Sadly no specifics about the 28 physicians they analyze.

That's not to say that it's not important, but the labor required is vastly underappreciated. I say this as someone who has completed the task for many papers.

To my knowledge, generic trials aren’t as involved as their non-generic counterparts for obvious reasons. But they are still non-trivial logistical undertakings.

Making generic drugs is non-trivial. The medicinal chemistry may be decades old, but you still need to do trials to demonstrate efficacy equivalency to the non-generic version. Are they really saying they'll do 100 of these trials by the end of the year?

While this is cool, I'm thinking that this type of initiative should be done by the federal government. A generic drug "mint" if you will.

Ethically, you are more than welcome to experiment on yourself. That's your prerogative. But, as has already been expressed here, the issue is once you start giving your creation to others. Even when the science is conceptually very simple, like in the case of nucleic acid vaccines, a huge number of variables can impact the safety and efficacy endpoints for the recipient. That's why trials and regulation are essential.

Are these regulatory systems perfect? Absolutely not (they are in dire need of reform). But they form an essential safety barrier for the general public. Decrying them as class warfare is incredibly naive.

I would kill for a command line EHR, especially if I could edit notes in vim!

The newer crop of physicians have a much better time using EMRs. Don't get me wrong, they are acutely aware of the ridiculousness that is modern billing-centric medical records. But having been trained in that atmosphere, it definitely appears less painful to their day-to-day.