Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Allan Harris's avatar

So, to raise what seems like an obvious question - how can a group of people with obvious conflicts of interest, be given the responsibility of voting on the approval / disapproval of the head of the HHS, knowing their support or lack of support may affect their future rewards from these pharmaceutical companies? Thank God for platforms like this that expose this insanity.

Expand full comment
mejbcart's avatar

Yes, this LIST is important, BUT we need the DATA between 2019 and 2024, not old stuff, which doesn't not even include inflation...

It would be optimal if the entire senate committee having the decisive impact on that imrpotant decision, whom to choose, was consisting of members who in total have ZERO campaign, etc., etc., contributions from PHARMA, or anyone for that matter. They get their HIGH PAID salaries (and that many of them retirees..), enough is enough. Does any father or mother of raising children get even a penny from Eli Lilly?? On the contrary, every penny needs to be hard earned!

As a side note, feel pity with those who carry that cheap name, Penny, now to be erased due to copper shortage..

Expand full comment
23 more comments...

No posts