Online Pharmacy pays 60% of the profit

hmm.... it was up and running on that URL last night. Not sure what happened after I went to bed.

actually, the page does load when I type the url in, or click the link it my sig. just not coming up when I click on it in Compar's post.

 

link is in my sig, that was a joke.

 

Nice, very nice

 

Hmm.. I try to add a store for another of my domains and they claim that that name has already been registered with them.

Looks like someone else owned it before and was participating in the same program.

Why do I always run into such things on a weekend?

 

YOu are funny
Do you read news on adminpanel

 

Yes.. is there some of the news that is relevant to this?

 

If I find I will PM you, if you find send PM to me, OK?

 

The writing is on the wall. When you see the following from the FDA:

I do not think anyone can be sanguine this will be around that much longer. My gut feeling is that the FDA is pushing hard, but so far, the law has not made the industry, legally, persona non grata. But I think the FDA will fight this one till it wins.

 

I agree with you. And the first piece of advice arising out of this is diversify your income stream. Don't put all your eggs in the online pharmacy basket. This is a piece of advice I've been giving myself for a year or more. The only problem is finding another online income stream with this potential and return.

Now the second problem with all this is that if the FDA wins they will simply drive all the online pharmacy sites underground -- read off shore. Now there will be no regulation and/or control.

Prohibition never works. It is the FDA themselves who have published and approved a list of drugs for which it is legal to issue prescriptions without a face to face consultation. So I have trouble seeing how they can have it both ways.

In a parallel situation the US Governement has been trying to shut down online gambling for years. So far they have made almost zero inroads. So we certainly should not be sanguine, but there is also no reason to abandon ship. Just make sure you know where the life boat is and that it will keep you afloat if you should ever need it.

 

But they do, and that is the reality. Pondering on how they can come to the conclusion will yield about as much, it seems to me, as pondering why google bans adsense on pharmacy sites while allowing adwords pharmacy advertisers. It is what it is.

With the FDA clearly stating their position, and health authorities now taking action in several states, there is a concrete reality here - it is not alarmist conjecture to say this is doomed. Each to their own, but I'm interested in building sites for the long haul, and don't wish to sink further resources of time and money into what appears to be a sinking ship of an industry.

In my case, my host is located in California, one of the current states currently being targeted for Pharmacy Affiliate closure (along with Florida and NY). The advice provided by the back office, to move the site host to another state or to Canada in an attempt to avoid closure is not something I, for one, am interested in pursuing. As the trend to end online pharmacies expands and migrates, moving my site from state to state, in a cat and mouse with government health and regulatory agencies, is just not a game I want to play.

 

Agree with you my friend 100%

 

If you havn't yet, make your pharmacy sites Whois info private!!!!

 

My whois is private
But Thanks Nintendo

 

I just closed the website. To be honest, I'm personally glad. Lesson learned. Due diligence.

 

And why you closed website???

 

Because I was morally conflicted from the beginning with doing this. With a financially devastating restaurant closure, I need to bring in money, and do so fast; the needs of my family are paramount in my mind. I live in a rural area, jobs are virtually nil, and I have a rep as a "citified French Chef." But doing something under exigent circumstances is never the way to go. It was wrong of me to pursue this, as my personal belief is that it is wholly unethical. I deluded myself into thinking otherwise for a brief while.

Any kid can obtain the information they need to obtain these drugs. Controlled or not, legally sold over the net or not, they are drugs, many with a history of some known, potentially dangerous results; anti-depressants bringing on crises of depressive swings at the onset, as with anti-acne meds, with suicides not unknown among them. I find it repugnant.

We can talk all we want about the legality of it. Absent the direct care of a physician, these drugs should not be handed out by some quack after reading an online questionnaire and I happen to agree with the FDA on this one. I was hypocritical in pursuing it and am glad to be out of it. What little money I made will not go to me but back, I would presume, to the company.

The above considerations aside, the company I needed to keep to try to make this site competitive - links on pages with porn, casino, and the like - made me wonder what the hell was I doing with my life, and, "is this what kind of work I wanted to put out there?"

Additionally, it soon became evident to me that the money to be made was not, in the main, in providing the online service - but in how many affiliates you can get to sign up under you. I do not want to trade in contributions based on air and nothing more.

Each to their own, with no judgments on anyone else. I have enough to do looking at myself in the mirror and answering truthfully. But for the reasons above, I want no part of it.

******

Now, separately, the back office does not seem to have a provision for deleting an account - anyone know how? They have bank information and I'd rather this be deleted.

Paul

 

If you have no use for the domain and it's indexed by google I would probably be interested of taking it off your hands if name is any good. PM me.

 

Kalev, I appreciate your offer, but I don't want to do anything to promote, or profit, by the practice. Besides, I think the name is like a million other pharm names - if you want to do this, I'm sure you could do better.

Best,

Paul

 

Paul,

What you have to do to assuage your own conscience is your business and I would never interfere or even comment, however the characterization of the online physicians who read and approve, or reject, the questionnaires as "quacks" is unproven and unjustified. If you want to quit that is your business. But please don't demean the system, or the people involved, just to justify your own position.

 

Bob, I am not surprised, based on certain exchanges between us, that you are once again interpreting my intent rather than reading what I wrote.

If trying to act in line with what my conscience dictates is assuaging my conscience, then, I guess, I am assuaging my conscience. The examples are now legion as to why I do not believe this to be an ethical practice. I claim stupidity and a certain measure of hypocrisy, as stated above. But I act now in good conscience, and state my opinions accordingly.

We can go back and forth, but it would be of no use.

Permit me to quote the American Medical Association's view:

Going to the Medical Board of California, in satisfaction of (1) above, as to what constitutes a patient/doctor relationship and ethical practice:

- emphasis mine.

Now, maybe I'm seeking to assuage my conscience further by saying this but, perhaps, is it not clear as hell that authoritative medical associations clearly condemn the practice of online sites which sell drugs based on questionnaires, without physical examination or direct physician care? Does the view of the FDA, National Institute of Health, American Medical Association and individual state medical boards - all of whom condemn this practice, and are now taking action to shut sites down under this condemnation - do they not speak at least a modicum of persuasive argument? Or is this all just some subterranean attempt to assuage my individual conscience yet again?

I stand by what I have written. Each to their own, but I do not believe the practice is ethical, and believe the doctors who take part should be censured, at the very least, as quacks.