Thank you Dave Hartwick, your response makes sense. I didn’t think that the idea of profit being behind Big Pharma’s actions was way the fuck out there.
I understand that they are not charities, and that certainly no one is under any obligation to do something for the greater good. I mean that’s just for pussies anyway.
Speaking of pussies, I also wonder why I have been readily prescribed painkillers for nonsense. Just within the last year, I went to urgent care for a UTI and on a separate occasion, a cut finger requiring 4 stitches. Both times the doctor prescribed “something for pain” right off the bat. Really? Fucking stupid.
[QUOTE=RickJay]
If you say something that’s just false, welcome to the place people will be very quick to challenge you on it.
[/QUOTE]
Thank you. I’m glad to be here. Which pharmaceutical company do you work for?
I was experiencing mild restless legs a couple of years ago. As it turns out, that is one of the symptoms of iron-deficiency anemia, which I had big time. Soon after taking iron supplements the restlessness went away.
The idea that they want to maximize profits isn’t way-out. The notion that they are conspiring to withhold cures is rather problematic.
Because those who work for pharmaceutical companies also suffer from the diseases for which they are supposedlly withholding cures, as do their relatives and friends. What you are suggesting requires that everyone who works or has worked for Big Pharma is willing to suffer and die, and have their relatives suffer and die, in order that pharmaceutical companies including their competitors can make money.
IOW, suppose I am a research scientist for Pfizer, and my daughter suffers from depression. I know that Eli Lilly has a one-dose pill that can cure depression, which they are withholding from the market so as to make money off things like Prozac. Why would I keep my mouth shut and let my daughter suffer? Or maybe I work for Eli Lilly. What’s to stop me from slipping her a pill to cure her on the side? And then what does she say when people ask her what happened?
Or do I just keep my mouth shut and take the chance that she will commit suicide?
It just doesn’t sound plausible to me. These kind of conspiracies don’t last in the real world. In other news, Oswald acted alone and OJ really did it.
What Shodan said. The example I usually cite is Dr. Howard Temin, who shared a Nobel Prize in Medicine for his work in discovering reverse transcriptase when researching the first-discovered cancer-causing virus. He died of cancer. If anyone Knew The Truth about cancer, it was him, and yet he died. Because The Truth about cancer is that it’s caused by lots of things (like, sometimes, viruses!) and it’s a conglomeration of dozens or hundreds of types of diseases that we just call “cancer” like it’s one thing that we can find a magic bullet treatment for. But we can’t. We have to fight all these diseases separately and hope that some of the drugs work on multiple kinds and hope that the patient’s own innate genetics don’t make the treatment less effective (sometimes, it will actually make it work better), and that we can find more effective and less patient-harmful treatments and cures. And maybe preventatives, like the HPV vaccine.
Thank you Shodan and Ferret Hunter. I understand the points you are making. To be clear, I did not come in saying as a fact there is intentional withholding of cures, so everyone can calm the fuck down. I simply asked a couple of questions and disclosed that sometimes the practices (like the unnecessary prescribing of narcotics that I have personally experienced) make me wonder. Some of you jumped on that shit like your livelihood depended on it, or just to be combative, or maybe because you’re just shitty because you were always picked last for the kickball team…I don’t know, but I don’t think that questioning the practices of big pharmaceutical companies necessarily means that you are automatically batshit crazy.
Interesting to see “money” cited as the reason that vaccine uptake is not higher in developing countries - when the reflex antivax position is that promoting vaccines is all about making more money for drug companies (as if higher profits weren’t available in waiting until people get severely ill from preventable diseases and require antibiotics and complex hospital care).
Shodan makes an excellent point about all the pharma employees, researchers, foundations etc. involved in research and development of new drugs also being susceptible to currently incurable diseases and having loved ones in the same predicament. It always strikes me as flamingly stupid, vicious (or both) to believe that all these people would sacrifice their own lives and those of people dear to them simply for money.
Uh-huh, Just Asking Questions. Now where have we heard that before?
I predict that the next time a drug company announces a new drug that can treat RLS, a ton of people will seize the occasion to denounce Big Pharma for catering to what they see as a dubious ailment, instead of curing cancer, diabetes, etc.
The way I picture it is, it’s like an unpleasant charge builds up in my legs, and the only way to discharge it is to move them.
Ambivalid, you truly have my sympathy. To need to move your legs to relieve that miserable feeling and not be able to - that does indeed sound like hell.
I understand, and I’m not suggesting that. Maybe someone can answer this for me, because I honestly don’t know. Does a researcher working for a company have say in how their findings are developed and marketed, or if they are developed and marketed? I would think that a researcher and a marketer would have very different functions within the framework of the company. Are there instances by a researcher of “Wow, I never intended for that to happen” or " why aren’t they listening to me?" As I said, I really don’t know.
Again, I’m not suggesting that an individual would *let their child die *( a bit dramatic, but whatev) for money, but surely these kinds of conflicts come up? I’m sure there has been someone involved in the tobacco industry who has had a loved one die from smoking related illness while they themselves have spend their life pushing smoking as something that others should enjoy? Maybe once or twice?
[QUOTE=Jackmannii]
I predict that the next time a drug company announces a new drug that can treat RLS, a ton of people will seize the occasion to denounce Big Pharma for catering to what they see as a dubious ailment, instead of curing cancer, diabetes, etc.
[/QUOTE]
You’re probably right, and I’m not saying RLS is a dubious ailment, but Percocet for a UTI? Hydocodone for 4 stitches?! C’mon, Really? No one thinks that’s weird?
Unless their behavior is markedly unusual, I don’t generally second-guess the pain regimen someone’s created with their doctor, when I know the particulars, which is rare.
Are you tailoring your interactions with me based on your interactions with previous posters? Is it your practice to dismiss people as "just another one of those people"?
[QUOTE=inner Stickler]
Unless their behavior is markedly unusual, I don’t generally second-guess the pain regimen someone’s created with their doctor, when I know the particulars, which is rare.
[/QUOTE]
Now we’re calling my discomfort with a couple of stitches in my finger “pain management”? That certainly seems a slap in the face of those who suffer legitimate chronic pain.
I can tell you that I could go to a walk-in today and get a prescription for a narcotic without too much effort. Of course the frequency with which I do that, and the number of doctors with whom I interact is going to flag me eventually me, but nonetheless, IMO there is something wrong with the current practices.
And some diseases have animal hosts, so that the reservoirs of contagion out in the wild will prevent the disease ever being eridicated. We got really lucky with smallpox.
Not a great way to be taken seriously. You seem to shift between speaking rationally and just spewing rant bits. Is this deliberate?
[QUOTE=Yllaria]
And some diseases have animal hosts, so that the reservoirs of contagion out in the wild will prevent the disease ever being eridicated. We got really lucky with smallpox.
[/QUOTE]
Also another good point I had neglected to factor in. Thank you (even if you do appear rather douchey).
[QUOTE=Shodan]
I’m sorry - we don’t do that here.
[/QUOTE]
Ha! I see that…I’m obviously new. I didn’t realize that bunched panties was part of the uniform here in the pit.
RLS really is torture, but there is no reason why you should suffer from it. There are plenty of remedies. Gabapentin and its big brother Lyrica work wonders and they aren’t narcotic. Tell your doctor to give you one of those.
The second post in the thread works well to answer that question.
I work in medical research, employed by a hospital, not a pharma company. We test pharma companies’ stuff out, or do government-sponsored research, or do individual studies inspired by one of our own doctor’s ideas about what might be useful.
Know why drug companies want to make money? Besides the money thing, that is. To pay for more research. I have personally seen numerous studies where it got to phase II or III testing, where millions upon millions and several years had already been sunk into drug development and analysis and filing with the Feds to make the study happen, and the study proceeded, and… nada. The drug/device didn’t help. Sometimes the studies were even terminated early because the evidence was that overwhelming. And it sucks every time it happens, because there was hope and solid potential at the start.
Even when the company is using a drug that’s already in use for something else, it takes a ton of money and time to direct their research towards using it for a new indication. They have to gather evidence that it could potentially be useful for the new diagnosis, may have to reformulate the drug’s dosage or method of using (like one that took an anti-cancer pill and diluted it down into a tiny dosage then put it into an eye drop), submit to the FDA and hope they grant permission.
That research vs marketing question? It’s literally illegal for the drug companies to encourage doctors to use drugs for uses they’re not FDA-approved for, or to advertise them as such. Companies have gotten huge multimillion dollar fines for doing so. Any time a company wants to use the drug for something else, it’s a new round of several years of human testing all over again, and requesting approval from the FDA at each turn.
Why do I “jump” on stuff like this? Because there is so much misinformation out there. Because people love smearing with a broad brush of conspiracies. Because for every “greedy bastards” story there are tons of stories of people just trying to help others - and yes, make a living. (God knows I don’t get paid much for what I do, working in a non-profit hospital.) So it kind of gets old after a while.
