Its exactly the same as what happened with Lucentis

I think Lucentis is made by Genetech, not Norvartis, no?

he is just a student politician that has managed to keep that gig going for his whole career.

Are you auditioning for Binners’ job?

well binners does seem to be more perceptive than most of you…

Lucentis – is that the one where the same drug licensed for one use is pennies but licenced for direct injection into the eye costs a huge amount – and the company owning the patent will not apply for a license to use the cheap version in direct injection?

The chemical formula and molar mass of those two drugs are different TJ, they aren’t the same. The cheaper drug is just as effective, but with a few more side effects.

When used for colonic cancer, the cheaper drug you are talking about – Avastin – costs significantly more due to the cost associated with getting the drug approved for that use by the FDA. If you want the same drug to keep fixed costs for all uses you have to consider forcing government to subsidise all costs of bringing a drug to market.

I read somewhere that doctors prescribe avastin for eye injection off label and it is sourced as a special – so my guess is the price difference reflects the costs of it being approved as a licensed medicine.

I’ve started looking for jobs in Dublin

I had my Australian citizenship approved last week.

I hate to break it to you but Oz isn’t in the EU.

Nothing like lucentis. Avastin (is a cancer drug it’s a big antibody that is dosed at a high level and widely used. It mops up a signal molecule (VEGF) that stimulates blood vessel growth in tumours. Lucentis (rabinizumab) is a different antibody tagetting the same VEGF molecule. But it is not the whole molecule, just the small binding tips (antibodies are Y shaped and it’s the tips of the Y). The smaller lucentis is injected in the eye, originally to mitigate possible safety issues with antibodies.

Both molecules neutralise the same target, so the NHS did a study to show they had the same clinical effect in wet AMD. And they do. But for each vial of avastin you can treat 20 eyes. Assuming you retain sterility.

So you see it is not a generic, it’s another molecule that works the same way and used as a substitute due to cost per mg dose being very different in cancer and eye treatment. There is a 40x difference in price. Physicians can use anything off label but pharma cannot promote off label use. And there have been cases of eye infections with avastin. The worry about the effects of a fully functional antibody inside the eye does not appear to be significant, however.

As for new drugs, there is currently a negotiation on price for performance. We don’t know if you’ll respond, so first doses are free and you pay for patients who respond. That’s one model, there are others. I’m all for NICE and cost effectiveness btw, but get frustrated when other countries who are substantially the same come to different conclusions. And NICE don’t have to show their workings.

PS communism never developed a medicine.

Good until the last line, the commies did some interesting work but it never took hold globally – bacteriophage therapy etc.

Back from my non-EU surf…. pretty awesome.

Lucentis was developed by Genentech, it was marketed by Novartis outside of the US.

well binners does seem to be more perceptive than most of you…

I am giving you a ‘could try harder’ as a Binners replacement. You still haven’t even posted any tired Monty Python images yet which is just plain lazy.

well binners does seem to be more perceptive than most of you…

Well perhaps if you predict every combination of every possible outcome every couple of days; reflect on a few negative polls as evidence, talk up Tom Watson, Jess Philips and Rory Stewart – eventually you will hit something. Not sure what though.

And completely ignore anything that is remotely positive about Corbyn.

Yeah I can see that’s some sort of opinion dressed as perception.

One thing about Binners that is good is he effectively pursueded me to be a Labour member. Nice one.

Look at the mortality rate for phage therapy. It suits communism well 😉

Afternoon Comrades. Any news on how the revolution is progressing? Just making plans for the weekend and wondered if I needed to factor it in?

Late September, Comrade Binnerski, time to make sure you’ve finished your fruit harvest.

Oh, and get the last of the spuds out before the slugs get to them.

Just making plans for the weekend and wondered if I needed to factor it in?

Don’t worry, the organic cafe has yet to be nationalized so you have plenty of time to quaff craft ale, feign concern about the poor and worry about house prices.

Coryn isn’t fit to even carry Tom Watsons bag…

Conference bounce:

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 33% (+3)
LAB: 22% (-1)
LDEM: 22% (-)
BREX: 14% (-)
GRN: 6% (+1)
UKIP: 1% (+1)

via @YouGov, 24 – 25 Sep
Chgs. w/ 20 Sep

— Britain Elects (@britainelects) September 27, 2019

NEW: UK General Election voting intention, fieldwork 25th September 2019. Changes vs 5th-6th September.

CON 27 (-2) LAB 24 (NC) LD 22 (+4) BREX 16 (-1) SNP 4 (NC) GRE 3 (NC) AP 4 (-2) pic.twitter.com/WLOYAvBWJo

— Survation. (@Survation) September 26, 2019

Nothing happened at conference to put me off voting Labour… but nothing happened to make a Labour majority government any more likely. Did people not notice it? Or was it a failed opportunity to grow support, while the focus was on Labour?

Did people not notice it?

The SC ruling dominated the news. The daft Watson thing at the start didn’t help either

The outcome of the conference was some excellent policy ideas, especially the green new deal. Well explained to people this could be hugely popular.

Coryn isn’t fit to even carry Tom Watsons bag…

Maybe Watson can carry it himself and shut the door behind him.

Conference also had some silly things, 4 day week has people worried they lose salary and while revoking private schools charity status is a valid argument, seizing their buildings is bonkers.

Fact is conference was always going to be about Brexit & Johnson has the stronger narrative, even if it is poisoning the country

I suspect Yougov is closer to reality than situation (I was polled as part of the survation one)

Nothing happened at conference to put me off voting Labour… but nothing happened to make a Labour majority government any more likely. Did people not notice it? Or was it a failed opportunity to grow support, while the focus was on Labour?

Of course it was a failed opportunity to grow support – outright banning private schools and seizing intellectual property isn’t going to attract the centrists and centre left voters that are required to grow their vote further. Doubling down on harder left policies is not going to get them into power as those that are attracted to those kinds of policies will vote labour regardless.

I think I’m fairly representative of someone whom Labour would need to persuade to vote for them if they were to stand any chance of forming a government.

However, all I see is lunacy at the moment: no position on Brexit; a frankly ludicrous policy on private schools; and a general swing to the bad elements of the far left that we had in the 70s.

When Corbyn became leader I was quite optimistic that he might put clear air between Labour and Tory policies. I didn’t really want this much clear air, however, and I’m sure others feel the same.

Looks like I’ll be voting Lib Dem again, but only as a least worst option.

JP

I’ll agree to that sentiment. Lifelong labour voter, despite not being in their core demographic, until it’s lurch to the left. Ok I live in a very safe conservative seat (5th in the country) but I voted Lib Dem last time and will again.

Alistair Campbell nails it by always saying you must win the middle ground to win power. Neither party commands that space so neither will govern. I see little ambition of that from the current Labour party. A party who delivered the largest majority in history and three consecutive general election victories.

Yes, agreed.

The pharma thing is another non-starter for winning the middle ground, too.

I take it all back. The Tory’s have just announced additional funding for rural bus services, so hats off to Jezza. I’m sure he can sit back and see the influence he’s having on policy

The didn’t specify whether they were going to write any large messages down the side of thse buses 😉

no position on Brexit

I honestly have no idea why people keep saying this.

You’re right Molls. Its completely unfair criticism

He’s at least 17 different positions on Brexit, depending on who he’s talking too 😉

I honestly have no idea why people keep saying this.

I honestly have no idea why molgrips keeps thinking that Corbyn has a position on Brexit.

I don’t care what his position is any more.

As long as he backs a vote on his Brexit that lets us reject it and remain if we wish, that’ll do me.

I expect many other voters do want a single clear position to be adopted by Labour before they’ll vote for its candidates at a general election though, but that’s unlikely to happen unless he moves aside. And that’s not happening.

the brexit decision needs to be completely divorced from a GE – there needs to be a referendum first or the issue will be completely clouded by political affiliations.

In fact A50 just needs to be revoked until a workable NI border solution has been agreed with the Irish (not anyone else…).

Then, if such a solution can be found (…) have that 2nd referendum with options to 1. leave so no EU body has any control (courts/etc), 2. remain, 3. customs union/eea/whatever, 4. anything else, and apply PR to the vote – like most political elections are at university.

I agree that is what should happen.
But it won’t.

Standing in the way of a VONC. 🙁

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49891500

Ian Blackford doesn’t have skin in this game and he’s spot on.

While Margaret Beckett would be ideal for all, Labour should push forward someone from their front bench like Angela Rayner or Keir Starmer now… and wrong foot the LibDems and those MPs cut adrift from their old parties…

“ You don’t want our party leader to be interim PM, and we’re not okay with that, but this is one of the most important months in British political history… so here is our alternative… back them and let’s get an extension now, rather than wait for a crisis to unfold. ”

“ You don’t want our party leader to be interim PM, and we’re not okay with that, but this is one of the most important months in British political history… so here is our alternative… back them and let’s get an extension now, rather than wait for a crisis to unfold. ”

This. And it can be *anyone*. As Ken Clarke says the identity of the caretaker is irrelevant, yes it shouldn’t be a mainstream party leader but beyond that it doesn’t matter.

It should be Bercow.

That would be amazeballs.

It should be Bercow.

I know you jest and if an apolitical candidate was required he’d be the man.

…but this isn’t apolitical, this is a seriously political role. The opposition have the numbers to change a political course and remove a government that they all think is fundamentally wrong. You can’t get much more political than that.

…but this isn’t apolitical, this is a seriously political role

Agreed… .but in this instance it probably needs to  be someone  who  is  party apolitical whilst still representing the political no deal camp.

If not Bercow then Blackford purely because, other than to unite a temporary government to deal with  the single issue, he cannot ever command a majority as PM so presents absolutely  no danger of hanging on in there for his own purposes and can be removed from the post by any of the other coalition parties at will.

Plus he usually comes across as the only adult in the room.

More important than being political or apolitical at this stage, I’d say vaguely competent was a more pressing qualification

So someone who is capable of finding their own arse, using both hands, politically speaking, is a must.

So that’s grandad out in the first round. There are pot plants with sharper political instincts, and things are about to require just those instincts.

The next month is going to see all manner of political manoeuvring, the likes of which this country has never seen before. Someone like Ken Clarke would be ideal. Someone with bags of high-level political experience, rather than some bloke who spent 30 years as an anonymous back bencher then found himself leader of the opposition, by mistake.

The lib dems and their tory mates are making no deal more likely. That’s the end result of their politicking. They would prefer no deal to Corbyn as PM. That’s fine, but they should be honest about it. The labour party is by far the biggest party and should lead a new govt. Swinson talks about maths, yet she denies the fact that labour have 246 MPs to her 18, and the 21 tory rebels. She needs to decide her priorities very quickly. Betraying the remain side of the argument will not be a good look.

While I hate to think I agree with Jo Swinson on anything, on this she is absolutely correct. There is no way the maths add up for a Corbyn led coalition, even though he has precedence in his favour. Corbyn knows this too of course, that’s why he won’t stand aside.