Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

A Multiple Sclerosis (MS) drug just passed its third trial in a row, and it costs pennies. Metformin and clemastine, a diabetes pill and an antihistamine already sitting in pharmacies, are repairing the nerve damage MS causes. No new drug. No decade of toxicology testing. No billion-dollar price tag... show more

Harshi Peiris, Ph.D.

11,434 subscribers

33,086 views • 6 days ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Health & Wellness Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

15 Comments

williambendenders6 days ago

$ is all

Harshi Peiris, Ph.D.6 days ago

Sadly it is

Carl6 days ago

I did this regimen about 10 years ago. The side effects of clemastine are terrible. I’ll stick to my monthly natalizumab infusion, thanks.

Harshi Peiris, Ph.D.6 days ago

That’s good information. Of course no two people … even twins are the same. Therefore the way we develop any disease or respond to treatment can be different. It’s very important to distinguish between generic advice over precision medicine. Who responds better could be a whole other trial. But it does show improvement biologically across multiple trials and that is definitely something to think about 👍

CbassTheFish ⚡ 🇬🇷6 days ago

@carljung84 I would be interested in seeing the results of your trial. It is good that you are progressing these things in an objective sense. Carl comments appear subjective. Also Carl only replies to other X posts in a defensive manner. Has never post on his profile, since joining in 2026.

Harshi Peiris, Ph.D.6 days ago

@carljung84 Check out the news letter 👍😊 I will post it natively on Twitter and substack both.

You can’t make this crap up!6 days ago

@JaniceDean FYI. You probably know.

gui alvm6 days ago

Links, studies, nothing? Pls.

MonkseatonCan6 days ago

I know how frantic the MS community gets over anything with hope attached. I do hope they get this moving and properly tested ASAP.

Trinka Lucas6 days ago

Fascial

Mark Smith6 days ago

@grok true?

Capt Dan6 days ago

We all know the answer...

Phil D6 days ago

So how can someone get hold of this? Possible to get them both and dose according to what’s out there?

Secure the Bits6 days ago

Follow the money…

Harshi Peiris, Ph.D.6 days ago

It usually is in the money. This is why I try to find trials that work done with already patented drugs. If they work … easy, fast, cheap. Also reduces wait time. But this is not for all diseases and conditions sadly.

Related Videos

BREAKING: Scientists just gave two old, cheap drugs to MS patients — a hay fever pill and a diabetes tablet — and measured something no drug has ever shown before. Signs of actual nerve repair. Not slowing the attack. REPAIRING the damage. Here's the science behind it 🧵

BREAKING: Scientists just gave two old, cheap drugs to MS patients — a hay fever pill and a diabetes tablet — and measured something no drug has ever shown before. Signs of actual nerve repair. Not slowing the attack. REPAIRING the damage. Here's the science behind it 🧵

Harshi Peiris, Ph.D.

467,169 views • 6 months ago

This is why people DON'T trust the system. If ivermectin has even a real signal in oncology, It should trigger MASSIVE funded trials, not smug ridicule and silence. Honest question: Why do low cost drugs always struggle to get big studies while billion dollar treatments get fast tracked? Follow the DATA wherever it leads. Credits: William Makis

This is why people DON'T trust the system. If ivermectin has even a real signal in oncology, It should trigger MASSIVE funded trials, not smug ridicule and silence. Honest question: Why do low cost drugs always struggle to get big studies while billion dollar treatments get fast tracked? Follow the DATA wherever it leads. Credits: William Makis

Craig Brockie

41,343 views • 5 months ago

PillPack founder TJ Parker⚡️ says Hims' Wegovy pill alternative is a “$50 drug that doesn't work” and a “financial Hail Mary.” "The Wegovy pill has a specific technology called 'SNAC' to allow you to absorb the peptide and have the drug be effective. Hims explicitly said they didn't use that technology and said they're using liposomal absorption, which maybe works, maybe doesn't, but there's certainly no proof that it works." "There are zero studies and zero approval. This is where it's super different from the injectables, where they weren't changing the formulation. It was very similar to the branded drug." "[The pill] is different in the sense that, here, there's no evidence this drug works at all. So the most likely scenario is they're selling a $50 drug that doesn't work that still has a bunch of side effects because it still has the drug that doesn't get absorbed through your G.I." "It's not an IP issue, it's really an efficacy and safety issue."

PillPack founder TJ Parker⚡️ says Hims' Wegovy pill alternative is a “$50 drug that doesn't work” and a “financial Hail Mary.” "The Wegovy pill has a specific technology called 'SNAC' to allow you to absorb the peptide and have the drug be effective. Hims explicitly said they didn't use that technology and said they're using liposomal absorption, which maybe works, maybe doesn't, but there's certainly no proof that it works." "There are zero studies and zero approval. This is where it's super different from the injectables, where they weren't changing the formulation. It was very similar to the branded drug." "[The pill] is different in the sense that, here, there's no evidence this drug works at all. So the most likely scenario is they're selling a $50 drug that doesn't work that still has a bunch of side effects because it still has the drug that doesn't get absorbed through your G.I." "It's not an IP issue, it's really an efficacy and safety issue."

TBPN

77,039 views • 7 months ago

WOAH 🚨 Pay attention to this American pharmacist exposing that some cheap, very effective drugs, HAVE BEEN BANNED form being prescribed because they’re too cheap So instead of the cheap option, drugs that cost $1,000+ are allowed for certain treatments (INSANE) “The most insane examples of why drugs cost so much is a drug called Brenzavvy. You almost certainly haven't heard of it, but you've probably heard of similar drugs like Jardiance or Farxiga. The reason you haven't heard of Brenzavvy, though, is because no insurance companies will cover it. Most doctors won't prescribe it, and most wholesalers won't even carry it. When I tell you why our entire healthcare industry is turning its back on this proven drug in one of the most critical classes in existence, you are going to be furious. They are shunning Brenzavvy because it's too cheap. I'm not being hyperbolic or sensational. I mean it literally. At my pharmacy, Brenzavvy costs $60 bucks. When they took that price to the pharmacy benefits managers, or PBMs, that's the people in charge of deciding what's covered on your insurance, they all said no, because Brenzavvy can't do a rebate at a price that low. Farxiga and Jardiance, the other Drugs in the SLGT 2 class with Brenzavvy, cost insurance payers $1000 bucks each prescription up front. Then they get a big, probably like 40% rebate later. So that's a $400 rebate, and that is a huge selling point for the PBMs to prove how important they are. The PBMs get a piece of that rebate, and they get a percentage of the final price. An HHS report from last year said that the PBMs get 23% on average for for brand meds. After the rebate, Farxiga and Jardiance still cost $600. 23% of that is $138 for the middleman. Those drugs get dispensed 8 million times a year, which means the total they make in a year off of those two drugs is $1.1 billion. They don't make the drug, they don't prescribe it, they don't dispense it, they don't sell it. They only have to do one thing to make that money. Keep Brenzavvy off their list. If they let in a drug that costs 1/10 of the price and doesn't pay rebate, they literally lose a billion dollars a year. To me, that's the clearest example of why we will never get affordable health care in America. As long as we have PBMs involved, they can't afford to save you money.“ So while this might not be an outright ban, meaning illegal to create, for all purposes it is a ban. Because if the insurance companies won’t cover it, their doctors won’t prescribe it and nearly all wholesalers won’t carry it, that means the insurances companies and PBMs are effectively banning medication in America so they can make maximum profits. Billions a year on a single Medicine, when there are much cheaper options available for the customer This is organized crime. This is racketeering

Wall Street Apes

107,917 views • 1 year ago

San Francisco Department of Public Health says there are warning about a new synthetic opioid called cychlorphine “We believe it is more potent than fentanyl” The first death has just occurred from this new synthetic drug “The drug is stronger than Fentanyl, believe it or not, and just started to circulate in the United States” They say this new synthetic drug is being laced into other drugs. So someone could take a pill and unknowingly have this new drug added into it “It can be mixed into a a pill. It can be sold as a powder. It can be sold mixed in with cocaine, it can be sold as cocaine” It's also believed to be resistant to Narcan, so it’ll be much easier to overdose and die from

San Francisco Department of Public Health says there are warning about a new synthetic opioid called cychlorphine “We believe it is more potent than fentanyl” The first death has just occurred from this new synthetic drug “The drug is stronger than Fentanyl, believe it or not, and just started to circulate in the United States” They say this new synthetic drug is being laced into other drugs. So someone could take a pill and unknowingly have this new drug added into it “It can be mixed into a a pill. It can be sold as a powder. It can be sold mixed in with cocaine, it can be sold as cocaine” It's also believed to be resistant to Narcan, so it’ll be much easier to overdose and die from

Wall Street Apes

106,999 views • 4 months ago

Trump suggested that the breakthrough on drug prices could also translate to lowering health insurance. In terms of real-world results, Trump called it “massive.” For example, he explained how a drug that sells for $137 in America will drop to just $15 to $18. In other countries, the same drug is sold for only $10, and they will now have to raise the price slightly. But America is no longer footing the bill, so the rest of the world can get cheap drugs. And finally — in a move once thought impossible — Americans will be paying a fair price.

Trump suggested that the breakthrough on drug prices could also translate to lowering health insurance. In terms of real-world results, Trump called it “massive.” For example, he explained how a drug that sells for $137 in America will drop to just $15 to $18. In other countries, the same drug is sold for only $10, and they will now have to raise the price slightly. But America is no longer footing the bill, so the rest of the world can get cheap drugs. And finally — in a move once thought impossible — Americans will be paying a fair price.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

34,081 views • 11 months ago

🇺🇸 Seattle's solution to its drug crisis: Move the problem somewhere poorer. The city's new leftist Mayor is reportedly pushing homeless populations out of downtown and into Chinatown, a neighborhood already under pressure. No services. No treatment. Just a different zip code. This is "progressive" city management in practice.

🇺🇸 Seattle's solution to its drug crisis: Move the problem somewhere poorer. The city's new leftist Mayor is reportedly pushing homeless populations out of downtown and into Chinatown, a neighborhood already under pressure. No services. No treatment. Just a different zip code. This is "progressive" city management in practice.

Mario Nawfal

27,307 views • 4 months ago

GIVEAWAY ALERT!!! IS IT A BIRD, IS IT A PLANE, NO IT'S A NEW EASTER UPDATE OF BRAZILIAN DRUG DEALER 3: I OPENED A PORTAL TO HELL IN THE FAVELA TRYING TO REVIVE MIT AIA I NEED TO CLOSE IT WITH A REVAMPED MULTIPLAYER AND NEW MAPS!!!! AND WITH THAT I'M GIVING AWAY 3 WHOLE DAMN KEYS OF THIS MASTERPIECE, SO IN ORDER TO GET A CHANCE TO WIN ONE, LIKE+RETWEET THIS POST AND WISHLIST BRAZILIAN DRUG DEALER BEFORE 4: DEMONS FROM THE PORTAL TO HELL I OPENED ARE STILL IN THE FAVELA AND NOW I HAVE TO SAVE MAMADAS FROM RONALDO. LINK IS GIVEN IN THE REPLY

GIVEAWAY ALERT!!! IS IT A BIRD, IS IT A PLANE, NO IT'S A NEW EASTER UPDATE OF BRAZILIAN DRUG DEALER 3: I OPENED A PORTAL TO HELL IN THE FAVELA TRYING TO REVIVE MIT AIA I NEED TO CLOSE IT WITH A REVAMPED MULTIPLAYER AND NEW MAPS!!!! AND WITH THAT I'M GIVING AWAY 3 WHOLE DAMN KEYS OF THIS MASTERPIECE, SO IN ORDER TO GET A CHANCE TO WIN ONE, LIKE+RETWEET THIS POST AND WISHLIST BRAZILIAN DRUG DEALER BEFORE 4: DEMONS FROM THE PORTAL TO HELL I OPENED ARE STILL IN THE FAVELA AND NOW I HAVE TO SAVE MAMADAS FROM RONALDO. LINK IS GIVEN IN THE REPLY

RohanKar

48,032 views • 5 months ago

.Crémieux dismantles the myth that China only makes "me too" drugs, and what it means for the future of gene therapy: "One of the things China's been accused of for a long time is just doing 'Me Too' drugs... where you basically see a new drug get approved and then you copy it immediately. "Are these Chinese drugs just Me Too? No. These are cell and gene therapy trials." "In the US we are banned from offering gene therapies that do germline changes, meaning that they affect sperm or eggs." "If we can cure a family of like a horrible, debilitating disease for all time, why don't we?"

.Crémieux dismantles the myth that China only makes "me too" drugs, and what it means for the future of gene therapy: "One of the things China's been accused of for a long time is just doing 'Me Too' drugs... where you basically see a new drug get approved and then you copy it immediately. "Are these Chinese drugs just Me Too? No. These are cell and gene therapy trials." "In the US we are banned from offering gene therapies that do germline changes, meaning that they affect sperm or eggs." "If we can cure a family of like a horrible, debilitating disease for all time, why don't we?"

MTS

46,545 views • 4 months ago

A new $82 million dollar park is opening under the 6th street bridge in Los Angeles, California The promotion materials show it being amazing, clean, a place for kids with a splash pad and tons of amenities and fields It’s not even open and it’s already COVERED in graffiti, it looks like a dump. Residents are worried as soon as the gate comes down and it opens the homeless drug addicts will start moving in like they did at MacArthur Park By the looks of this park, it already has no chance. It’s already destroyed Also this park is doomed. The LA city council member who’s in charge of this area is Ysabel Jurado. This is a woman who has voted against new 41.18 no-camping zones that other council members wanted in their districts This woman advocated for the homeless to setup encampments anywhere This park has no chance. $82 million dollars down the drain

A new $82 million dollar park is opening under the 6th street bridge in Los Angeles, California The promotion materials show it being amazing, clean, a place for kids with a splash pad and tons of amenities and fields It’s not even open and it’s already COVERED in graffiti, it looks like a dump. Residents are worried as soon as the gate comes down and it opens the homeless drug addicts will start moving in like they did at MacArthur Park By the looks of this park, it already has no chance. It’s already destroyed Also this park is doomed. The LA city council member who’s in charge of this area is Ysabel Jurado. This is a woman who has voted against new 41.18 no-camping zones that other council members wanted in their districts This woman advocated for the homeless to setup encampments anywhere This park has no chance. $82 million dollars down the drain

Wall Street Apes

131,487 views • 9 days ago

Parsi: There is no doubt that we have now, after 20 years of hearing from the hawks, that the only solution is to go to war, we tried it. One third of the U.S. Navy was there in the region. This was not a small operation. This was a major operation short of an actual invasion, and it failed. There is just no doubt that the military operation was not a success. And hopefully, at a minimum, we will not be having that debate again. It has now been settled. It's no longer a theoretical or academic topic. It has been tried, proven to be a failure.

Parsi: There is no doubt that we have now, after 20 years of hearing from the hawks, that the only solution is to go to war, we tried it. One third of the U.S. Navy was there in the region. This was not a small operation. This was a major operation short of an actual invasion, and it failed. There is just no doubt that the military operation was not a success. And hopefully, at a minimum, we will not be having that debate again. It has now been settled. It's no longer a theoretical or academic topic. It has been tried, proven to be a failure.

Acyn

133,670 views • 3 months ago

My wife and I own a pharmacy. Last month we spent days trying to pry one prescription loose from a company that did everything it could to hold onto it. The drug was everolimus. A generic. It treats cancer and protects transplant patients from rejecting their new organ. Not exotic. Not rare. A pill. The patient wanted it filled with us because we're cash-pay and cost-plus. No insurance. No PBM. No secret markups, no games. Our price was $318. That's not cheap by our standards — most of what we fill runs under $20 — but it was honest. Here's what that same prescription looked like on the other side of the counter. In 2023, Medicare was paying about $6,645 for it. That's roughly 21 times our price for the identical medication. Medicare spent around $240 million on everolimus alone that year. If they'd paid our price, they'd have saved roughly $230 million. On one generic drug. So how does an insurance company profit off a drug that expensive? Don't they pay for it? No. You pay for it. In your premiums. Their job isn't to spend less — it's to keep your healthcare dollars circulating inside their own companies. And the tool they use is called spread pricing. Spread pricing works like this: the middleman bills the health plan one price, pays the pharmacy a lower one, and keeps the difference. You never see it. On TRICARE, they pay an independent pharmacy like mine about $311 to fill everolimus. That barely covers our cost of the drug. Meanwhile the plan gets billed thousands. That gap — north of $6,000 on a single fill — is pure margin the middleman pockets. Now here's the part they'd rather you not think about. The pharmacy we were fighting was Accredo. Accredo is owned by Express Scripts. Express Scripts is the pharmacy benefit manager owned by Cigna. Same company, three masks. That nesting-doll structure isn't an accident — it's the whole design. When the pharmacy, the PBM, and the insurer are all one entity, they can shuffle money between their own pockets and call it whatever they want. The confusion is the product. And this isn't a story about one weird drug. It's the business model. The FTC has been digging into exactly this. In its January 2025 report on the three biggest PBMs — CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and OptumRx — staff found those companies marked up specialty generic drugs by hundreds and thousands of percent when dispensing through their own affiliated pharmacies. Just those markups generated more than $7.3 billion above what the drugs actually cost to acquire, from 2017 to 2022. One in five of the specialty generics they studied was marked up over 1,000%. Some cancer generics: over 3,000%. On top of that, the FTC pegged spread pricing on those same drugs at another $1.4 billion. One example straight from the FTC's files: dimethyl fumarate, a multiple sclerosis drug. Costs about $177 to acquire. The PBMs paid their own pharmacies close to $4,000 for a 30-day supply. Same trick. Different drug. And they steer the profitable ones to themselves on purpose. Pharmacies affiliated with the big three took in 68% of specialty dispensing revenue in 2023 — up from 54% in 2016. The prescriptions marked up more than $1,000 disproportionately end up at their own pharmacies, not independents like mine. So when we called to transfer this patient's everolimus to be filled without insurance, it landed like we were asking them to set $6,000 on fire. Of course they stonewalled us. That's why we fired them. No insurance means no invisible $6,000 charge buried in a premium you can't itemize. It means the price you see is the price. Ours was $318. Theirs was thousands. Same pill.

My wife and I own a pharmacy. Last month we spent days trying to pry one prescription loose from a company that did everything it could to hold onto it. The drug was everolimus. A generic. It treats cancer and protects transplant patients from rejecting their new organ. Not exotic. Not rare. A pill. The patient wanted it filled with us because we're cash-pay and cost-plus. No insurance. No PBM. No secret markups, no games. Our price was $318. That's not cheap by our standards — most of what we fill runs under $20 — but it was honest. Here's what that same prescription looked like on the other side of the counter. In 2023, Medicare was paying about $6,645 for it. That's roughly 21 times our price for the identical medication. Medicare spent around $240 million on everolimus alone that year. If they'd paid our price, they'd have saved roughly $230 million. On one generic drug. So how does an insurance company profit off a drug that expensive? Don't they pay for it? No. You pay for it. In your premiums. Their job isn't to spend less — it's to keep your healthcare dollars circulating inside their own companies. And the tool they use is called spread pricing. Spread pricing works like this: the middleman bills the health plan one price, pays the pharmacy a lower one, and keeps the difference. You never see it. On TRICARE, they pay an independent pharmacy like mine about $311 to fill everolimus. That barely covers our cost of the drug. Meanwhile the plan gets billed thousands. That gap — north of $6,000 on a single fill — is pure margin the middleman pockets. Now here's the part they'd rather you not think about. The pharmacy we were fighting was Accredo. Accredo is owned by Express Scripts. Express Scripts is the pharmacy benefit manager owned by Cigna. Same company, three masks. That nesting-doll structure isn't an accident — it's the whole design. When the pharmacy, the PBM, and the insurer are all one entity, they can shuffle money between their own pockets and call it whatever they want. The confusion is the product. And this isn't a story about one weird drug. It's the business model. The FTC has been digging into exactly this. In its January 2025 report on the three biggest PBMs — CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and OptumRx — staff found those companies marked up specialty generic drugs by hundreds and thousands of percent when dispensing through their own affiliated pharmacies. Just those markups generated more than $7.3 billion above what the drugs actually cost to acquire, from 2017 to 2022. One in five of the specialty generics they studied was marked up over 1,000%. Some cancer generics: over 3,000%. On top of that, the FTC pegged spread pricing on those same drugs at another $1.4 billion. One example straight from the FTC's files: dimethyl fumarate, a multiple sclerosis drug. Costs about $177 to acquire. The PBMs paid their own pharmacies close to $4,000 for a 30-day supply. Same trick. Different drug. And they steer the profitable ones to themselves on purpose. Pharmacies affiliated with the big three took in 68% of specialty dispensing revenue in 2023 — up from 54% in 2016. The prescriptions marked up more than $1,000 disproportionately end up at their own pharmacies, not independents like mine. So when we called to transfer this patient's everolimus to be filled without insurance, it landed like we were asking them to set $6,000 on fire. Of course they stonewalled us. That's why we fired them. No insurance means no invisible $6,000 charge buried in a premium you can't itemize. It means the price you see is the price. Ours was $318. Theirs was thousands. Same pill.

Forest Park Pharmacy

59,415 views • 2 months ago

Doctor exposes a sobering reality about chemotherapy drug use and cancer. “They [kill] a lot of people sooner than they would have if they had just actually left them alone.” Dr. Gene Posca explains that the FDA has had a troubling history of approving experimental drugs while sidelining safety. Yes, many of these drugs shrank tumors — but there was a devastating cost. “[Patients] died more often and earlier,” Dr. Posca lamented. It’s a grave reminder that efficacy is not the most important aspect of a drug — safety is. And this reality is one that the medical industry has ignored for far too long. #ad: This clip comes from an eye-opening new film by The Truth About Vaccines. If you’ve wondered why Americans are sicker than ever — and why no one stopped it — this film lays it all out. I’ve already watched it, and it tells the corruption story masterfully. You can watch it now for free here:

Doctor exposes a sobering reality about chemotherapy drug use and cancer. “They [kill] a lot of people sooner than they would have if they had just actually left them alone.” Dr. Gene Posca explains that the FDA has had a troubling history of approving experimental drugs while sidelining safety. Yes, many of these drugs shrank tumors — but there was a devastating cost. “[Patients] died more often and earlier,” Dr. Posca lamented. It’s a grave reminder that efficacy is not the most important aspect of a drug — safety is. And this reality is one that the medical industry has ignored for far too long. #ad: This clip comes from an eye-opening new film by The Truth About Vaccines. If you’ve wondered why Americans are sicker than ever — and why no one stopped it — this film lays it all out. I’ve already watched it, and it tells the corruption story masterfully. You can watch it now for free here:

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

75,409 views • 11 months ago

Not infrequently, I met people who say, 'John I support almost everything the Libertarian Party stands for but not your pro drug policy.' This is usually based on a misunderstanding of our policy. We are not pro drugs. We are against the state micromanaging our lives. A state so powerful it can knock on your door today to stop you smoking pot, will turn up soon after and arrest you for a Facebook post. We are in favour of privately organised campaigns to warn of the obvious dangers related to drug use. If that campaign has a compelling case it will change hearts and minds and people will voluntarily say no to drugs. The alternative is to stamp out drug use by the state threatening violence ... but that doesn't change hearts and minds and fuels a black market. Today I opposed a bill by the Greens to legalise pill-testing because they proposed a new slothful, inefficient and costly bureaucracy to manage the process. Do we really want a state so intrusive it wants public servants to control pill-testing? No. Libertarian Party NSW (Liberal Democrats)

Not infrequently, I met people who say, 'John I support almost everything the Libertarian Party stands for but not your pro drug policy.' This is usually based on a misunderstanding of our policy. We are not pro drugs. We are against the state micromanaging our lives. A state so powerful it can knock on your door today to stop you smoking pot, will turn up soon after and arrest you for a Facebook post. We are in favour of privately organised campaigns to warn of the obvious dangers related to drug use. If that campaign has a compelling case it will change hearts and minds and people will voluntarily say no to drugs. The alternative is to stamp out drug use by the state threatening violence ... but that doesn't change hearts and minds and fuels a black market. Today I opposed a bill by the Greens to legalise pill-testing because they proposed a new slothful, inefficient and costly bureaucracy to manage the process. Do we really want a state so intrusive it wants public servants to control pill-testing? No. Libertarian Party NSW (Liberal Democrats)

John Ruddick MLC - Libertarian

10,846 views • 2 years ago

Roman Yampolskiy says AGI is no longer a question of when, but how much it costs Scaling laws are predictable: the cost has dropped from $1 trillion to $100 billion, and will soon reach $1 billion AI already writes 100% of the code for next-gen models, so recursive self-improvement has already begun

Roman Yampolskiy says AGI is no longer a question of when, but how much it costs Scaling laws are predictable: the cost has dropped from $1 trillion to $100 billion, and will soon reach $1 billion AI already writes 100% of the code for next-gen models, so recursive self-improvement has already begun

Haider.

18,844 views • 5 months ago

🚨 The Paxil scandal is an astonishing example of how drug data can be hidden and spun—and then sold to kids. “In the late 90s, the manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline or GSK did a series of trials and found that the drug was no better than placebo. …There was an email that was sent to staff where GSK said that [it] would be commercially unacceptable to disclose the poor efficacy data of this drug. So instead of telling the truth, they hired a PR firm to write the medical journal for them, to ghostwrite the article and put a positive spin on it, and then that was submitted to the journal, and it was published in 2001. And it wasn't long before the regulators in the US and also in Europe discovered that the drug actually was increasing the risk of suicidal ideation. It was doing the exact opposite of what the drug was meant to do. And so they put out a warning saying that this drug showed no efficacy in children and adolescents, but the drug continued to be marketed off-label…because the prominent journal had published this peer-reviewed paper. GSK purchased thousands of pre-prints and sent them out to all their representatives, and then they went to doctors, giving free samples, saying this drug is safe and effective for children. And I think within a time span of three years, GSK made over a billion dollars in sales from a drug that had never proven to be safe or effective in children and adolescents.” -Investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi, PhD

🚨 The Paxil scandal is an astonishing example of how drug data can be hidden and spun—and then sold to kids. “In the late 90s, the manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline or GSK did a series of trials and found that the drug was no better than placebo. …There was an email that was sent to staff where GSK said that [it] would be commercially unacceptable to disclose the poor efficacy data of this drug. So instead of telling the truth, they hired a PR firm to write the medical journal for them, to ghostwrite the article and put a positive spin on it, and then that was submitted to the journal, and it was published in 2001. And it wasn't long before the regulators in the US and also in Europe discovered that the drug actually was increasing the risk of suicidal ideation. It was doing the exact opposite of what the drug was meant to do. And so they put out a warning saying that this drug showed no efficacy in children and adolescents, but the drug continued to be marketed off-label…because the prominent journal had published this peer-reviewed paper. GSK purchased thousands of pre-prints and sent them out to all their representatives, and then they went to doctors, giving free samples, saying this drug is safe and effective for children. And I think within a time span of three years, GSK made over a billion dollars in sales from a drug that had never proven to be safe or effective in children and adolescents.” -Investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi, PhD

Jan Jekielek

140,141 views • 9 months ago

NEW LONG FORM VIDEO: The rise and fall of OnlyFans The owner of OnlyFans made $700 million last year with just 46 employees and no debt. By almost any measure, it’s one of the most profitable businesses on the internet. About a year ago, the owner tried to sell the company and has been struggling ever since to get the price he wants. So why is one of the most profitable businesses in internet history so hard to sell? The answer goes back to how the business was built. It all started with a $10,000 loan from a father to his son to launch the company. Today, more than $7.2 billion in revenue flows through OnlyFans each year. If a business generating $700 million in annual cash flow were publicly traded, it would likely be valued in the tens of billions of dollars. But here we are, and OnlyFans is still stuck on the market. And look, this is a complicated story. OnlyFans is an adult content platform, which makes it one of the more challenging businesses to analyze and talk about openly. Still, there are some fascinating business lessons behind how it grew, why it became so profitable, and why selling it has proven so difficult.

Sensitive content

NEW LONG FORM VIDEO: The rise and fall of OnlyFans The owner of OnlyFans made $700 million last year with just 46 employees and no debt. By almost any measure, it’s one of the most profitable businesses on the internet. About a year ago, the owner tried to sell the company and has been struggling ever since to get the price he wants. So why is one of the most profitable businesses in internet history so hard to sell? The answer goes back to how the business was built. It all started with a $10,000 loan from a father to his son to launch the company. Today, more than $7.2 billion in revenue flows through OnlyFans each year. If a business generating $700 million in annual cash flow were publicly traded, it would likely be valued in the tens of billions of dollars. But here we are, and OnlyFans is still stuck on the market. And look, this is a complicated story. OnlyFans is an adult content platform, which makes it one of the more challenging businesses to analyze and talk about openly. Still, there are some fascinating business lessons behind how it grew, why it became so profitable, and why selling it has proven so difficult.

Michael Girdley

95,409 views • 5 months ago

I will take no joy when Starmer eventually goes. This country has felt like it has been frozen in a permanent crisis for the last decade. People are struggling & suffering and see no improvement in their lives. It is them that are the real losers of this whole sorry saga

I will take no joy when Starmer eventually goes. This country has felt like it has been frozen in a permanent crisis for the last decade. People are struggling & suffering and see no improvement in their lives. It is them that are the real losers of this whole sorry saga

Matthew

65,022 views • 7 months ago

EVERYONE'S BUYING THE M4 MAC MINI AS A CHEAP DESKTOP. HERE'S WHY IT ENDS UP UNUSED. the pitch is irresistible: a tiny mac that runs cool, quiet, and cheap. then the receipt shows up. the mac mini ships with no screen, no keyboard, no mouse. add a monitor, a decent keyboard and mouse, and more storage, and the "$799 mac" is past $1,000 fast. and macos isn't windows. if your world is gaming, specific windows apps, or the setup you already know, the mini fights you the whole way. that's how so many end up back on a pc, the mini in a drawer. so what is the mac mini actually great at? not being your main desktop. it's the box you never look at. headless in a corner, it's a near-silent always-on server: run local ai models on it, host your automations, keep your files, and reach it from the laptop you already use. it earns its keep by disappearing. the honest turn: the mac mini isn't a cheap desktop. it's a cheap server pretending to be one. buy it for the job it's quietly brilliant at, not the one the ads imply. want a main computer? price the whole setup first. want a silent little box that runs ai and never bothers you? this is the one. no monitor in the box, no keyboard, no "just $599". save this before you buy the sticker price instead of the real one.

EVERYONE'S BUYING THE M4 MAC MINI AS A CHEAP DESKTOP. HERE'S WHY IT ENDS UP UNUSED. the pitch is irresistible: a tiny mac that runs cool, quiet, and cheap. then the receipt shows up. the mac mini ships with no screen, no keyboard, no mouse. add a monitor, a decent keyboard and mouse, and more storage, and the "$799 mac" is past $1,000 fast. and macos isn't windows. if your world is gaming, specific windows apps, or the setup you already know, the mini fights you the whole way. that's how so many end up back on a pc, the mini in a drawer. so what is the mac mini actually great at? not being your main desktop. it's the box you never look at. headless in a corner, it's a near-silent always-on server: run local ai models on it, host your automations, keep your files, and reach it from the laptop you already use. it earns its keep by disappearing. the honest turn: the mac mini isn't a cheap desktop. it's a cheap server pretending to be one. buy it for the job it's quietly brilliant at, not the one the ads imply. want a main computer? price the whole setup first. want a silent little box that runs ai and never bothers you? this is the one. no monitor in the box, no keyboard, no "just $599". save this before you buy the sticker price instead of the real one.

RetroChainer

12,520 views • 2 months ago