Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: flatsville who wrote (5105)	3/28/1999 12:53:00 PM
From: flatsville	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Still don't get that 80% factoid-- U.S. TRADE, BY PRODUCTS: Double-digit growth in most export categories (Source: Department of Commerce) Medicinals & pharmaceuticals-- (in millions) 1994--exports 6,093 imports 4,680 1995--exports 6,554 imports 5,544 1996--exports 7,330 imports 7,076 1997--exports 8,230 imports 8,737 Percentage change 1996-1997 exports 12% imports 23% pubs.acs.org ------------------------------------------------------- Now clearly the trend here is that the U.S. is importing more in the medicinals and pharmaceuticals area year over year, but 80% from abroad, now really! The hitch here could by the types of basic chemicals used in "prescription" manufacturing...A very different table from a source I have yet to find. ---------------------------------- My sanity has not quite yet been restored...Thank you for your attention...Have a nice day.

To: flatsville who wrote (5105)	3/29/1999 7:53:00 PM
From: David Eddy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Flatsville - I have been trying to run down the origin of the "80% of basic chemicals used in pharmaceutical manufacturing in the U.S. come from abroad" quote that came out of the Bennett/Dodd sub-committeee. This sounds like an urban myth zinging around the 'Net in Y2K several years ago about how most/all/99%/majority/your guess/much of Insulin (pick some other drug, that's fine too) came from (perhaps) two plants in Denmark. The point of this is that these little sound-bites get picked up & repeated ad nauseum until they become FACT. But they're not. The guy (Martyn Emory) who was credited with exposing our exposure to Insulin embargos pointed out that he was massively mis-quoted. But what's a little truth in the name of a snappy sound-bite? Regarding the Bennett/Dodd report... most of that is 2nd/3rd/4th hand information from witnesses & Gartner Group surveys. While Insulin isn't your "basic chemicals", it's plenty close enough to the gist... I've seen too many "facts" distorted... just run it thru the Scary Gary North spin machine a few times. - David