The totally off-topic thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem with such research is that someone has to be first. If it works then great, but if it doesn't work and there are problems they the person may be worse but, learning what happens benefits everyone after them.
Agreed. Would you want to be the guinea pig?
 
Need help does anyone know about the tax Deductibility of income insurance but specifically through superannuation ?

I am told no and yes so very confused
 
Except you're not the guinea pig. The guinea pig, (and the rat, and the horse it seems) has already had its turn and the research has now moved onto humans.
Would you want to be the guinea pig? I don't.
 
Need help does anyone know about the tax Deductibility of income insurance but specifically through superannuation ?

I am told no and yes so very confused

No if its through your super. This is because your super fund files its own tax return. Any costs relating to the operation of the super fund including expenses like insurance is part of the super entity and super income that is taxed is net of these expenses.
 
Would you want to be the guinea pig? I don't.

Well part of my current role is to provide information on a small element of research to allow someone to do a risk/benefit analysis. (often I do AFF when procastinating on these reports as they are boring as Bat droppings - like now) On the whole, the bit I see seems to be controlled pretty well. The HREC is supposed to be independent so I don't have knowledge of their processes. But the information I provide outlines the benefit required ranging from a general increase in knowledge for very low risk, upto life saving for at the upper end of the risk range. The patients are fully informed of the risk, and for my area I provide suggested risk wording with comparison to other risk factors. I also see some research that is about providing treatments targetted to the individual patient, or to providing treatments that are not otherwise available due to cost but can save lives. As such I would have no problem with participating in the research if I needed it, after carefully considering the risk statement.

But you're still missing the point. Before treatments/research projects get to humans, they have already been tested on animals, like guinea pigs.
 
Australia's highest-earning Velocity Frequent Flyer credit card: Offer expires: 21 Jan 2025
- Earn 60,000 bonus Velocity Points
- Get unlimited Virgin Australia Lounge access
- Enjoy a complimentary return Virgin Australia domestic flight each year

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Man, the Melania Trump Memes are coming thick and fast.
Seems she stole Seinfeld's pirate shirt now. :lol:
 
But you're still missing the point. Before treatments/research projects get to humans, they have already been tested on animals, like guinea pigs.
Not missing the point.

We don't know much about stem cell research and testing on guinea pigs doesn't make me any more confident.

I have been taking various versions of new medication the past 30 years. Immune suppresants. No one really knows long term side effects as no one has been on any of the medication for more than 3-4 years. Hope I don't have issues later in life.

Mum was on some experimental medicine in the 90's related to rheumatoid arthritis and hormones. Didn't do much for her so she stopped taking it.

Wonder cures don't work for everyone.
 
Not missing the point.

We don't know much about stem cell research and testing on guinea pigs doesn't make me any more confident.

I have been taking various versions of new medication the past 30 years. Immune suppresants. No one really knows long term side effects as no one has been on any of the medication for more than 3-4 years. Hope I don't have issues later in life.

Mum was on some experimental medicine in the 90's related to rheumatoid arthritis and hormones. Didn't do much for her so she stopped taking it.

Wonder cures don't work for everyone.

Umm, we know that it is safe enough to use on humans. Strangely enough the only way to know if it'll help people is to actually give it to them.
Your experience in the 1990s is irrelevant to effectiveness of an entirely different treatment now.
I guess that sciencey black magic stuff is far too hard to understand. Not really surprised since opinion is clearly vastly better than evidence based science.
 
Last edited:
Again WHOLE of FUEL CYCLE. Some small operational matter does not represent the whole fuel cycle - the cost of all that concrete and construction, etc. etc. etc. Besides operationally the snowy system only needs to pump water back when there is a lack of rainfall. They cannot possibly do that all the time.

A true Spock-like statement - CORRECT - they do not do it 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

Actually they do it nearly every day of the week and 52 weeks of the year for a number of hours a day generally between 1am and 4.30am (from memory - I knew I shouldn't have tossed out that presentation).

With all the rain (and snow) recently this is their current generation (out of total generation capacity of 3,950MW):

21 July
18:15 315 MW
18:30 320 MW
18:50 67 MW - wholesale price must be dropping off rapidly. Coal and gas are virtually unchanged and wind has only gone up by 20.
19:05 66 MW

However they pump it back up once the off-peak wholesale price hits a trigger level and they start to ease in the pumping station as the price falls further until it is pumping at 80-85% (from memory) capacity. I asked about why not higher - "Off-peak low-price goes from many hours over night and running at too high a capacity risks higher break-down/maintenance costs. If off-peak price really plummets then we temporarily raise capacity higher to maximise our earnings. Another constraint is the capacity of the reservoir and how low we can run it without causing operational issues to arise."

One of the not-so-public details in a presentation I was given as a fund manager by them back in the 2000s.

If they waited solely for rain then their output would be a fraction. Then while it is cold enough (aka snow/ice) there is minimal flow.

They are limited to where they can store the water down-mountain - so only one of the 9 hydro power stations can do this. It can account for over 95% of all power generated in a typical year with average rainfall (what NSW Treasury's co-presentation said).

The clue is given by the pumping stations:
Pumping Stations • Snowy Hydro

The one used for Tumut 3 pumps nearly 300 cubic metres (or tonnes) PER SECOND - back up the mountain. That is what chews through the La Trobe Valley brown coal-fired electricity.

The other one I don't believe is used for pumping back up for peak generation.

Try to find any mention of the use of brown coal-fired electricity used to pump the water back up-mountain daily to generate the Snowy's power - harder to find than hen's teeth!

Best I could come across is in wikipedia...
Tumut 3 Power Station

Tumut 3 Power Station is the first pumped storage hydroelectric power station in Australia.[SUP][7][/SUP] Pump-storage schemes use off-peak energy to pump water to a reservoir on a higher level. This water then passes through turbines to generate electricity when prices are higher.[SUP][8][/SUP] The sole powerhouse is located above ground, approximately 1,800 metres (5,900 ft) below Talbingo Dam.[SUP][7]

[/SUP]
 
Last edited:
Umm, we know that it is safe enough to use on humans. Strangely enough the only way to know if it'll help people is to actually give it to them.
Your experience in the 1990s is irrelevant to effectiveness of an entirely different treatment now.
I guess that sciencey black magic stuff is far too hard to understand. Not really surprised since opinion is clearly vastly better than evidence based science.


Game, set and match - a truly unplayable serve!

But I seem to recall some black science mumbo jumbo (often paid for by the industry bodies themselves) saying that all of the following had NO harmful side-affects on living people:
  • Asbestos
  • Smoking
  • 245T
  • 245DT
  • Thalidomide
  • Aluminium
  • Lead
  • Fenfluramine/phentermine (Fen-Phen) - After 24 years on the market - It is estimated that as many as 6.5 million people took it to help fight obesity. After consumers began experiencing heart disease and other pulmonary problems, the FDA set the recall in motion. American Lawyer reported that more than 50,000 Fen-Phen victims have filed suits against Fen-Phen’s maker Wyeth, and legal expenses combined with awards may have exceeded $21 billion.
  • Diethylstilbestrol (DES) - It was not until 1971 before it was connected to a rare tumor that kept appearing in the daughters of women who had taken it.
  • Cerivastatin (Baycol) - Baycol, prescribed to patients as a treatment for high cholesterol, is reportedly responsible for more than 100,000 deaths and about as many lawsuits.
  • Rofecoxib (Vioxx) 5 years on the market - Vioxx, prescribed to more than 20 million people as a pain reliever for arthritis, was found to be responsible for increased risk of heart attack and stroke. Both Merck and the FDA were roundly criticized for ignoring evidence of the dangers of Vioxx before its eventual recall.
  • Valdecoxib (Bextra) - 1 year on the market - Pharmacia & UpJohn Company was fined $1.195 billion, in addition to legal awards, after admitting to criminal wrongdoing, specifically with ‘intent to defraud or mislead’ in relation to the promotion of the drug.
  • Troglitazone (Rezulin) - 1 year on the market - Rezulin, an anti-diabetic and anti-inflammatory drug, was eventually found to be causally connected with hepatitis.
  • Able Laboratories Generic Prescription Drugs - Some drugs were found to be too potent; others not potent enough. Moreover, four of its managers were found to have fraudulently distributed misbranded and adulterated drugs.
  • Terfenadine (Seldane) - 13 years on the market - The FDA sought a recall from the manufacturer after cases of cardiac arrhythmia (abnormal electrical activity in the heart) appeared in patients taking Seldane with other drugs. The recall is notable mostly for its scale; more than 100 million patients worldwide used Terfenandine as of 1990.
  • Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) - over 60 years on the market - For decades it was used for everything from dieting to cold medication to treatment of psychological disorders, existing in a kind of limbo where it was neither banned nor fully endorsed. That is, until an analysis by Yale University in 2000 recognized its connection with cardiac events and stroke, particularly in women.
  • Mibefradil (Posicor) - In only one year on the market, Posicor was linked to 123 deaths. Considered relatively safe when taken alone, Posicor became potentially deadly when combined with any of 25 different drugs. The large number of deaths are troublesome considering that the drug was prescribed to no more than 200,000 people worldwide in the space of one year, a relatively small number. Posicor is on this list for stimulating debate surrounding policies encouraging the FDA to hasten the approval of certain drugs. It is often cited as a strong example of what can go wrong when drugs are rushed to market.

This list is a bit out-of date. (Don't mention the Statins...)
 
Sorry but smoking and asbestos don't belong on the list.
I made a presentation to a RPAH Grand Rounds on asbestos.It has been used by man for ~ 4500 years.Disease from Asbestos was first described by Pliny the Younger in the first century AD.
Came into industrial use after 1862 when Canadian miners showed it off in the UK.Disease was noted in the early 1900s and Asbestosis first used as a diagnosis in 1924.By the 1930's it's significance in causing malignancies well known and calls for it's banning commenced.It was Industry and Governments that successfully fought these demands not medical science.
Of interest asbestos workers in North America were not able to be insured by some companies in 1918.Canada only stopped mining asbestos in 2011.
Asbestos fibres also occur naturally in air.California and Noumea have both had mesotheliomas from natural occurrence-in California it has been shown the rate of mesothelioma increases the closer to known outcrops of asbestos containing rocks you live.Studies in Antarctica suggest asbestos has been in the air for ~ 10000 years.

To smoking.Well recognised as a cause of cancer in the 1940s and by the early 50s proven beyond doubt.Calls for it's banning stem from then.Real science was united.

And do tell us about statins.
 
Umm, we know that it is safe enough to use on humans. Strangely enough the only way to know if it'll help people is to actually give it to them.
Your experience in the 1990s is irrelevant to effectiveness of an entirely different treatment now.
I guess that sciencey black magic stuff is far too hard to understand. Not really surprised since opinion is clearly vastly better than evidence based science.
Regardless of whether you feel that the use of stem cell technology is safe to use, others have the right to choose a different path and IMO it's nothing to do with "science black magic' which i think is a bit disingenuous. If I was offered part in a trial for a serious disease (which thankfully I don't have) I would think long and hard and read up as much as I could before deciding. If I had tried most other things I probably would elect to go the stem cell way but others have the right to pass on this option and it's none of my business - they have that right as John K does. He is not convinced that the technology is safe yet. Likewise I can accept your view on the technology that for you there is no issue.
 
Hmmm. Updating to iOS 9.3.3 and have run into a spot of bother. The update has stalled with multiple error messages.

Plan B in progress.
 
I'll not make mention of the fairly robust phased testing of drugs that has resulted in tens of millions of people being alive today that otherwise wouldn't be. To acknowledge that many if not all medications potentially have both beneficial and detrimental side effects. If there is black magic involved it is getting the patient to cooperate in ensuring the desired one occurs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top