Comments on: Big Pharma: An Ethics and Morals Vacuum

By: Dr. Ron

Dr. Ron — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:31:51 +0000

A blatant reason why the US and its medical system of ’sicknessss care’ needs to be overhauled, philosophically, is in the very first sentence of the Hippocratic path…”first do no harm.”

According to your links and stats Iatrogenic causes of death is the leading killer of Americans… our “health care” system is the leading cause of death. And yet the majority of Americans have no clue.

Dr. Rons last blog post..Side Effects of Zrii?

By: slowsmile

slowsmile — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 14:55:48 +0000

In answer to this - in my recent trawlings on the internet the reason is because when college biochem graduates come out of Uni and start research companies - they desperately need the funding for they’re new drugs, and the only funding they can hope for is from Big Pharma. Putting a new drug thru research is certainly not trivial - it costs $200 million to put a drug thru research before general release to the public. Well the only people that can afford this are Big Pharma. Small companies all have to do this because of the cost. So Big Pharma, indirectly, controls its smaller competition.

This is also why companies making Traditional Chinese Medicines, Alternate Therapies etc. cannot “legally” show proof of purpose and be described as cures. They just can’t affford to prove it. Big Pharma controls all this ….and the US govt does nothing…

By: Jimmy Justo

Jimmy Justo — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 14:40:18 +0000

slowsmile, I imagine that both theories are true in different circumstances. Too bad polarity, partisanship, preferences and my way or the highway predominates. But when I was speaking of money available, I meant money and scientists outside of Big Pharma influence, after all, many Doctors, research scientist, investors, are not fans of Big Pharma. Assuming as you say Big Pharma may have vested interest in comforting us instead of curing us, why are no funded startups or anti Big Pharma initiatives finding the findable cures either? So much money could be made by those not under the “spell” of Big Pharma really going for “the cure” because they are not weighted down with the size and scope of the legacy research and products of Big Pharma?

By: slowsmile

slowsmile — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 14:21:08 +0000

Jimmy…I completely agree. But I guess the UK has recognised the corruption and bad business practice that really exists now within the Big Pharma sector worldwide - not just in the US. But it is also true that both UK and Europe have tighter safety and effacy controls on Big Pharma - with less “influence” from Big Pharma than occurs in the US.

You say that they chase the next big thing - but where are the cures for cancer, hepatitis, HIV etc ? This is why I question the Germ Theory.

The Cellular Theory believes that that the microbes inside us can turn from good to bad - they can morph from good bacteria to mycoplasm to bad virus to bad yeast to bad fungi due to the different healthy and unhealthy states of the body “terrain”. So this theory is all about maintaining a healthy body “terrain” - and not surprisingly - is very similar in principle to ancient practices like Traditional Chinese Medicine and Ayurvedic Medicine.

By: Jimmy Justo

Jimmy Justo — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 13:49:33 +0000

slowsmile. no doubt history is often somewhat of myth sometime for benign reasons and the prevalent theory even is science, built on a theory can have unintended consequences. One would think that the amount of money that could be made with a real cure would spur individual scientists in a world full of investment cash chasing the next big things would eventually find a real cure, because when you describe the UK’s se3ven principles as “and promotes mutual sharing of information for the common good” I do not think that means one cannot hold secrets in their drug patents.