> > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > you own any stock in any corporation that would be likely to benefit > by the reduction in import of pharmaceuticals from outside the US? I worked in a drug store when I was in high school.
> You sure sound like you do. Before you ask, personally I can answer no > to the above unless one of the mutual funds of my 401K plans owns > stock in a pharmaceutical company. Nor do I own or benefit in any way > (other than as a consumer) from purchasing drugs from outside the US > (e.g. by having an interest in Shoprxonline). Makes you lilly white and unbiased? I argued the data. I posted credible sources and provided links. Every statement I made is supported by facts.
Now, you try the same. The implied "conflict of interest" strawman is just that - a strawman. You can't argue the facts so you go for the innuendo? Typical usenet.
> >> As you're well aware advertising Tadalafil or Sildenafil Citrate is > >> likely to produce a big "Huh?" from the prospective purchaser so these [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Not illegal to purchase; Illegal to import except under very strict conditions as I pointed out. And that is specific to the importation for experimental use under an active IND by a registered manufacturer.
> illegal to sell. Big difference. No risk to > the purchaser from legal action unless he resells or the drugs are > scheduled substances. Wrong.
What is it about some people that makes them think they know everything?
Here is the FDA policy on importation of unapproved new drugs: http://www.fda.gov/ora/import/pipinfo.htm
"The United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) (21 U.S.C. section 331) prohibits the interstate shipment (which includes importation) of unapproved new drugs. Thus, the importation of drugs that lack FDA approval, whether for personal use or otherwise, violates the Act. Unapproved new drugs are any drugs, including foreign-made versions of U.S. approved drugs, that have not been manufactured in accordance with and pursuant to an FDA approval.
Cialis-generic sold by this Indian website is by definition an unapproved new drug and it is illegal to import.
> Part of the reason you need to ask in the > various groups is to determine what the supplier does if the goods are > seized. Shoprxonline retries or refunds your money if the goods don't > arrive. They guarantee delivery. (These people should pay me a > commission) So then - if the goods are confiscated yet it isn't illegal to import, the agency that confiscates the package is guilty of illegal search and seizure - they would have violated the Fourth Amendment http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html
> >> By "counterfeit" in connection with medication I (and I suspect most > >> people) understand that instead of Tadalafil you'd be getting a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > (in my sense) drugs with seemingly valid brand names to the > pharmacies. The difference is the FDA. No, you can never be 100% certain of product integrity. And admittedly, the US distribution system has problems. However, there is a very distinct paper trail required. And, the number of instances of counterfeit drugs in the US is extremely low, as compared to India and as compared with internet sourced ex-US.
> > What makes > >you think Cipla and Ranbaxy are quality manufacturers? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Indian government's seal, not in baggies as is the case with the > home-grown variety. OK - so you base the standard an their ability to package in nice looking containers drugs that they manufacture under unknown conditions from API of unkown origin in violation of international patents.....with the Indian governments stamp of approval? And all this because you read it in a magazine? And no URL to back it up?
> > What makes you > >so confident that what this website is selling isn't fake? > > You'll soon find out if the Viagra or Cialis or Levitra is fake. Is this before or after you have an adverse drug reaction?
> >As far as I could tell - and I looked - Cipla does not have a single > >approved NDA - not one. As such, the FDA would not be required to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > think that you have more than a concerned amateur status in this > discussion. I actually know what I'm talking about.
> >Even if the company is as good as you say, there is no evidence that > >the content of the package you receive actually came from them. In [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > either (without lots of work) but if the supermarket takes it, it's > real. If someone you didn't know handed you a white looking tablet at a party and said it was aspirin and you had a headache, would you take it?
If someone you knew by site handed you a bottle of pills where the label said it was aspirin but you didn't recognize the brand, would you take it?
If your best friend handed you a bottle of Bayer aspirin and the pills inside had the Bayer logo, would you take it?
> >> >> However > >> >> asking in sci.med is hardly wise. Try one of the weightlifting groups [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > But who are unwilling to share their knowledge I gave you the URLs - you do with the information what you like.
> and/or have a very > conservative view (i.e. they're good little drones) of treatment or > they simply don't know very much about the particular condition. I think using anabolic steroids for non-medical conditions is foolish.
> Do > you really think anon (to take an example) knows as much about steroid > use as a biochemist working in the body builder area? I have no idea who anon is.
> Or Howard as > much as some guy suffering from ED and who has made the required > investigation? I would prefer talking to someone who actually has medical training in endocrinology and sexual dysfunction.
In another thread we had a lively discussion about Cialis and "Dr" Maus from Germany provided a rendition of how it constricts blood vessels. LOL
> For example there's an erroneous (or incomplete > statement) in the drug contraindications for Cialis and Levitra but > not for Viagra. Maybe one of those people you think are so wonderful > can tell us what it is. You make an assumption that the three are identical chemically, but they are not. The aproved product labels reflect the clinical data at the time of submission which is updated at 3 6 12 and every 12 months thereafter.
> Nope, the horror stories about the MD activity > and lack of knowledge would boggle the mind. Another strawman.
> >> The people on > >> the body building groups are ordering/acquiring scheduled drugs so [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > and roll bar--and keep it under 10 mph when you drive a car. Is your > real name Ned Flanders? Strawman number 3.
> Most PCP's know squat about the two subjects we're discussing here. The comparison was between sci.med and alt.support.drugabuseonmusclebeach.
> The body builders can speak for themselves but for ED there's basic > information on Mescape, information about the drugs on MedScape > DrugInfo, Rx.com, Drugs.com, and cutting edge information on Medline. > Anyone with a computer can know more than the average PCP in a couple > of hours. OK - now tell me a great sage and keeper of all that is ED. I'm 67 years old, I have no history of heart disease other than some nominal atrial arrhythmia. For this I take digoxin and coumadin. And I have gout so when it flairs up I take naproxyn and when I remember, I take Zyloprim. And then again, my wife insists that I take propecia for that hairline that little bald spot I seem to be developing.
So Doc, which of the 3 PDE5 should I take?
> >This is what you said - > >"Shoprxonline is reputable but there are those that aren't." [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Not at all. It simply says that we've got some stupid drug laws and > Shoprxonline is assisting the buyer in circumventing them. Circumventing laws to make a profit....ok.
> >And this: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Many US companies drug companies manufacture or subcontract the > manufacture of the base to other countries. That's not what the statement says. It says you may be getting the finished dosage form FROM big pharma. It doesn't say that the APIs are sourced from the same third party.
> Let's see. In 2000 I priced bulk Sildenafil Citrate from China at > $3,000 a key (minimum order). At the maximum dosage (100mg) that works [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > from drugstore.com at $8.66. And that's cheap. Some real bricks and > mortar pharmacies are asking $13.00. It explains how the price difference is possible.
Wasn't it you who tried baiting folks once before and were summarily shot down. Are you trying for round two?
> But Viagra is passe today. Lilly's Cialis is strangely priced exactly > the same as Pfizer's Viagra at $8.66 (and they say that there's > competition in the pharmaceutical industry <g>) but, depending on the > level of risk you want to take, "generic cialis" can be had for as low > as 0.50 per 20mg (not Shoprxonline)--tablet or in alcohol suspension > at around $1.00. Like I said - it is an unapproved new drug and is illegal to import into the US.
> >Or this: "All of our generic medicines are manufacturered in FDA > >approved facilities and come in factory sealed packaging with [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > And we went through why those Chicken Little URL's you quoted don't > apply or are simply self-serving. "We"? Good - when the Indian government is pushing through legislation to invoke the death penalty for drug counterfeiters, you call it chicken little.
Now, how about a URL that shows just how safe Indian drugs are?
> >And then to argue that it's ok because you have a weightlifter NG > >following that has identified the good ones? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Save the insults too. Why? Are you one of those sensitive types?
js
|