 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Frank Filz
|
| | | (...) the (...) For research of course one can't use pure cost/benefit analysis. There has to be risk and potential analysis also. Also, some amount of basic research must continue, so that you don't purely allocate money by ranking all the possible (...) (25 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | (...) No, the research dollars will be spent where there is the *perception* of best return. Further, it may be simply be the perception of the best short-term return. And just to add to that, it may involve more resources than a single company can (...) (25 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones
|
| | | | (...) be (...) for (...) rare (...) And that is exactly when the government finally starting funding AIDS research - when Nancy Reagan's friend Rock Hudson got AIDS. (25 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
