Teh Big Pharma Conspiracy... How Big?

[Bronze Dog]

I've exchanged a lot of comments with altie nuts about how big a Big Pharma conspiracy would have to be.

According to Fore Sam, a cookie-cutter mercury-autism woo who tends to get personal with me, it only takes the CEOs' intimidation, since ALL the doctors and scientists there are too cowardly to risk their job to help people. (Which is especially silly, since many joined up specifically to help people.)

So, any thoughts?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I've exchanged a lot of comments with altie nuts about how big a Big Pharma conspiracy would have to be.

According to Fore Sam, a cookie-cutter mercury-autism woo who tends to get personal with me, it only takes the CEOs' intimidation, since ALL the doctors and scientists there are too cowardly to risk their job to help people. (Which is especially silly, since many joined up specifically to help people.)

So, any thoughts?

Who needs a conspiracy when you have a good marketing department?

 

[kookbreaker]

My dare to the 'Big Pharma conspiracy' nutters is to make their claims that doctors and pharmaceutical companies are hiding cures for Cancer directly to the faces of doctors and nurses who work in Cancer wards.

When their face gets reattached, they might reconsider their position.

 

[Dave1001]

Who needs a conspiracy when you have a good marketing department?

great point

 

[kevin]

what is the nature of the big pharma conspiracy? I see mention of hiding cancer cures for some unknown reason (so they spent all the money developing a cure but now won't sell it?)

i've also heard of them not researching for cures but just symptom treatments that have to be applied over and over and over (which at least makes sense capitalistically)

And of course all the money going into baldness and erectile disfunction instead of cancer treatments.

Is that about the extent of it?

 

[TobiasTheViking]

I've exchanged a lot of comments with altie nuts about how big a Big Pharma conspiracy would have to be.

According to Fore Sam, a cookie-cutter mercury-autism woo who tends to get personal with me, it only takes the CEOs' intimidation, since ALL the doctors and scientists there are too cowardly to risk their job to help people. (Which is especially silly, since many joined up specifically to help people.)

So, any thoughts?

I have many opinions and thoughts on that.. but i'm not sure what you are looking for specificly. Could you verbose your request?

 

[ponderingturtle]

what is the nature of the big pharma conspiracy? I see mention of hiding cancer cures for some unknown reason (so they spent all the money developing a cure but now won't sell it?)

The general logic is this.

X is a simple all natural product that will cure disease Y. Pharma sells Drugs A,B,C to treat disease Y and make lots of money on those drugs. They can not patent or control X as anyone can take it, so they cover it up and spread lies about it.

That seems to be the basic logic behind this

 

[Dave1001]

The general logic is this.

X is a simple all natural product that will cure disease Y. Pharma sells Drugs A,B,C to treat disease Y and make lots of money on those drugs. They can not patent or control X as anyone can take it, so they cover it up and spread lies about it.

That seems to be the basic logic behind this

It's interesting how even though there are no laws I am aware of against it, there seems to be an aversion of pharmaceutical companies that sell cancer medication from merging with tobacco companies, and companies that sell high fat, high salt junk food for merging with pharmaceutical companies that sell heart disease medication. The closest large companies come to profitting off both ends that I'm aware of are: (1) big drug store chains that sell medication as well as cigarettes and junk food, and (2) GE, which sells weapons to injure people and medical equipment to make them better. Anyone aware of (any other) companies that profit from both ends in this way?

 

[Dave1001]

The general logic is this.

X is a simple all natural product that will cure disease Y. Pharma sells Drugs A,B,C to treat disease Y and make lots of money on those drugs. They can not patent or control X as anyone can take it, so they cover it up and spread lies about it.

That seems to be the basic logic behind this

It's true to a degree in obvious ways. There's arguably little financial incentive to tell people to do some simple excercises at home and eat a moderate varied diet of inexpensive, healthy foods. There seems to be a greater financial incentive to sell people hypertension and diabetes drugs a couple decades later.

 

[pgwenthold]

It's true to a degree in obvious ways. There's arguably little financial incentive to tell people to do some simple excercises at home and eat a moderate varied diet of inexpensive, healthy foods. .

Yet, doctors do this all the time (tell people to get a proper diet and excercise). I thought they were part of the conspiracy?

 

[Dave1001]

Yet, doctors do this all the time (tell people to get a proper diet and excercise). I thought they were part of the conspiracy?

I meant there's not a great incentive for large, profit-seeking institutions to spread the message of inexpensive health maintenance through moderate diet and excercise, in the same way that there's a strong incentive for pharmaceutical companies to agressively spread messages of drug prescription and consumption for health maintainence (for example with people with obesity related hypertension or diabetes).

 

[T.A.M.]

Cancer - There are cures, it is called surgical excision of the malignancy. Once it has spread to the lymphatic system and beyond, there is no cure, end of story. There may be remission, but it is not cured.

Diabetes - The only cure is diet and exercise, and once the pancreas is beaten to death (by your bodies own insulin resistance or by drugs like glyburide), that cure will not even work.

Hypertension - Cure is same as for Diabetes, for most, diet and exercise, but for those with a strong family history, even that might not be enough.

I'll be honest, there is no doubt that the Pharma companies are out to make profit, and yes this is the overwhelming push behind the research they do. What do you expect, it is the AMERICAN way.

The research, however, does get done, and these companies are in competition with each other, which lowers the med prices. And their patents are only so long, then they make no money off the drug. And yes, then they manipulate the molecule to make it better, and patent it under another name...also good sound business. The medicines they put out work, and for the most part are safe.

They also apply the principles of scientific method and theory to their studies, and have them peer reviewed. Doctors are trained in critical thinking and critical analysis of scientific studies and drug trials in med school. There are regulatory bodies, and numerous stop gaps, and lets not forget that good old american faithful....the law suit, to keep them in check.

I am far from a Pharma lobbyist, but I understand and appreciate their role.

 

[kevin]

The general logic is this.

X is a simple all natural product that will cure disease Y. Pharma sells Drugs A,B,C to treat disease Y and make lots of money on those drugs. They can not patent or control X as anyone can take it, so they cover it up and spread lies about it.

That seems to be the basic logic behind this

bah, crap. Big pharma are masters at taking existing about to go off patent medicines and getting them re-patented by slight changes to the molecule. Would be easy to do for some natural drug too.

 

[ktesibios]

It's interesting how even though there are no laws I am aware of against it, there seems to be an aversion of pharmaceutical companies that sell cancer medication from merging with tobacco companies, and companies that sell high fat, high salt junk food for merging with pharmaceutical companies that sell heart disease medication. The closest large companies come to profitting off both ends that I'm aware of are: (1) big drug store chains that sell medication as well as cigarettes and junk food, and (2) GE, which sells weapons to injure people and medical equipment to make them better. Anyone aware of (any other) companies that profit from both ends in this way?

Well, if you want a literal example of profiting from both ends, Purina manufactures both cat food and cat litter.

 

[American]

The most obvious argument against any conspiracy is that everyone either gets cancer, may get it, or knows somebody close who has.

However I would not bother presenting this argument to conspirists, as the best way to deal with such people is to ignore them where ever they are found.

 

[asmodean]

Diabetes - The only cure is diet and exercise, and once the pancreas is beaten to death (by your bodies own insulin resistance or by drugs like glyburide), that cure will not even work.

Quick nitpick. There's several types of diabetes. Type 1 (the type I've had for 25+ yrs) is an auto-immune disease killing of insuline producing cells. Pretty much calls for insulin injections from the start. Diet and excercise wont "cure" (treat) type 1 though it will help a lot.

Type 2 though can sometimes be treated with nothing but excercise and proper diet with the roto cause of hightened insulin resistance.

Gestational diabetes? .. *shrug* Dunno about that one.

 

[asmodean]

The most obvious argument against any conspiracy is that everyone either gets cancer, may get it, or knows somebody close who has.

Exactly. It's not like Big Pharma(tm) will run out of cancer patients with a cure-for-cancer in their patent portfolio.

 

[Cuddles]

How big? I caught one once that was <--------------> this big. But it got away before I could take a photo.

 

[bobdroege7]

why cure cancer when we can sell a drug at 150$ a dose that neither treats or diagnoses cancer, only monitors the progress of the disease?

 

[Consternatio]

why cure cancer when we can sell a drug at 150$ a dose that neither treats or diagnoses cancer, only monitors the progress of the disease?

So, how do you explain the drugs trials like the one my mother was involved in after being diagnosed with cancer?

OK, this was in the UK, but I'm fairly sure we'd be willing to share the results of a drug trial that (for my mother, anyway) resulted in a reduction in the size of the tumour in her breast and lymph glands from the first treatment, and had erradicated it by the end of her sessions (6 in total), thus saving her from having to undergo extensive and invasive surgery? My mother is a walking, talking, breathing example of the search for new cures and treatments.

No, the big companies never develop cures for cancer. All those scientists and doctors like seeing people dying, just so they can carry on working for a big company and provide the shareholders with huge profits.

Give me a break. You have no idea what you're talking about.