While it's a little off topic I will indulge this view.

First, 1 train of thought is that wealth makes heath with better diet and cleaner living standards and stress is the big one that leads to many diseases.

Second, it depends on how dangerous the experimental treatment is. The more dangerous the further down the economic scale gets tested. Down to the lowest being prisoners.

One thing about a capitalist society is we are judged first on what we do for a living. Almost every first question when introductions are done is my name is, then it's "so what do you do?" which tells the group your worth. Then we go to possessions. "What do you drive?" "OOhhh, is that the new Ipad?" or how about high school where if you're not wearing levis and nikes your a poor pariah to be forever shunned. This teaches the lower class generation that we are NOT EQUAL and to be a part of this group I will need to have Nikes and Levis and be able to talk about playing the newest video game or movie. We created the society and only want to put band-aids all over the wounds and never fix the disease.

Doesn't anybody ever wonder why the richest country has the most amount of prisoners per capita?

We also reward pathological liars by putting them into office and people that tell the truth are labelled subversive or dangerous or we are told that they are the liars. WTF is with that?

How many rich people are drug addicts in % compared to poor people? Why do they do it? Mostly because they are bored are used to everything and want to feel anything or just to relieve stress that comes with their high paid jobs. 

I do agree with this one though.

Yes I too think people should be judged by what they do. But not by their jobs. They should be judged by what they do with their lives. Meaning I look at where they started and where they are at this moment in time.

In my eyes rich person who was given money and is running multi milion business is nothing compared to a guy who was born in slums and was able to crawl out of the hole to middle class. 

As I stated before there something rotten......

Precisely, we in the 1st world live in societies that are engineered by the rich and famous, and those they see as being below their station are ostracised, snubbed and given little opportunity to compete socially or in the workplace.  However, while the poorest of society may steal to feed and clothe themselves, it is often the spoiled rich kids who are pirating and stealing the luxury items to make their 'play' dollars go even further.  Poor kids generally don't have computers to pirate music or movies, and most often they live in neighbourhoods where stores trading in luxury goods simply do not exist.  Again, it comes back to the greed of the huge corporations and the rich... they whine about theft yet their own social engineering contributes largely towards it.

Anecdotal nonsense.

More nonsense. You need to read responsible literature about how stringently honest testing done in hospitals is, and how protocols are examined before libeling decent, caring and honest researchers.

Yes on paper codes are very stringent.

I have only this to say to your response 

http://www.healthiertalk.com/pills-kill-1995

and quote from third pharagraph

How can this happen? I know that many of you assume that the government ensures the safety of all the drugs that hit the market. And they do . . . but only to a point.

Another quote from same article

It’s so serious that Merck, the drug’s maker, has put aside a $48 million war chest in anticipation of lawsuits.

Truth is there is a lot of money in medicine and pharmaceutical companies want you to be sick because that enables them to sell even more pills.

I cannot find the link at the moment but I will try to sum it up the best as I can,

In my country there is a painkiller pill called Leakdol. You don't need prescription for this particular "medicine". One of substances (additives) that this drug is made of is proven and was proven a while ago to cause cancer. That drug was tested extensively and approved by government about 15 years ago and just until recently general public didn't know about above stated fact. Lekadol is still in pharmacies for folk to buy. 

Not so funny thing is that people who run the company involved made some of the biggest donations to political party that was in power at that time.

That implication should be proven before being made as accusation by innuendo. If true, then criminal and civil penalties should be meted out by a court.

When you find an instance of abuse of the protocols, bring it up immediately to the proper authorities. This thread is about ISP's.

Ya I realize that everything you disagree with is nonsense or wacko and I suppose responsible literature must be Doc and Opra approved or it to is nonsense.

American Drug Industry Uses the Poor as Human Guinea Pigs

Over 40,000 human guinea pigs participate in drug testing experiments run by huge pharmaceutical companies in the United States annually. Most of these people are poor and “down-and-outers,” who need the money drug testing provides.

U.S. to begin using prison inmates for medical experiments

A federal panel of medical advisers has recommended that the government loosen restrictions limiting the testing of experimental pharmaceuticals on prisoners. The restrictions were put in place in the 1970s after prisoner abuses were discovered.

Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/019970.html#ixzz1Rl1SQZrR

Medical Panel Recommends Drug Testing at Prisons

Almost all drug testing at prisons was discontinued in the 1970s following revelations of medical maltreatment during pharmaceutical trials. However, the latest proposal recommends the resumption of testing in those cases where experimental medications could help the participants. Such research has the potential to benefit not only the prisoners, but also the general population, the advisers note.

Testing a wide range of pharmaceutical products on inmates was common until the early 1970s, when horrific practices involving testing both inside and outside of the prison environment began to surface.

http://health.dailynewscentral.com/content/view/2381/62

...and that's just your rosy little circle. Take a look at the other capitalist societies prisoners and trading in body parts for a price.

A big trust issues with ISPs are that many are former or current telcos as well as cable providers and it's their wet dream to be able to eventually tier charges and fees as part of internet service.  Joining them with movie and recording studios and letting them legislate remedies to hacking is a serious conflict of interest and leverages their semi-monopoly standings unfairly against consumers.

Open your cell phone or cable bill (unless you use VOIP) and tell me you want your internet usage to morph into that.  Then precede that with having established they can serve as a legislature and punitive authority for internet users.

By bringing up my extreme example I'm just pointing out that people on power will exploit little folk. The fact is that Media producers and ISP are not the same company. As far as I read so far ISP warnings aren't sanctioned by goverment and/or law either.

Therefore I think that media companies want to circumvent or take the law in their own hands.

Why will ISP go with the scheme. In my opinion CEOs of Media companies and ISP got together for a barbecue and some large sums were promised to CEOs of ISPs. 

I do agree that piracy is stealing and It shouldn't happen but shouldn't we "treat disease" rather than we are "treating symptoms". 

I gave my 2 suggestions.

Try before you buy and reasonable prices. 

I agree with starkers who said that prices are set to maximum what market can bear. 

EDIT: Someone could see it as tapping the phone and then sharing what they found out with 3 rd party.

Rupert Murdoch and News of the World scandal comes to my mind.

myfist0: This thread is about ISP's. If you persist in making personal comments and straying so far from the OT, I will edit your objectionable comments from this thread. 

Strict protocols govern any human testing. I wrote that, and your references confirm that. That's my last comment on this thread about that... and your last comment will be your last if you persist in your usual baiting.

Further: If you are quoting someone else, use quotation marks.

Sinperium
reply 69
A big trust issues with ISPs are that many are former or current telcos as well as cable providers and it's their wet dream to be able to eventually tier charges and fees as part of internet service.  Joining them with movie and recording studios and letting them legislate remedies to hacking is a serious conflict of interest and leverages their semi-monopoly standings unfairly against consumers.

Open your cell phone or cable bill (unless you use VOIP) and tell me you want your internet usage to morph into that.  Then precede that with having established they can serve as a legislature and punitive authority for internet users.


I have written about this as well (Net Neutrality). It applies to non-wireless services (the FCC current regulations). Unfortunately, wireless services are excluded from that and I've also written about "capping". I think you'll find my feelings are no different from yours.

This will not change without the collapse of capitalism.

More likely will go the route retailers use for shoplifting. Shoplifting has been around since the first shops and could also not be stopped. This lead the retailers to add a curtain percentage on to all the items in the store so that even if nobody stole that product it also had it price raised.

Hey Doc - Permission to copy your first post over to another forum I frequent?

Indeed, inflation does that, as does the cost of guarding from theft.

No one seems to object to cameras and security guards in stores to protect the merchants from thieves, do they? Yet somehow, that seems to be unusual or outrageous, somehow, if a merchant chooses to sell his goods on the internet.

Why should that be? Aren't they entitled to protection as well?

If this theft didn't exist, the need for policing wouldn't be necessary (apart from monitoring mandatory under the Patriot Act). As it is, it does and this theft impacts revenues driving taxes and prices higher... just like in your example, myfist0. We all bear the brunt of that. I'd think you'd object to that.

Well I would more put it in an ISP rules point of view like this...

I walk into a store and after some time a guard pulls me into a room and takes off my nice shoes and accuses me of stealing them and if I want to prove they are my shoes I can pay $35 and walk home in my socks while some independent body (that I am sure I have no say in who that body is, probably the company that makes the shoes) reviews my case.