Lawyers may seek judicial review of panel reviewing paroxetine

KP-PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%
Sat Mar 22 11:16:16 EST 2003


CLARIFICATION below.

"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:D%Yea.23310$S%3.1310852 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| "John H." <johnh at faraway.xxx> wrote in message
| news:UCUea.235$zU5.7108 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
| |
| | http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7390/618
| |
| | BMJ 2003;326:618 ( 22 March )
| |
| | News roundup
| |
| | Lawyers may seek judicial review of panel reviewing paroxetine
| | Abergavenny  Roger Dobson
| |
| |
| |
| | Lawyers acting for more than 4000 people who
| | allege side effects from the
| | antidepressant drug paroxetine (Seroxat) may
| | seek a judicial review over the
| | composition of a review panel set up to look
| | at the drug and other selective
| | serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).
| |
| | The lawyers say they are unhappy that some
| | of the committee members have
| | links with the drugs industry. It has been
| | claimed that some members of the
| | review team, which is drawn from the
| | Committee on Safety of Medicines, have
| | shares in GlaxoSmithKline, the maker
| | of paroxetine (Guardian 17 March: 1).
| |
| | ...
|
| [John, it's OK if you're 'angry' with me for using your post in my
| 'hard' way. Please Forgive me, if possible. kpc]

That dodn't come out right in my prior post. I was referring to doing
'difficult' stuff in the thread that John H. started, =not= [of
course] implying that my comments had anything to do with John. I
took the Coward's 'way' by not doing the work, up front, to get
things properly clarified. I Apologize, John.

I'm just working to demonstrate the Consequences inherent in
acquiescing to 'blindly'-automated TD E.I-minimization - to expose
the Falseness of the 'premise' of each person's 'getting-theirs' -
"and to hell with everyone else", depending upon who it is that's
standing in one's presence.

Truth is that, in such 'endeavor', to the degree of 'moving toward'
'self', inherent, one always 'closes the door' to one's own welfare -
because one's welfare derives in the group's welfare.

It's 'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization that instantiates the
Illusion inherent.

This Illusory stuff is the essence of "the 'beast', "Abstract
Ignorance" - the absence of understanding of how and why nervous
systems process information via 'blindly'-automated TD
E/I-minimization within nervous systems which, nevertheless, do
process information via 'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization.

John's post provides a concise example of groupwise instances - "us
vs. them" stuff.

It's just that I'm using John's example to discuss this 'difficult'
stuff that I have to accept - because I understand what's inherent in
my Choice - that I've no 'right' to be 'offended' if John is 'angry'
because I do.

See?

Go through the middle of what's 'difficult', instead of 'around' it,
and, when there's sufficient understanding the Illusory stuff just
'poofs!' outta-here.

I'm trying to 'teach' the "poof!" stuff - that it constitutes the
direct route, through which Himan interactive dynamics can become
win-win.

All the rest is 'just' intergenerationally-handed-down
'coersed-consensus' stuff - you know - 'fear' that's
'blindly'-automated in accord with 'rules' that were haphazardly
accumulated, and handed-down, Parent to Child, over the course of the
millenia.

Nobody's ever gone back to 'examine' and re-evaluate the worth of
such 'blindly'-handed-down 'rules' because they're, 'typically'
actively enforced, Parent-to-Child, so 'transgressing' with respect
to them 'blindly' and automatically precipitates 'aggression', in one
form or another.

That's why it's been 'taboo' to even 'examine' the 'rules'.
'Blindly'-automated 'survival' that's actually nothing more than a
'prison' in which Aliveness 'just' is 'flipped-off'.

It's some of what NDT is about - lifting folks up out of the Illusion
of the 'rules' being what matters.

What matters is folks' actually actively fostering Humanity's
Survival through an approace in which folks see the same-stuff within
each other, despite individually-unique experience.

It's all the same-stuff with experientially-'defined'
individually-unique 'meaning'-interfaces 'dropped' onto it.

You know - "Poof!"-yourself-Alive by, using the example John has
posted to see that it's Illogical to 'argue' about selling a drug
that negatively-impacts folks who use it.

Sellers and buyers, realize that there's Error, inherent, and Choose
to do that which Fixes the Error without hurting anybody.

The Error is what needs Fixing. It's not some stuff that 'must be
denied' - that 'must be perpetuated' - or through which one can 'get
rich' - all of this stuff is anti-Humanity's-Survival, and the more
folks pursue such, the more such pursuit elevates populations-wide TD
E/I - and the more it drags-down =all= of Humanity.

'Blindly'-automated TD E/I seeks 'self', while actually undermining
'self' in this way.

Over the millenia, Humanity has cycled in and out of such - it's what
underpins economic "recessions" and "depressions", and what
precipitates "War" - folks 'acquiesce' increasingly to
'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization, which results in
populations-wide TD E/I agumenting, until populations-wide "going
amygdalar" happens - and Savagery, in one form or another, 'poofs'
into being.

But when how and why it happens this way within nervous systems is
'understood' [when "biological mass" is created with respect to such]
the dynamics just 'go away'.

This stuff is what Jesus addressed when He said, "He who saves his
life loses it, but he who loses it, saves it."

Lose 'blindly'-automated 'moving toward' 'self' - gain Freedom of
Life.

Understand that the stuff of one's 'passion' derives in the
same-stuff as anyone else's 'passion'.

All that's necessary is understanding, not Killing - 'cause the rest
is just 'servo-mechanism' stuff.

Servos can do some stuff, but their 'way' is
relatively-statically-predefined - 'robotic' - not 'Alive'.

"Lose the 'servo'-stuff, gain Life."

I'm not saying it adequately. I Apologize.

I'm 'tired' and 'hungry' - and have Sorrow that I've got to work in
this 'solitary' way.

ken

| John's post provides an example of the Coward's 'way' by-committee
| [institutionalized Coward's 'way'].
|
| It's obvious that such constitutes 'moving toward' 'self' and
'moving
| away from' doing the work in acertaining Truth -
'blindly'-automated
| "volitional diminishing-returns decision" via 'blindly'-automated
TD
| E/I-minimization [AoK, Ap7].
|
| ken






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list