Vitamin, Mineral, and Herb Ban

I personally don't see why things like vitamin supplements are being banned (is that really what the new law is going to do?) but I do think some form of regulation is in order to prevent unscrupulous people marketing "snake oil" as amazing cure-all remedies.

OTOH, if people want to do 1000% RDAs of each vitamin each day then I don't see any reason to stop them doing it. I'm generally against a lot of this "nanny state" regulation.

I have taken large doses of vitamin C before when I've had colds but TBH I don't know whether it made any difference. I haven't taken vitamin supplements for quite a while now though. If I want a hit of vitamin C for a cold I'd much rather make myself some freshly squeezed orange juice. Tastes a lot nicer than those disgusting 1000mg fizzy tablets from Roche

Michael.

 

I know some of their patent people, both from Sandoz Basel and from ICI/Zeneca (Jealott's Hill).

 

I work at Jealotts Hill and have had dealings with most of the patent guys. Mostly on an irregular basis though, so they probably wont remember me.

Incidentally, the numbers you quoted on the number of candidates screened in order to get a new drug (10,000 to one) is likely to be an underestimate these days. In the agchem industry, we are finding it harder and harder to come up with viable candidates. I believe we are screening in the region of 100,000 compounds per year thanks to the advent of combinatorial chemistry, and even then its very hard to come up with something. I am sure it is the same in the pharmaceutical industry as well.

 

I can never remember the exact success rates of drug discovery (and anyway the figures tend to go up and down like a yo-yo), so I erred on the side of generosity. What you say doesn't surprise me at all. Moreover, it isn't going to get any easier.

I once knew a lot more of the JH patent folk, back when it was ICI Agro and I worked at ICI Australia's R&D facility at Ascot Vale. We had a lot of common interests in selective herbicides. Most of that old group has now gone and the current head came from ICI Paints Division in Slough (as an old Dulux Australia man, I'm so ancient I remember when he started there!).

One guy at JH had, at last reckoning, 9 Garrard 301 & 401 turntables (all, I think, in running order). I put his possession of nine of the things down to an excess of enthusiasm and disposable income (a DINK, y'see). He also has a hi-fi in every room, courtesy of his brother who upgrades constantly and who gives him all the stuff he doesn't want.

 

I put it down to the vast salaries you patents guys earn

I've heard that some of the guys were into hifi, but have never really had the opportunity to chat to them about it.

Things have changed a lot since the old ICI days, the senior management are fairly brutal when it comes to cost savings. Its all about saving money these days. Last year they closed down an entire department in Basel (120+ jobs), moving many of the jobs to JH. This was pretty much unheard of in Switzerland and caused a lot of disquiet over there.

 

I live 200m from that facility. I was thinking of applying to something there maybe.. they do pay well and seem to value a good education. Or then again, I might just do a PGCE and become a Fast Track teacher....

 

Robbo, I guess it reflects the cyclical nature of the agro business. It's one reason why The Big N wanted out. Before the Novartis merger, old Marc Moret, Big Cheese Almost For Life of Sandoz, had made it clear that Sandoz would become a Pharma and Nutrition company. Shortly after, the Sandoz Specialty Chemicals Division became Clariant. And then came Novartis, "Moret's final coup", as the "Basler Zeitung" put it.

Agro only got kept because Ciba-Geigy was so proud of its Agro, the world's biggest agro business, but it was always clear in Basel that Dan the Man had it in his sights. I'm still amazed that they kept CibaVision (awaiting a good offer?). Meanwhile, the name Sandoz has returned - it's used for the generics business.

 

If you mean patents as a career, BB, be prepared for the toughest exams you've ever undertaken - and get your reading knowledge of German or French up to speed, because one of the exams requires you to read stuff in one of those languages. But if it's your thing and you have the grit to see it through (it's really a prolonged endurance test), it's immensely rewarding as a career (financially it's not bad, but you can do much better in private practice).

 

Nah not patents.. I think competition is too fierce for patent attorney places.. having said that I only tried Mathys & Squire, so maybe I gave up too soon. The profession still appears to be very Oxbridge orientated. I am not Oxbridge; what I have is good but it can't compete with a Masters from Oxbridge (which everyone at Mathys seems to have). I was thinking about something more attainable like supply chains/production....

Having said that, I guess a private Patent Attorney sounds like a perfect job.. you could live anywhere in the world and use the net and phone to conduct business?!??

 

Oxbridge is certainly favoured by the big London firms, for no reason other than snobbery, so far as I can ascertain. However, the fact is that non-Oxbridge can do the job every bit as well (or better) than Oxbridge. It just depends on whether you have the aptitude for the job (not everybody has - some people can't stand it).

As for working anywhere in the world, weeeeell, it's not quite so simple. Certainly there are places all round the world - I have this big Californian law firm that still chases me occasionally. But you'll still need a qualification, which means you've got not only to study but also practise. The only way you can learn to draft a patent application is by doing it. I can now bang 'em out at a speed that frightens the life out of my assistants, but it wasn't really so long ago that I was like them, in awe of someone else with this seemingly magical ability that I would never learn, I thought. With qualifications and experience, the world's your oyster, but you'll still have to learn the local law, and you may have to pass local exams. I am qualified in Europe, Australia and New Zealand; I think that'll do!

 

Alas, your profession is out-of-reach methinks. Especially now that the UK has some 40% of young people graduating from university. Even Oxbridge is processing 50% more students than it did 10 years ago.

 

Go and read medicine. Join the big conspiracy. But keep quiet about it.

 

I have missed the boat with that regard also.. If I had my time again, I would definately NOT study engineering. I must have been crazy. Look at every product you use in your daily life - we make none of it.

 

But we design and engineer much of it.

Engineering is a great career - if you can do it:JOEL:

 

That's me busted then

 

Just thinking back on topic - if someone wanted to have supplements of minerals and vits, surely eating a strict diet of the right foods would be the best way versus taking engineered processed products? eg - if you want to take amino acid supps why dont you go the whole hog and eat more proteins?

With my limited engineering capabilities Im afraid I cant talk in detail about triglycerides and the such, just my 2pence worth.

 

TRUST ME ON THIS - you will HATE every minute of it. 3 out of my 3 siblings (yep, all of them!) are teachers at varying levels, and they never stop whinging and moaning about the paperwork and stress, and the standards of the monsters' upbringing (well, most of the class in my sister's inner city Liverpool school are monsters anyway - I know as I had to sit in on one of her lessons once - amazing how 5 and 6 year olds can already be nasty bits of work!). The amount of reporting, planning etc is ludicrous - forget those long summer holidays, as you'll be doing 50 hour weeks all year - and that's probably an understatement. For the wages they offer, I'd never take it - double them (into management territory - which is really what teachers ARE now!) and I might reconsider.

Tones - I know my 2 points were simplistic, but I wanted to open up the ideas in debate Thalidomide though - surely they'd have questioned WHY it wasn't tested on pregnant women BEFORE it went on sale!? I mean, pregnant women (at least now) aren't exactly a rare, small percentage of the population are they? I still smell a rat there...

My main beef with not trusting doctors is that my company one prescribed me something to help with headaches I was getting at work. After being stoned at work all day (thanks to his prescription!) and losing performance, after 4 months I went to my OWN GP and found out that what the other had prescribed was addictive antidepressants.

By this point I'd stopped taking them anyway and just went to my own doctor to confirm it was safe to have stopped. Having a history of reactive depression in the family, and the other doctor knowing that, I feel it's unforgiveable he didn't tell me the dangers of the drugs. Luckily I wasn't hooked, but I lost my bonus that year and work wouldn't reconsider DESPITE it being their own doc who put me in the crap performance situation. Both employer and GP are lucky I didn't sue.

 

My gf has been a teacher for 10 years. She loves the kids, she loves the job, and she gets some 11 weeks holiday a year which is only partially consumed by paperwork i.e. planning and marking. I think it can't be worse than industry. I just thought it might be good if we were both teachers. Also, if we both learn another European language - we could work toward the goal of moving out of the UK. 2 teachers salaries ain't gonna make us rich, but it's steady, in demand, and it offers time for travel.

I don't trust the NHS or UK doctors. Bad experiences etc.

 

Thalidomide was tested on pregnant guinea pigs before it was launched. The only snag with this was that it doesn't cause any fetal abnormalities in guinea pigs. It is not ethical to 'test' new drugs on pregnant women, dom. You smell a lot of rats, really.

 

I *had* a very close childhood friend who did just that. The guy was strong as a horse and thought that with "natural" remedies he could beat it.
*It* killed him (and the memory of the *shell* that he had become before his death is indelibly imprinted in my mind), had he taken the pharmaceutical path there is is every reason to believe he would still be alive today.