Originally posted by normbenignActually, I would say that publicly funded research tends to be too focused on short-term results, when the whole point of it is to work towards long-term goals. The private sector can handle short-term-focused research just fine.
The word for the cooperation of vitamins and minerals and other nutrients is synergy. Most nutrients have at some level of intake toxicity, and poor interactions with other nutrients.
"In order to get grants, researchers try to be quite sure their results will definitly move knowledge forward or they will not get refunded."
If you've seen the mov ...[text shortened]... mpared to the "research" he's been doing in parapsychology on the government's dime.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraWhen the private sector pays to get politicians in office, it expects to be rewarded for putting out the big bucks. If a politician wants to get re-elected, the politician will reward the groups that pay the bills.
Actually, I would say that publicly funded research tends to be too focused on short-term results, when the whole point of it is to work towards long-term goals. The private sector can handle short-term-focused research just fine.
Originally posted by KazetNagorrathe point of publicly funded research is that it is public money. so in theory, we, the public, can influence what it is spent on. private research on the other hand is influenced by profit. no company will research a cure that may not yield profit or not make money fast enough.
Actually, I would say that publicly funded research tends to be too focused on short-term results, when the whole point of it is to work towards long-term goals. The private sector can handle short-term-focused research just fine.
I'm cynical of the medical industry
2 things I don't like - Zantac very effective anti heartburn pill. A 'silver bullet' Never gets any advertising but they promote worse drugs all the time, heartburn is a real burden to some so they need zantac.
Cannabis - a lot of potential as an anti depressant, works well with some chemo to promote appetite - effective (not a cure) against lung cancer - yes lung cancer. They lobby against it, its very immoral to do so.
We get sold rubbish. They charge way to much for new life saving drugs, they wilfully over and over promote profitable drugs over good ones - I am close to a jehovah witness in my attitudes towards them.
I wonder with life saving drugs if the pharma companies are victims themselves of bad laws - if they could get 30 year patents and less regulation on the side effects of life saving drugs they might make more and cheaper?
I don't think that the acid blockers are the right way to go. You need your stomach acid for proper digestion.
I'd say a better approach would be to supplement with pro-biotics and make sure you are eating some good pre-biotics. You should also use something like noni that helps your intestinal track to get moving (stimulates the muscles) followed by some good fiber such as psyllium husks. This kind of stuff is simply helps set up a good foundation for digestion.
According to Dr. Weil, deglycyrrhizinated licorice (DGL) is something you can get that will naturally help with heartburn. I'm sure if you do an internet search on Dr Weil and heartburn you can read up on it if you wish.
Although Pot does have some medical benefit, it seems to me that most people who use this line of reasoning simply want an excuse to get high legally. The medical industry has taken pot and put it in a pill so that you get the same medical benefits without getting high, but I don't think that pill is doing very well.