MovieChat Forums > fc31 > Replies
fc31's Replies
<blockquote>My brother was banking on a slew of new cancer drugs that were undergoing FDA approval. If any of them get approved, they'll be too late for him.</blockquote>
Yeah, let's get rid of FDA. People suffered too much because of it.
Is that what you are trying to say?
<blockquote>Like everyday</blockquote>
They rejected 3 drugs last year out of 58, due to the fact test data showed drugs had no significant effect, not due to safety issues. Drug companies usually make sure there is no safety issue in their test data.
Do you really think pharmaceutical companies would let go if she made an unsubstantiated statement, not suing for reputational damage? Even just to shut her up.
Every anti-vaxxer costs them money.
You sounded more and more ignorant.
Yeah, I retracted that statement because they do reject drugs based on the test data submitted by pharmaceutical companies, though I have never seen independent testing happening.
Yet, she was not sued.
Like I said before you don't look so different from flat earthers.
It is not about sytem being "perfect". It is about there is nothing there.
FDA does not conduct their own tests on drugs, they let pharmas submit their own test data, and a lot of time those data were picked and parsed to manipulate the results, and because of the "revolving door" politics, FDA simply turned a blind eye.
Perfect? How about they just do something? Like conducting independent testing? Or force pharmaceutical companies to have their drugs tested at a third party organisation?
And you wonder why people became anti-vaxxers.
No, I don't see she made any direct claim, not from that language.
The language was not great, but that does not mean she believed the vaccine directly caused autism in her child, otherwise she would have sued the company. She was making general statements, like angry parents do.
If it were a direct claim then pharmas could have sued her.
I think she could have been coached by lawyers, probably from her publisher.
In absence of a law suit, it means she did not claim it or prove it, it was only a suspicion.
Then again you can't stop people ignorant enough to believe what she was saying was a fact, instead of an accusation, then again people like that are always going to be ignorant and lied to.
That is why politicians and media keep lying and misleading people on daily basis.
You can't make claims like it is a fact without evidence, that is the basic scientific approach.
I doubt she directly claimed that, her questioning it however was legitimate enough for genuine researches to be conducted.
Your claim of her so far you did not show any evidence.
If you do not question what you are told, then you are not any better than any flat earther.
Other than bias and stubbornness, so you haven't shown any ability of critical thinking.
Anyway if that is all you can do, then this is the end of this conversation for me.
We could express our opinions and suspicion, couldn't we? In the absence of actual research. That is how hypotheses and theories were formed, created genuine science.
It helped creating researches on the subject, which means those were not conducted before.
Is free speech not your thing? Or only when speaking against big pharma?
There were of course uninformed voices, which made evident in this thread, but there were genuine concerns.
It is not science if we could not question it.
This absolute 'for or against', I think we see ignorance on the both sides.
Touché!
It reduces the harm COVID viruses do to your body. I am not going to say it is useless, but it is not the same as most traditional vaccines.
That is another thing about the COVID vaccines, that it won't stop infection or transmission (I checked), so it is inescapable, you will get infected, that is why you have to get vaccinated.
At least in the beginning when the early virus variants were a lot more deadly. Now I think it is about as strong as flu.
I don't think you understand what mRNA or mRNA vaccines are. mRNA as I understand is a blueprint of making protein, mRNA vaccine is the instructions for body to make antibodies for COVID virus (it is not going to change your DNA), unlike more traditional inactivated virus vaccines.
They are stronger and more direct, but less research on their effects. If you bypass or directly manipulate body's immunity what is going to happen to your immune system?
The drug companies could have made traditional vaccines but they did not. I think they were using the opportunity to push the untested technology.
I think I was 48 at the time of taking the first vaccine shot, and I took booster shot about every 9 months instead of government recommended every 3 ~ 6 months, still I developed eczema and hip joint pain the past few years, both are autoimmune diseases, could be COVID vaccine related.
But even they conduct research now to say that is not a vaccine issue, but would they test the early batches?
I was near the high risk group, taking vaccine is better than death, but still I question it's safety.
COVID vaccines expedited trials, everything was very rushed, there is nothing wrong in questioning an experimental technology (mRNA vacchines).
Though the studies were only conducted in 2012, 2 years after her book on it: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism.html
She could not have known at the time. If the researches were done because of her, then maybe it was not a waste of time.
Actually if you know about business, the picture is much less rosy.
Jessica Alba's net worth mostly came from the fact she was the founder of The Honest Company, Inc. (HNST), which was valued at 1.7 billion in 2015, and Jessica Alba owns 6% of it (around 5.6 million shares, including 1.4 million stock options according to regulatory filings in 2021), but that was the peak valuation.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/denizcam/2021/05/04/inside-jessica-albas-long-and-turbulent-road-to-taking-the-honest-company-public/
The company was listed on Nasdaq in May 5, 2021 at about $19 per share, and now it is around $2.5, and I just checked its current market capitalisation now is around 247 million.
I think people like Jessica Alba have to hold onto their shares for a number of years (probably 3 ~ 5 years) after listing before they can sell, so her holding is likely worth about 10 ~ 15 millions now, depending on whether she excised her stock options, which I suspect she did not since share prices were falling and those options likely became worthless.
I think that could be less than the money she put into this business.
Still more than most people could earn in their life time, but it is probably not enough for an extravagant celebrity life style.
In April 2024, Alba stepped down from her role as Chief Creative Officer: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2024/04/09/jessica-alba-steps-down-from-the-honest-company/73268672007/
Which was a job she was paid a $700,000 base salary beginning in 2022, an annual cash bonus worth up to $500,000, and annual restricted stock units valued at $1.5 million, rising to $3 million in 2024.
Her stepping down could also indicate she was going to sell, because public listed corporations need to disclose when insiders (such as chief executives) sell, after her stepping down she is no longer an insider.
So she was not going into poverty anytime soon, but financially speaking she probably wanted to make movies.
I asked AI and it is estimated that Jessica Alba was likely paid 2 ~ 5 million for the role, a lot higher than her corporate job, in a lot less time.
Because I was offended, can't pretend I was not. This is a stupid and pointless show even without identity politics.
And I hate people pretending identity politics did not ruin Marvel movies and TV shows after Disney took over.
Yeah, nice to see Vader and the death star again, the movie however was underwhelming
In the hindsight, yeah, pretty much.
It turned out to be an Armenian name, means little fawn or deer: https://www.thebump.com/b/osha-baby-name
It probably sounded alien enough for them to use.