SCIENTIST: How Much Should Gardasil Cost? Merck's Net Income for 2006 ~ $4.5 BILLION Dollars

http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover

http://www.the-scientist.com/article/home/53410/

Excerpt: Merck could cut the price of its new vaccine by 90% and
still do very well.

I've had some questions about Jeffrey P Utz, who has given the
Vaccination Industry Viewpoint and added confusion and distortions for
several years.

What we've found out is that at one time, after Med School, he was
awarded a 'restricted' medical license ... apparently when that
expired, he was awarded NONE.

He then appeared on Usenet as an avid Pharma Shill ... working in
alliance and in tandem with, although not listed with the Snake-oil
Team.

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/snake-oil.htm

Ilena Rose wrote:
http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover

http://www.the-scientist.com/article/home/53410/

Excerpt: Merck could cut the price of its new vaccine by 90% and
still do very well.

Why should it? How else will it make money to develop new drugs?

Why don't you use your brain and tell us how much it should cost and how
you came up with that figure.

I've had some questions about Jeffrey P Utz, who has given the
Vaccination Industry Viewpoint and added confusion and distortions for
several years.

I express *MY* views. I don't know or care what the drug industry
viewpoint is.

...

Jeff

"Jeff" wrote in message
news:TkHrj.1120$r03.266@trnddc08...
Ilena Rose wrote:
http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover

http://www.the-scientist.com/article/home/53410/

Excerpt: Merck could cut the price of its new vaccine by 90% and
still do very well.

Why should it? How else will it make money to develop new drugs?

Why don't you use your brain and tell us how much it should cost and how
you came up with that figure.

I've had some questions about Jeffrey P Utz, who has given the
Vaccination Industry Viewpoint and added confusion and distortions for
several years.

I express *MY* views. I don't know or care what the drug industry
viewpoint is.

Well - let's address the issue ilena brought up head on - no, the company
would NOT do very well. The company would fold, probably overnight. That
kind of a business decision would cause a virtual instantaneous loss of
confidence in the company and investors - small, big, all - would sell Merck
and the next think Merck would be doing would be filing for bankruptcy.
Decisions have ramifications.

Skeptic wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message
news:TkHrj.1120$r03.266@trnddc08...
Ilena Rose wrote:
http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover

http://www.the-scientist.com/article/home/53410/

Excerpt: Merck could cut the price of its new vaccine by 90% and
still do very well.
Why should it? How else will it make money to develop new drugs?

Why don't you use your brain and tell us how much it should cost and how
you came up with that figure.

I've had some questions about Jeffrey P Utz, who has given the
Vaccination Industry Viewpoint and added confusion and distortions for
several years.
I express *MY* views. I don't know or care what the drug industry
viewpoint is.

Well - let's address the issue ilena brought up head on - no, the company
would NOT do very well. The company would fold, probably overnight. That
kind of a business decision would cause a virtual instantaneous loss of
confidence in the company and investors - small, big, all - would sell Merck
and the next think Merck would be doing would be filing for bankruptcy.
Decisions have ramifications.

Gee, you mean like Merck is in business to make money and not supply
free drugs?

Actually, in that case, Merck would not be filing for bankruptcy. Merck
would, instead, be filing the papers with the Securities and Exchange
Commission announce that they have a new President and CEO and other
senior officers of the company.

Jeff