• 13 Posts
  • 185 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 26th, 2023

help-circle



  • Feel ya, no job is perfect. My giant employer is great about WFH for those hired as such during a particular period of time, but they’ve outsourced HR entirely to a third party - a simple inquiry becomes a three day saga, abd if I’m talking in real time to HR, voluntarily, it’s because I’ve a concern of some immediacy.

    WFH plus great benefits > downsides, but it’s always a balancing act of priorities for sure.








    1. Suffer through working life
    2. Retire, downsize, go see the world without having to convince a gf/partner

    Nothing wrong with disliking dating, it’s a screwy social ritual intended to use a short series of interactions to determine if this is a person you could trust and genuinely like enough to share everything - including tough mornings - and compromise with for the next fifty years.

    Works for some folks. Doesn’t work for others. I’m happily married, took a couple false starts and youthful indiscretions to get here - as well as the magic of the internet and some long discussions about relationships/commitment/poly/nonstandard stuff.

    Works for us, maybe not for most.







  • ____@infosec.pubOPtoFlying@lemmy.worldLSA Pilot To Be
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Thanks, that’s exactly the sort of thing I was looking for - I generally work well with most people, but I know myself well enough to know that there are a handful of folks I might not be quite on the same wavelength with.

    Relative to the overall cost of training, an initial lesson or discovery flight seems like a pretty low-cost/low-risk way to get a feel for the people, and also for how they treat their equipment.






  • I benefit from an orphan drug, and the R&D was most definitely subsidised by the public purse.

    My insurance pays a few grand a month for it.

    The mfg coupon covers most of the rest, minus a copay.

    This is the second iteration of the original drug. The first hasn’t meaningfully fallen in price and only the original company can manufacture and distribute the generic even under the name of competitors.

    There was no breakthrough in the second iteration, and the logic to solve the “problem” they solved was straightforward. So now I pay more, for an anecdotally less effective version that addresses a risk irrelevant to me but present in the original.

    There is yet a third iteration on the way.

    Shock revelations:

    • pharma companies are greedy and will double dip against both government subsidies and patients/insurance at every opportunity.
    • XX Pharma didn’t pay for the original R&D, my gov did.
    • if one replaces Na with a/several similar elements, one still ends up with a salt, often resulting in a drug variant that “doesn’t affect blood pressure” and offers no other real benefits, nor risks.
    • Clinical trials for said alternative salt are broadly leas expensive than for the original. That does not result in lower prices.

    Nationalise pharma research, if not the manufacturers.

    Also, generics are often manufactured in countries with, shall we say, fewer controls and regulations. Know who makes those pills and where. If you can’t stomach the FDA reports on that manufacturer, find a pharmacy who will sell you something else…