Daily Links: Stemming the flow

  • Geno reaps benefits from getting majority of reps [Star Ledger]
  • Jenny Vrentas camp report reaches familiar conclusion [The MMQB]
  • Dyer: Let Rex boast [CBS New York]
  • Will stem cell treatment revitalize Chris Johnson? [The MMQB]
  • Amaro continues to struggle [New York Post]
  • Colon rates highly in pass protection [PFF]



190 comments
tsjc68
tsjc68

I just noticed that we've been spending a good chunk of the thread talking about contraceptives, and the name of today's Daily Links is "Stemming the flow".



williamg1
williamg1

What are the chances Aboushi starts at some point this season, if not the beginning of the season?

Brendan
Brendan

Pettine is doing something cool in camp, whichever unit wins the competition, everyone wears their colored jerseys the next day (so, for the Jets, everyone today would be wearing green because the D beat the O in the goal line drill yesterday).

Bent
Bent moderator

So...apparently Ben "Dancing Bear" Ijalana and Brent "Potatoe" Qvale are ahead of Marcus Zusevics and Dakota "BullDozier" Dozier is ahead of Will Campbell in the battle for the last two OL spots.  And, yes, as expected Dalton Freeman is ahead of Caleb "Slaughterhouse" Schlauderaff for the backup center spot.


Adjust your contest entries accordingly.

levi
levi

 That stem cell article is some very interesting stuff. Its a bit long but really makes you think about the possibilities of what it can do without surgery or medicine. Of course thats where the issue of lost money to big pharm comes into play and why some types are illegal here.

Bent
Bent moderator

@tsjc68 I can see into the future.

Bent
Bent moderator

@williamg1 Some of the stories coming out about Aboushi are making him real easy to root for.


Dare I suggest a rotation at LG?

Brendan
Brendan

@williamg1 It's still early, but it looks like he's got a real shot to win the job. 

bklyndude
bklyndude

@Brendan

I'm guessing since Pettine is copying everything he learned from Rex,  the Browns would have just hired Rex in a heart beat if he had been let go after the season.

The original is always better than the knock-off imitation.

Bent
Bent moderator

@Brendan We did that a few years ago with the Black Jerseys.

juunit
juunit

@tsjc68 

All these injuries to players I talked up during the draft process are gonna make me look bad.

Brendan
Brendan

@Bent I like it. 


THE BULLDOZIER REIGNS SUPREME. 

boomer
boomer

@levi Don't kid yourself.  Galaxo and other drug companies are some of the biggest investors in stem cell research.


It's not as simple as just drawing cells from one place and jamming them in another.

tsjc68
tsjc68

@Brendan @williamg1

The Twitter Box keeps portraying it as a 50/50 proposition at the moment.  Aboushi seems to have really turned a corner.


Remember, at the close of the 2013 season (and before his dismal showing at the Senior Bowl), Aboushi was in the mix in R2 and Winters was just a fringy R3-R4 prospect.

Brendan
Brendan

@Disgruntled Jets Fan Well, I looked into it and Bent is correct, it was a unit-thing not an individual thing. But I also saw a quote from Rex, who said he stole it from Sparano. 

Brendan
Brendan

@Bent Wasn't that just to award standout players, though? 

Bent
Bent moderator

@Disgruntled Jets Fan I'm assuming you're all drafting entries well in advance of when we post the thread before the last preseason game.

levi
levi

@boomer  Dont get me wrong, I dont know much about it but I find it fascinating. I just assume big pharm is evil with little knowledge about it. I will be reading up on it though.

Disgruntled Jets Fan
Disgruntled Jets Fan

Oh yeah, I'm sure that sort of thing has been around for a long time. I doubt nyone comes up with anything truly novel in TC very often.

Bent
Bent moderator

@Brendan @Bent No, I think it was exactly as you describe.  The defense kept winning nearly every day haha.

boomer
boomer

@levi @boomer Big government is evil.  There's a reason why you can go to multiple countries around the world and get this treatment today but you can't get it done in the US and its not the drug companies.


Maybe we could get our elected officials to stop worrying about important issues like the names of NFL teams and focus on some of the small stuff like letting new drugs and procedures come to market to actually help people.


I won't hold my breath.

Brendan
Brendan

@Bent Ah, okay. I remembered that as handing out individual jerseys, but I could be wrong. 


And yeah, I'd expect the defense to win most days. That's what is happening in Cleveland. 

tsjc68
tsjc68

@juunit @BDarc23 @tsjc68 BDarc is joking about a57se and Hank from Naples claiming that my draft scouting skills must suck since I went 0-17 in the picks contest...


...even though i never submitted an entry to the picks contest and the 17 names in question wasn't a prediction of whom I thought we'd draft with our 12 choices but just a list of 17 names of guys I liked personally (and we actually did draft one of them, Dakota Dozier).


He's goofing on 57 and Hank being their usual moronic selves.


williamg1
williamg1

@boomer @levi In fairness, big government helped with the funding that led to these discoveries and its uses. 

juunit
juunit

@boomer @levi 

I've got a cousin who's working towards her PhD in stem cell research. So they're at least allowing some research into it. Unlike with certain drugs, which are still 100% illegal to do anything with. 

boomer
boomer

@williamg1 @boomer @levi Big government doesn't pay for anything, we do.


You want less government interference, shrink government and let the companies pay for these things themselves.  

tsjc68
tsjc68

@williamg1 @boomer @levi

And in further fairness, the reason that big government occasionally stands in the way of further scientific/medicinal breakthroughs or treatments coming to market in a cost-effective manner is because big government (like all types of government) is still prone to the corrupting influence of big money (like pharma companies lobbying government to prevent Medicare from buying cheaper generics) or big special interest (like religious groups lobbying to prevent science from studying stem-cells for narrow ethical reasons).

boomer
boomer

@juunit @boomer @levi There is absolutely a ton of R&D going into stem cell therapies, has been for years, for treating things as widely disparate as Parkinson's and muscle regeneration.  We just happen to have an exceptionally cumbersome process for bringing new drugs and therapies to market in the US.


Anyway, back to football.

tsjc68
tsjc68

@boomer @williamg1 @levi

But without government funding at the outset, these companies wouldn't start doing that pharma research in the first place, is what William is saying.

boomer
boomer

@tsjc68 @williamg1 @boomer @levi Which came first, big government or the evil money to influence it?


You wouldn't need to spend millions to lobby government if government didn't make that the preferred method. And drug companies wouldn't lobby against cheaper generics and try to keep their patents if it didn't cost tens of millions to jump through all the hoops laid down by government to bring new drugs to market.


Stem cell therapies have been around for decades. The only issue religious groups have made is over the use of infant or cord blood stem cells.


I have no issue with drug safety but if you think that is all that is going on then I have a couple bridges and some wetlands to sell you.

williamg1
williamg1

@tsjc68 @williamg1 @boomer @levi


No doubt. 

Although, in this case, I suspect politics. People hear "stem cells" and automatically think "embryonic stem cells" -- not knowing the difference between that and adult stem cells. 

levi
levi

@Bent  That reminds me of damon Wayans but I cant exactly remember why.

boomer
boomer

@tsjc68 @boomer @williamg1 @levi I understand what he's saying I just disagree. If you create a system where funding comes from a particular source then thats where people will go to get funding. 


Shrink the scope of government back to its Constitutional duties and you will get a more efficient market.

Disgruntled Jets Fan
Disgruntled Jets Fan

Newsflash: there's no discernable difference between government and big money.

tsjc68
tsjc68

@williamg1 @tsjc68 @boomer @levi

Well, Hobby Lobby just won a case where they got the right to opt out of providing coverage three drugs because they claimed they were abortifacients (and thus immoral) instead of just contraceptives (not immoral, apparently), even though the medical community says "you're wrong, these aren't abortifacients, they're just contraceptives".


So, yeah.  Non-scientists attempting to guide ethical public policy based on their scientific claims doesn't always work out well.

boomer
boomer

@tsjc68 @williamg1 @boomer @levi Actually, thats false. Hobby Lobby only objected to 3 out of nearly 20 birth control drugs that they already provide to all of their female employees free of charge because they are indeed abortifacients. Your wrong on the science.


Pretty sure one of the other 17 or so free birth control products will get the job done.

boomer
boomer

@tsjc68 @boomer @williamg1 @levi Apparently the Supreme Court disagrees with you.


I'm curious as to why you would slam big pharma in one comment and then rely on them to back up your claim that morning after pills (the name should be a giveaway) are not aborifacients.  Who do you think sells those pills that the government wants to make mandatory?


They're still legal. If a woman wants one she can pay for it rather than having me pay for it.  Works for me.


And I'm not even religious.

tsjc68
tsjc68

@boomer @tsjc68 @williamg1 @levi

The Supreme Court are also not scientists.


And I'm not relying on Big Pharma press releases to tell me that Plan B and IUDs are not abortifacients, I'm relying on actual independent scientists to say they're not abortifacients, because they're not.  They prevent pregnancies, they don't kill fetuses.


That's a contraceptive, not an abortifacient.

boomer
boomer

@tsjc68 @boomer @williamg1 @levi They aren't making a scientific determination, they are making a decision based on vested interests. Its all about when you believe life begins. Some believe it begins at conception, others believe it is later.  


You can keep saying that its a contraceptive but you aren't basing your statement on fact, its just an opinion and others disagree.


In any case, why should I pay for any drugs that someone else wants?

tsjc68
tsjc68

@boomer @tsjc68 @williamg1 @levi

In any case, why should I pay for any drugs that someone else wants?


Because you are a citizen of this democracy and "paying for things you don't personally want and need" is part of the social contract.


We all pay for tons of things we don't personally want/need/use, and we do so for the collective good.

boomer
boomer

@tsjc68 @boomer @williamg1 @levi No, its not part of the social contract. This was rammed through by one party and has never had the support of the populace.


And it won't last.

tsjc68
tsjc68

@boomer @tsjc68 @williamg1 @levi

Not talking just about this specific thing, but about the general "why should I have to pay for things I don't use" argument against governmental programs.


Nobody ever said "Every dollar of your taxes must be spent on programs you personally use".  That's not what the social contract is all about.

boomer
boomer

@tsjc68 @boomer @williamg1 @levi The social contract concept was based on the theory that a majority can support spending on programs that promote the betterment of society. This include things like schools, roads and other institutions that promote a better society even if they don't demonstrate immediate benefit to an individual. 


It does not mean that any program passed by government is in fact a betterment of society and that is especially true when you talk about laws that do not have the support of the majority.




Thats what the social contract is all about.