Re: [North Georgia Democrats] Unintended consequences?

Natasha Stark commented on W Lorraine Watkins's post in North Georgia Democrats. Natasha Stark 12:32pm Oct 2 :-D Did you know you're still being cited? You should google scholar yourself ;-) Comment History W Lorraine Watkins 12:24pm Oct 2 LOL I don' t have any idea what it was that got to the NEJ. I would probably be embarrassed to read it. A different time and a different life. Natasha I admire your passion and I know sincere dedication to the good and it is folks like you who will make the system honest and lead improvements. IMO we just have to let Ayn Rand moulder in her grave. Natasha Stark 12:15pm Oct 2 Seen. And I found your 69 journal article in the New England Journal of Medicine. Cool stuff. I look forward to reading it W Lorraine Watkins 12:07pm Oct 2 Natasha I am well aware of what the system is today. And how radically different it is. But new is not necessarily best. Your numbers are from my perspective meaningless without appropriate definitions and that can be debated endlessly. But IMO a very high percentage of what is called research is crap and proof of the corrupting influence of applying a business model to civil (inalienable) rights. Actually by my definition is mostly not even science. Natasha Stark 11:37am Oct 2 W Lorraine Watkins this is a general comment as I am not sure how long it has been since you were a PI, but one of the newer developments in the research space is indeed the development of marketable products. Universities are just now starting to ramp up technology, licensing, and commercialization offices to adjust to these changes. That being said, I didn't claim we were exceptional. I said we are the leader in research. And we are. That is a numerical, statistical fact that has been reported on ad nauseum by both NSF and NIH at every conference I've attended for the past 2 years. Sally Rockey just presented the updated numbers in August at the NCURA conference, and it is a frequent topic on her blog Rock Talk. Now, does that mean that we will continue to be the leader? Not if the government continues to cut research funding and we are losing ground. Which is precisely why NSF and NIH are on a major campaign to have research funding restored, and are putting out everything possible to get the public to pay attention to what is happening with research funding and how continuing to slash the dollars going to research ~ especially biomedical research ~ will eventually be the death of us (literally). At any rate, what was your research on? Do you have any pubs available in pubmed? Mark Gilstrap 11:29am Oct 2 I think there is a broad, responsible consensus for action to prevent a widespread Ebola outbreak in the US. View All Comments Original Post W Lorraine Watkins 10:00pm Oct 1 Unintended consequences? More information on the Liberian under treatment in Texas seems to suggest he knew full well he had been exposed to Ebola and actually quickly sought out medical attention telling them of his concern about Ebola. I would love to know if he bought his airline ticket before or after he had contact with the woman who died from it along with her brother in Liberia? All the Medical ptb are out there reassuring the US that the medical care for Ebola is so much better than in Africa, specifically Liberia. "it is a different disease in the US than in Africa" they say. It would be hardly surprising that Liberians who worry about contact would head for the airport. So do we have a moral obligation to bring Ebola victims here for life saving treatment? View Post on Facebook · Edit Email Settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.