[Politics] Brexit

[Two Professors]

Didn't even know we have any manufacturers owned by brits these days...there must be some Shirley?

Surely that should be applauded.The more truly international investment in our economy must be welcome by any normal person.After all,we are going global,not hiding away in a small,shrinking,market.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Surely that should be applauded.The more truly international investment in our economy must be welcome by any normal person.After all,we are going global,not hiding away in a small,shrinking,market.

What, going "global" like France just did with their 13 billion Euros-worth of contracts signed with India - despite being shackled by the EU?

 

[Simster]

I'm just glad to see how important non-EU countries see the UK economy. I'm almost certain the US will waive their massive tariffs on steel when it comes to the UK, what with our special relationship. We are BOUND to be treated differently from the rest of the world in that regard because our economy is so incredibly important.

Indeed, you only have to look at Russia to see how they're treading on diplomatic eggshells with us to ensure they get a nice fat slice of the UK pie once we've left that nasty old EU.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Didn't see this on the side of the bus!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/13/uk-save-money-brexit-obr-divorce-bill

 

[JC Footy Genius]

OBR SAYS BREXIT LIABILITIES ONLY £2.5 BILLION COMPARED TO £500 BILLION* COST OF REMAINING

Chuka and other remainers are gloating that the UK to EU “other liabilities”, mainly pensions, from 2019 to 2064 will accumulate to £2.5 billion. Of course what they don’t say is that if the UK stays in the contribution would hit some £500 billion* over the same 45 years…

*Assuming contribution payments grow at trend inflation.

https://order-order.com/2018/03/13/...2-5-billion-compared-500-billion-remain-cost/

Should have put the £500 Billion on the side of the Bus

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-europe-cost/
regards
DR

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I hope the Remainers on here who were forecasting/ parroting doom pre-referendum aren't too disappointed with the Spring Statement today. All seems reasonably positive and light years from the Treasury/experts (people on this thread) predictions .. eg In Recession with half a million jobs lost. Chin up!

 

[nicko31]

Didn't see this on the side of the bus!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/13/uk-save-money-brexit-obr-divorce-bill

Hopefully during this time we can move out of the G20 relegation zone

 

[Ernest]

I hope the Remainers on here who were forecasting/ parroting doom pre-referendum aren't too disappointed with the Spring Statement today. All seems reasonably positive and light years from the Treasury/experts (people on this thread) predictions .. eg In Recession with half a million jobs lost. Chin up!

I look forward to the day when Labour are in power and Comrade McDonnell opens his re-education and work camps in the wastes of Scotland for people like you and you spend the rest of your days picking organic courgettes and making Fair Trade chocolate for decent people like me to enjoy

 

[BigGully]

Sorry, my bad. They’re part French. I get confused as to which British institution has been sold to which foreign owner these days; I’m sure you understand.

Whilst your apologising for yet another gaff, couldn't you at least have the courtesy to reply to ''chip'' who seems to have at least the same knowledge of the pharmaceutical industry as you and questioned the legitimacy of your own argument, an argument that you demanded us all to accept due to your own self proclaimed title of this boards pharmaceutical expert , many thanks just hope ''chip'' has hung around long enough to engage with your late response ...

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Whilst your apologising for yet another gaff, couldn't you at least have the courtesy to reply to ''chip'' who seems to have at least the same knowledge of the pharmaceutical industry as you and questioned the legitimacy of your own argument, an argument that you demanded us all to accept due to your own self proclaimed title of this boards pharmaceutical expert , many thanks just hope ''chip'' has hung around long enough to engage with your late response ...

Yes I will reply and I welcome questions on the subject. I needed some time to think about it and was then away. But can I ask you one thing, why the “self proclaimed title of this boards pharmaceutical expert” snipe? I’ve never made such a claim. My only crime seems to be talking about a topic which I have a lot of experience about....in the same way Uncle Spielberg is talking about mortgages elsewhere. You made a similar comment before, about how I think I know more than the entire UK population and the government.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I think that the point about time to market for new drugs is important but not always entirely clear whether this is negative or positive. I know that there has been much scaremongering with claims that "people will die", e.g. particularly in relation to cancer therapies https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...-cancer-specialist-paul-workman-a7573851.html. However, the counter to this is in the very small number of meta studies the outcome has been that most drugs that have entered the market with recent EMA approval have no benefit in quality of life or survival rates (e.g. http://www.bmj.com/content/359/bmj.j4530):

Conclusions This systematic evaluation of oncology approvals by the EMA in 2009-13 shows that most drugs entered the market without evidence of benefit on survival or quality of life. At a minimum of 3.3 years after market entry, there was still no conclusive evidence that these drugs either extended or improved life for most cancer indications. When there were survival gains over existing treatment options or placebo, they were often marginal.

There is also a very strong argument that it is beneficial to get real human data before adopting new agents. The most oft quoted example is thalidomide where a delay in approval allowing pertinent patient-use data to become available would have had a very positive outcome. Evidence-base is the key thing, not the regulatory approval mechanism, where large-scale, and preferably prospective longitudinal studies can really evaluate efficacy. So, I guess that there is a real incentive for the EU to co-operate although from a professional point of view it is probably easier and more effective for the UK to engage in closer co-operation with our partners in the US and Canada. There's also no reason why new theraputic agents should be slower to the UK markets with closer alignment with the USA although no evidence that this will lead to better outcomes. This should be about good science not politics.

I think we’re talking about slightly different things here, my point all along has been about submissions. When it comes to drugs being approved there are three different time periods, not all mutually exclusive. Using the initial patent approval as the starting point you have the period until the initial submissions-typically the US and the EU, 1). You then have a period where other secondary markets are submitted, 2). You also have the time it takes the respective agencies to decide if the drug will be approved or not, 3). 1) and 3) are not driven, and should not be driven, by any considerations other than scientific; I cannot therefore see any reason why Brexit will affect these one way or another if the MHRA have adequate resource. Where the delay will occur is with 2), I believe the UK will slip into the same category as nations like Japan and be a secondary market and therefore suffer a delay with new drugs being submitted and subsequently approved.

I totally agree about evidence of more time being needed, but these fall into 1) and 3) and are not affected by Brexit.

PS the BMJ link doesn’t work. I’d like to read this as there must be a reason why drugs without any obvious life extension or QOL improvement were approved. Did they have equivalence but a better safety profile? Different, more preferable, formulations or routes of administration? These are the first things which jump out. I once worked on a “new” drug and the only difference was it was taken once a day as opposed to three. We only had to demonstrate the same efficacy and safety profile as the older version.

 

[BigGully]

Yes I will reply and I welcome questions on the subject. I needed some time to think about it and was then away. But can I ask you one thing, why the “self proclaimed title of this boards pharmaceutical expert” snipe? I’ve never made such a claim. My only crime seems to be talking about a topic which I have a lot of experience about....in the same way Uncle Spielberg is talking about mortgages elsewhere. You made a similar comment before, about how I think I know more than the entire UK population and the government.

Fairplay, I apologise for the 'snipe' the delay suggested to me that perhaps you were not so clear on an answer so decided to swerve it, I had noted that [MENTION=33622]Chips[/MENTION] response seemed to shut down the discussion quite quickly from other posters too.

I shall leave it with you both.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Fairplay, I apologise for the 'snipe' the delay suggested to me that perhaps you were not so clear on an answer so decided to swerve it, I had noted that [MENTION=33622]Chips[/MENTION] response seemed to shut down the discussion quite quickly from other posters too.

I shall leave it with you both.

Apology accepted . No, I saw the post but then only had a few hours before leaving for Everton. I thought about it but never got a chance to reply over the weekend.

 

[ManOfSussex]

[tweet]973889833717387264[/tweet]

#wouldhavehappenedanyway
#apriceworthpaying
#takingbackcontrol

 

[Deleted member 22389]

[tweet]973889833717387264[/tweet]

#wouldhavehappenedanyway
#apriceworthpaying
#takingbackcontrol

In the article it reads....


The majority of its UK-based jobs are unlikely to be relocated, with the company's British operations regarded as a centre of excellence ‎for marketing and other corporate functions.


Next >>>>

 

[ManOfSussex]

In the article it reads....


The majority of its UK-based jobs are unlikely to be relocated, with the company's British operations regarded as a centre of excellence ‎for marketing and other corporate functions.


Next >>>>

#apriceworthpaying, #wouldhavehappenedanyway & #takingbackcontrol as I said.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Didn't even know we have any manufacturers owned by brits these days...there must be some Shirley?

BAE Systems is a British company - owned by shareholders so it could conceivably owned by non-Brits.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

#apriceworthpaying, #wouldhavehappenedanyway & #takingbackcontrol as I said.

Some jobs might move, whilst others will be created, but nobody is leaving this country completely.

As for Unilever go back to 2012, there where 800 job losses then, what argument was used then?

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-u...tes-with-800-job-losses-idUKBRE85D11620120614

 

[ManOfSussex]

Some jobs might move, whilst others will be created, but nobody is leaving this country completely.

As for Unilever go back to 2012, there where 800 job losses then, what argument was used then?

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-u...tes-with-800-job-losses-idUKBRE85D11620120614

Who wants global HQs of companies in this country anyway. We're British.