Subject:
|
Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 May 2000 23:33:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
854 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> Of course in the general sense, since the people who are contributing some of
> the money to be used for research aren't perfectly knowledgeable, there will • be
> a certain amount of money designated for things based on the perceived need • for
> a solution (for example, if someone close to Bill Gates was struck by some • rare
> and unusual disease, one would might find that research of that disease was
> well funded just because the person Bill is close to is important to him, and
> Bill has a lot of money to throw around).
And that is exactly when the government finally starting funding AIDS research
- when Nancy Reagan's friend Rock Hudson got AIDS.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
228 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
