Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 33

Thread: Cancer research versus health care lobbing expenditires

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Misplaced . . .
    Posts
    3,607

    Cancer research versus health care lobbing expenditires

    More fun with real numbers...

    From

    http://www.academia.edu/309237/Trend...ancer_research

    We have estimated that in 2004/2005 the global spend on cancer research was 14,030 million euros, with the USA, dominated by the NCI (c. 83%) accounting for the largest absolute spend.
    OK, go to the NCI website:

    http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/f...search-funding

    In recent years, NCIís budget has been relatively flat, averaging approximately $4.9 billion per year over the past 6 years.
    So, if they're 83 percent of the total, that makes $5.9 billion the total amount spent in the U.S. on cancer research.

    Finally, from

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbyin..._United_States

    see the chart "A growing billion dollar business"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbyin...ollar_business

    It appears that lobbying in the health care industry, outside political campaign contributions, totals 4.2 billion.

    Don't care what party you belong to, this is kinda disgraceful...If the lobbyists give another one billion for in campaign contributions, we in the U.S. spend just about as much on lobbying as on cancer research. Just as a BTW, Hillary Clinton got a lot as a U.S. Senator -- second highest, it was reported -- no one, left or right, seems immune.

    The lobbying money has to come from somewhere, so these "lobbying health care dollars" aren't available for doing any solving or curing work...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    280

    Cancer Research

    Charles, do you realize how many people would be out of work if they found a cure for cancer? Think about it.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    977
    You are exactly right Eddie, and other issues fall into the same thing. Why do you suppose we do nothing to secure our southern border, knowing full well that is where most illegal drugs come from. If there was no illegal drugs, addicts, arrests, rehab, trials, incarcerations, how many people would be out of work?

    Why do you suppose that in Europe, autos over there get great mileage, towards 80 MPG. It has been done here a few times, and each time the "inventor" disappeared. So if all the vehicles in the US doubled in MPG, think of all the lost revenue from the less sales and road tax.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    14

    Proof of statement

    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Shaw View Post

    Why do you suppose that in Europe, autos over there get great mileage, towards 80 MPG. It has been done here a few times, and each time the "inventor" disappeared. So if all the vehicles in the US doubled in MPG, think of all the lost revenue from the less sales and road tax.
    I for one, would like to see the proof of this statement.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,510

    Cancer research versuss health car lobbing exp

    your wrong
    Lets kill cancer and put those people out of work then lets find cures for other diseases like Parkinson, Dementia spinal Biffeda,
    Cerebal Paulsy, etc etc . There will be plenty of work for other needed cures.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Misplaced . . .
    Posts
    3,607
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie Harren View Post
    Charles, do you realize how many people would be out of work if they found a cure for cancer? Think about it.
    Na, About the same time, they'll stop illegal immigrants. Then there will be all those jobs that no one else will take available. In fact, South Carolina just went through that.

    Of course to be fair, it would be the lobbyists who got those thankless jobs, & the victorious cancer researchers would get the cushy lobbyist's jobs. But life don't work out that way.

    Still... I think I know the answer to Fermi's Paradox (look it up). The reason there is no evidence of other intelligent life in the universe is about 200 years after a species learns how to use radio transmission for communication, that species self-destructs. That give us only around 50 more years to worry about. So run up the debt & leave the lights on.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,033
    Quote Originally Posted by msorwan1975 View Post
    I for one, would like to see the proof of this statement.
    It's pure bunk, Urban Legend mixed with ignorance (and I happen to actually have a relative who was purportedly "offed" for "inventing a better motor" for real....... he IS really dead too, from mysterious causes ..... LOL )

    There is no "new tech," there is no "goobermint suppression" and most of all there just AINT NO MAGIC!

    Physics is physicks is fizzix

    al

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    977
    I frequent other forums, one in particular is one where there are some extremely knowledgable people. and, it has many people that participate from other countries. So I sent a PM to one member that lives in Germany, and posed this very question about vehicles getting 80MPG. He knows the issue of comparing MPG to what they use ther, he is from here originally. His response was "absolutely". That many vehicles get that and more.

    So, take a step back, and think about all the technology we have, and why we can't make this happen? I doubt I can get "proof", but tell me why we can't do this. And, why don't we take full advantage of all the natural gas we have, and convert our vehicles to CNG? If it is such abundance as we hear, it's a simple thing to do, many stationary generators are fueled by NG, I've overseen jobs where many have been installed, and it's easy.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    2,378
    Remember that the US gallon is smaller in volume than the European one, so 80 mpg there would equate to around 67 mpg Stateside.

    On the other hand, VW has run the prototype of a hybrid diesel city car that they expect will use 1 litre per 100 kilometers (235 US mpg).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Shaw View Post
    I frequent other forums, one in particular is one where there are some extremely knowledgable people. and, it has many people that participate from other countries. So I sent a PM to one member that lives in Germany, and posed this very question about vehicles getting 80MPG. He knows the issue of comparing MPG to what they use ther, he is from here originally. His response was "absolutely". That many vehicles get that and more.

    So, take a step back, and think about all the technology we have, and why we can't make this happen? I doubt I can get "proof", but tell me why we can't do this. And, why don't we take full advantage of all the natural gas we have, and convert our vehicles to CNG? If it is such abundance as we hear, it's a simple thing to do, many stationary generators are fueled by NG, I've overseen jobs where many have been installed, and it's easy.
    "Think about it?"

    THINK about it????

    I've been stepping back and thinking about this for 35yrs........ I'm a gearhead, not only do I read about this stuff but I spend money on it, cars that is, motors........ and there IS NO MAGIC!

    Nor suppression.

    "Proof" is simple, but it takes some reading. And a basic understanding of things mechanical.

    We in America are required to meet a bunch of safety and EPA regulations that other countries don't have to adhere to, our cars are heavier. That's IT. It's simple power-to-weight ratios..........And we require more in a car, there is very little market for stripped tiny cars here.

    Get netflix, watch 'Top Gear' and you can watch Europeans drive and test European cars all day long. That doesn't mean that they understand mechanical things, they don't, but they do DRIVE those mythical cars, and talk about them. They test them, and they aren't boring top watch. And none of them get any better milage over there than anywhere else all things being equal (They don't have to drink corn gas)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Misplaced . . .
    Posts
    3,607
    Well Al, they (the Top Gear presenters) have changed their minds on the turbo diesels over the past few years. They're lauded now. And BMW is finally marketing a decent diesel in the States starting next year. 32 city/45 highway. But I don't buy new cars & let them depreciate as I sleep.

    http://www.autoweek.com/article/2013...NEWS/130809933

    & if you'll take less poop than the BMW, you can get higher milage. If only they were sold in the States...

    I still think hydrogen is the answer, but as you've pointed out, hydrogen filling stations are a ways away -- beyond my lifetime.

    Edit:

    Actually, ceramic engines would help a lot. What's the theoretical & practical limits with a steel/aluminum engine, around 22% efficient?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...rgy_efficiency
    Last edited by Charles E; 10-19-2013 at 10:21 PM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,119
    I have averaged over 50 mpg with my 2006 VW Golf TDI for the past several years. I wish the 70+ mpg Polo were available in the US.

    http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...sel-quick-spin

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,033
    I don't believe hydrogen will ever be the answer...... hydrogen isn't a found "fuel," it's simply a carrier. You can't mine hydrogen, you must first "uncombine it" from something it's bound up in, like water...... only in deep space can you go around scooping up hydrogen. And "uncombining" hydrogen, breaking it loose to use as "fuel" takes more fuel than it can give back (simple fizzicks again ) Hydrogen "fuel cells" and such aren't majick, they're just ba'ddries.

    I know, I know, the silly people are all impressed that when you use it the byproduct is WATER!

    Whee..... to a physicist or a chemist or an engineer that's like "DUHH!!! "WHAT ELSE would you expect?""

    It's like the stupid "electric car" conundrum. Ya' first gots ta' MAKE the 'lectric, then you gots to STORE the 'lectric, then ya' turn around and reuse it....... handy, but not cost-effective for cars. (And please don't jive me about "solar" 'lectric.....) but anyway, again, the stupid people think 'lectric is "green" because the byproduct of "using it" is........ "nothing!" (this isn't at all true, but there's always a market for stupid )

    And it LOOKS like "nothing"

    To most of the voting populace, "looks like nothing" is enough

    Electricity isn't a fuel, it's just an extra step.

    Hydrogen, the same.

    al

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,033
    Quote Originally Posted by mks View Post
    I have averaged over 50 mpg with my 2006 VW Golf TDI for the past several years. I wish the 70+ mpg Polo were available in the US.

    http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...sel-quick-spin
    We got 50mpg out of the old Volkswagen loafs back in the 80's...... with a half dozen people and two-three dawgs aboard

    And driving one was like space travel

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    ONTARIO CANADA
    Posts
    861
    From what I understand cars over in Europe get very high mileage, I know when I was over there I was amazed at the mileage. Was then told that because of the pollution controls here, that mileage was not going to happen.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •