine Webster
November 2006.

he truly listens to people at all levels.

“David is a fascinating person to work for and with. He knows how to get to the heart of a very complex problem very quickly. His comments are always thoughtful and thought-provoking. He values creative brainstorming. He is open-minded, always ready to question accepted wisdom. He truly listens to people at all levels of a company, which is why he can come up with solutions where others see only obstacles or are frustrated by blind spots. I highly recommend him as a colleague and problem-solver.”

Katharine Webster
Reporter, writer, and editor
July 4, 2011

Sanofi's labs are loosely organized and allow ideas to bubble up organically from bench scientists, Mr. Webster said.

After the French drug maker Aventis agreed over the weekend to accept a sweetened takeover offer from its national rival, Sanofi-Synthélabo, the clear winner in the strange and bitter battle is, oddly, the Swiss drug maker Novartis.

Yes, Daniel Vasella, the chairman and chief executive of Novartis, looked a little silly offering to bid for Aventis just as the management of Aventis was secretly cozying up to its former enemy. But the outlines of the Sanofi-Aventis merger led some analysts to think that Dr. Vasella had just avoided disaster. Indeed, the American depository receipts of Novartis rose 5 percent yesterday on news that Dr. Vasella had been left alone at the dance still clutching a corsage.

The reason for the concern among these analysts can be found deep in the announcement that both Aventis and Sanofi released yesterday. Under ''Main Terms of the Agreement,'' the companies agreed that the new management would be drawn equally from each company.

Eight members of the Aventis board and eight members of Sanofi's board will make up the new board, with Sanofi's chairman and chief executive, Jean-François Dehecq, running the combined company and casting the crucial 17th vote. Four management committees will have an equal number of members from each company, with two panels led by someone from Aventis and two by someone from Sanofi.


''Yes, it's a merger of equals,'' said Dr. Joelle Sissman, a Sanofi spokeswoman.

Many times over the last 20 years, pharmaceutical executives have announced ''mergers of equals'' that were supposed to create new drug powerhouses. The most recent were the chiefs of GlaxoWellcome and SmithKline Beecham, who announced in 2000 that their combination would create a drug-discovery ''king.''

Instead, GlaxoSmithKline's labs went through a three-year period of upheaval and chaos that is only now beginning to sort itself out. Productivity in the research labs plummeted, according to numerous prominent scientists who left the company. The cause of this turmoil has been attributed to the decision by top executives to divvy up the top jobs in the new company with the precision of two boys splitting a piece of chocolate cake.

Executives jockeyed for position for more than year, leading to enormous uncertainty. Committees were formed to create entirely new standard operating procedures because adopting one company's procedures would have been unfair to half of the company. Former scientists describe months of wrangling over whether clinical forms used the words ''sex'' or ''gender,'' ''white'' or ''Caucasian.''

''Every time there is a merger, all these decisions have to be made anew,'' said one former top GlaxoSmithKline scientist. ''You spend years fighting over nothing.''

The executive team at GlaxoSmithKline split the baby with a surgeon's precision, allowing the research organization's lifeblood to drain out on the operating table.

While Mr. Dehecq may yet avoid such a disaster, the early signs are not encouraging. First, there is the decision to split the company's boards and committees evenly. Second, French government officials have been so deeply involved in the negotiations that it is likely they will push the combined company to continue its Solomonic management process as cuts take place at sites in Germany and France.

Finally, although many researchers at the two companies speak French -- something of a plus -- the cultures of the two organizations could hardly be more different, said David Webster, president of the Webster Consulting Group.

Sanofi's labs are loosely organized and allow ideas to bubble up organically from bench scientists, Mr. Webster said. Aventis's labs, by contrast, are bureaucratic, hierarchical and spread over operations, a result of numerous mergers of equals that paralyzed scientific creativity, he said. Aventis's scientific productivity has been abysmal. If Sanofi were able to throw out Aventis's culture entirely, the future of the Sanofi-Aventis labs could be bright, Mr. Webster said.

''But since it's a merger of equals, I think there's going to be a huge culture clash and my forecast for the outcome isn't very bright,'' he said.


Delicate Balance Needed in Uniting Of Drug Giants
By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: April 27, 2004

i am so grateful to have u in my life...u r bringing peace to my soul, truly.

as am i to have u in mine...you are bringing joy and wisdom to mine <3

while evading the trap of fitting into a society that is obviously very sick.

We envision a vibrant movement made up of locally
based community groups and professionals in the
field, a movement that understands the importance of
language and telling stories and knowing our history, a
movement that has reverence for the human spirit and
understands the intertwined complexity of these things
we call mental health and wellness. We understand the
importance of economic justice, diversity and global
solidarity. We see the critical need for accepting,
even celebrating, mental diversity, while evading the
trap of fitting into a society that is obviously very sick.
Fundamentally, we recognize an urgency: if we are going
to shift the current paradigm, we need a movement that
has both the political savvy to understand how to fight
the system, and the tools to take care of each other as
the world gets even crazier.

draft, by Sascha Altman DuBrul.
august 22, 2012

Not even playing the guitar - just (fairly obviously) looking for attention.

abrod said...
The hipster invasion has already begun. There's already some scruffy hipster who plunks a guitar in his pajama pants some mornings outside the F train entrance on 1st ave. Not even playing the guitar - just (fairly obviously) looking for attention. Bet his parents back in Ohio don't even know that the $2500 rent they pay for his one-bedroom is helping destroy the neighborhood...

AUGUST 1, 2012 10:31 AM


Spike said...
@abrod -- sounds like you are describing Hippie Lou, who has to be in his 40's at least, unless there are two guitar strumming pj-wearing guys in the neighborhood? He's an interesting cat with quite the past. Say hi to him some time.

AUGUST 1, 2012 11:25 AM

abrod said...
@Spike-

I think this guy is younger than his 40s, and he's new to the area too as far as I can tell - I haven't seen this guy before. Only seems to pop up in the mornings on 1st ave between 2nd st and Houston.

Unless Hippie Lou has a multi-year migratory pattern maybe?

AUGUST 1, 2012 11:53 AM

ev grieve

hippie land

Once in a meadow there lived hippie Sue
Hippie Tony and hippie Jim lived there too
There sitting smoking was hippie Jack
Making joints from the buds in his hippie rucksack

There was Hippie Emma who cooked the meal
and hippie Ray who helped her peel
Hippie Sarah played all day on her guitar
toking on Smokey Blues magic cigar

They danced all night from the break of dawn
and lay in the sun in the early morn
They all swam naked in a nearby lake
after acid fuelled trips they would take

They believed in peace and stopping the war
They didn't know what all the fighting was for
Hippie Sue would sit hugging her favourite tree
Hippie Lou would sit making Jewelery

They would take all their wears to market to sell
From colourful robes to a painted shell
They lived in the meadow in a giant tee'pee
Young and naked, beautiful and free

They would dance and sing songs about the day
when freedom would come and war go away
News travelled far of this peaceful community
people came near and far all wanting to be free

As this village soon grew of people from near and far
something happened that was a little bizzare
People started to wonder what they were fighting for
and soon it became the end of war

This hippie meadow was full of different races
of hippie people from all different places
Hippie Lou taught people the meaning of how to live
Hippie Sue taught people the meaning of how to give

Hippie Jim taught people who didn't know how to share
Hippie Ray taught people who didn't know how to care
This was a beautiful sunny hippie paradise
A way of living together simple but nice

This place will still be forever there
Hippie Jim sitting waiting for stories to share
But you don't need a map just a hippie heart
You've known how to get there from the start!

by Rachel-erika Henderson · Mar 25, 2010

the current shortage is the result of short-sighted strategy by vaccine-makers.

Just months before Americans began clamoring for the last remaining flu shots, 12 million doses from last year's stockpile of a virtually identical vaccine were dumped in the trash as expired.

Now, as clinics around the country struggle to cope with one of the worst flu seasons in years, the shortage is likely to raise questions as to why flu vaccine is declared unfit at the end of each season when it might provide a safety net for the following year.

Since this summer, an estimated $120 million worth of last year's flu vaccine was destroyed. But except for the June 30 expiration date, they were identical to the current shots now in such short supply. Experts say that flu vaccine can lose potency over time, but it does not spoil like fruit.

To some health experts, those expired vials are beginning to look very appealing.

"By and large, the expiration dates that are put on drugs are very conservative. This vaccine quite possibly could have been used," said Dr. Larry Drew, director of the UCSF virology laboratory.

Flu shot manufacturers overestimated demand for their vaccines last year, producing a record 93 million doses. But the winter of 2002-03 yielded the third mild flu season in a row. People didn't seem to care much about flu shots.

Left with a surplus last year, the two vaccine-makers reduced production this year to 83 million.

David Webster, a Bethlehem, Pa., drug industry consultant, said the current shortage is the result of short-sighted strategy by vaccine-makers. Fearful of being stuck with another surplus of vaccine, as occurred last year, they eased off production this year.


"I think manufacturers bear the full blame for this shortage," he said.

Webster said that it would have been difficult for vaccine-makers to produce 10 million extra doses four years ago, when vaccine prices were $2 a dose. But prices since then have nearly quadrupled. Vaccine-makers have such a profit cushion now, he argues, that it would have been a good business decision to make the extra doses.

"The cost of producing that is sort of a drop in the bucket," he said. "Instead of shaving it as close as they could, it would have been wise for them to have produced 'shortage insurance' themselves .... It was a huge strategic blunder on their part."


12 million old flu shots thrown out last summer / Vaccine is now in short supply as contagion rages
Sabin Russell, Chronicle Medical Writer
Published 4:00 a.m., Saturday, December 13, 2003

a man who had directed on the rabies racket the penetrating light of scientific truth.

Dr. Webster’s Death Deplored
Research on Rabies Made Him a Benefactor of All Dogs and Their Owners.

We are quite certain that Dr. Leslie T. Webster never owned a show dog
and are inclined to think that he never had attended a dog show, yet
his sudden passing following a stroke this week robbed the purebred
and the mongrel alike of one of their greatest benefactors – a man who
had directed on the rabies racket the penetrating light of scientific
truth and who was finding his way through painstaking laboratory
research toward a really effective rabies vaccine.

There was a personal shock in the headline, “Dr. Leslie T. Webster
Dies:  Specialist in Rabies Field.”  We had been talking to his office
just before the holiday and learned that, recovered from an illness in
the spring, he expected to be back in his laboratory this month.  We
had planned to drop by to see whether work with ultra-violet radiation
to inactivate the rabies virus had reached the stage where a report on
it could be made public.  It was one of those calls which, through
pressure of other things, was put off until too late.

It was always a pleasure to see Dr. Webster.  There was always a
twinkle in his eye and a remarkable patience as he explained some of
the intricacies of his work to the untutored layman.  He spoke with a
bit of hesitation, seemingly a tiny impediment in speech, but he was
so thoroughly a master of his subject that he held his audience,
whether it was the lone layman or a gathering of fellow scientists or
groups of medical or veterinary men.

Our first contact with him came about five years ago.  We had plunged
into controversy growing out of the wide agitation for compulsory
vaccination to combat rabies, attributing much of the agitation to the
makers of the vaccines, and we had them buzzing around our ears like
angry hornets.  There was comparatively little scientific literature
dealing with the subject from disinterested sources and in that little
the name of Dr. Leslie T. Webster of the Institute for Medical
Research stood out.  He had read a paper before a Massachusetts
Medical Group in which he questioned many popular theories about
rabies.  We sought and obtained a chance to visit him at the
institute.

Members of the Institute, we learned, do not give interviews.  When
they have reached conclusions which they feel are important,
announcement is made of them through the Institute’s organ, The
Journal of Experimental Medicine.  Dr. Webster, however, was willing
to and did spend hours straightening out a man who was not after a
story but who wanted to know for his own guidance in future writing,
what was known about rabies and the most effective means of combating
it.  It took hours because Dr. Webster did not content himself with
going into the published material but in reviewing the tremendous
research he had undertaken, the checking of all experiments in medical
history, in which at least five animals had been used.  It showed how
inadequate most of these had been and how strangely rabies had been
neglected.

At that time Dr. Webster had completed exhaustive tests with
commercial vaccines which proved that those inactivated with phenol
failed to give immunity and those inactivated with chloroform provided
that immunity only if the injection was from two to five times that
prescribed for dogs per gram of body weight.  The tests were made on
mice but held true for dogs, as Dr. Webster pointed out, because
rabies is on of the diseases with the same reaction on all animals,
horses, cows, dogs, foxes, rodents, and men.  The fact that he had
proved conclusively that the vaccines which thousands of pet owners
were being forced by law in some States, a number of cities and many
localities to use on their pets was ineffective disturbed him but he
was unwilling to have it magnified.  As he properly pointed out, “Some
day the effective vaccine will be found and we don’t want to have to
overcome a prejudice that all vaccines are worthless.”

When the report with its indictment of the vaccines appeared, Dr.
Webster was much amused by the journalistic treatment.  The report, in
true scientific fashion, started with the recitation of the problem, a
description of the laboratory tests and arrived at the carefully
phrased conclusions – all completely irrefutable from a scientific
point of view.  Naturally to the newspaper man and his public, it was
the conclusion that carried the news.  Dr. Webster chuckled at what he
considered putting the cart before the horse and at his own lesson in
journalism – the telling of the what, when, where and why at the start
of the story.  To a degree he used the journalistic technique in his
own book, “Rabies,” the first comprehensive textbook on the disease,
but he never strayed far from the scientific form – all of its
conclusions were most carefully supported by exhibits and references.

It was following the publication of his book that Dr. Webster was
given the annual award of the Dog Writer’s Association for the “person
who, over a long period of time, has performed a meritorious work in
the field of dogs.”  He told us privately that few things had come to
him which gave him greater pleasure and the members of the association
were agreed that never had they made a happier choice of the recipient
of their medal.

One of the tragic aspects of Dr. Webster’s death is that he had been
working with promising results on a virus inactivated by ultra-violet
rays.  That work, incidentally, had an important bearing on results
accomplished by other Rockefeller Institute scientists with influenza
virus.  In this, however, as in his other researches, he had able
assistants who had worked with him and who can be expected to carry
on.  To them his methods, his personality and his hopes will
undoubtedly give special inspiration.


By Arthur Roland
New York Sun
July 16, 1943

Latisha Monique Thomas

On Friday, April 20, 2012. Survived by mother Elizabeth Thomas; grandmothers Barbara Hodge and Patricia Jenkins; and a host of other relatives and friends. Preceded in death by father Maurice A. Hodge and grandfather Maurice W. Hodge. Services Saturday, April 28, at Ebenezer Church of God, 7550 Buchanan St., Landover Hills, MD. Visitation 10 a.m. Service 11:30 a.m. Interment Resurrection Cemetery. Arrangements by J.B. JENKINS FUNERAL HOME, INC.

Published in The Washington Post on April 27, 2012

Marion Havas Webster

A retired NIH Budget Analyst, died at home on February 23, 2012. She did volunteer work at Sibley Hospital and Hillwood Estate Gardens. She is survived by her husband, Henry de Forest Webster. Her children are Christopher White Webster, Henry de Forest Webster II, Sally Ann Webster, David Leslie Webster and Steven George Webster. She has six grandchildren and many friends nearby.
A Memorial Service will be held at 2 p.m. on Sunday, March 4 at the Friendship Heights Village Community Center 4433 South Park Avenue. Chevy Chase MD, 20815.

Published in The Washington Post from February 28 to March 2, 2012

because i can't imagine there's a huge list of them who can accept the things you have to do to make yourself heard in new york city.

how sweet of you lou. i only saw the first part of yr msg while i was at work and wondered what the amazing msg was that you were gonna tell me about. i was so surprised to find that it was the msg i sent you!

i took a really big leap when i decided to leave and didn't know if there would be anything better on the other side of the chasm i leaped from, and it hasn't been easy, but i know i'm where i belong as strongly as i knew i wasn't where i belonged before. gratitude is important, but also courage, just the same as what you did and were prepared to do to find your own happiness.

what's interesting is that women i know who are younger, prettier, thinner are not doing as well as i am and are actually jealous of me- how strange is that? people don't understand that besides the gratitude, attitude is next important. when you're happy, everyone wants a piece of it and people can see that i'm happy. just got hit on again yesterday at my job. it always surprises me. and they're usually way younger than i am. unbelievable!

i've been learning to treat myself better than i ever have my whole life. everyone else always came first. now i buy myself fresh flowers once a week, get a pedicure with a sassy dark color, have beautiful lingerie in bold colors, treat myself to a completely frivolous pretty pair of shoes once in a while. i never used to indulge in such things. who knew a great pair of shoes would put a smile on my face all day long? and if it makes me feel pretty, then it's worth it. i've always been so practical, but now i temper it when possible.we're all responsible for our own happiness.

i've been sick with laryngitis all this wk & it drove me crazy not to be able to sing, but my voice is just strong enuf now to be able to do a 3 part harmony last night. that is so much fun when it fits right. so beautiful. i joined a bunch of bluegrassers for red river valley. not my style but i can do it. now that a bunch of ppl have heard me sing, they're getting interested in collaborating for a duet or playing backup for me. that's got me very excited. my fear is gone now and there's only joy. i found a great bunch of ppl to play with and we've become friends in less than a month since i started going.

just got my review at work today and got the maximum raise for my payscale. i wasn't sure that would happen, though i've always gotten excellent reviews consistently, because there's been so much turmoil in my life in the year since i came back to work full time after being sick and then leaving my husband, packing & moving, court dates, house sale, figuring out dating and social life, i've been more scatterbrained than usual but trader joe's where i work has been very flexible and forgiving when i forget what time i'm due in, or space out occasionally.

you're such a kind sweet man lou. i can't imagine that you're not inundated with women. perhaps you are. if you lived near me, i would love to hang out with you. i'm pretty content with the man i'm seeing, but it's too early to be thinking about anything other than having a good time and catching up on all the good stuff i was missing when i was married.

thank you for all your kind words and encouragement. it means a lot to me. how is my story encouraging to you? it seems to me that you have already been living your dream and sacrificing things and maybe relationships to hold onto it. how long have you been living the life you dreamed of? i thought it must be a while, but maybe it hasn't been all that long. how did your gig go, or did that happen yet? please tell me about it. i know what the life of a street busker is like, and it's full of sacrifices but full of rewards as well. i believe in the happiness index rather than money and things to define success. the people in costa rica have it right. but not everyone in this country would feel successful based on their definition. the things that most impress me about people are things that have no monetary value.

i hope that, if you haven't already, you find some wonderful woman who can accept the life you lead and encourage you to do what makes you happy, because i can't imagine there's a huge list of them who can accept the things you have to do to make yourself heard in new york city. a lot of people don't want to struggle and end up giving up their dreams in favor of comfort.

The outcome of all of this was a 'Lord of the Flies' kind of chaos.

At its birth in 2000, the executives who created GlaxoSmithKline crowed that the company would unleash a cabinetful of new medicines. ''We will be the kings of science and innovation,'' Dr. Jean-Pierre Garnier, the chief executive, said at the time.

Three years later, GlaxoSmithKline is still a long way from its coronation.

The company has introduced just three new medicines, only one of which it discovered. Indeed, nine top scientists who recently left Glaxo said they believe its laboratories' productivity was getting worse, not better. ''It's a disaster,'' said one of them, Dr. Peter G. Traber, who was the company's chief of clinical development until February.

What went wrong? According to Dr. Traber and others, the very thing that was supposed to bolster the labs' output -- the merger -- has instead hampered it.

If they are correct, GlaxoSmithKline's problems could have implications for the entire industry. Poor lab productivity is bedeviling almost every drug company. Across the industry, introductions of new drugs plummeted last year to 17 from a high of 53 in 1996, despite a near doubling in annual research spending, to $32 billion.


To survive the long drought at the lab, many executives have concluded that one company is better than two. The $400 billion worldwide pharmaceutical industry has rapidly consolidated; 38 major drug companies have merged since 1994. And at nearly every major merger announcement, executives said that lab synergies were a driving force behind the deals.

But many scientists say that if mergers are executives' cure for poor pipelines, the medicine is making the patient sicker. And they point to Glaxo, the world's second-largest pharmaceutical company, after Pfizer, as proof.

''The effect of mergers on research productivity is an issue that this industry has yet to deal with,'' said Dr. Traber, who left Glaxo to run the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, one of the nation's top centers of biomedical research. ''You save a bit of money, but it's disaster to the labs.''


David Webster, president of the Webster Consulting Group, which specializes in the drug industry, said that his research confirms Dr. Traber's conclusions. Mr. Webster noted that many of GlaxoSmithKline's top scientists left voluntarily shortly after the merger. A major reorganization in the midst of a merger, Mr. Webster said, increased the uncertainties for all and made even basic decisions difficult. ''The outcome of all of this was a 'Lord of the Flies' kind of chaos,'' he said.

Where Are All the New Drugs?
by Gardiner Harris

October 5, 2003

What really touched me is your statement that I helped in some small way to make you a person of conscience.

I am writing to tell you that you had a profound impact on my development as a sentient human being and a person of conscience, of caring.

I am prone to hyperbole, but I am not using it here.  *profound.*  I will do great things one day, and you will hear about them (and me), and when you do, I want you to know that you were the best thing that ever happened to me.

I can think and I can speak and I can articulate my thoughts, logically and provocatively, because of you.

You sacrificed selflessly to make me and others sentient beings, in the best sense of the word.
Most of the great literature I read in my life I read in your class.
You have much to be proud of, and I thank you.

Peace, hippie lou aka david


David, your timing could not have been better in sending such encouraging words. I really needed to be reminded that we teachers have made an impact for the good on those we attempt to teach.

What really touched me is your statement that I helped in some small way to make you a person of conscience, one who cares for his fellow travellers in life's journey.   It's messages like yours that mean so much more than any paycheck that the impersonal school system issues.  You are such a considerate young man in offering your thoughts on the impact I may have made on you and, I hope, your fellow chassmates.

I'm willing to bet that I don't have to wait to hear about the great things you have done with your life since we last saw one another.  Knowing you as I think I do from your days at Whitman, I expect that you have already achieved true greatness.  If you'd care to share, I'd love to know more details about your life these past few decades. (Just saying that makes me feel old.)

I still enjoy what I'm doing.   I occasionally get a chance to teach some of the great literature I loved teaching when you were in my class.  Needless to say, I don't miss grading all those compositions and research papers.  I do miss coaching forensics.  You guys on the forensic team were my best students and the ones I most miss.  We had some great times, didn't we?

I'll look forward to hearing from you.  And, yes, peace!

Our serendipitous encounter provided a puffy cloud-like companion to my mind.

Dear Hippie Lou,

Our serendipitous encounter provided a puffy cloud-like companion to my mind as I sauntered away into the sun.

1) Red is not your color.  It ages you unnecessarily.  Perhaps consider your previously natural dark brown with navy or metallic blue tips.
2) Pam seems to be a rare find.
3) Words fall gracefully onto paper from your fingers; however, if decide to turn this into a book, you need an editor.

Let us meet again soon.  I enjoyed our extended chat.

just wanted to take the time to say thank you obi wan... you always have really encouraging positive things to say to me... good or bad day... this padawan is grateful to have you as a guiding force.

i should treasure my gift.

the absolute highlight of my afternoon started in the bowels of the union square mta station…after fighting my way downstairs and onto the crowded uptown 6 platform, a short man appears before me; his eyes twinkling.

he smells slightly of alcohol, but it’s that smell when someone drinks and then covers it up with a breath mint or something.  he isn’t full board blasting, and shows no signs of inebriation.  ”can you play me some classic rock?  anything, anything.  don’t tell me what you’re playing, i’ll try to guess.”  such exuberance, how could i turn him down?

so trains are roaring in and out of the station…i wait for a lull, and then break into my old chestnut, the wind cries mary.  i figure that qualifies as classic rock, no?  there’s a signature part of the song, the part that goes doo doo doo, it’s an ascending hammer-on, and as soon as my newly made acquaintance hears it he says, “and the wind, it HOWLS…”

i said yeah, you got it bro.  the word mescaline is the next thing out of his mouth, he kept saying it, along with are you experienced.  ”that’s the album that song’s from, isn’t it?”  i said yeah, you got it bro.  he proceeds to describe with great delight (and relish) his experience listening to the album, i’m assuming while tripping on mescaline, but at this point it’s pure conjecture on my part.

“i was listening to the album, and i saw jimi hendrix with a headband.”  hmmm, i say to myself, jimi hendrix often wore a headband.  ”no bro,” he said, reading my mind, “this was before i ever saw a picture of him.”

so on we went, by now we’re on the 6 train headed uptown.  i learn my friend is from brockton ma, and he has a hard core boston accent.  nothing to sneeze at, because i learn later in our conversation that he’s been in the ny to the c since 1983.  which now that i write it, is the year a merman i should turn to be.

mass?  i proceed to tell him about my travels to amherst college at age 16, my love encounter with psychedelics and a bootleg tape of fire on the mountain, an experience that changed my life forever.
so my stop’s coming up, and i just had to know why he was in ny and what drew him here.  we got to the heart of the matter quickly.  ”in ny, i’m like an ant.  in any other city, i stick out.  no one cares here.”

back to the high watt smile.  train pulls in the station.  what’s your name, bro?  ”i’m george.”  hi george, i’m hippie lou.

he looked me straight in the eye.  ”i’d give anything to be able to play the guitar.”

as i was stepping off the train, i shouted back, you should learn, bro, it’s never too late.  it’s my standard answer, my standard encouragement, my standard reprise..  he’s 53, i thought to myself, but so what?

“it *is* too late.”

as the train pulled off, this remark exploded in my brain, my psyche, my consciousness.  shrapnel, grapeshot, god knows what else flying everywhere.

it hit me hard.  guitar is a difficult instrument.  i have been playing for 42 years, and am just now starting to really feel it, really connect with myself and my instrument to the point where something magical happens when i play for people.

i shouldn’t be so polyannish about the skill, the experience i have acquired.  it is such a privilege to pick an instrument up and make it sing.

i should treasure my gift. i am so lucky to be able to work on it and share it with others, to make their day a little brighter.

thank you george.  i’ll never forget you, or my tears as i write this.

you made me cry, mary.


march 2012.

In some way, most of my research involves discovering untruths or processes that produce untruths.

dr. david schriger.

the teacher opens the door, but you must enter alone.

what you don't want is generalized comments.

what you do want is a teacher that works with you on all your specific problems, one after the other.

the teacher opens the door, but you must enter alone.

then the teacher opens another door, and again, you enter alone.

imagine a long hallway of open doors with a satisfied student at the end of it, all smiles and master of the subject.

see the teacher, exhausted but happy.



by newton meyers.

you drink too much and rely on others for their sweat.

for some reason I don't believe that you did what you said you did as an economist.

if doing what you said you could do was so hard Im surprised you made it through to get your PHD

I thought you had more personal character strength.

you drink too much and rely on others for their sweat.


have a great day and a great time and a great life


regretfully


your thinking was not fresh.. since it was in agreement with my own..
it was derivative.

you are a surprise to me . I thought you had more realness