I do understand their concern to certain extent because you can't (and I know how cliche' this is) kill the goose that laid the golden egg. You have to remember that majority of drugs, as is to my knowledge, are invented right here in the U.S. Our high drug prices fund R&D for the conception of drugs all these other countries are jocking off of. I realize the extent of how many cool points I'm probably losing but you have to recognize certain truths however unfair they might be. But I also won't deny that too much of U.S. pharmaceutical firms profit margin is going towards political agendas (even though there might be some that are necessary, it is the U.S.) and that the option of using IOP's be readily available to those that can't bear the financial burden of medicinal healthcare supplemented by U.S. pharmaceutical companies. I believe a financial categories be implemented by assigning people to certain criteria that enables them to use IOP's for drugs that are too heavily priced. This decision needs to come from a non-political outside source, if such a thing exists, such as a medical review board whose members specialize in economical and medicinal distribution plans that can accurately reflect drug availability to current social conditions. Disjunction from political "lobbying", and I put an emphasis on those quotation marks, is absolutely necessary to ensure protection against unilateral decisions that, as in the real world, are always geared towards the financial interest of those involved. I probably have it all wrong and I'm probably not getting my idea across as completely as I'd like to but I think at least some of you will understand what I'm getting at. I think mass chemical analysis of drug contents with regard to the country of origin would help serve as a good basis to support or discredit the claims the FDA, DEA, and American citizens make about make IOP drug safety. BTW, how does a DB'er get some profile status aroud here? Hope you enjoyed (or hated) my post. Peace, Bromo.