1 edit
Originally posted by Zahlanzi1 drug in 10,000 gets FDA approval.
How can the tell their new employees to NOT find a cure for cancer?
they don't. they simply make them sign non disclosure agreements, or decide not to submit a certain drug for testing.
how many articles with headlines "omg, drug shows promise in curing cancer in rats" have you seen? how many articles with headlines "remember when we told you about t ...[text shortened]... lows us to sell it now, lets get rid of cancer". lots of the former and none of the latter.
So no I haven't yet heard of the "1" that offers a quick fix for cancer.
Edit: How can they "not" submit a certain drug for testing that offers a cure without writing down their decisions? Someone at the top has to tell the lower level employees to NOT be too effective. And non-disclosure doesn't save anything this explosive from getting out. Remember WikiLeaks? Any written record of a decision to NOT pursue a drug because it is too good of a cure would offend the integrity of SOME employees. I just takes ONE who has access to written decisions to go public.
Originally posted by ZahlanziWhich also has a lot to do with this;
How can the tell their new employees to NOT find a cure for cancer?
they don't. they simply make them sign non disclosure agreements, or decide not to submit a certain drug for testing.
how many articles with headlines "omg, drug shows promise in curing cancer in rats" have you seen? how many articles with headlines "remember when we told you about t ...[text shortened]... lows us to sell it now, lets get rid of cancer". lots of the former and none of the latter.
http://xkcd.com/1217/
Originally posted by normbenignWell sure, my priority is keeping my job. But I might as well do some science in between drinking coffee.
Possibly true, but when a bureaucracy is formed, its first instinct is its own preservation, not accomplishing any great cosmic good. If this is true of private for profit companies, it is more true of government entities.
Originally posted by techsouthprivate companies have the right to do whatever they want with their funds, and their findings and they answer to nobody except maybe some of their stockholders. this is the main point. you are simply clinging to an example i gave about companies not willingly pursuing a cure.
1 drug in 10,000 gets FDA approval.
So no I haven't yet heard of the "1" that offers a quick fix for cancer.
Edit: How can they "not" submit a certain drug for testing that offers a cure without writing down their decisions? Someone at the top has to tell the lower level employees to NOT be too effective. And non-disclosure doesn't save anything ...[text shortened]... ity of SOME employees. I just takes ONE who has access to written decisions to go public.
there are countless ways to make money without curing diseases. a private company is allowed to always choose to make more money. are you seriously claiming now that counting on the morals of a corporation is a safer bet than a government(people) funded and regulated project?
Originally posted by ZahlanziSince you're asking for links, here are four random surveys, a survey of surveys put's pollies consistently in the lowest least trusted professions. Are you seriously claiming now that counting on the morals of the least trusted people on earth is what we should do with our most valuable possession i.e. our health?
priv..... are you seriously claiming now that counting on the morals of a corporation is a safer bet than a government(people) funded and regulated project?
You're welcome to do that Z, but don't bring them down on the heads of all those people that are a little more wise than you.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/9552179/Ten-least-trusted-professions.html?image=9
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/the-most-and-least-trusted-professions-005308134.html
http://www.indiatimes.com/lifestyle/work-and-life/5-least-trusted-professionals-76009-5.html#list_start
http://career.jobboom.com/workplace/challenges/2007/12/19/4732266-ca.html
Originally posted by Wajomaoh yeah, polls, that's a legitimate argument. have a poll in amurica of whether or not obama is muslim. there are polls asking if obama is the antichrist leaning in favor of yes. have a poll on whether or not americans "believe" in evolution.
Since you're asking for links, here are four random surveys, a survey of surveys put's pollies consistently in the lowest least trusted professions. Are you seriously claiming now that counting on the morals of the least trusted people on earth is what we should do with our most valuable possession i.e. our health?
You're welcome to do that Z, but don't ...[text shortened]... 5.html#list_start
http://career.jobboom.com/workplace/challenges/2007/12/19/4732266-ca.html
but lets admit for a second that politicians and government officials are corrupt. (humor me). it is still a public institution. you can still demand and receive results, paperwork of what happened with the money, where it went. and if you do not like what is going on, you can demand a change. assuming of course that apathy doesn't grip the population.
what transparency can you demand from a drug company? they are a private corporation, they only answer to stockholders. and stockholders (especially minor ones) don't participate in decision making. they only frown if the bottom line suffers. all these factors lead to companies doing pretty much whatever they want as long as they can dodge the laws well enough and show profit to soothe their stockholders.
Originally posted by ZahlanziIt was you that asked for links, it was you that bought up the question of integrity, but when it doesn't go your way, hmmmm. It wasn't one odd ball poll, it was a random selection of four.
oh yeah, polls, that's a legitimate argument. have a poll in amurica of whether or not obama is muslim. there are polls asking if obama is the antichrist leaning in favor of yes. have a poll on whether or not americans "believe" in evolution.
but lets admit for a second that politicians and government officials are corrupt. (humor me). it is still a pub ...[text shortened]... s long as they can dodge the laws well enough and show profit to soothe their stockholders.
You want more that concur? They're out there and you know it, politicians are the least trusted people there are. Your questioning CEO morality just back fired big time, go ahead, admit it.
Originally posted by ZahlanziHow many people suffer from cancer Z? Do they need to charge a million each person? Even having said that I don't doubt there are people who would happily hand over a million to be cured. If you had a million and cancer what would you do? Give it to the IRS right?
they cannot "hit the jackpot" if they cure cancer. they cannot make the cure a million dollars and expect people to buy it.
Originally posted by Wajomahuh? are you 5? we invent what the other said now?
It was you that asked for links, it was you that bought up the question of integrity, but when it doesn't go your way, hmmmm. It wasn't one odd ball poll, it was a random selection of four.
You want more that concur? They're out there and you know it, politicians are the least trusted people there are. Your questioning CEO morality just back fired big time, go ahead, admit it.
government funded and REGULATED projects. since you missed the point, let me explain it to you: it means that you don't rely on corrupt officials to do what needs to be done, you get off your fat apathetic ass and you constantly control them. and you change them if they misbehave.
Originally posted by Wajomatried to understand whatever point you are trying to make here, was unable to find the logic in this convoluted mess you call an argument.
How many people suffer from cancer Z? Do they need to charge a million each person? Even having said that I don't doubt there are people who would happily hand over a million to be cured. If you had a million and cancer what would you do? Give it to the IRS right?
let me restate my point. a private company is funding a R&D project. upon success they are free to charge whatever they think is economically feasible, to recuperate the R&D costs and make profit. if they wish to charge 1 million dollars for something that cures cancer and nobody else has a similar product, it is their right.
Yet it is wrong. cures must be given to the population. they should cost 0. because it is a social contract. an individual works for society and in turn he is taken care of when he cannot work anymore. healthcare along with education must be provided free of charge. they aren't supposed to be a profit industry.
and before your fragile capitalist mind gets all upset over the audacity of such a notion (free healthcare, how evil), find out how much the US military budget is and what profit the military returns. how much has been spent on the bailouts these last years. then tell me you would still rather fund a billion tanks than provide healthcare for your fellow citizens.
ain't it nice how you wish the healthcare system to be a profit organization, yet you have no objections supporting the military's cash guzzling.
Originally posted by ZahlanziAnd this is what you call a conversation?
huh? are you 5? we invent what the other said now?
government funded and REGULATED projects. since you missed the point, let me explain it to you: it means that you don't rely on corrupt officials to do what needs to be done, you get off your fat apathetic ass and you constantly control them. and you change them if they misbehave.
You can calm down now, and then you can apologise. Once we have that formality out of the way we will proceed with your education.
Originally posted by Wajomaheh. it's ok, i don't think i would be missing anything important if we discontinue this.
And this is what you call a conversation?
You can calm down now, and then you can apologise. Once we have that formality out of the way we will proceed with your education.
So you blokes (pooper, ATY and Ms temper tantrum herself)want to play with the car repair analogy, trying to turn it around by pointing out there are shonky operators in the industry, well news for you lot, there are shonky operators in every industry especially when the subject of 'reality' show 'documentaries'. But as we have seen there is an industry that consistently scores lower than mechanics in trust-worthiness and that is pollies, the people we should trust our health care to? (The regulation of our healthcare, same thing).
You could have said the car repair analogy does not apply to this situation and that might have been the end of it, but since it does appear applicable I'll take that as an invitation to explore it further. Hold on to the top of your head, Universal Health Care for Cars. We don't need links, we don't need polls, we all know what the outcome would be, when people no longer become responsible for the cost of maintaining their car there would be a massive down turn in the personal care of the car, I put it to you that there would be a portion of car owners who would down right abuse their vehicles health knowing that there's a free set of tires after that burnout, a new engine because no fluids were ever checked, a new tail light because it was just too hard to look behind when reversing. The losers of course would be the good guys, those that cleaned, drove responsibly, checked oil and water and tire pressures.
Originally posted by whodeyAnd exactly how do you know which countries are producing the most effective research? Certainly not from U.S. news sources. Plus there are procedures and meds available inother countries that are not available here. Many additives allowed in US foods, cosmetics, and other products are not allowed in Europe due to health concerns.
Yea, socialized medicine around the world are coming up with "cures" hand over fist, eh?
Where do you people come from? ðŸ˜
Originally posted by EladarIndeed, many decades ago iodine was put in US salt. Now many of us try hard to limit salt intake. Very interesting comments on iodine. There is zero money to be made by researching the health benefits of real food. Perhaps farmers will unify to support such research and then use it in advertising. Sour cherry juice has taken a big leap due to reserch indicating it helps prevent and control arthritis.
Not only do the drug companies make big bucks, they also fund education for doctors. Many doctors in the US are nothing more than people trained to give perscriptions for drugs. My wife recently went to an endocrinologist. I asked him about supplementing iodine for my wife instead of going right to the bio-identical hormones. His comment was that if somet ...[text shortened]... to read up on new discoveries in natural supplementation making money writing perscriptions.