<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_14_0011220</id>
	<title>Pharma Marketing Faces a Character-Count Conundrum</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1268578020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>this\_boat\_is\_real writes <i>"There's growing concern over how pharmaceutical companies use social media and the Internet to market their products. Last November, the US Food and Drug Administration held a hearing on the topic, and many were worried over how marketing mediums such as Twitter &mdash; which has a 140-character limit on text &mdash; <a href="http://blogs.nature.com/nm/spoonful/2010/03/pharma\_faces\_a\_character\_count\_1.html">can sufficiently disclose drug risks</a>."</i> Here's the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDER/ucm184250.htm">FDA's announcement about last year's hearings</a>, which includes links to an archive of presentations as well as a video record of the meeting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>this \ _boat \ _is \ _real writes " There 's growing concern over how pharmaceutical companies use social media and the Internet to market their products .
Last November , the US Food and Drug Administration held a hearing on the topic , and many were worried over how marketing mediums such as Twitter    which has a 140-character limit on text    can sufficiently disclose drug risks .
" Here 's the FDA 's announcement about last year 's hearings , which includes links to an archive of presentations as well as a video record of the meeting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this\_boat\_is\_real writes "There's growing concern over how pharmaceutical companies use social media and the Internet to market their products.
Last November, the US Food and Drug Administration held a hearing on the topic, and many were worried over how marketing mediums such as Twitter — which has a 140-character limit on text — can sufficiently disclose drug risks.
" Here's the FDA's announcement about last year's hearings, which includes links to an archive of presentations as well as a video record of the meeting.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470464</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268597880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Side effects are often haphazard - some guy may have reported having more headaches during clinical trials, but the true cause was his kids drums or listening to his iPod too much.  Someone may have had a heart attack during trials but that was due to chance or perhaps too high a cholesterol.  Drug testing is as scientific as we can make it, but is nowhere near the chemistry lab experiments we did in high school for being truly controlled.  The systems involved and the myriad possible interactions are just too hard to test completely, so any reported side effects (possibly higher than a certain threshold) have to be reported.  How many software incompatibilities have we seen over the years where software package x and driver y don't get along?  The same thing happens for drugs, especially when the elderly who have the weakest (on average) immune systems are the ones coping with the most interactions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Side effects are often haphazard - some guy may have reported having more headaches during clinical trials , but the true cause was his kids drums or listening to his iPod too much .
Someone may have had a heart attack during trials but that was due to chance or perhaps too high a cholesterol .
Drug testing is as scientific as we can make it , but is nowhere near the chemistry lab experiments we did in high school for being truly controlled .
The systems involved and the myriad possible interactions are just too hard to test completely , so any reported side effects ( possibly higher than a certain threshold ) have to be reported .
How many software incompatibilities have we seen over the years where software package x and driver y do n't get along ?
The same thing happens for drugs , especially when the elderly who have the weakest ( on average ) immune systems are the ones coping with the most interactions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Side effects are often haphazard - some guy may have reported having more headaches during clinical trials, but the true cause was his kids drums or listening to his iPod too much.
Someone may have had a heart attack during trials but that was due to chance or perhaps too high a cholesterol.
Drug testing is as scientific as we can make it, but is nowhere near the chemistry lab experiments we did in high school for being truly controlled.
The systems involved and the myriad possible interactions are just too hard to test completely, so any reported side effects (possibly higher than a certain threshold) have to be reported.
How many software incompatibilities have we seen over the years where software package x and driver y don't get along?
The same thing happens for drugs, especially when the elderly who have the weakest (on average) immune systems are the ones coping with the most interactions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31477200</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Kalriath</author>
	<datestamp>1268578980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong.  We don't allow prescription drug advertising (except for unsubsidised non-special authority ones, such as Losec for heartburn, and the two ED medications).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong .
We do n't allow prescription drug advertising ( except for unsubsidised non-special authority ones , such as Losec for heartburn , and the two ED medications ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong.
We don't allow prescription drug advertising (except for unsubsidised non-special authority ones, such as Losec for heartburn, and the two ED medications).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469622</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1268499840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>that's a very good point. before i visited the states i'd never seen an ad on tv for prescription drugs. i can't see how it helps anyone other then the drug company, and their well being doesn't trump the publics.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's a very good point .
before i visited the states i 'd never seen an ad on tv for prescription drugs .
i ca n't see how it helps anyone other then the drug company , and their well being does n't trump the publics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's a very good point.
before i visited the states i'd never seen an ad on tv for prescription drugs.
i can't see how it helps anyone other then the drug company, and their well being doesn't trump the publics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469270</id>
	<title>Information</title>
	<author>Sarten-X</author>
	<datestamp>1268496060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm in favor of full disclosure of significant risks, but I think it's a bit ridiculous that a side effect with 0.1\% occurrence  needs to be listed in every advertisement. If you're getting a prescription medication, you should be talking to a doctor. The doctor should be able to warn you of significant side effects, and those lovely information sheets can tell you about the rest. Is this much information REALLY necessary?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm in favor of full disclosure of significant risks , but I think it 's a bit ridiculous that a side effect with 0.1 \ % occurrence needs to be listed in every advertisement .
If you 're getting a prescription medication , you should be talking to a doctor .
The doctor should be able to warn you of significant side effects , and those lovely information sheets can tell you about the rest .
Is this much information REALLY necessary ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm in favor of full disclosure of significant risks, but I think it's a bit ridiculous that a side effect with 0.1\% occurrence  needs to be listed in every advertisement.
If you're getting a prescription medication, you should be talking to a doctor.
The doctor should be able to warn you of significant side effects, and those lovely information sheets can tell you about the rest.
Is this much information REALLY necessary?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470054</id>
	<title>140 characters</title>
	<author>Gentlewhisper</author>
	<datestamp>1268505420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Not intended for off-road use. Best if used before date on carton. May explode if recharged improperly. Contains no artificial colors or ingredients. This product is meant for educational purposes only. Void where prohibited. Some assembly required. List each check separately by bank number. Batteries not included. Contents may settle during shipment. Use only as directed. No other warranty expressed or implied. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Postage will be paid by addressee. This is not an offer to sell securities. Apply only to affected area. May be too intense for some viewers. Do not stamp. Use other side for additional listings. For recreational use only. All models over 18 years of age. If condition persists, consult your physician. No user-servicable parts inside. Simulated picture. Times approximate. No postage necessary if mailed in the United States. Breaking seal constitutes acceptance of agreement. As seen on TV. One size fits all. Many suitcases look alike. Contains a substantial amount of non-tobacco ingredients. Colors may, in time, fade. We have sent the forms which seem to be right for you. For office use only. Not affiliated with the American Red Cross. Edited for television. Post office will not deliver without postage. List was current at time of printing. Not the Beatles. Penalty for private use. Substantial penalty for early withdrawal. Do not write below this line. Your cancelled check is your receipt. Add toner. Avoid contact with skin. Sanitized for your protection. Sign here without admitting guilt. Slightly higher west of the Mississippi. Employees and their families are not eligible. Contestants have been briefed on some questions before the show. Limited time offer, call now to insure prompt delivery. You must be present to win. Use only in well-ventilated area. Keep away from fire or flame. Approved for veterans. Booths for two or more. Check here if tax deductible. Price does not include taxes. Not recommended for children. No alcohol, dogs, or horses. Restaurant package, not for resale. Packaged by weight, not volume: some settling may occur during shipping. Opened for inspection. Lather, rinse, repeat. Keep out of reach of children. For external use only. Do not exceed recommended dosage. Suggested serving. Do not remove this tag until sold for retail. Dry clean only. Not for use with the Republican party. If left parked for over 10 minutes, may be towed. This product is meant for educational purposes only. Ask your doctor or pharmacist. Do not open. Authorized personnel only. You may have additional rights which vary from state to state. Not recommended for children under 12. Parental guidance is irrelevent. Batteries not included. Does not come with any other figures. Any resemblence to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental. Void where prohibited. Some assembly required. Contents may settle during shipment. Use only as directed. No other warranty expressed or implied. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle. Postage will be paid by addressee. Address correction requested. This is not an offer to sell securities. Apply only to affected area. Not for internal use. May be unsettling to some viewers. Do not stamp. Use other side for additional listings. For recreational purposes only. Do not disturb. Must be over 18 or have your parent's permission. If condition persists, consult your doctor. Freshest if eaten before date stamped on carton. Subject to change without notice. Times approximate. No postage necessary if mailed in the United States. Breaking seal constitues acceptance of agreement. Place stamp here. One backup copy may be made. One size fits all. Colors may, in time, fade. Any inperfections are inherent in the material. Slippery when wet. For office use only. Net weight before cooking. Post Office will not deliver without postage. Keep cool; process promptly. List current at time of printing. At participating locations only. Penalty for private use. See label for sequence. Substantial penalty for early withdrawal. Licensed f</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not intended for off-road use .
Best if used before date on carton .
May explode if recharged improperly .
Contains no artificial colors or ingredients .
This product is meant for educational purposes only .
Void where prohibited .
Some assembly required .
List each check separately by bank number .
Batteries not included .
Contents may settle during shipment .
Use only as directed .
No other warranty expressed or implied .
Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment .
Postage will be paid by addressee .
This is not an offer to sell securities .
Apply only to affected area .
May be too intense for some viewers .
Do not stamp .
Use other side for additional listings .
For recreational use only .
All models over 18 years of age .
If condition persists , consult your physician .
No user-servicable parts inside .
Simulated picture .
Times approximate .
No postage necessary if mailed in the United States .
Breaking seal constitutes acceptance of agreement .
As seen on TV .
One size fits all .
Many suitcases look alike .
Contains a substantial amount of non-tobacco ingredients .
Colors may , in time , fade .
We have sent the forms which seem to be right for you .
For office use only .
Not affiliated with the American Red Cross .
Edited for television .
Post office will not deliver without postage .
List was current at time of printing .
Not the Beatles .
Penalty for private use .
Substantial penalty for early withdrawal .
Do not write below this line .
Your cancelled check is your receipt .
Add toner .
Avoid contact with skin .
Sanitized for your protection .
Sign here without admitting guilt .
Slightly higher west of the Mississippi .
Employees and their families are not eligible .
Contestants have been briefed on some questions before the show .
Limited time offer , call now to insure prompt delivery .
You must be present to win .
Use only in well-ventilated area .
Keep away from fire or flame .
Approved for veterans .
Booths for two or more .
Check here if tax deductible .
Price does not include taxes .
Not recommended for children .
No alcohol , dogs , or horses .
Restaurant package , not for resale .
Packaged by weight , not volume : some settling may occur during shipping .
Opened for inspection .
Lather , rinse , repeat .
Keep out of reach of children .
For external use only .
Do not exceed recommended dosage .
Suggested serving .
Do not remove this tag until sold for retail .
Dry clean only .
Not for use with the Republican party .
If left parked for over 10 minutes , may be towed .
This product is meant for educational purposes only .
Ask your doctor or pharmacist .
Do not open .
Authorized personnel only .
You may have additional rights which vary from state to state .
Not recommended for children under 12 .
Parental guidance is irrelevent .
Batteries not included .
Does not come with any other figures .
Any resemblence to real persons , living or dead , is purely coincidental .
Void where prohibited .
Some assembly required .
Contents may settle during shipment .
Use only as directed .
No other warranty expressed or implied .
Do not use while operating a motor vehicle .
Postage will be paid by addressee .
Address correction requested .
This is not an offer to sell securities .
Apply only to affected area .
Not for internal use .
May be unsettling to some viewers .
Do not stamp .
Use other side for additional listings .
For recreational purposes only .
Do not disturb .
Must be over 18 or have your parent 's permission .
If condition persists , consult your doctor .
Freshest if eaten before date stamped on carton .
Subject to change without notice .
Times approximate .
No postage necessary if mailed in the United States .
Breaking seal constitues acceptance of agreement .
Place stamp here .
One backup copy may be made .
One size fits all .
Colors may , in time , fade .
Any inperfections are inherent in the material .
Slippery when wet .
For office use only .
Net weight before cooking .
Post Office will not deliver without postage .
Keep cool ; process promptly .
List current at time of printing .
At participating locations only .
Penalty for private use .
See label for sequence .
Substantial penalty for early withdrawal .
Licensed f</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Not intended for off-road use.
Best if used before date on carton.
May explode if recharged improperly.
Contains no artificial colors or ingredients.
This product is meant for educational purposes only.
Void where prohibited.
Some assembly required.
List each check separately by bank number.
Batteries not included.
Contents may settle during shipment.
Use only as directed.
No other warranty expressed or implied.
Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment.
Postage will be paid by addressee.
This is not an offer to sell securities.
Apply only to affected area.
May be too intense for some viewers.
Do not stamp.
Use other side for additional listings.
For recreational use only.
All models over 18 years of age.
If condition persists, consult your physician.
No user-servicable parts inside.
Simulated picture.
Times approximate.
No postage necessary if mailed in the United States.
Breaking seal constitutes acceptance of agreement.
As seen on TV.
One size fits all.
Many suitcases look alike.
Contains a substantial amount of non-tobacco ingredients.
Colors may, in time, fade.
We have sent the forms which seem to be right for you.
For office use only.
Not affiliated with the American Red Cross.
Edited for television.
Post office will not deliver without postage.
List was current at time of printing.
Not the Beatles.
Penalty for private use.
Substantial penalty for early withdrawal.
Do not write below this line.
Your cancelled check is your receipt.
Add toner.
Avoid contact with skin.
Sanitized for your protection.
Sign here without admitting guilt.
Slightly higher west of the Mississippi.
Employees and their families are not eligible.
Contestants have been briefed on some questions before the show.
Limited time offer, call now to insure prompt delivery.
You must be present to win.
Use only in well-ventilated area.
Keep away from fire or flame.
Approved for veterans.
Booths for two or more.
Check here if tax deductible.
Price does not include taxes.
Not recommended for children.
No alcohol, dogs, or horses.
Restaurant package, not for resale.
Packaged by weight, not volume: some settling may occur during shipping.
Opened for inspection.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Keep out of reach of children.
For external use only.
Do not exceed recommended dosage.
Suggested serving.
Do not remove this tag until sold for retail.
Dry clean only.
Not for use with the Republican party.
If left parked for over 10 minutes, may be towed.
This product is meant for educational purposes only.
Ask your doctor or pharmacist.
Do not open.
Authorized personnel only.
You may have additional rights which vary from state to state.
Not recommended for children under 12.
Parental guidance is irrelevent.
Batteries not included.
Does not come with any other figures.
Any resemblence to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
Void where prohibited.
Some assembly required.
Contents may settle during shipment.
Use only as directed.
No other warranty expressed or implied.
Do not use while operating a motor vehicle.
Postage will be paid by addressee.
Address correction requested.
This is not an offer to sell securities.
Apply only to affected area.
Not for internal use.
May be unsettling to some viewers.
Do not stamp.
Use other side for additional listings.
For recreational purposes only.
Do not disturb.
Must be over 18 or have your parent's permission.
If condition persists, consult your doctor.
Freshest if eaten before date stamped on carton.
Subject to change without notice.
Times approximate.
No postage necessary if mailed in the United States.
Breaking seal constitues acceptance of agreement.
Place stamp here.
One backup copy may be made.
One size fits all.
Colors may, in time, fade.
Any inperfections are inherent in the material.
Slippery when wet.
For office use only.
Net weight before cooking.
Post Office will not deliver without postage.
Keep cool; process promptly.
List current at time of printing.
At participating locations only.
Penalty for private use.
See label for sequence.
Substantial penalty for early withdrawal.
Licensed f</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469680</id>
	<title>It's easy to do in 144 characters...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268500560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Viagra: Get yur d!ck up! F-ck lik a horse! SFX: Eye sh!t, belly sh!t, soft sh!t, piss sh!t, heart sh!t, brain sh!t, crash yur plane sh!t.</p><p>#Pfizer</p></div></blockquote><p>See?</p><p>There's more info in 144 characters than you'll get from the tv commercials.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Viagra : Get yur d ! ck up !
F-ck lik a horse !
SFX : Eye sh ! t , belly sh ! t , soft sh ! t , piss sh ! t , heart sh ! t , brain sh ! t , crash yur plane sh ! t. # PfizerSee ? There 's more info in 144 characters than you 'll get from the tv commercials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Viagra: Get yur d!ck up!
F-ck lik a horse!
SFX: Eye sh!t, belly sh!t, soft sh!t, piss sh!t, heart sh!t, brain sh!t, crash yur plane sh!t.#PfizerSee?There's more info in 144 characters than you'll get from the tv commercials.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31474060</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268599920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And I say this as someone who will ardently defend the freedom of speech, even down to things one finds disgusting or shocking or distasteful. But speech when you're trying to sell something is different altogether. Speech when you're selling something that could have significant risks, ten times so. No constitutional amendment is required here.</i> </p><p>Your bar for "ardently defend the freedom of speech" is really fucking low.  This thread is a good example of how pro-censorship, pro (medical)patent, and pro state-licensing the slashdot crowd is.  Freedom to tinker?  Information wants to be free.  "Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle..."?  "fuck that TJ shit" the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/crowd says!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I say this as someone who will ardently defend the freedom of speech , even down to things one finds disgusting or shocking or distasteful .
But speech when you 're trying to sell something is different altogether .
Speech when you 're selling something that could have significant risks , ten times so .
No constitutional amendment is required here .
Your bar for " ardently defend the freedom of speech " is really fucking low .
This thread is a good example of how pro-censorship , pro ( medical ) patent , and pro state-licensing the slashdot crowd is .
Freedom to tinker ?
Information wants to be free .
" Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle... " ?
" fuck that TJ shit " the /crowd says !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I say this as someone who will ardently defend the freedom of speech, even down to things one finds disgusting or shocking or distasteful.
But speech when you're trying to sell something is different altogether.
Speech when you're selling something that could have significant risks, ten times so.
No constitutional amendment is required here.
Your bar for "ardently defend the freedom of speech" is really fucking low.
This thread is a good example of how pro-censorship, pro (medical)patent, and pro state-licensing the slashdot crowd is.
Freedom to tinker?
Information wants to be free.
"Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle..."?
"fuck that TJ shit" the /crowd says!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470716</id>
	<title>It's not the count of the characters</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1268560020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not the count of the characters, but the content of their character that is the problem with big pharma.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not the count of the characters , but the content of their character that is the problem with big pharma .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not the count of the characters, but the content of their character that is the problem with big pharma.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396</id>
	<title>Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements.</title>
	<author>laughingcoyote</author>
	<datestamp>1268497140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs. The reason that prescription drugs are, well, by prescription, is that they may carry significant risks, and careful evaluation by a professional is required as to whether a patient should take them.</p><p>If a patient needs a prescription, let their doctor be the one who gives them their options, based on a full discussion of the risks and benefits of each possible one, and let the patient be the one to decide based on this information. And while we're at it, let's disallow the pharma companies from ever knowing how often a given doctor prescribes their stuff, so that they can't give any type of reward or kickback (they would still, of course, know how often they're prescribed in aggregate).</p><p>Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional, not a glossy brochure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs .
The reason that prescription drugs are , well , by prescription , is that they may carry significant risks , and careful evaluation by a professional is required as to whether a patient should take them.If a patient needs a prescription , let their doctor be the one who gives them their options , based on a full discussion of the risks and benefits of each possible one , and let the patient be the one to decide based on this information .
And while we 're at it , let 's disallow the pharma companies from ever knowing how often a given doctor prescribes their stuff , so that they ca n't give any type of reward or kickback ( they would still , of course , know how often they 're prescribed in aggregate ) .Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional , not a glossy brochure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs.
The reason that prescription drugs are, well, by prescription, is that they may carry significant risks, and careful evaluation by a professional is required as to whether a patient should take them.If a patient needs a prescription, let their doctor be the one who gives them their options, based on a full discussion of the risks and benefits of each possible one, and let the patient be the one to decide based on this information.
And while we're at it, let's disallow the pharma companies from ever knowing how often a given doctor prescribes their stuff, so that they can't give any type of reward or kickback (they would still, of course, know how often they're prescribed in aggregate).Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional, not a glossy brochure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31471812</id>
	<title>Google Buzz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268578020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't have this limit.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't have this limit .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't have this limit.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470152</id>
	<title>As a vistor to the US...</title>
	<author>trawg</author>
	<datestamp>1268506680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... I am regularly amazed by the sheer number of pharma ads on television. Depending on the time of day I can see anywhere between 50 to 100\% of the ads on TV being about pharma products.</p><p>I'd worry about getting those ones down before I worried about the Internet ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... I am regularly amazed by the sheer number of pharma ads on television .
Depending on the time of day I can see anywhere between 50 to 100 \ % of the ads on TV being about pharma products.I 'd worry about getting those ones down before I worried about the Internet ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I am regularly amazed by the sheer number of pharma ads on television.
Depending on the time of day I can see anywhere between 50 to 100\% of the ads on TV being about pharma products.I'd worry about getting those ones down before I worried about the Internet ones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470118</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Panoptes</author>
	<datestamp>1268506020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>After reading this (and other comments in a similar vein) I can see more clearly what is wrong with commercialised healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry in the USA. For all us non-Americans out in the real world, the title of that patriotic song "God Save America" might be changed to "God Save Us From America".</htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading this ( and other comments in a similar vein ) I can see more clearly what is wrong with commercialised healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry in the USA .
For all us non-Americans out in the real world , the title of that patriotic song " God Save America " might be changed to " God Save Us From America " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading this (and other comments in a similar vein) I can see more clearly what is wrong with commercialised healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry in the USA.
For all us non-Americans out in the real world, the title of that patriotic song "God Save America" might be changed to "God Save Us From America".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469742</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1268501280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.</p></div><p>That and the Powerpoint slides from their gratis "training" seminar in the Caribbean.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.That and the Powerpoint slides from their gratis " training " seminar in the Caribbean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.That and the Powerpoint slides from their gratis "training" seminar in the Caribbean.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469232</id>
	<title>What's wrong with twitter and drugs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268495760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My dealer uses twiiter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My dealer uses twiiter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My dealer uses twiiter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470052</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268505420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is indeed pretty clear. Those rights were granted to human beings, not multi-national conglomerates. Corporations don't, and weren't supposed to, have the same rights as human beings. Free speech is not unlimited - when your "speech" is detrimental to the well being of the vast majority of citizens, then it is no longer protected by the Constitution. Yelling "fire!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind...</p><p>Also, it has happened plenty of times before; remember Joe Camel?</p><p>Furthermore, it's not just some "small group" who can't handle not being manipulated by advertising - it's pretty much the extreme majority. They've spent the last 60 years studying our brains just so that we *can't* ignore their marketing efforts - and they're pretty damned good at it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is indeed pretty clear .
Those rights were granted to human beings , not multi-national conglomerates .
Corporations do n't , and were n't supposed to , have the same rights as human beings .
Free speech is not unlimited - when your " speech " is detrimental to the well being of the vast majority of citizens , then it is no longer protected by the Constitution .
Yelling " fire !
" in a crowded theatre comes to mind...Also , it has happened plenty of times before ; remember Joe Camel ? Furthermore , it 's not just some " small group " who ca n't handle not being manipulated by advertising - it 's pretty much the extreme majority .
They 've spent the last 60 years studying our brains just so that we * ca n't * ignore their marketing efforts - and they 're pretty damned good at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is indeed pretty clear.
Those rights were granted to human beings, not multi-national conglomerates.
Corporations don't, and weren't supposed to, have the same rights as human beings.
Free speech is not unlimited - when your "speech" is detrimental to the well being of the vast majority of citizens, then it is no longer protected by the Constitution.
Yelling "fire!
" in a crowded theatre comes to mind...Also, it has happened plenty of times before; remember Joe Camel?Furthermore, it's not just some "small group" who can't handle not being manipulated by advertising - it's pretty much the extreme majority.
They've spent the last 60 years studying our brains just so that we *can't* ignore their marketing efforts - and they're pretty damned good at it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212</id>
	<title>A simple solution</title>
	<author>bogaboga</author>
	<datestamp>1268495580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the drug companies should do is to add a disclaimer such as: -</p><p>"Though these drugs may work as advertised, their use is not intended for use by residents of the USA. Such residents who wish to employ these drugs should ensure that their employment does not go against laws in their jurisdictions."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the drug companies should do is to add a disclaimer such as : - " Though these drugs may work as advertised , their use is not intended for use by residents of the USA .
Such residents who wish to employ these drugs should ensure that their employment does not go against laws in their jurisdictions .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the drug companies should do is to add a disclaimer such as: -"Though these drugs may work as advertised, their use is not intended for use by residents of the USA.
Such residents who wish to employ these drugs should ensure that their employment does not go against laws in their jurisdictions.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469226</id>
	<title>Isn't the solution obvious?</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1268495700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>All the cool kids today are using URL shorteners. They make it impossible to see where a link is going, make the link's function depend on <i>two</i> 3rd parties rather than just one, and probably provide lots of sneaky analytics data; but they allow you to embed URLs in your tweets, so clearly it's worth it.<br> <br>

Anyway, the fine nation of Uganda has the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ug TLD. All we have to do is obtain dr.ug and set up a URL shortening service specifically for linking to giant lists of scary sounding side effects from pharma shill tweets. What could be more logical?(Besides, y'know, <i>not fucking direct marketing Prescription Drugs</i>...)</htmltext>
<tokenext>All the cool kids today are using URL shorteners .
They make it impossible to see where a link is going , make the link 's function depend on two 3rd parties rather than just one , and probably provide lots of sneaky analytics data ; but they allow you to embed URLs in your tweets , so clearly it 's worth it .
Anyway , the fine nation of Uganda has the .ug TLD .
All we have to do is obtain dr.ug and set up a URL shortening service specifically for linking to giant lists of scary sounding side effects from pharma shill tweets .
What could be more logical ?
( Besides , y'know , not fucking direct marketing Prescription Drugs... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the cool kids today are using URL shorteners.
They make it impossible to see where a link is going, make the link's function depend on two 3rd parties rather than just one, and probably provide lots of sneaky analytics data; but they allow you to embed URLs in your tweets, so clearly it's worth it.
Anyway, the fine nation of Uganda has the .ug TLD.
All we have to do is obtain dr.ug and set up a URL shortening service specifically for linking to giant lists of scary sounding side effects from pharma shill tweets.
What could be more logical?
(Besides, y'know, not fucking direct marketing Prescription Drugs...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31473476</id>
	<title>Media</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268594580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The plural of "medium" is "media." There is no word "mediums." Sorry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The plural of " medium " is " media .
" There is no word " mediums .
" Sorry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The plural of "medium" is "media.
" There is no word "mediums.
" Sorry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469370</id>
	<title>Can Twittering help my pharmaceutical business?</title>
	<author>MillionthMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1268496900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt>
<br>
<tt>Tard. dysk.; fever; shaking/sweating/confus./incr. pulse/bloodpress (NMS)</tt>
<br> <br>
<tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt> <tt>1234567890</tt>
<br>
<tt>occas. fatal; [mini]strokes 4 psychotic old ppl.; suic. risk; coma; death</tt>
<br> <br>
Yay!</htmltext>
<tokenext>1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 Tard .
dysk. ; fever ; shaking/sweating/confus./incr .
pulse/bloodpress ( NMS ) 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 occas .
fatal ; [ mini ] strokes 4 psychotic old ppl .
; suic .
risk ; coma ; death Yay !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890

Tard.
dysk.; fever; shaking/sweating/confus./incr.
pulse/bloodpress (NMS)
 
1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890 1234567890

occas.
fatal; [mini]strokes 4 psychotic old ppl.
; suic.
risk; coma; death
 
Yay!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469974</id>
	<title>Chemical Death..... in 140 chars or less</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268504460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>End prohibition..... Re-Legalize cannabis.... educate the public on the proper medicinal use of cannabis.</p><p>The pharma companies will lose money naturally.  Who wants to take a pill that kills you slowly when you can use cannabis without side effects.<br>(Gotta use it properly though and that takes information that's not mainstream.)</p><p>Search for "Granny Storm Crow" and start reading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>End prohibition..... Re-Legalize cannabis.... educate the public on the proper medicinal use of cannabis.The pharma companies will lose money naturally .
Who wants to take a pill that kills you slowly when you can use cannabis without side effects .
( Got ta use it properly though and that takes information that 's not mainstream .
) Search for " Granny Storm Crow " and start reading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>End prohibition..... Re-Legalize cannabis.... educate the public on the proper medicinal use of cannabis.The pharma companies will lose money naturally.
Who wants to take a pill that kills you slowly when you can use cannabis without side effects.
(Gotta use it properly though and that takes information that's not mainstream.
)Search for "Granny Storm Crow" and start reading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469314</id>
	<title>How to meet the character limit :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268496420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Buy \_\_MIRACLEDRUG\_\_ to cure \_\_DREADDISEASE\_\_\_.  See your doctor before using.  May be fatal."</p><p>There, as long as \_\_MIRACLEDRUG\_\_ and \_\_DREADDISEASE\_\_ aren't too long I think we've met the 140-character limit and mentioned the worst possible side-effect.  Can we archive this discussion now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Buy \ _ \ _MIRACLEDRUG \ _ \ _ to cure \ _ \ _DREADDISEASE \ _ \ _ \ _ .
See your doctor before using .
May be fatal .
" There , as long as \ _ \ _MIRACLEDRUG \ _ \ _ and \ _ \ _DREADDISEASE \ _ \ _ are n't too long I think we 've met the 140-character limit and mentioned the worst possible side-effect .
Can we archive this discussion now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Buy \_\_MIRACLEDRUG\_\_ to cure \_\_DREADDISEASE\_\_\_.
See your doctor before using.
May be fatal.
"There, as long as \_\_MIRACLEDRUG\_\_ and \_\_DREADDISEASE\_\_ aren't too long I think we've met the 140-character limit and mentioned the worst possible side-effect.
Can we archive this discussion now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470102</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>AuMatar</author>
	<datestamp>1268505840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Already happens, see alcohol and tobacco advertising restrictions.  Previous SCOTUS rulings oked them.  The current SCOTUS may not, but we may get lucky and have Scalia or Thomas die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Already happens , see alcohol and tobacco advertising restrictions .
Previous SCOTUS rulings oked them .
The current SCOTUS may not , but we may get lucky and have Scalia or Thomas die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Already happens, see alcohol and tobacco advertising restrictions.
Previous SCOTUS rulings oked them.
The current SCOTUS may not, but we may get lucky and have Scalia or Thomas die.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31479114</id>
	<title>Everything can be twitterified!</title>
	<author>WWWWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1268644680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>many were worried over how marketing mediums such as Twitter &mdash; which has a 140-character limit on text &mdash; can sufficiently disclose drug risks."</p></div><p>Let's see...</p><blockquote><div><p>"Buy Viagra (NB: It's a drug; engage brain)" 42 characters.</p><p>"Buy Viagra! It kills you in large doses." 40 characters.</p><p>"Buy Viagra! But only if you need it." 36 characters.</p><p>"Buy Viagra! Note: use with care." 32 characters.</p><p>"Buy Viagra - use as intended." 29 characters.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>You were saying?</p><p>Plus, I'm sure people aren't using stand-alone twitter messages to actually sell the products. They probably include links to web pages, which don't have size limits. Worrying about Twitter size limits and ability to not include lengthy warnings is like that Teletype manager-type guy who picked capital letters instead of lower-case letters because you can't spell 'God' right with only lower-case letters. Societal norms are bound to collide with technology when the technical limitations are seen oh good heavens I need coffee I started rambling again.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>many were worried over how marketing mediums such as Twitter    which has a 140-character limit on text    can sufficiently disclose drug risks .
" Let 's see... " Buy Viagra ( NB : It 's a drug ; engage brain ) " 42 characters .
" Buy Viagra !
It kills you in large doses .
" 40 characters .
" Buy Viagra !
But only if you need it .
" 36 characters .
" Buy Viagra !
Note : use with care .
" 32 characters .
" Buy Viagra - use as intended .
" 29 characters .
You were saying ? Plus , I 'm sure people are n't using stand-alone twitter messages to actually sell the products .
They probably include links to web pages , which do n't have size limits .
Worrying about Twitter size limits and ability to not include lengthy warnings is like that Teletype manager-type guy who picked capital letters instead of lower-case letters because you ca n't spell 'God ' right with only lower-case letters .
Societal norms are bound to collide with technology when the technical limitations are seen oh good heavens I need coffee I started rambling again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>many were worried over how marketing mediums such as Twitter — which has a 140-character limit on text — can sufficiently disclose drug risks.
"Let's see..."Buy Viagra (NB: It's a drug; engage brain)" 42 characters.
"Buy Viagra!
It kills you in large doses.
" 40 characters.
"Buy Viagra!
But only if you need it.
" 36 characters.
"Buy Viagra!
Note: use with care.
" 32 characters.
"Buy Viagra - use as intended.
" 29 characters.
You were saying?Plus, I'm sure people aren't using stand-alone twitter messages to actually sell the products.
They probably include links to web pages, which don't have size limits.
Worrying about Twitter size limits and ability to not include lengthy warnings is like that Teletype manager-type guy who picked capital letters instead of lower-case letters because you can't spell 'God' right with only lower-case letters.
Societal norms are bound to collide with technology when the technical limitations are seen oh good heavens I need coffee I started rambling again.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470610</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>laughingcoyote</author>
	<datestamp>1268557560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free speech is never absolute, and certainly never in a commercial setting. For example, your doctor cannot go post your medical records on a public website. That's free speech, but HIPAA bans it, and I think you'd find arguing that a doctor should be exempt from HIPAA on free speech grounds not to meet the reception you'd expect in court.</p><p>In advertising specifically, tobacco and alcohol ads are already restricted. Indeed, a mandate of disclosures (and a requirement that advertising be true) are all allowable restrictions.</p><p>And I say this as someone who will ardently defend the freedom of speech, even down to things one finds disgusting or shocking or distasteful. But speech when you're trying to sell something is different altogether. Speech when you're selling something that could have significant risks, ten times so. No constitutional amendment is required here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free speech is never absolute , and certainly never in a commercial setting .
For example , your doctor can not go post your medical records on a public website .
That 's free speech , but HIPAA bans it , and I think you 'd find arguing that a doctor should be exempt from HIPAA on free speech grounds not to meet the reception you 'd expect in court.In advertising specifically , tobacco and alcohol ads are already restricted .
Indeed , a mandate of disclosures ( and a requirement that advertising be true ) are all allowable restrictions.And I say this as someone who will ardently defend the freedom of speech , even down to things one finds disgusting or shocking or distasteful .
But speech when you 're trying to sell something is different altogether .
Speech when you 're selling something that could have significant risks , ten times so .
No constitutional amendment is required here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free speech is never absolute, and certainly never in a commercial setting.
For example, your doctor cannot go post your medical records on a public website.
That's free speech, but HIPAA bans it, and I think you'd find arguing that a doctor should be exempt from HIPAA on free speech grounds not to meet the reception you'd expect in court.In advertising specifically, tobacco and alcohol ads are already restricted.
Indeed, a mandate of disclosures (and a requirement that advertising be true) are all allowable restrictions.And I say this as someone who will ardently defend the freedom of speech, even down to things one finds disgusting or shocking or distasteful.
But speech when you're trying to sell something is different altogether.
Speech when you're selling something that could have significant risks, ten times so.
No constitutional amendment is required here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470806</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>crackspackle</author>
	<datestamp>1268561460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable?</p></div><p>I thought the way it worked was that a patient develops some sort of disorder or symptoms that causes him to seek out a doctor who can make the actual diagnoses and determine the best course of treatment. Why would a patient necessarily need to know about new treatment options if they have a competent doctor that they see regularly? Shouldn't the doctor be the one to decide if a new treatment is right?

</p><p>The argument is that drug advertising often causes people to seek out unnecessary, expensive treatments, sometimes for conditions which they don't really have. Why do people to it? We probably all want to fix ourselves in some way, and what would be better than a magic pill or ointment? That's how snake oil salesmen got their start and the drug companies appear all to aware of this, churning out shiny new patented drugs that in only a few years are determined to be ineffective or worse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you ban all drug ads , then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable ? I thought the way it worked was that a patient develops some sort of disorder or symptoms that causes him to seek out a doctor who can make the actual diagnoses and determine the best course of treatment .
Why would a patient necessarily need to know about new treatment options if they have a competent doctor that they see regularly ?
Should n't the doctor be the one to decide if a new treatment is right ?
The argument is that drug advertising often causes people to seek out unnecessary , expensive treatments , sometimes for conditions which they do n't really have .
Why do people to it ?
We probably all want to fix ourselves in some way , and what would be better than a magic pill or ointment ?
That 's how snake oil salesmen got their start and the drug companies appear all to aware of this , churning out shiny new patented drugs that in only a few years are determined to be ineffective or worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable?I thought the way it worked was that a patient develops some sort of disorder or symptoms that causes him to seek out a doctor who can make the actual diagnoses and determine the best course of treatment.
Why would a patient necessarily need to know about new treatment options if they have a competent doctor that they see regularly?
Shouldn't the doctor be the one to decide if a new treatment is right?
The argument is that drug advertising often causes people to seek out unnecessary, expensive treatments, sometimes for conditions which they don't really have.
Why do people to it?
We probably all want to fix ourselves in some way, and what would be better than a magic pill or ointment?
That's how snake oil salesmen got their start and the drug companies appear all to aware of this, churning out shiny new patented drugs that in only a few years are determined to be ineffective or worse.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469308</id>
	<title>Re:What's wrong with twitter and drugs?</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1268496420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hENrQg8MM5U" title="youtube.com">Ed Wunsler: my weed man doesn't like to be on the phone, so i text him</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ed Wunsler : my weed man does n't like to be on the phone , so i text him [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ed Wunsler: my weed man doesn't like to be on the phone, so i text him [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469268</id>
	<title>140 Chars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268496060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yo dawg.Come check out this new medication for Lupus. It's off the chain.You'll be fucking up with fat bitches in no time!Btw it causes horr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yo dawg.Come check out this new medication for Lupus .
It 's off the chain.You 'll be fucking up with fat bitches in no time ! Btw it causes horr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yo dawg.Come check out this new medication for Lupus.
It's off the chain.You'll be fucking up with fat bitches in no time!Btw it causes horr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469366</id>
	<title>Huh...interesting problem</title>
	<author>ucblockhead</author>
	<datestamp>1268496840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think I'll send a letter to my congresswoman asking for a bill requiring all text ads be at least 141 characters in length.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I 'll send a letter to my congresswoman asking for a bill requiring all text ads be at least 141 characters in length .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I'll send a letter to my congresswoman asking for a bill requiring all text ads be at least 141 characters in length.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469730</id>
	<title>not a problem</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1268501160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wanna bet the law gets changed ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wan na bet the law gets changed ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wanna bet the law gets changed ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31473160</id>
	<title>Darwinian selection</title>
	<author>Jawn98685</author>
	<datestamp>1268591820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone who buys drugs, or more importantly, has selected a physician who can be convinced to prescribe said drugs, on the basis of what the drug company put up on a social networking site deserve's to be removed from the gene pool.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who buys drugs , or more importantly , has selected a physician who can be convinced to prescribe said drugs , on the basis of what the drug company put up on a social networking site deserve 's to be removed from the gene pool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who buys drugs, or more importantly, has selected a physician who can be convinced to prescribe said drugs, on the basis of what the drug company put up on a social networking site deserve's to be removed from the gene pool.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470064</id>
	<title>Why must they advertise on Twitter?</title>
	<author>Al Dimond</author>
	<datestamp>1268505480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The disclosure laws are there for a reason. If you can't satisfy their requirements in a tweet then you can't advertise pharmaceuticals on Twitter. If you can't satisfy them in a Google ad then you can't advertise pharmaceuticals in a Google ad.</p><p>This isn't affecting any one company over another or anything like that. It's just following the laws to their conclusion -- and, really, going right along with their intention. Putting a drug in your body is of much greater consequence than what company you buy your mass-produced junk from, and these laws make sure drug companies can't just do snappy, feel-good 10-second spots with no substance whatsoever like beer companies and cola companies.</p><p>A big part of advertising is repeating a brand name over and over. There's an impression made by hearing a brand name in association with positive images or text, even if you aren't very involved with the ad. The disclosure laws try to prevent companies from just spamming you with impressions and making sure there is substantial information right up front. If it's behind a link, as many of these companies propose, that's all lost. The casual eye skips over, gets the positive impression and none of the disclosure.</p><p>So... within our current framework if there's no room to disclose right up front there should be no ad at all. Maybe the disclosure laws suck, maybe the fact that drugs are advertised at all sucks... those are separate points. As the law stands now, no Twitter ads for Viagra. Yay!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The disclosure laws are there for a reason .
If you ca n't satisfy their requirements in a tweet then you ca n't advertise pharmaceuticals on Twitter .
If you ca n't satisfy them in a Google ad then you ca n't advertise pharmaceuticals in a Google ad.This is n't affecting any one company over another or anything like that .
It 's just following the laws to their conclusion -- and , really , going right along with their intention .
Putting a drug in your body is of much greater consequence than what company you buy your mass-produced junk from , and these laws make sure drug companies ca n't just do snappy , feel-good 10-second spots with no substance whatsoever like beer companies and cola companies.A big part of advertising is repeating a brand name over and over .
There 's an impression made by hearing a brand name in association with positive images or text , even if you are n't very involved with the ad .
The disclosure laws try to prevent companies from just spamming you with impressions and making sure there is substantial information right up front .
If it 's behind a link , as many of these companies propose , that 's all lost .
The casual eye skips over , gets the positive impression and none of the disclosure.So... within our current framework if there 's no room to disclose right up front there should be no ad at all .
Maybe the disclosure laws suck , maybe the fact that drugs are advertised at all sucks... those are separate points .
As the law stands now , no Twitter ads for Viagra .
Yay !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The disclosure laws are there for a reason.
If you can't satisfy their requirements in a tweet then you can't advertise pharmaceuticals on Twitter.
If you can't satisfy them in a Google ad then you can't advertise pharmaceuticals in a Google ad.This isn't affecting any one company over another or anything like that.
It's just following the laws to their conclusion -- and, really, going right along with their intention.
Putting a drug in your body is of much greater consequence than what company you buy your mass-produced junk from, and these laws make sure drug companies can't just do snappy, feel-good 10-second spots with no substance whatsoever like beer companies and cola companies.A big part of advertising is repeating a brand name over and over.
There's an impression made by hearing a brand name in association with positive images or text, even if you aren't very involved with the ad.
The disclosure laws try to prevent companies from just spamming you with impressions and making sure there is substantial information right up front.
If it's behind a link, as many of these companies propose, that's all lost.
The casual eye skips over, gets the positive impression and none of the disclosure.So... within our current framework if there's no room to disclose right up front there should be no ad at all.
Maybe the disclosure laws suck, maybe the fact that drugs are advertised at all sucks... those are separate points.
As the law stands now, no Twitter ads for Viagra.
Yay!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31471854</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Velex</author>
	<datestamp>1268578440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable?</p></div><p>
Don't they tell these things to their doctor?
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you ban all drug ads , then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable ?
Do n't they tell these things to their doctor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable?
Don't they tell these things to their doctor?

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31476376</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>alexkorban</author>
	<datestamp>1268573640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think prescription medicines can be advertised in New Zealand. At least I don't see ads for them on TV. It really amazed me to see all the pharmaceutical ads when I was in the US.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think prescription medicines can be advertised in New Zealand .
At least I do n't see ads for them on TV .
It really amazed me to see all the pharmaceutical ads when I was in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think prescription medicines can be advertised in New Zealand.
At least I don't see ads for them on TV.
It really amazed me to see all the pharmaceutical ads when I was in the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469322</id>
	<title>Neither can anything else</title>
	<author>purplie</author>
	<datestamp>1268496480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So they think a 30-second commercial is long enough to disclose drug risks?  Or anything else than a many-page highly technical report that assumes the reader knows all the implications of the implications?  And when the risks are often not even well-known in the first place?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So they think a 30-second commercial is long enough to disclose drug risks ?
Or anything else than a many-page highly technical report that assumes the reader knows all the implications of the implications ?
And when the risks are often not even well-known in the first place ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they think a 30-second commercial is long enough to disclose drug risks?
Or anything else than a many-page highly technical report that assumes the reader knows all the implications of the implications?
And when the risks are often not even well-known in the first place?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470026</id>
	<title>mare</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268505180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">website Third, you States tHat there And she ran direct orders, or Decli8ed in market Get tough. I hope something that you the project to</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>website Third , you States tHat there And she ran direct orders , or Decli8ed in market Get tough .
I hope something that you the project to [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>website Third, you States tHat there And she ran direct orders, or Decli8ed in market Get tough.
I hope something that you the project to [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469728</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>digital\_proletariat</author>
	<datestamp>1268501100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Tell your doctor? Tell your doctor?.. Shouldn&rsquo;t my doctor be telling me?.. When you tell your doctor, isn&rsquo;t he just a dealer at that point?" -- Bill Maher</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Tell your doctor ?
Tell your doctor ? . .
Shouldn    t my doctor be telling me ? . .
When you tell your doctor , isn    t he just a dealer at that point ?
" -- Bill Maher</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Tell your doctor?
Tell your doctor?..
Shouldn’t my doctor be telling me?..
When you tell your doctor, isn’t he just a dealer at that point?
" -- Bill Maher</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31472046</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Cimexus</author>
	<datestamp>1268581200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... didn't know NZ allowed it too.</p><p>My home is Australia but I've spent a decent amount of time in both the US (several years) and NZ (4 or 5 months). I don't remember seeing a single prescription drug ad in NZ, but in the US geez, there's one every ad break. I think there must be some serious limitations on the NZ version of the law allowing it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... either that or a cultural difference that just doesn't make it as worthwhile for the pharma companies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting ... did n't know NZ allowed it too.My home is Australia but I 've spent a decent amount of time in both the US ( several years ) and NZ ( 4 or 5 months ) .
I do n't remember seeing a single prescription drug ad in NZ , but in the US geez , there 's one every ad break .
I think there must be some serious limitations on the NZ version of the law allowing it ... either that or a cultural difference that just does n't make it as worthwhile for the pharma companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting ... didn't know NZ allowed it too.My home is Australia but I've spent a decent amount of time in both the US (several years) and NZ (4 or 5 months).
I don't remember seeing a single prescription drug ad in NZ, but in the US geez, there's one every ad break.
I think there must be some serious limitations on the NZ version of the law allowing it ... either that or a cultural difference that just doesn't make it as worthwhile for the pharma companies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276</id>
	<title>Re:A simple solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268496120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An even easier solution - <i>don't advertise prescription drugs to patients</i>.</p><p>(The over-the-counter drugs are generally low-risk, and in any case the warnings are right on the packaging when you buy them.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An even easier solution - do n't advertise prescription drugs to patients .
( The over-the-counter drugs are generally low-risk , and in any case the warnings are right on the packaging when you buy them .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An even easier solution - don't advertise prescription drugs to patients.
(The over-the-counter drugs are generally low-risk, and in any case the warnings are right on the packaging when you buy them.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>barzok</author>
	<datestamp>1268498520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs. The reason that prescription drugs are, well, by prescription, is that they may carry significant risks, and careful evaluation by a professional is required as to whether a patient should take them.</p></div></blockquote><p>There are only 2 countries which allow "direct to consumer" advertising of prescription drugs - the US and New Zealand, and I'm not 100\% about NZ (been a while since I looked). That should tell you something right there.</p><blockquote><div><p>Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional, not a glossy brochure.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs .
The reason that prescription drugs are , well , by prescription , is that they may carry significant risks , and careful evaluation by a professional is required as to whether a patient should take them.There are only 2 countries which allow " direct to consumer " advertising of prescription drugs - the US and New Zealand , and I 'm not 100 \ % about NZ ( been a while since I looked ) .
That should tell you something right there.Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional , not a glossy brochure.Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs.
The reason that prescription drugs are, well, by prescription, is that they may carry significant risks, and careful evaluation by a professional is required as to whether a patient should take them.There are only 2 countries which allow "direct to consumer" advertising of prescription drugs - the US and New Zealand, and I'm not 100\% about NZ (been a while since I looked).
That should tell you something right there.Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional, not a glossy brochure.Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31478190</id>
	<title>Re:A simple solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268588220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><tt>&gt;&gt;&gt; len("Though these drugs may work as advertised, their use is not intended for use by residents of the USA. Such residents who wish to employ these drugs should ensure that their employment does not go against laws in their jurisdictions.")<br>232</tt></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; len ( " Though these drugs may work as advertised , their use is not intended for use by residents of the USA .
Such residents who wish to employ these drugs should ensure that their employment does not go against laws in their jurisdictions .
" ) 232</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt; len("Though these drugs may work as advertised, their use is not intended for use by residents of the USA.
Such residents who wish to employ these drugs should ensure that their employment does not go against laws in their jurisdictions.
")232</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31481296</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268664540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well thats just it, I had a doctor who had *a lot* of swag from a particular drug which she pushed very hard. Indeed I trusted her on it and it was a miserable experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well thats just it , I had a doctor who had * a lot * of swag from a particular drug which she pushed very hard .
Indeed I trusted her on it and it was a miserable experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well thats just it, I had a doctor who had *a lot* of swag from a particular drug which she pushed very hard.
Indeed I trusted her on it and it was a miserable experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31472478</id>
	<title>I agree...don't use Twitter or SMS messaging...</title>
	<author>hackel</author>
	<datestamp>1268585880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...until they both get their act together and allow for messages &gt;160 characters.  This is absolutely the most ridiculous restriction in the 21st century I have ever seen.  1120 bits per message?  Seriously?  It's like we're living in the 80s with 300 baud modems on our mobiles or something...so ridiculous!  And the cost is even more outrageous.  In the U.S. most companies charge 20 cents per message...  That's $1497 per MiB!  WTF is wrong with this picture?</p><p>Google Buzz has vastly improved upon the Twitter concept, allowing attachments of images, links, etc. with no character limit.  I really hope twitter will soon die the miserable death it deserves...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...until they both get their act together and allow for messages &gt; 160 characters .
This is absolutely the most ridiculous restriction in the 21st century I have ever seen .
1120 bits per message ?
Seriously ? It 's like we 're living in the 80s with 300 baud modems on our mobiles or something...so ridiculous !
And the cost is even more outrageous .
In the U.S. most companies charge 20 cents per message... That 's $ 1497 per MiB !
WTF is wrong with this picture ? Google Buzz has vastly improved upon the Twitter concept , allowing attachments of images , links , etc .
with no character limit .
I really hope twitter will soon die the miserable death it deserves.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...until they both get their act together and allow for messages &gt;160 characters.
This is absolutely the most ridiculous restriction in the 21st century I have ever seen.
1120 bits per message?
Seriously?  It's like we're living in the 80s with 300 baud modems on our mobiles or something...so ridiculous!
And the cost is even more outrageous.
In the U.S. most companies charge 20 cents per message...  That's $1497 per MiB!
WTF is wrong with this picture?Google Buzz has vastly improved upon the Twitter concept, allowing attachments of images, links, etc.
with no character limit.
I really hope twitter will soon die the miserable death it deserves...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470390</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268510220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There are only 2 countries which allow "direct to consumer" advertising of prescription drugs - the US and New Zealand, and I'm not 100\% about NZ (been a while since I looked). That should tell you something right there.</i></p><p>Canada has some limited drug ads.</p><p><i>    Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional, not a glossy brochure.</i></p><p><i>Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.</i></p><p>Ha. The dirty secret of the drug business is when you bring your prescription to the pharmacy &amp; have it filled, the pharmacist immediately sells the prescription to a data broker. Not to build a profile of the patient, but to build a profile of the doctor. Then they sell this info to drug sales reps.</p><p>So Dr. Smith, we notice that you prescribe a lot of drug A, which is for medical condition B. We think our drug, drug X, is much better, and here's some scientific literature that might help you make a decision. And if you start prescribing more of drug X than drug A, we'll hire you as a consultant, or send you to a nice medical conference in Hawaii...</p><p>The drug business does develop new drugs, and they do help people. But they are very scummy in other ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are only 2 countries which allow " direct to consumer " advertising of prescription drugs - the US and New Zealand , and I 'm not 100 \ % about NZ ( been a while since I looked ) .
That should tell you something right there.Canada has some limited drug ads .
Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional , not a glossy brochure.Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.Ha .
The dirty secret of the drug business is when you bring your prescription to the pharmacy &amp; have it filled , the pharmacist immediately sells the prescription to a data broker .
Not to build a profile of the patient , but to build a profile of the doctor .
Then they sell this info to drug sales reps.So Dr. Smith , we notice that you prescribe a lot of drug A , which is for medical condition B. We think our drug , drug X , is much better , and here 's some scientific literature that might help you make a decision .
And if you start prescribing more of drug X than drug A , we 'll hire you as a consultant , or send you to a nice medical conference in Hawaii...The drug business does develop new drugs , and they do help people .
But they are very scummy in other ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are only 2 countries which allow "direct to consumer" advertising of prescription drugs - the US and New Zealand, and I'm not 100\% about NZ (been a while since I looked).
That should tell you something right there.Canada has some limited drug ads.
Medical decisions should be made based upon a detailed discussion with a professional, not a glossy brochure.Sometimes I wonder if the glossy brochure and a few free pens &amp; notepads is all the professional is working off as well.Ha.
The dirty secret of the drug business is when you bring your prescription to the pharmacy &amp; have it filled, the pharmacist immediately sells the prescription to a data broker.
Not to build a profile of the patient, but to build a profile of the doctor.
Then they sell this info to drug sales reps.So Dr. Smith, we notice that you prescribe a lot of drug A, which is for medical condition B. We think our drug, drug X, is much better, and here's some scientific literature that might help you make a decision.
And if you start prescribing more of drug X than drug A, we'll hire you as a consultant, or send you to a nice medical conference in Hawaii...The drug business does develop new drugs, and they do help people.
But they are very scummy in other ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470556</id>
	<title>Re:A simple solution</title>
	<author>bjwest</author>
	<datestamp>1268599680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I totally agree.  Pharmaceutical companies should not be allowed to advertise prescription drugs and OTC medications should be limited to after family hours.  My thoughts on why there's so much prescription drug abuse by the young is that they are bombarded by advertisements on TV.</p><p>Have a pain, take this drug..  Life got you down?  Here try this one.  No wonder kids think drugs are the answer to everything.  That's what they've been told by Pharma...  Take a drug (prescription, of course, illegal drugs are bad m-kay) to make your life "normal".</p><p>Lawyers shouldn't advertise either, but that's getting into another topic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally agree .
Pharmaceutical companies should not be allowed to advertise prescription drugs and OTC medications should be limited to after family hours .
My thoughts on why there 's so much prescription drug abuse by the young is that they are bombarded by advertisements on TV.Have a pain , take this drug.. Life got you down ?
Here try this one .
No wonder kids think drugs are the answer to everything .
That 's what they 've been told by Pharma... Take a drug ( prescription , of course , illegal drugs are bad m-kay ) to make your life " normal " .Lawyers should n't advertise either , but that 's getting into another topic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally agree.
Pharmaceutical companies should not be allowed to advertise prescription drugs and OTC medications should be limited to after family hours.
My thoughts on why there's so much prescription drug abuse by the young is that they are bombarded by advertisements on TV.Have a pain, take this drug..  Life got you down?
Here try this one.
No wonder kids think drugs are the answer to everything.
That's what they've been told by Pharma...  Take a drug (prescription, of course, illegal drugs are bad m-kay) to make your life "normal".Lawyers shouldn't advertise either, but that's getting into another topic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470444</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1268597520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>there are already tonnes of restrictions on what's aired on TV and cable. it's freedom to speak not freedom to force millions to listen to your ad. and yes we do ban lots of stuff because a minority can't handle them.<p>
it's like you've got no grip on what happens in the real world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there are already tonnes of restrictions on what 's aired on TV and cable .
it 's freedom to speak not freedom to force millions to listen to your ad .
and yes we do ban lots of stuff because a minority ca n't handle them .
it 's like you 've got no grip on what happens in the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there are already tonnes of restrictions on what's aired on TV and cable.
it's freedom to speak not freedom to force millions to listen to your ad.
and yes we do ban lots of stuff because a minority can't handle them.
it's like you've got no grip on what happens in the real world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470120</id>
	<title>Re:Information</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268506020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> If you're getting a prescription medication, you should be talking to a doctor.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I agree, but I came to a different conclusion: Your doctor should be informed on medications enough that he is recommending what you take, you should not be requesting drugs you saw on tv.</p><p>Doctors not only know the side effects, but they also know the alternatives. Why should pharmaceutical companies be advertising things you cant directly buy at all?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're getting a prescription medication , you should be talking to a doctor .
I agree , but I came to a different conclusion : Your doctor should be informed on medications enough that he is recommending what you take , you should not be requesting drugs you saw on tv.Doctors not only know the side effects , but they also know the alternatives .
Why should pharmaceutical companies be advertising things you cant directly buy at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If you're getting a prescription medication, you should be talking to a doctor.
I agree, but I came to a different conclusion: Your doctor should be informed on medications enough that he is recommending what you take, you should not be requesting drugs you saw on tv.Doctors not only know the side effects, but they also know the alternatives.
Why should pharmaceutical companies be advertising things you cant directly buy at all?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469578</id>
	<title>Re:Isn't the solution obvious?</title>
	<author>lawpoop</author>
	<datestamp>1268499360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anyway, the fine nation of Uganda has the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ug TLD. All we have to do is obtain dr.ug and set up a URL shortening service... What could be more logical?</p></div><p>Dr. Uganda?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyway , the fine nation of Uganda has the .ug TLD .
All we have to do is obtain dr.ug and set up a URL shortening service... What could be more logical ? Dr .
Uganda ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyway, the fine nation of Uganda has the .ug TLD.
All we have to do is obtain dr.ug and set up a URL shortening service... What could be more logical?Dr.
Uganda?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469540</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>HellYeahAutomaton</author>
	<datestamp>1268499000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about quit allowing drug manufacturers to release drugs with no more than 2 side effects?<br>What ever happened to "Do no harm"?</p><p>The problem isn't fitting the contraindications into a tweet, its having too many contraindications.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about quit allowing drug manufacturers to release drugs with no more than 2 side effects ? What ever happened to " Do no harm " ? The problem is n't fitting the contraindications into a tweet , its having too many contraindications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about quit allowing drug manufacturers to release drugs with no more than 2 side effects?What ever happened to "Do no harm"?The problem isn't fitting the contraindications into a tweet, its having too many contraindications.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31471564</id>
	<title>I recommend...</title>
	<author>cafn8ed</author>
	<datestamp>1268574900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a disclaimer for twitter, I recommend appending "U may die." to the end of every ad.  At least it's more adult-sounding than "Ur so ded."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a disclaimer for twitter , I recommend appending " U may die .
" to the end of every ad .
At least it 's more adult-sounding than " Ur so ded .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a disclaimer for twitter, I recommend appending "U may die.
" to the end of every ad.
At least it's more adult-sounding than "Ur so ded.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470024</id>
	<title>Risk disclaimers are BS for any prescription</title>
	<author>Quila</author>
	<datestamp>1268505180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need a prescription, right? So that means you've seen a doctor and a pharmacist if you're taking it, and it was the responsibility of one or both of them to explain all of the risks to you. Too damn bad if you're taking prescription meds without a prescription, you deserve what you get.</p><p>The disclaimer is effectively inherent in any legally prescribed medication.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need a prescription , right ?
So that means you 've seen a doctor and a pharmacist if you 're taking it , and it was the responsibility of one or both of them to explain all of the risks to you .
Too damn bad if you 're taking prescription meds without a prescription , you deserve what you get.The disclaimer is effectively inherent in any legally prescribed medication .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need a prescription, right?
So that means you've seen a doctor and a pharmacist if you're taking it, and it was the responsibility of one or both of them to explain all of the risks to you.
Too damn bad if you're taking prescription meds without a prescription, you deserve what you get.The disclaimer is effectively inherent in any legally prescribed medication.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469298</id>
	<title>Why a 140-char limit, and why not by words?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268496300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would anyone use a social media platform that artificially limits your entries to 140 chars? This is a technical limitation that would seem to limit the utility of the service.</p><p>Why would they create a blogging site and deliberately degrade it in this way?</p><p>And why limit it by chars? Wouldn't limiting by number of words (provided each word is no longer than say 30 chars) be a better way to keep posts simple without introducing a situation where users use awkward abbreviations to shorten their entries?</p><p><strong>A service that limits the length of entries by number of words (and say one URL per entry) instead of by number of chars would seem to me to be the best way to enforce brevity. Isn't the point of brevity to reduce the time spent reading information? The typical Twitter entry with awkward abbreviations would seem to cancel out this advantage.</strong></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would anyone use a social media platform that artificially limits your entries to 140 chars ?
This is a technical limitation that would seem to limit the utility of the service.Why would they create a blogging site and deliberately degrade it in this way ? And why limit it by chars ?
Would n't limiting by number of words ( provided each word is no longer than say 30 chars ) be a better way to keep posts simple without introducing a situation where users use awkward abbreviations to shorten their entries ? A service that limits the length of entries by number of words ( and say one URL per entry ) instead of by number of chars would seem to me to be the best way to enforce brevity .
Is n't the point of brevity to reduce the time spent reading information ?
The typical Twitter entry with awkward abbreviations would seem to cancel out this advantage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would anyone use a social media platform that artificially limits your entries to 140 chars?
This is a technical limitation that would seem to limit the utility of the service.Why would they create a blogging site and deliberately degrade it in this way?And why limit it by chars?
Wouldn't limiting by number of words (provided each word is no longer than say 30 chars) be a better way to keep posts simple without introducing a situation where users use awkward abbreviations to shorten their entries?A service that limits the length of entries by number of words (and say one URL per entry) instead of by number of chars would seem to me to be the best way to enforce brevity.
Isn't the point of brevity to reduce the time spent reading information?
The typical Twitter entry with awkward abbreviations would seem to cancel out this advantage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31472920</id>
	<title>Drug risks?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268589720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are none - our benevolent pharma company overloards tells us so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are none - our benevolent pharma company overloards tells us so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are none - our benevolent pharma company overloards tells us so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469784</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1268501760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds to me like with the exception of the (possibly) the last bullet point those kind of ads should be banned. They play into people's fears and constant need to "enhance" themselves. These companies are just hoping to make us all hypochondriacs and it seems to be working sadly. The ins and outs of various diseases and medicines should be left to the expert, the doctor, not some half-brained twit who rots their brain watching hours and hours of pharma ads.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds to me like with the exception of the ( possibly ) the last bullet point those kind of ads should be banned .
They play into people 's fears and constant need to " enhance " themselves .
These companies are just hoping to make us all hypochondriacs and it seems to be working sadly .
The ins and outs of various diseases and medicines should be left to the expert , the doctor , not some half-brained twit who rots their brain watching hours and hours of pharma ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds to me like with the exception of the (possibly) the last bullet point those kind of ads should be banned.
They play into people's fears and constant need to "enhance" themselves.
These companies are just hoping to make us all hypochondriacs and it seems to be working sadly.
The ins and outs of various diseases and medicines should be left to the expert, the doctor, not some half-brained twit who rots their brain watching hours and hours of pharma ads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469798</id>
	<title>Re:A simple solution</title>
	<author>SEWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1268501940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"#NonUSA Buy ExcelSuperGreenDrug! #USA Sorry, you die."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" # NonUSA Buy ExcelSuperGreenDrug !
# USA Sorry , you die .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"#NonUSA Buy ExcelSuperGreenDrug!
#USA Sorry, you die.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31491764</id>
	<title>Easy solution: prevent marketing altogether.</title>
	<author>Ustice</author>
	<datestamp>1268672340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>EASY solution.  Make it illegal to market prescription medication to consumers. Patients should not be going to their doctors asking for drugs. Doctors should be making diagnoses, and prescribing the appropriate drug for the patient's condition. It's dishonest and dangerous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>EASY solution .
Make it illegal to market prescription medication to consumers .
Patients should not be going to their doctors asking for drugs .
Doctors should be making diagnoses , and prescribing the appropriate drug for the patient 's condition .
It 's dishonest and dangerous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EASY solution.
Make it illegal to market prescription medication to consumers.
Patients should not be going to their doctors asking for drugs.
Doctors should be making diagnoses, and prescribing the appropriate drug for the patient's condition.
It's dishonest and dangerous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469250</id>
	<title>Is that really the problem?</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1268495940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As if character count is the real worry with how Big Pharma markets their wares?  Talk about misdirection and misframing....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As if character count is the real worry with how Big Pharma markets their wares ?
Talk about misdirection and misframing... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As if character count is the real worry with how Big Pharma markets their wares?
Talk about misdirection and misframing....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469908</id>
	<title>Re:A simple solution</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1268503380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you can't SELL directly to the consumer then you should not be allowed to market to the consumer. These are substances that are considered so bad that untrustworthy civilians can't be trusted to buy them without a doctors referral. That line of reasoning should apply to the ads. People that can't be trusted to buy their own drugs should not be conned into demanding them from their doctor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you ca n't SELL directly to the consumer then you should not be allowed to market to the consumer .
These are substances that are considered so bad that untrustworthy civilians ca n't be trusted to buy them without a doctors referral .
That line of reasoning should apply to the ads .
People that ca n't be trusted to buy their own drugs should not be conned into demanding them from their doctor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can't SELL directly to the consumer then you should not be allowed to market to the consumer.
These are substances that are considered so bad that untrustworthy civilians can't be trusted to buy them without a doctors referral.
That line of reasoning should apply to the ads.
People that can't be trusted to buy their own drugs should not be conned into demanding them from their doctor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469836</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Tromad</author>
	<datestamp>1268502480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable"</p><p>Shouldn't the patient be discussing their symptoms to the doctor? I do a review of systems with all of my patients. Unless there is something new, anything that is bothering a patient I should already know about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If you ban all drug ads , then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable " Should n't the patient be discussing their symptoms to the doctor ?
I do a review of systems with all of my patients .
Unless there is something new , anything that is bothering a patient I should already know about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable"Shouldn't the patient be discussing their symptoms to the doctor?
I do a review of systems with all of my patients.
Unless there is something new, anything that is bothering a patient I should already know about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469376</id>
	<title>Re:Why a 140-char limit, and why not by words?</title>
	<author>amRadioHed</author>
	<datestamp>1268497020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The messages are limited to the size of an SMS messages since that is how tweeting was originally meant to be done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The messages are limited to the size of an SMS messages since that is how tweeting was originally meant to be done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The messages are limited to the size of an SMS messages since that is how tweeting was originally meant to be done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31473016</id>
	<title>news at 11...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1268590680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>marketing keeps corporations alive, no matter what the are in business of doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>marketing keeps corporations alive , no matter what the are in business of doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>marketing keeps corporations alive, no matter what the are in business of doing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469826</id>
	<title>I can just see it now...</title>
	<author>mcalchera</author>
	<datestamp>1268502360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>cialis may b rite 4 u 2day! side fx r: ur ass may leak, &lt;3 atk, u cant sleep. call ur dr if u hav erection 4 more than 4 hrs</htmltext>
<tokenext>cialis may b rite 4 u 2day !
side fx r : ur ass may leak , &lt; 3 atk , u cant sleep .
call ur dr if u hav erection 4 more than 4 hrs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cialis may b rite 4 u 2day!
side fx r: ur ass may leak, &lt;3 atk, u cant sleep.
call ur dr if u hav erection 4 more than 4 hrs</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470132</id>
	<title>Re:A simple solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268506380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Zicam, fen-phen, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Zicam , fen-phen , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Zicam, fen-phen, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31476772</id>
	<title>Yawn</title>
	<author>dfenstrate</author>
	<datestamp>1268576160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, a smug foreigner. You're the only thing more common on slashdot than *nix discussions.<br>I hate to be the one to break it to you, buddy, but your country's shit stinks, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , a smug foreigner .
You 're the only thing more common on slashdot than * nix discussions.I hate to be the one to break it to you , buddy , but your country 's shit stinks , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, a smug foreigner.
You're the only thing more common on slashdot than *nix discussions.I hate to be the one to break it to you, buddy, but your country's shit stinks, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1268501700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs.</p></div><p>Not going to happen, check out the Constitution:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press</p></div><p>It's pretty clear.  And personally I don't favor amending it just so some easily manipulable people can stop getting upset when their doctors don't prescribe them the random medicine they saw on TV.  Learn not to be manipulated by advertising, it's an important life skill.  Don't make the rest of us suffer just because a small group who can't handle it.  By your logic we ought to ban a lot of things because a small minority can't handle them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs.Not going to happen , check out the Constitution : Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ; or abridging the freedom of speech , or of the pressIt 's pretty clear .
And personally I do n't favor amending it just so some easily manipulable people can stop getting upset when their doctors do n't prescribe them the random medicine they saw on TV .
Learn not to be manipulated by advertising , it 's an important life skill .
Do n't make the rest of us suffer just because a small group who ca n't handle it .
By your logic we ought to ban a lot of things because a small minority ca n't handle them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quit allowing the advertisement of prescription drugs.Not going to happen, check out the Constitution:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the pressIt's pretty clear.
And personally I don't favor amending it just so some easily manipulable people can stop getting upset when their doctors don't prescribe them the random medicine they saw on TV.
Learn not to be manipulated by advertising, it's an important life skill.
Don't make the rest of us suffer just because a small group who can't handle it.
By your logic we ought to ban a lot of things because a small minority can't handle them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469772</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268501580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How about quit allowing drug manufacturers to release drugs with no more than 2 side effects?</i></p><p>Because we all have different DNA, so one person will have side effects, where another person does not. All drugs have some side effects, even natural ones. Some people react badly to caffeine for example.</p><p>However, very little work is done to match your DNA profile to side effects of any given drug. Most clinical studies only track your "race" European, African, Asian etc which is a poor indicator of genetic differences. Hopefully as the cost of DNA mapping is get significantly cheaper there will be a batter mapping of your genetics Vs side effects so a Doctor can administer drugs which match your generic profile.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about quit allowing drug manufacturers to release drugs with no more than 2 side effects ? Because we all have different DNA , so one person will have side effects , where another person does not .
All drugs have some side effects , even natural ones .
Some people react badly to caffeine for example.However , very little work is done to match your DNA profile to side effects of any given drug .
Most clinical studies only track your " race " European , African , Asian etc which is a poor indicator of genetic differences .
Hopefully as the cost of DNA mapping is get significantly cheaper there will be a batter mapping of your genetics Vs side effects so a Doctor can administer drugs which match your generic profile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about quit allowing drug manufacturers to release drugs with no more than 2 side effects?Because we all have different DNA, so one person will have side effects, where another person does not.
All drugs have some side effects, even natural ones.
Some people react badly to caffeine for example.However, very little work is done to match your DNA profile to side effects of any given drug.
Most clinical studies only track your "race" European, African, Asian etc which is a poor indicator of genetic differences.
Hopefully as the cost of DNA mapping is get significantly cheaper there will be a batter mapping of your genetics Vs side effects so a Doctor can administer drugs which match your generic profile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, let's solve those disclosure requirements</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1268499420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are four kinds of drug ads: <ul> <li>ads for an over-the-counter drug such as Advil (ibuprofen),</li><li>"help seeking ads" that mention a disease and no drug ("if you have symptoms A, B, and C it could be disease XYZ; visit LearnAboutXYZ.com"),</li><li>"reminder ads" that mention a prescription drug and no disease ("ask your doctor whether PLACEBO is right for you"), and</li><li>ads that mention both a prescription drug and a disease, which also have to mention the side effects.</li></ul><p> If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are four kinds of drug ads : ads for an over-the-counter drug such as Advil ( ibuprofen ) , " help seeking ads " that mention a disease and no drug ( " if you have symptoms A , B , and C it could be disease XYZ ; visit LearnAboutXYZ.com " ) , " reminder ads " that mention a prescription drug and no disease ( " ask your doctor whether PLACEBO is right for you " ) , andads that mention both a prescription drug and a disease , which also have to mention the side effects .
If you ban all drug ads , then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are four kinds of drug ads:  ads for an over-the-counter drug such as Advil (ibuprofen),"help seeking ads" that mention a disease and no drug ("if you have symptoms A, B, and C it could be disease XYZ; visit LearnAboutXYZ.com"),"reminder ads" that mention a prescription drug and no disease ("ask your doctor whether PLACEBO is right for you"), andads that mention both a prescription drug and a disease, which also have to mention the side effects.
If you ban all drug ads, then how do you educate the public that a particular syndrome is treatable?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31481296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31476772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31476376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31474060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31477200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31471854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31478190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_14_0011220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31472046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469308
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469298
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469578
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31472046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469584
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31471854
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469784
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470052
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470118
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31476772
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470610
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31474060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469508
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469742
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469622
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31477200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31481296
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31476376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469540
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470464
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469728
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469268
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469730
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31478190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469276
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469908
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31470132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_14_0011220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_14_0011220.31469314
</commentlist>
</conversation>
