<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/style/rss/rss_feed.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?><?xml-stylesheet href="/style/rss/rss_feed.css" type="text/css" media="screen" ?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Clipmarks | enbar's Comments</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/comments/</link><feedUrl>http://rss.clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/comments/</feedUrl><ttl>15</ttl><description>Clip, tag and save information that's important to you. Bookmarks save entire pages...Clipmarks save the specific content that matters to you!</description><language>en-us</language><item><title>Fred Phelps's organization (the "God Hates Fags" pastor) has decided God hates Jews, too</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/5DF5769F-4460-4CE1-86FD-A9E0D568AD84/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  I find this choice of photo pretty curious. "Some Jews Will Repent" is a pretty tame slogan compared to the other ones quoted in the article, such as "Rabbis Rape Kids" and "God Hates Jews."  &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-11-13-westboro-gay-jewish_N.htm?csp=34&amp;utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A Religion-TopStories %28News - Religion - Top Stories%29" title="http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-11-13-westboro-gay-jewish_N.htm?csp=34&amp;utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A Religion-TopStories %28News - Religion - Top Stories%29"&gt;www.usatoday.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content7.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/7F3EEBD4-7AA0-4CA9-8CC9-C579DDF682EB.gif" alt="Home" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" id="topTools"&gt;
&lt;form name="hiddenValForm"&gt;&lt;/form&gt;
		&lt;tbody&gt;
				



&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;span&gt;Anti-gay church sets its sights on Jews&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content8.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/57A7D852-2626-4FDC-A391-895C20B50A24.jpg" alt="Andrew Bullard, right, holds a "God Loves All" sign in front of an anti-Semitic sign held by a demonstrator from the Westboro Baptist Church, an anti-gay group that claims U.S. combat deaths are God's punishment for America's tolerance of homosexuality, in Montpelier, Vt., Sept. 1." /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;p id="AutoGeneratedID-2"&gt;In Washington, Margie Phelps balanced several signs targeting Jews, Israel and the Obama administration. One read "Rabbis Rape Kids," another said "God Hates Jews." Margie Phelps' T-shirt read "Jews Killed Jesus." She argued with men and women passing by, warning them that God will soon send the Jews to hell.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;p id="AutoGeneratedID-3"&gt;"I don't care what you claim, chosen wise," she said. "Obedience is the standard."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;p id="AutoGeneratedID-4"&gt;Taking a break from yelling at passersby and singing homophobic lyrics to the tune of the Jewish celebratory song "Hava Nagila," Margie Phelps explained the change in tactic. "We've protested this nation's love of f**s for 20 years," she said. "And Jews have been carrying the water for the homosexual agenda."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;p id="AutoGeneratedID-5"&gt;Westboro members targeted several Jewish organizations last month on a statewide tour of New Jersey. Their visit to Washington included a protest in front of the U.S. &lt;a href="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Events and Awards/War/The Holocaust" title="More news, photos about Holocaust"&gt;Holocaust&lt;/a&gt; Memorial Museum.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/christianity/" rel="tag"&gt;christianity&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/disturbing/" rel="tag"&gt;disturbing&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/evangelicalism/" rel="tag"&gt;evangelicalism&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/extremism/" rel="tag"&gt;extremism&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/judaism/" rel="tag"&gt;judaism&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/news/" rel="tag"&gt;news&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/pluralism/" rel="tag"&gt;pluralism&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/religion/" rel="tag"&gt;religion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/rels327/" rel="tag"&gt;rels327&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-11-13-westboro-gay-jewish_N.htm?csp=34&amp;utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A Religion-TopStories %28News - Religion - Top Stories%29</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:55:50 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Hanged Census Worker likely Insurance Fraud/Suicide</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/16F32C29-626F-4E4A-9E6F-0BFAC0F18458/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/billpar/"&gt;billpar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  There were no defensive wounds on Bill Sparkman's body, and while his hands were bound with duct tape, they still were somewhat mobile, suggesting he could have manipulated the rope, the officials said. He was found hanging from the tree yet was in contact with the ground. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jbzG_BlkG2Hfc818EPRRn1bBlP6gD9BUI2PO0" title="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jbzG_BlkG2Hfc818EPRRn1bBlP6gD9BUI2PO0"&gt;www.google.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WASHINGTON — Investigators trying to solve the mystery of a census taker found hanging from a tree with the word "fed" scrawled on his chest are examining whether he manipulated the scene in order to conceal a suicide and make a life insurance claim possible for his son, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Two law enforcement officials, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case, said investigators were trying to determine whether Bill Sparkman committed suicide but altered the scene to make it look like a homicide, allowing his son to collect.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Life insurance policies typically do not cover suicides within a certain time period after the policy begins.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;law enforcement officials&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;were looking closely at that possibility and increasingly doubted he was killed because of his government job, as was first feared.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/news/" rel="tag"&gt;news&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/politics/" rel="tag"&gt;politics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jbzG_BlkG2Hfc818EPRRn1bBlP6gD9BUI2PO0</clipSource><pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 14:20:40 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Kent Couch, the amazing balloon-and-lawn-chair pilot (July 2008)</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/68E2F761-B321-4779-927E-F49936BC6C79/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  I'm clipping this because until today I thought this was an urban legend. Apparently a guy pulled it off in 1982 too. Years on the Internet has made me doubt everything. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Balloon-Flight-Kent-Couch-Flies-On-Chair-Using-150-Party-Balloons-From-Oregon-To-Idaho/Article/200807115026344?lpos=World_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&amp;lid=ARTICLE_15026344_Balloon_Flight%3A_Kent_Couch_Flies_On_Chair_Using_150_Party_Balloons_From_Oregon_To_Idaho" title="http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Balloon-Flight-Kent-Couch-Flies-On-Chair-Using-150-Party-Balloons-From-Oregon-To-Idaho/Article/200807115026344?lpos=World_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&amp;lid=ARTICLE_15026344_Balloon_Flight%3A_Kent_Couch_Flies_On_Chair_Using_150_Party_Balloons_From_Oregon_To_Idaho"&gt;news.sky.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content9.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/E89E3C59-CC41-4135-97FF-64117C19ED98.gif" alt="Sky News Logo" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;H1&gt; 
						US Man Flies By Party Balloons
					&lt;/H1&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;H2&gt;An American has flown 235 miles on a garden chair using 150 helium-filled party balloons to lift him.&lt;/H2&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content6.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/C632307D-9B91-4D2E-B960-8E33C12CC4A6.jpg" alt="Balloon Flight" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kent Couch rose into the sky from his home in Oregon, clutching a mug of coffee,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;He travelled around 20mph and nine hours later ended his journey in Idaho after shooting some of the balloons with a ball-bearing gun.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Mr Couch, who navigated with a GPS satellite-guided tracking device, said: "If I had the time and money and people, I'd do this every weekend."&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;"Things just look different from up there. You've moving so slowly. The best thing is the peace, the serenity.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;"You can hear a dog bark at 15,000 feet.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Couch was inspired by a TV show about the 1982 garden chair flight over Los Angeles by truck driver Larry Walters, who gained folk hero fame but was fined £750 for violating air traffic rules.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/aviation/" rel="tag"&gt;aviation&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/cool/" rel="tag"&gt;cool&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/news/" rel="tag"&gt;news&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/random_sh!t/" rel="tag"&gt;random_sh!t&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Balloon-Flight-Kent-Couch-Flies-On-Chair-Using-150-Party-Balloons-From-Oregon-To-Idaho/Article/200807115026344?lpos=World_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&amp;lid=ARTICLE_15026344_Balloon_Flight%3A_Kent_Couch_Flies_On_Chair_Using_150_Party_Balloons_From_Oregon_To_Idaho</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:51:01 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Glenn Greenwald comments on Sue Myrick's calls for an investigation of CAIR</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/E5B157BA-D19A-4D1C-8CFE-E31D63554F31/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  I don't know the full context of this, but it's something I'd like to learn more about. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/10/15/investigation/index.html" title="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/10/15/investigation/index.html"&gt;www.salon.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content7.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/BD1563F1-230B-40B3-8902-1F5CCEA8DE0D.gif" alt="salon.com" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;H1&gt;&lt;A href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/"&gt;Glenn Greenwald&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/H1&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;H2&gt;GOP House members call for investigation of Muslim political activity&lt;/H2&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;A group of House Republicans is calling for an investigation into whether a leading American Muslim advocacy group tried to "spy" on congressional offices by placing interns on key security committees.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Rep. Sue Myrick, North Carolina Republican, cited an internal January 2007 memo in which the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) &lt;STRONG&gt;discussed placing Muslim interns on Capitol Hill&lt;/STRONG&gt; to "focus on influencing congressmen responsible for policy that directly impacts the American Muslim community."&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;That's consistent with what virtually every political advocacy group in the nation does; it's normally called activism and democracy.  But because, in this case, it's a group of Muslims who are doing this, these House Republicans are depicting it as some sort of nefarious espionage plot against the U.S. that demands a criminal investigation. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/activism/" rel="tag"&gt;activism&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/conservatives/" rel="tag"&gt;conservatives&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/gwot/" rel="tag"&gt;gwot&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/islam/" rel="tag"&gt;islam&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/pluralism/" rel="tag"&gt;pluralism&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/politics/" rel="tag"&gt;politics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/possible_blog_post/" rel="tag"&gt;possible_blog_post&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/religion/" rel="tag"&gt;religion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/10/15/investigation/index.html</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:18:29 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>David Grann, "Trial by Fire: Did Texas Execute an Innocent Man?" (on Todd Willingham's execution, Feb. 2005), The New Yorker (Sept. 7, 2009)</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/A8006A3F-9684-4EDC-8AE9-64D9E72E8039/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  A damning piece by The New Yorker on the story of Todd Willingham. Willingham was executed in 2005 for triple homicide after being convicted of killing his three children by setting their room on fire. Texas officials ignored reports by fire scientists, whose investigations showed that there had been no solid evidence that the fire was arson. The arson investigators who testified in Willingham's case relied on traditional methods whose scientific validity had long ago been disproven, and the parole board apparently did not even bother to read the exonerating information provided to them by Willingham's lawyer. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all" title="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all"&gt;www.newyorker.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV id="logo"&gt;&lt;A title="Go to The New Yorker homepage" href="http://www.newyorker.com/"&gt;&lt;IMG alt="The New Yorker" src="http://www.newyorker.com/images/elements/print/newyorker_printlogo.gif" /&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;H1 id="articlehed"&gt;Trial by Fire&lt;/H1&gt;
        
        

        
            
            
                
                
                
                    &lt;H2 id="articleintro"&gt;Did Texas execute an innocent man?&lt;/H2&gt;
                
                
            
        

        
        
            &lt;H4 id="articleauthor"&gt;
                










    
    












    
    

    
    
        
            
            

                
                

                
                &lt;SPAN class="c cs"&gt;

                
                    
                

            

            
            
                
                
                
                    
                    
                
                
            

            

            
                
            

            
            

            

        

        
        

            
            
                

                
                    
                    
                

            
                
                    

                        
                        

                        
                        
                        
                        
                            &lt;SPAN&gt;by &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/david_grann/search?contributorName=david grann"&gt;David Grann&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/H4&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;In mid-August, the noted fire scientist Craig Beyler, who was hired by the commission, completed his investigation. In a scathing report, he concluded that investigators in the Willingham case had no scientific basis for claiming that the fire was arson, ignored evidence that contradicted their theory, had no comprehension of flashover and fire dynamics, relied on discredited folklore, and failed to eliminate potential accidental or alternative causes of the fire. He said that Vasquez’s approach seemed to deny “rational reasoning” and was more “characteristic of mystics or psychics.” What’s more, Beyler determined that the investigation violated, as he put it to me, “not only the standards of today but even of the time period.”&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Texas could become the first state to acknowledge officially that, since the advent of the modern judicial system, it had carried out the “execution of a legally and factually innocent person.”&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/capital_punishment/" rel="tag"&gt;capital_punishment&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/crime/" rel="tag"&gt;crime&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/death_penalty/" rel="tag"&gt;death_penalty&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/investigative_journalism/" rel="tag"&gt;investigative_journalism&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/law/" rel="tag"&gt;law&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all</clipSource><pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:55:06 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content8.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content9.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content6.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content7.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content8.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content9.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content6.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content7.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content8.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Right, so tell me again how the "free market" is the best way to manage health-care delivery</title><link>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/4FC1E3B0-62D7-4CD3-A2E3-6C8263B81714/</link><description>&lt;b&gt;clipped by:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/clipper/enbar/"&gt;enbar&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;clipper's remarks:&lt;/b&gt;  An editorial from 2007 shows how research into three promising anticancer drugs has been abandoned. The reason is that the compounds on which the drugs are based cannot be patented (melatonin, for example), which means that pharma companies are unlikely to turn a profit. Understandable, from the perspective of the pharma companies, but unconscionable, from the perspective of cancer patients. &lt;br&gt;&lt;div border="2" style="margin-top: 10px; border:#000000 1px solid;" width="90%"&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:"&gt;&lt;div align="center" width="100%" style="padding:4px;margin-bottom:4px;background-color:#666666;overflow:hidden;"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;"&gt;Clip Source: &lt;a style="color:#FFFFFF;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#"&gt;www.nytimes.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;img src="http://content9.clipmarks.com/image_cache/enbar/512/73D09AA8-64F5-49AC-97AE-58828B3A97D3.gif" alt="New York Times" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;NYT_HEADLINE type=" " version="1.0"&gt;
Patents Over Patients
&lt;/NYT_HEADLINE&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;DIV class="byline"&gt;By RALPH W. MOSS&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;WE could make faster progress against cancer by changing the way drugs are developed. In the current system, if a promising compound can’t be patented, it is highly unlikely ever to make it to market — no matter how well it performs in the laboratory. The development of new cancer drugs is crippled as a result.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early this year, another readily available industrial chemical, dichloroacetate, was found by researchers at the University of Alberta to shrink tumors in laboratory animals by up to 75 percent. However, as a university news release explained, dichloroacetate is not patentable, and the lead researcher is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test the chemical. So the university is soliciting public donations to finance a clinical trial. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;hr size="2" color="#666666" /&gt;&lt;div style="padding: 10px;"&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:left;"&gt;Potential anticancer drugs should be judged on their scientific merit, not on their patentability.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style="margin-bottom: 40px;"&gt;Tags: &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/economics/" rel="tag"&gt;economics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/healthcare/" rel="tag"&gt;healthcare&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/medicine/" rel="tag"&gt;medicine&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/opinion/" rel="tag"&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/research/" rel="tag"&gt;research&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://clipmarks.com/tags/science/" rel="tag"&gt;science&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><clipSource>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html?_r=1&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1253466136-HDjIzs6ppu03Q1i2FhyKLg#</clipSource><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:10:12 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>