Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From the Economist:
"The debate over oncology drugs is one of the thorniest in American health care. Americans' spending on cancer may rise from $125 billion last year to up to $207 billion by 2020, according to Medco, a pharmacy-benefit manger. Some of the new cancer drugs hold immense promise, but others have limited efficacy and are exorbitant."
Heh, right. Sure it is. They're not at all under the thumb of big pharma.
i never said the FDA wasnt corrupt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
No. Because even the industries it regulates spent the Bush years complaining about the lack of funding and staffing. I was a news reporter in that industry at the time. It's practically all Big Pharma and Big Device talked about.
And also because all the news articles I cited, plus all the other ones that popped up, talked about CUTS being the problem, not bloating.
But you have a narrative to promote, I see, so facts probably won't stop you.
i have no narrative to "promote", what i am saying is that the FDA has become over bloated and corrupt over the years. in the old days the FDA used to do their own drug testing after the pharmaceutical companies did theirs and sent the FDA the reports. it was only AFTER the FDA did their drug testing that new drugs were put on the market. these days the FDA just accepts what ever test results the pharmaceutical companies give them. and if big pharama wants a particular drug on the market, they can skew the test results slightly to show that their new wonder drug is safe by FDA standards. and then a few years down the road, the lawsuits start to fly about the wonder drug and its damaging side effects. take actos for instance. its an effective drug for controlling ones blood sugar, but now it is accused of causing bladder cancer in those that have used it for more than a year. and it isnt just actos, but many other drugs as well. so many in fact that there are law firms around the country that specialize in suing pharmaceutical companies.
In the near future many diseases will be curable. fantastic research is happening by research department at major universities. Biomed companies and BP are not the only producers of healing methods.
Until the patent expires. Then don't you being owning any of their stock
that assumes that the pharamceutical company doesnt change the drug in the slightest so they can renew the patent on the drug. remember prilosec? they changed the binder and renamed the pill nexium and extended the patent on that drug for another 7 years.
I note human testing of this drug will not start until next year. Cancer is more than one disease. We'll see.
Exactly. Cancer is caused by cell mutation, which can have a myriad of different causes. I highly doubt a single drug or drug therapy can have much of an impact. This seems highly hyped.
As for the Big Pharma stuff--until you can prevent cancer, there is still a need for curative therapies. Obviously no one will be losing money.
Exactly. Cancer is caused by cell mutation, which can have a myriad of different causes. I highly doubt a single drug or drug therapy can have much of an impact. This seems highly hyped.
But cancer at its most fundamental is uncontrolled cellular growth. All cancers have that defining characteristic. The cause doesn't really matter. In fact, you have tumor-fighting cells. You would spontaneously get cancer if those cells failed.
Think about it, how many billions of dollars have been raised to find a cure for breast cancer over the years and yet the machines that help detect breast cancer haven't been improved or updated in all that time? Why haven't breast cancer rates declined significantly since smoking bans were implemented? Where is all this money going?
I wonder what people imagine. Lots of pharma scientists with cures to every disease just sitting there, and the while an evil CEO rubs his hands together with a evil laugh. . .
I've worked for a large pharma company, and there isn't any such. . .capability. Building drugs is more akin to russian roulette with one molecule lottery
and even if I hadn't had this inside game to know that the inside of the pharma company is pretty much as mundane as anywhere else. . .pure logic should help you call BS on the idea that pharma could/would hide anything
you have random scientsts all throughout the world working for universities
you have tons of companies, some very small, working on cures
and you have your competitors
game theory is simple
you never hold back
because the second you do, someone else might patent it first
and then your screwed
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
