SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : wla(warner lambert) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ted Downs who wrote (147)12/5/1997 4:06:00 PM
From: Judd  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 942
 
Ted, Duncan

This reminds me of the old philosophical situation in which a train engineer knows that 2 people are lying ahead on the track and he cannot possibly stop in time and not kill them. However, he can take a turn in the track which is under construction and derail the train and most certainly kill hundreds of people riding on the train, however saving the lives of 2 people who are not on the train.

What's the logical thing to do? (The doctor's and the FDA are the train Engineers)

Judd



To: Ted Downs who wrote (147)12/5/1997 4:31:00 PM
From: Zoltan!  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 942
 
>>Then I understand you're saying that Warner Lambert is an unethical company is that correct? Also, by your implications you can also include the FDA with your statement is that correct?

Did I not say in a post precedent that that accusation is precisely what I would never presume to make?
exchange2000.com

Yet you seem determined to derive that inference. Just because one decides to undertake an affirmative ethical act against their own interest that does make another that does less necessarily unethical. It depends on the facts and they are not complete at this time.

What is troubling is that it appears that WLA decided to change its labelling disclosure concerning the risks only after Glaxo's actions.

Take some Zantac, you and your gum company will both profit.

Regards