Retardalert. wrote:
tomtom wrote:Tell me, do you really believe any kind of study that can endanger corporations would be even funded by US government?.EVERY SINGLE FRIGIN DAY! You are one huge F'tard.
Resorting to calling someone names doesn't make them wrong. It just makes you an ignorant crybaby.
someone else wrote:
Resorting to calling someone names doesn't make them wrong. It just makes you an ignorant crybaby.
Ok tomtom sidekick! You 13 year old girls need to leave this board.
Calling him a name is just defining him as what he is.
Retardalert's comment about them doing research that could damage pharm companies sales every single day is what makes him wrong. Anyone who knows anything about the types of things people research these days would know that.
It is amazing that such an absurd initial post has actually caused so many to feel compelled to say stupid things or to refute stupid statements.
9/10. At least.
hey13yearoldgirl wrote:
someone else wrote:Resorting to calling someone names doesn't make them wrong. It just makes you an ignorant crybaby.
Ok tomtom sidekick! You 13 year old girls need to leave this board.
Calling him a name is just defining him as what he is.
Retardalert's comment about them doing research that could damage pharm companies sales every single day is what makes him wrong. Anyone who knows anything about the types of things people research these days would know that.
Do you have any evidence to back up your claims? Come on, you should know the rules, since you're not a 13 year old girl, right?
citation needed wrote:
The vaccine is certainly effective in the short term.
No, since no one ever PROVED virus -> cancer relationship. Vaccination MIGHT offer protection, but it's still theory.
And even if they do offer protection, it's still just one type of cancer. And since risk of developing cancer depends mostly of lifestyle, you can "save" said woman from cervical cancer, yet she will die 3 years later due to breast cancer.
Lifestyle changes offer protection against ALL kind of cancer. You know, there are countries where virtually no one die due to this disease. They do not use ridiculously expensive vaccination programs, people there just don't eat junk.
someone else wrote:
Why do you expect people in the business to follow some sort of ethical code that compels them to make legitimate treatments at their own expense? To them, it's completely ethical to make people feel comfortable while keeping them addicted to their medicine. It's not wrong as long as the patients feel comfortable. Why on earth would they purposefully make less money by curing people and risking losing tons of patients? It's a dog eat dog world and the dog that makes the most money is the winner. Is this too hard to grasp? How do you refute this?
Man, you expect common sense from people who use FAITH? They trust in world, doctors are to help them, politics are to care for them, police is to protect them, said otherwise and you will be outlawed from their little religious community.
In democracy we trust.
middle professor wrote:
tomtom wrote:But you are aware of fact, that antibiotics were discovered by pure accident BEFORE era of pharma corporations?
Trust me, if it was today, you would be getting medicines every day for the rest of your life - just like HIV infected ones.
Penicillin was effectively discovered in 1928, first used medically in 1930 and first large scale trails in around 1939-1942.
Top 5 "Big Pharma" companies
1. Johnson & Johnson. Founded 1886
2. Pfizer - founded 1849
3. Roche - 1896
4. GlaxoSmithKline - founded 1830, 1843, 1880, 1904
5. Novartis - 1996
I wish that I could just make up facts without feeling like an idiot. Arguing would be so much easier.
Yes? And when they started to control law?
When they established law prohibiting private research and private practice?
It's sooo easy to control sheep, they will use every argument to defend their herder...
middle professor wrote:
I assume from this that you regularly steal, lie, and cheat instead of following some sort of ethical code?
I'm sure he doesn't. But I can't see him as a leader of big corporation, either.
tomtom wrote:
citation needed wrote:The vaccine is certainly effective in the short term.
No, since no one ever PROVED virus -> cancer relationship. Vaccination MIGHT offer protection, but it's still theory.
YES IT HAS BEEN PROVEN. I gave you the evidence in my first post on this thread. If you do ten minutes of reading on the proteins mentioned you will see that HPV can immortalize the cells it infects. That IS cancer. I hate to keep arguing around in circles but pointing that out to you was the whole reason I joined this thread. I should have known I was wasting my time.
Sorry, changed computers, changed names. Chicken little=citation needed
someone else wrote:
What you call omniscient understanding I call basic psychology. If some people think that's unethical, I guarantee there will be somebody else who will do it and doesn't think it's unethical. And I'm sure there are people in the practice who really don't believe there is a cure and that treating the symptom is the only way to help the patient. It doesn't take a genius or omniscient understanding to know that greed happens and that ignorance happens. Combined, you get a lot of big businesses built on faulty foundations. It's not just that it happens, it's pretty much inevitable.
OK, so you're into speculative logic. I can work with that. Ask yourself a few questions:
1) If what you say were true, wouldn't it also be true of the many supplement companies that make billions of dollars selling vitamins that make people "feel better"?
2) Given the US drug approval process, how many people/organizations would need to be involved in this conspiracy to foist expensive placebos on unsuspecting Americans without a peep from the press? This sounds like a 9/11-inside-job sized conspiracy here. Is it really inevitable?
3) Given the huge logical leap between what you've said above and your original broad claim that "Big pharma DOESN'T WANT things that work", can you appreciate why I'm having a hard time taking you seriously?
tomtom wrote:
someone else wrote:Why do you expect people in the business to follow some sort of ethical code that compels them to make legitimate treatments at their own expense? To them, it's completely ethical to make people feel comfortable while keeping them addicted to their medicine. It's not wrong as long as the patients feel comfortable. Why on earth would they purposefully make less money by curing people and risking losing tons of patients? It's a dog eat dog world and the dog that makes the most money is the winner. Is this too hard to grasp? How do you refute this?
Man, you expect common sense from people who use FAITH? They trust in world, doctors are to help them, politics are to care for them, police is to protect them, said otherwise and you will be outlawed from their little religious community.
In democracy we trust.
Well said! Although, not in the best English.
tomtom wrote:
middle professor wrote:I assume from this that you regularly steal, lie, and cheat instead of following some sort of ethical code?
I'm sure he doesn't. But I can't see him as a leader of big corporation, either.
In medicine, there is no ethical obligation to give the patient the "correct" treatment. If you assume that people in the business would do this rather than make more money, then you probably haven't lived enough to know that rarely ever, if ever happens. Besides, they're making the patient FEEL better... nothing wrong with making a few bucks off of that, right? Well, at least that's how they think. It's easy to do when you're not at the shit end of the stick.
I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given to me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.
someone else wrote:
tomtom wrote:I'm sure he doesn't. But I can't see him as a leader of big corporation, either.
In medicine, there is no ethical obligation to give the patient the "correct" treatment. If you assume that people in the business would do this rather than make more money, then you probably haven't lived enough to know that rarely ever, if ever happens. Besides, they're making the patient FEEL better... nothing wrong with making a few bucks off of that, right? Well, at least that's how they think. It's easy to do when you're not at the shit end of the stick.
OK, so you're into speculative logic.
It's not so speculative when you consider the following (forgive me if I get some of the details wrong as I'm going off of memory but my post really speaks to the direction our health care system has taken):
- USA healthcare has the highest cost and the lowest efficacy of developed nations.
- The average number of prescriptions taken daily for a USA citizen over 65 is 11.
- The recommended vaccination schedule for infants and small children is 35 (it was 6 as recent as the 80's)
- Big Pharma funds any "legitimate" study of drug efficacy in the USA. Their supporters also hold prominent positions of influence at our universities, regulatory bodies and government.
- Diabetes, autism and other developmental disorders are skyrocketing.
Why don't we know more about the efficacy of vitamin, homeopathic and naturopathic type therapies? Why did it take until 2010 to bother to get to know vitamin D better? Usually when asked these questions our medical community responds with a collective yawn. Not nearly as sexy or prosperous as deriving therapies from horses, cows or apes.
We as a nation are becoming more impaired. Something is definitely wrong with our model. Sure the food supply is poison (that is a whole ‘nuther thread) but something else stinks as well.
I wish I could say that Big Pharma has our best interest at heart but whenever there has been billions of dollars involved, in any industry, maintenance of share price has been prioritized.
So, no, I don't have "evidence" that there is a conspiracy but there are so many smoking guns lying around that somebody has to be shooting them - my money is on Big Pharma.
Many of the people that post on here regarding this topic are both uninformed ignorant. I am a current pharmaceutical rep and am leaving the profession due to moral grounds and the fact that besides the salary, it is one of the least rewarding and most degrading jobs around. There is basically no need for pharmaceutical reps as we are nothing more than glorified UPS delivery men schlepping samples of drugs to doctors who don't want to see or deal with us. This industry is soon to be cut in half and you will see more lay-offs than you have ever seen in your life. The lies that permeate this industry go so deep that many people often lose themselves in thinking that what they do actually helps the doctors and people they interact with.
As a rep really do go through some grueling training. What you are taught however is to minimize the side-effects of the drugs you sell and get doctors to carry certain drugs that maximize other symptoms in order for them to prescribe an "accompanying" drug that balances them out when combined together (...and yes the doctors know this). A large portion of the doctors are on payroll from the Big Pharma companies and are paid upwards of 300-400k a year to prescribe their patients the respective drugs of these companies. The generic market is also going to kill these Name Brand Big Pharma companies come 2011-2012, as many of their blockbuster drugs lose the patent-Exclusivity they had (i.e. Eli Lilly: and Cymbalta).
Most pharm reps are over-paid and glorified by the uninformed person because they think "oh my gosh you work for this big pharm company or that one!). I will tell you now, these people work 20 hours a week at most and are paid for 40. While I am incredibly new to the industry, I have realized I wont sacrifice my integrity for any amount of money, especially at the expense of another person's life. People who sell the drugs to doctors that kill people are just as responsible as the doctor prescribing them. You probably don't know anything about htis though because these companies minimize the death statistics and attribute them to other factors because htye have the money to cover it up. Mark my words come 2012 when Big Pharma crashes. It's going to be ugly for a lot of people.
citation needed wrote:
someone else wrote:What you call omniscient understanding I call basic psychology. If some people think that's unethical, I guarantee there will be somebody else who will do it and doesn't think it's unethical. And I'm sure there are people in the practice who really don't believe there is a cure and that treating the symptom is the only way to help the patient. It doesn't take a genius or omniscient understanding to know that greed happens and that ignorance happens. Combined, you get a lot of big businesses built on faulty foundations. It's not just that it happens, it's pretty much inevitable.
OK, so you're into speculative logic. I can work with that. Ask yourself a few questions:
1) If what you say were true, wouldn't it also be true of the many supplement companies that make billions of dollars selling vitamins that make people "feel better"?
2) Given the US drug approval process, how many people/organizations would need to be involved in this conspiracy to foist expensive placebos on unsuspecting Americans without a peep from the press? This sounds like a 9/11-inside-job sized conspiracy here. Is it really inevitable?
3) Given the huge logical leap between what you've said above and your original broad claim that "Big pharma DOESN'T WANT things that work", can you appreciate why I'm having a hard time taking you seriously?
1) Sure, it would be true of some, I don't see the problem here or how that discredits anything I said about pharmaceuticals. Of course, you're assuming vitamins are the same thing as pharmaceuticals in that they don't do anything to treat the cause. I don't know much about supplement companies, but I don't see how it's even relevant to my argument.
2) Not many. The medicines that are approved usually have proven mechanisms for suppressing the patient's symptoms, but the root of the problem isn't fixed by using chemicals to block cell receptors that cause the symptoms to occur. There is something wrong with the body, and while the pain is temporarily relieved, the body is lacking something that it needs to function properly (such as vitamins) and it's not going to get that by chemicals that block cell receptors.
3) I can appreciate that you are having a crisis of trust right now and you don't want to give up your current camp. Change is hard. I don't see the leap in logic, however. Can you explain why anyone who was trying to make money would eliminate the source of their income (patients)? Don't you think it's a little ironic that the "most effective" medical practice we have nowadays keeps claiming that "there is no cure"? There's just this super-effective medicine that you will have to take for the rest of your life (because it treats the symptoms and once the medicine stops, the symptoms come back). People enter the business to "help people feel better" and are told by the system in place that "there is no cure." Treating symptoms is the only way they know how to think. You can't expect them to know about effective alternative medicines because they weren't taught about that in medical school due to the existing paradigm that penetrates modern medicine. I don't see how you can argue right now.
chicken little wrote:
YES IT HAS BEEN PROVEN. I gave you the evidence in my first post on this thread. If you do ten minutes of reading on the proteins mentioned you will see that HPV can immortalize the cells it infects. That IS cancer. I hate to keep arguing around in circles but pointing that out to you was the whole reason I joined this thread. I should have known I was wasting my time.
No, it has been not. Possibility doesn't means exclusivity (sorry for bad English here). Smoking increase chance of said cervical cancer, but only a little. Non-smoking person can get disease as well.
Vaccine producers state that their product can protect completely or almost completely against cervical cancer, while only proof is about reducing chance - it can be reduction by 0,1% as well.
Jefe in the CO wrote:
- Diabetes, autism and other developmental disorders are skyrocketing.
I'm not defending Big Pharma (there are plenty of things wrong with that industry) but Autism is skyrocketing because it is used as a differetial diagnosis for Intellectual Disabilities (nee' Mental Retardation) and Emotional Disturbance. I'm shocked that this is not commonly known and acknowledged.
OK, off-topic to this discussion. I'm into natural medicine, without any medical degree but still helping people around with advices.
So, what can do guy without medical experience, using vitamins and dietary regimen? Few that comes to my mind right now:
- It take few WEEKS before type 2 diabetes is cured
- It take WEEKS to cure Rheumatoid arthritis
- It take WEEKS to cure 95% cases of depression or panic attacks
All of them are stated as "uncurable" by modern medicine. So, trust to billion-dollar industry and whole modern medicine and you will be on expensive prescription for the rest of your life. Trust in poor natural medicine and you will be OK in no time, without need to take any drugs except few weeks.