Goldman's Blog

The Power of Musci

2008-10-28T22:34:00.000-07:00

My friend sent me a cool link. It is from a PBS special and talks about the power of music and its ability to bring together. The music about 4 minutes into it is pretty awesome. Enjoy.

...thanks Annie

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10242008/watch3.html

And the "Tool Report of The Year Award" goes to.....

2008-10-19T15:38:00.000-07:00

Stephen Doocy, host for Fox News Channel's "Fox and Friends".

Check out this great piece of commentary for Stephen Doocy. I especially love how he gets called out on by the one in the room playing up Palin.

Always great when politicians can put politics aside

2008-10-17T09:16:00.000-07:00

For those that haven't seen this, it is a pretty refreshing clip. It is from the Alfred Smith Foundation Charity Event where Barak Obama and John McCain roast each other.

Nice to see politics can be put aside and poked fun of...

Cure for cancer??? Not so fast...

2008-10-17T03:54:00.000-07:00

This is a long read, but a good one.

So late last night I was perusing the bulletin's on Myspace and came across bulletin a friend of mine had posted regarding a potential cure for cancer. Yes, that is right, a cure for cancer. However the premise behind the post was based on a news report that despite the "clear" efficacy of this treatment no pharmaceutical companies would develop it? See the video and article excerpt below regarding this potential cure for cancer.

(Below is from ImpactLab. com it can be found at
http://www. impactlab. com/2007/01/31/cure-for-cancer-found-but-no-one-is-talking/)
A $2 per serving cancer cure has been found by Researchers at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada yet most of the media world is silent.. Since this is not a patentable drug from a major drug company with little profit potential, it has received very little coverage.
Scientists may have cured cancer last week. So, why haven’t the media picked up on it?
Here’s the deal. Researchers at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada found a cheap and easy to produce drug that kills almost all cancers. The drug is dichloroacetate, and since it is already used to treat metabolic disorders, we know it should be no problem to use it for other purposes.
Doesn’t this sound like the kind of news you see on the front page of every paper?
The drug also has no patent, which means it could be produced for bargain basement prices in comparison to what drug companies research and develop.
Scientists tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body where it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but left healthy cells alone. Rats plump with tumors shrank when they were fed water supplemented with DCA.
Again, this seems like it should be at the top of the nightly news, right?
Cancer cells don’t use the little power stations found in most human cells - the mitochondria. Instead, they use glycolysis, which is less effective and more wasteful.
Doctors have long believed the reason for this is because the mitochondria were damaged somehow. But, it turns out the mitochondria were just dormant, and DCA starts them back up again.
The side effect of this is it also reactivates a process called apoptosis. You see, mitochondria contain an all-too-important self-destruct button that can’t be pressed in cancer cells. Without it, tumors grow larger as cells refuse to be extinguished. Fully functioning mitochondria, thanks to DCA, can once again die.
With glycolysis turned off, the body produces less lactic acid, so the bad tissue around cancer cells doesn’t break down and seed new tumors.
Here’s the big catch. Pharmaceutical companies probably won’t invest in research into DCA because they won’t profit from it. It’s easy to make, unpatented and could be added to drinking water. Imagine, Gatorade with cancer control.
So, the groundwork will have to be done at universities and independently funded laboratories. But, how are they supposed to drum up support if the media aren’t even talking about it?

Pretty crazy huh? Well after reading/watching this I really felt like I had to respond. Being in the pharmaceutical industry I feel like I have a pretty good grasp of the rocky landscape that exists for pharmaceutical companies that engage in the development of potential therapeutics. From the competitive pressures facing pharmaceutical companies, to the regulatory requirements/hurdles, to the ethical dilemmas executives have to face, to the political influence on pharmaceutical companies and the healthcare market, exists a lot of complexity that the general public is just unware of. The good and bad, the rhytme or reason, is irrelevant when looking the industry. The key point I am trying to make, is that it is the reality of our current system.

So, at face value how do you interpret a report that says a University has discovered a potential cure for cancer, but pharmaceutical companies are ignoring it because there is no “value” in it for them. Well, my first question is this. Do you really believe everything you hear and read from our vast, independent, quality and truth seeking media conglomerates? Last night I was watching a presidential roast with Barak Obama and John McCain and Obama even jabbed at the media for their “non-partisan, fact-finding, unbiased” journalistic stands (well, not quite as loquacious and direct as that, but it is clear that our major media outlets hardly consistently practice independent journalism). This reminds me of a nice analogy to the practice of sales and advertising. A sales professor of mine once said of the advertising executives, “advertising executives know that at least 20% of their advertising dollars are effective, the challenge though is figuring out which 20%”. I think that is a fair comparison to the mainstream media. I am sure greater than 20% of their reporting is fair and independent, but which 20%?

So when the media reports that a potential cure for cancer has been developed, but pharmaceutical companies are ignoring it, what do you really think? Well let me share another nugget with you. About 3 ½ years ago there was a news report of a San Diego-based biotechnology company that had developed a novel vaccine that had an efficacy rate of nearly 100% against the H5N1 flu strand in studies in mice. At the time the avian flu was broadcasted as the one the most dangerous potential pandemics that the world had to prepare for. Companies all over were flooding resources into potential vaccines and this San Diego based company had developed a vaccine that was nearly 100% effective in animal studies. Well, 3.5 years later there is little mention of this potential therapy and the companies stock price is hovering just about $1/share. The point is that companies all over are always researching and developing products that appear in the early stages to be potentially revolutionary therapies, however, the reality of it is that most of them end up failing. And they fail for all sorts of reason. Animal are not humans, although physiological similarities exists that prove beneficial in helping determine potential therapeutic viability, they are not the same, and often times what worked in an animal doesn’t work in a human. Safety profiles of potential therapeutics may demonstrate that in humans the required dosage for efficacy can be potentially toxic. Novel molecules can have unknown long-term side effects that have to be determined. There can be unknown pharmacological interactions between potential therapeutics. There may not be a suitable “delivery vehicle” for the product, which would require extensive development of a suitable formulation, which adds more risk and more cost.

But this news report said that this potential cancer cure is based on an existing compound, DCA, that is a chemical that is available commercially and has been used in small cases in different medical settings. I say so what. What does this mean? If the media started reporting that there was a discovery that the active ingredient in Drano cured herpes, but no pharmaceutical company would develop it because it wasn’t cost-effective, would you go and starting drinking Drano? Granted those inflicted with cancer obviously have a different perspective as they are fighting for their lives and is hardly something that should trivialized with my poor analogy; however, the point is discovering a potential therapeutic to actually properly developing a safe, deliverable and effective therapeutic is not a straight line connecting two dots. This was once the belief in the early in the 1900’s.

In 1906 consumer watchdog groups, journalist and government officials pressed for the stricter regulation on food and drug products. This resulted in the formation of the Food and Drug Administration, however, was still felt by many as inadequate. It wasn’t until 1937 that the need for strict regulation was realized. In 1937 a pharmaceutical company created a product called “Elixir Sulfanilamide”, which was comprised of a toxic ingredient called DEG. This product was essentially a flavored concoction of DEG and since no preclinical or animal studies were required, was distributed to thousands of people. However, after over 100 people died taking this “Elixir” an investigation was triggered, which then discovered that the product was essentially a poison to humans. This incident spurned the 1938 Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and several amendments of it have resulted in the complex, expensive and challenging regulatory pathway pharmaceutical products must undergo.

Rewatch the video clip and listen as this outraged reporter keeps talking over the research that made this discovery telling him that the findings need to be taken with a grain a salt. However, that is irrelevant to the reporter. This is a classic example of how the media loves to sensationalize their stories. Let me throw out a few things that could likely happen if in fact there was true demonstrated evidence that this was a safe and effective cure for cancer.

1) A pharmaceutical company could actually be altruistic and choose to develop this product and potentially lose millions of dollars. However, I would argue that the PR alone for a company that says they have developed a cure for cancer would surely outweigh any development costs and generic competition losses they would face.

2) The Federal Government would subsidize the further development of this product with a pharmaceutical company and grant exclusitivity rights to ensure the company could make some sort of profit. Don’t believe this could happen? Read about the Hatch-Waxman Act, which pertains to generics. This would be done. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Price_Competition_and_Patent_Term_Restoration_Act

3) The Federal Government would allow a pharmaceutical company to file this product under Orphan Drug status. In a nutshell, granting a drug Orphan Drug status fast tracks them through the FDA regulatory pathway and also provides a period of market exclusitivity. This was designed to address situations such as this one. Orphan Drug status is granted for drugs that offer potentially promising therapeutic advantages, but for diseases with a very limited market. It is designed to encourage companies to develop products in markets that would normally cost more to develop in than they would ever make-up in revenue.

4) A pharmaceutical company or foreign government would take this discovery outside to a country or region with less rigid and less expensive regulatory requirements and prove its efficacy in markets outside the U.S. If it really was the miracle drug that it was, the hurdles for approval in the US would drop and approval would likely then be sought from the FDA. Some companies already do this. There is a San Diego-based company called Artes, that recently won FDA approval for a Botox substitute that they claim is superior to Botox and actually continues to get better and better over time once injected. However, instead of tackling the US market first they first got it approved in various European countries. Being a cosmetic treatment it would not be covered under socialized healthcare plans that most European countries have that fixed prices to levels that make it almost unprofitable market products in those countries. However, as a cosmetic treatment they would have a very different market and could charge a premium. Coupled with the simpler regulatory requirements they could make a return much faster that first coming to the US.

The reality of this is that none of these options will likely happen because there is no certainty that this discovery will actually work once it goes through the clinical trials that all drugs have to go through. Sampling of animal data and some human data is hardly proof enough, especially when there are likely several other products that companies are working on that have similar results. You ask yourself, how often do discoveries such as this happen. How often to companies, universities or centers of research make discoveries that could be revolutionary?

Let me try and put this in perspective for everyone. I have worked for four pharmaceutical companies in my years in the industry. At each of these companies, products were and have been discovered that could potentially be revolutionary.

My first company had developed a purely synthetic blood substitute. It was amazing, because the safety data was spectacular; it could act as an oxygen carrier with 8x the oxygen carry capacity of hemoglobin, and was universally compatible with any blood type. Well 12 years and $500 million later the product failed during Phase III clinical trials due to an unexplainable number of patient deaths vs. the control group. My third company had been developing therapeutics based on DNA plasmids. A technology now so simple you could develop a “drug” in a matter of weeks once the DNA sequence was identified for the molecule responsible for triggering the therapeutic response. This technology was applied to a wide array of disease targets including, HIV, flu, cancer and heart disease. This is in fact the company that I referenced earlier that potentially found a vaccine for the H5N1 flu virus. Despite being a promising technology, even 3 years since my departure, the company is still trying to find traction and prove their technology. Lastly, my current company, Amylin Pharmaceuticals recently (about a year ago) presented animal data that examined a triple hormone cocktail for the treatment of obesity. In this presentation, animal data was presented demonstrating incredible results in the weight loss of rats that were injected with this cocktail. Obese rats would have drops of 25% in body weight with 0% muscle loss and 100% fat loss. This was incredible data that no other current treatment could compete with, not even gastric bypass surgery. One year later I have not heard any news on its product. But this does not surprise the company, the investors, or me because we know there are still so many unknowns and hurdles that have to be addressed before any viable product is actually developed. This is part of the reason why drugs take 7-12 years from discovery to regulatory approval. And those are for the drugs that make it. Amylin’s first product discovered was Symlin and Symlin took 18 years from discovery to market approval. And don’t forget that for every drug approved and on the market there was probably hundreds more that were at one point thought to be potential product, but never made it.

So I think it is important that we listen to these kind of news reports with a bit of skepticism and be leery of the sensationalism of media. The media is a multi-billion dollar profit driven industry that like any other industry is trying to make money and often times at the expense of their moral and ethical obligations. Ratings rule their world and controversy drives these ratings. However, despite this, an important point was still brought up, but just under a context that, although plausible, is unlikely in this scenario. The concern that he brought up is a very real concern in that, what happens when business takes precedence over the ethics of saving lives? What happens if a potential treatment just would not be profitable because the market is too small or there is no IP available to block competition and inflate prices to ensure a profit? This leads me to submit that there is an inherent flaw in the system of how drugs are developed. A system designed to protect that consumers has been infiltrated by capitalism and politics…but I will save that for another day…

Google Drunk Email-Blocker

2008-10-15T12:58:00.001-07:00

I can think of a few of us that could use this and I can assure you it is on the way for texting.

Doesn't seem to be working that great yet, but give it some time. It is clear which demographic Google was targeting with this feature...

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1849897,00.html?cnn=yes

Financial definitions based on the recent financial crisis

2008-10-14T20:58:00.000-07:00

NEW WALL STREET TERMS:

CEO --Chief Embezzlement Officer.

CFO-- Corporate Fraud Officer.

BULL MARKET -- A random market movement causing an investor to mistake himself for a financial genius.

BEAR MARKET -- A 6 to 18 month period when the kids get no allowance, the wife gets no jewelry, and the husband gets no sex.

VALUE INVESTING -- The art of buying low and selling lower.

P/E RATIO -- The percentage of investors wetting their pants as the market keeps crashing.

BROKER -- What my broker has made me.

STANDARD & POOR -- Your life in a nutshell.

STOCK ANALYST -- Idiot who just downgraded your stock.

STOCK SPLIT -- When your ex-wife and her lawyer split your assets equally between themselves.

FINANCIAL PLANNER -- A guy whose phone has been disconnected.

MARKET CORRECTION -- The day after you buy stocks.

CASH FLOW-- The movement your money makes as it disappears down the toilet.

YAHOO -- What you yell after selling it to some poor sucker for $240 per share.

WINDOWS -- What you jump out of when you're the sucker who bought Yahoo @$240 per share.

INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR -- Past year investor who's now locked up in a nuthouse.

PROFIT -- An archaic word no longer in use.

2008 Election - SNL Skits

2008-10-13T22:37:00.001-07:00

For those who haven't seen the genius of SNL yet, check out the 2008 Election skits

2nd Presidential Debate

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/update-thursday-debate-open/742065/

Vice Presidential Debate - absolutely hilarious!

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/vp-debate-open-palin-biden/727421/

Presidential Debate - absolutely hilarious!

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/presidential-debate/704121/

Katie Couric and Palin Interview

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/couric-palin-open/704042/

Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/palin-hillary-open/656281/

Ari Gold - Entourage!

2008-10-13T20:35:00.000-07:00

For all of you Entourage lovers...in particular Ari Gold...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGTJSorTQvw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGUBVc8LGxk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5uC3HXNm28&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLeeDSuqIjM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aqmbAN92MM&feature=related

Another great Ron Paul clip

2008-10-13T20:26:00.000-07:00

Another great clip about Ron Paul. I just bought his book "The Revolution: A Manifesto." Will let you know how it is when I am all done with it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeAa77cNKc4&feature=related

Election 2008 - where are the public servants out there like Ron Paul?

2008-10-13T12:40:00.000-07:00

How can you not love this man? Ron Paul truly is an American and a Republican. He speaks with so much integrity and rationality you can't help but love him. Although I do not agree with a lot of his policies (most of his policies), he is someone that doesn't have a hidden agenda, speaks honestly, truthfully and most importantly....consistently. His voting record is impeccable when it comes to being in sync with his message.

Watch Ron Paul talk and then listen to every other mainstream Republican and Democrat and you start to see how much crap they are shoveling. Everyone is so concerned about getting elected and discrediting their opposition, they stop representing their own beliefs or fairly representing the people that have elected them.

Watch the second video starting a 6:00. Ron Paul gets attacked by a complete nimrod (Guliani) with Guliani putting words into his mouth that are designed to incite the emotions of everyone around him. Watch Ron's videos and you will see how much of a straight shooter that man is than Obama, McCain, Bush, Clinton, etc. Watch video 4 and see Charles Gibson from ABC call-out all other Republican nominees except Ron Paul!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hfa7vT02lA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7d_e9lrcZ8&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zthleIslVLU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcNnfbAzAfI&feature=related

Now, I am not saying I would vote for Ron Paul.

a) Although I very much admire the scruples and integrity of Ron I don't agree with his philosophy on government. Aside from his foreign policy view of non-intervention (not isolationism like so many Republicans like to spin it) I really can't agree with what he wants. However, no other politician backs up what we he or she says by their actions and specific examples more so than Ron Paul.

b) Also, I am not nearly as honest and steadfast as that man and for the reason I can't just vote on my morals and principles alone. I am not one that acts like an idealist, where an idealist would vote for Paul on morals alone and not because a different vote would be the lesser of two evils. For me, in this day in age the lesser of two evils is not necessarily the right choice, however, it sometimes the best choice considering the context of the situation.

But honestly, watching someone like Ron Paul say screw politics, screw mainstream media and wake up America is so refreshing it actually make me optimistic for the future. I just hope he and others like him preserve and stay strong. It is so sad that our society and government has become so ignorant, self-involved and easily corruptible it amazes me the others in this world are actually still envious of Americans. I think if Bush did anything good in the last 8 years, its open up the rest of the worlds eyes to our faults and our hypocrisy. Hopefully, it begins to actually open up our eyes before it is too late.

The point I am trying to make is that we as Americans need to start demanding that our elected officials have the integrity and honesty of a man like Ron Paul. Everyone should take a step back and look at where we are today. Take emotion out of it and starting thinking about what you want, what you believe in, and what is right and try and find the politicians that truly exhibit that, and not just say it in a campaign stump speech.

People will mock Ron Paul for his radical views (eliminating the Department of Education, the IRS, etc), but listen to that man's logic and show me another politician that can match what they say with their voting record, their evidence and their plan to fulfill what they tell us they are going to do.

For everyone's information I will be voting for Obama this year. Is he the most qualified candidate? No, but for that matter no one is, except maybe for Ron Paul. Do I think Obama is a "terrorist" who doesn't care about his country and will hurt us, a message that Palin and Mccain have tried to insinuate? Absolutely NOT! I truly believe that Obama will the best candidate that has a chance of actually of winning to address what I think is the most important issue facing our country at this time. And that is to enact changes in foreign policy that help restore confidence and respect in the United States by the rest of the world. I feel that McCain represents too much of the same and I have been leery from day one. However, his actions of late have solidified the fact that I feel he will only continue to drive us in the wrong direction. The nomination of Palin as VP was the nail/glue/screw/ in the coffin that there is no way I would ever vote for him. If there was ever a more political maneuver than her being picked to be VP I would be hard pressed to find it. For McCain and conservatives alike to criticize Obama's experience and then pick Palin as the second most powerful person in the world is insane!!!!! Who does Obama pick? Biden, a man that complements him where he is understandably not as strong. Obama picks someone who will help him be a better president and McCain picks someone that will get him more votes. That is the type of politics that I absolutely despise. I hate people telling me that Palin is a good pick and she will do a good job. Tell me HOW. What does she bring to the table? She is a fresh face that gets vote. That is it. What experience does she bring?

We are becoming the laughing stock of the rest of world and if it wasn't for the dependence on the American financial markets on the global economy, every country would be stepping all over us. People need stop getting caught up in the fear generated by the Republicans and start thinking pragmatically. Obama will be the best person right now who can do that for us...I just wished there was fiscal moderate/social liberal version of Ron Paul who could actually get elected and get this country back on track!

The beginning

2008-07-13T22:09:00.000-07:00

So this weekend was a great weekend. I took my first steps towards training for a triathlon. First step, and the hardest step. Stopping the drinking. Well not quite completely. But only having a total of 4 drinks the entire weekend is a big milestone, considering the company of friends I have. But, this helped create one of the most productive and satisfying weekends I have had in a while.

Gym in the morning with Baller Tom, followed by a little brunch was a nice way to start off the day. We then ran to the beach (only about 1/2-3/4 mile run) and then did some body surfing for about 1/2 hour. Then we ran home again. Felt good to be out there. It was a great day in Encinitas and it was nice to finalize capitalize on the amazing location that I live in after being here for over 4 years.

My buddy Eric came down and he took me bike shopping. He is a pretty experienced cyclist, so I just followed him around. We ended up stopping first at Leucadia Cyclery and lucked out. The happended to have a great used bike for sale for only $499. We checked out one other place, but came right back and picked it up. Whew. Got that out of the way.

Sunday.

Woke up around 7 and went the gym as usual. Stopped by Ralphs on the way home and stocked up on some healthy food for the week. Ended up going shopping with Eric again for biking gear. If you are going to cycle, you got to look the part right? (I never thought the day would come that I would be one of the guys that I always made fun/cursed at while they cycled by me in my car). Stocked up on the essentials and came back home for my first bike ride. I got a little lesson on how to clip in and out of the bike, which was key. And then we went out. We road up to the Carlsbad power station and then headed back. About 9.8 miles. Some key highlights. I am a massive pansie (well at least my quads are). I was burning about a mile into the ride, so I definitely have some training to do until the big day (Oct 5th by the way). And the big highlight..stopped at the traffic light waiting to make a left turn I fall off my bike. Details not needed, but lets just say I did fall on my ass with 4 cars next to me. A little embarassing, but at least I got my first fall out of the way. It felt really good though and I am excited to go out again.

Now a few hours later I started working on the deck with Bob. It is essentially done, but we have some finishing touches and we have to stain it. So we did that for about an hour and when I finished, I felt like a cripple. My hands, quads, butt, arms, everything was aching. So about 1/2 hour in the spa help relieve the pain, but I am not looking to the morning.

All in all a great weekend. I am looking forward to having more weekends like this, but lets see how long I can keep this up.