Cure for Hepatitis C: The Politics and Profits behind a Breakthrough

by Nomad

A breakthrough in curing a silent killer, Hepatitis C, should mean that patients will have a new lease on life. But unless they are extraordinarily wealthy or they  live in a state that expanded Medicaid in the wake of the Affordable Care Act, these people will be at the mercy of the profit-driven free market. So for most of the uninsured or under-insured Americans, it will mean no cure at all.

Good News 

Even for researchers who are loathe to use the word "cure," there's no question that the news is very good,

The Denver Post is reporting of a breakthrough drug for hepatitis C in clinical trials at the University of Colorado Hospital. This new anti-viral is being called the blockbuster cure for patients who have long had to endure debilitating treatment for this liver-destroying disease.

Astoundingly, Sovaldi, a daily-dose pill manufactured by California-based Gilead Sciences Inc., has cured about 90 percent of patients in only 12 weeks when used with older drugs, studies nationwide have found.

In other words, it's a very nearly the cure for a killer. Not life-long treatment like the HIV drug therapy, but an actual eradication of the affliction. 

A big big deal.

Silent Killer of the Baby Boomers
This is a disease that infects an estimated 150–200 million people around the world. In the US the majority of the estimated 3.2 million people with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) are baby boomer adults. Seventy-three percent of hepatitis C deaths were reported among those 45 to 64 years old.
For every 100 people who contract the virus, 75 will develop chronic infection. About 5 to 20 will develop cirrhosis over the next 20 to 30 years. Between 1 and 5 will die of cirrhosis and liver cancer. Meaning, more than 350 000 people die every year from hepatitis C-related liver diseases. The disease is found worldwide with some countries having chronic infection rates as high as 5% and above.

One of the particularly dangerous aspects of the disease is its insidious nature. Most of those infected with the virus do not know that they have it, which means they could easily be spreading it to others via exposure to blood—or, occasionally, sexual contact. The main mode of transmission in countries with infection rates above 5% is attributed to unsafe injections using contaminated equipment.

"In almost every country it is a significant public health problem, points out Charles Gore, president of the World Hepatitis Alliance, "and, in some, such as Egypt, which has 10% to 15% of its population living with hepatitis C, and Vietnam, where the prevalence of hepatitis B is 15% to 20%, it is simply overwhelming."

So curing this disease is unquestionably a great triumph for science. It's something that the researchers should be proud of. 

There is however one problem.

Now...The Bad News

Sovaldi was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last December, but it won't be cheap. Sovaldi costs $1,000 a day and that adds up to staggering $84,000 for a 12-week supply.

Flying the Flags: Is Support for a Hate Group Protected Free Speech?

by Nomad

A Boca Raton man flies the flags of the Confederacy and the KKK over his home. A recruitment sign along with a noose are also features in his front yard. Is this really free speech, protected by the Constitution or symbols meant to intimidate black Americans and other minorities?

Does freedom of speech include the freedom to demonstrate open support for a racist hate group? According to one west Boca Raton Florida man, it certainly does.  "Mr. Hayes" - the only name he would give-   hoisted both the KKK and confederate flag over his mobile home a couple weeks ago. He has also posted a sign recruiting new members.  

Hayes told  the reporter that he had moved to Florida from New York about four years ago.  Although the KKK has always had a violent history against blacks and other minorities, Hayes says he doesn't condone such acts. Nevertheless, he does think his right to free speech allows him to hang a noose in his front yard.

Sarah Palin vs. Albert Einstein

by Nomad

I saw Palin was criticizing Obama's dress sense the other day.  

“People are looking at Putin as one who wrestles bears and drills for oil,” she told Sean Hannity Monday night. “They look at our president as one who wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates.”

Victoria Woodhull: The Fascinating Story of America's First Female Presidential Candidate

by Nomad

Does the name Victoria Claflin Woodhull ring many bells? Probably not, but she was without argument one of the most talked-about women of the 19th century. Although something of an eccentric with a slightly unimpressive background, her biography, with its ups and downs, is a fascinating one. Her outspoken opinions about women's rights put her far ahead of her time.

  

Most of us think of the Victorian era as a time when women, like children of that time, generally were seen but not heard. A woman's place was in her home and any adventure outside of that realm could bring infamy.
Not altogether true.
Take the story of Victoria Woodhull.  As we shall see, her life contradicts that conventional wisdom. It's only surprising that Hollywood hasn't made a film about her tumultuous life; there's a lot of material there.

The Rise of A Radical

Her early life was hardly promising. Victoria Claflin and her sisters were raised by parents who used the girls as  "spiritualist mediums and faith healers in the family’s traveling medicine." They eventually married her off to Dr. Canning Woodhull when she was only 15. It must have come as a salvation to her since she stayed married to him for 11 years. ( As one source tells us, she would subsequently remarry three times and divorce twice more, in an age when divorce was unusual and socially disapproved.)

Eventually, she and her sister moved to New York City and became famous for giving financial advice from the spirit world to rich investors. In a twist of fate, despite her radical thought, her name was on the lips of many influential capitalists who took her stock tips.

Among her radical thoughts, Woodhull was most famous for being an early advocate for the right of women to vote. At heart, Woodhull was a social reformer. She was an advocate of free love- which despite its tantalizing name- actually only proposed marriage reforms. At that time, The Free Love movement's initial goal was to separate the state from sexual matters such as marriage, birth control, and adultery. These issues, proponents claimed, were personal matters and need not be legislated by others. Her opponents claimed she was simply promoting promiscuity and scandal.

That was to be expected, These were radical ideas for that time and even today we are still struggling with the same issues.

Comparing Justice: Breivik, Manning and Calley

by Nomad

Let's take a look at three very different crimes and three very different forms of justice. What can we learn from the comparisons between a mass murderer, a whistleblowing soldier and a soldier that committed war crimes? How does justice reflect a society's values and what does it say about a nation's values?

How a nation hands down justice and who it punishes and how it punishes reveals a lot about its values and its people. In fact, I would say that it's a defining benchmark. Where the courts are corrupt is where civilization ends. And where it is justice prevails is where fairness and civilized society flourishes. The law of the jungle was not after all intended to be a model for humanity.

As George Washington reminds us:

The administration of justice is the firmest pillar of government.

With this idea in mind, I thought I'd explore three very different cases to examine how justice was administered and what could be learned about how values change from country to country and over time. 

Breivik in Norway

In the summer of 2011, Anders Behring Breivik conducted a carefully-planned attack on government buildings in Oslo, Norway, which killed eight. While police sifted through the rubble looking for clues, Breivik traveled to camp on the island of Utøya. There he systematically hunted down and murdered 69 victims, mostly teenagers.

According to his 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, Breivik's apparent motive for his acts of terrorism revolved around his far-right militant ideology which included hatred for Islam, feminism, and Zionism.

The tone of the national response to the painful events was set by the prime minister Jens Stoltenberg in his address at the memorial service in Oslo cathedral two days after the tragedy:

"We are still shocked by what has happened, but we will never give up our values," Stoltenberg said. "Our response is more democracy, more openness, and more humanity." Norway, he suggested, would not seek vengeance as America had done after the 9/11 attacks." We will answer hatred with love," he said.