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.
Many years ago I used to work for Bristol-Myers, now Squibb, at their corporate headquarters in NYC. Park Avenue and 53rd St. for those non-believers. Competition Pfizer was just a few blocks away.
Please do not attempt to tell me how good and wonderful they are. You may be a "medical professional" but you are clueless on their Marketing, Advertising, Sales, Finance, etc., operations.
You are their Supplier, and by default, Salesperson. None of the above would be possible without YOU. Never heard the words "good of mankind" the entire time I was employed there. Sales goals, profits, 5 year plans, was all they talked about. Oh, yes, and what Government Grants were available. Damn, Pfizer got that grant over us!!!!!!! Have you ever had to sign a non-disclosure statement?
So when these Pharm Reps come out and "snitch" on them, do you really think I discount them? ROLF
Example? Shintrix. So the uptake rate for over 60 is only 30%. Not profitable enough. How can we increase sales? Get the FDA to lower the age to 50+. Not working to increase sales and profits? Expand the target population. It is coming with HPV vaccine. Rush petition to the FDA to expand the target population up to age 45. More potential for sales and profits. Rocket Science, or just Marketing 101?
Call me very jaded on their motives having worked for one.
Do you mean "Shingrix"? It is not the same vaccine as "Zostavax". According to the CDC, which I know you do not believe, "Two doses of Shingrix is more than 90% effective at preventing shingles and PHN". https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/shi...rix/index.html
On virtually every forum about shingles/shingles vaccine, people complain about not being able to get the vaccine at younger ages.
Disagreeing with her is neither stalking nor attacking when she makes statements that are factually wrong, then moves to thread after thread and repeats the same misinformation.
Which drugs "cause more problems than they solve"? Doctors will stop prescribing them if they do. Do you really think physicians want unhappy patients?
What about treating hypertension? Diabetes? Asthma?
Doctors do not get paid to write prescriptions. They get paid the same for an office visit whether they give you one or not.
As far as the lipid experts are concerned there is no debate about the effectiveness of statins. If you do not want to take one, fine. Type 2 diabetes? The very first point in the treatment algorithm is lifestyle changes. They do not "hand out drugs even before they mention food and exercise." The concept of pre-diabetes helps identify people who are headed for a diagnosis of full blown diabetes when those lifestyle changes have a better chance of heading it off. If that is not sufficient, then medication is discussed.
If a test is "neg or normal" it does not mean a patient is not sick. It just rules out a cause of the sickness. If you have bad headaches and a scan of your brain is normal, you can stop worrying about a tumor.
No, every test is not looking for an excuse to start a medication. Your doctor is very happy if everything comes back normal. Do you even know what a "baseline" is? It defines what is normal for you. Take the TSH for thyroid disease, for example. Gradual changes over serial measurements can be a clue that something is going on.
You do not want to be tested? Fine, do not get tested.
Newtovenice says too many tests are done.
Do you think they would suffer less without modern pain management options?
Are YOU for real?
It sounds like your friend was advised of the options, risks, and benefits and made her choice. Should she not have done that because it was not the choice you would have made for yourself?
Did you know that Hep C can now be cured? That it kills people? That carriers give it to other people?
Most doctors dislike direct to consumer advertising, by the way. However, advising people that there may be a treatment for a condition that bothers them but for which they would not seek care or even mention to a doctor because they did not know a treatment was available is doing them a service, is it not?
My apologies for omitting you when addressing the other poster.
Do you mean "Shingrix"? It is not the same vaccine as "Zostavax". According to the CDC, which I know you do not believe, "Two doses of Shingrix is more than 90% effective at preventing shingles and PHN". https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/shi...rix/index.html
On virtually every forum about shingles/shingles vaccine, people complain about not being able to get the vaccine at younger ages.
And according to my sister's doctor, her husband caused her shingles when he got the vaccine.
Im 70, and was in the hospital last yr for 12 hours for a sudden onset bladder infection. The ER wasnt concerned about the bladder infection but went off the deep end over my wbc even though I felt fine and didnt have a temp. So they admitted me against my better judgement. After I was moved upstairs, the nurse comes in to take vitals and ask questions. She of course wants to know what medications I take. I say Vit C. She says how are are you and you only take vitC? Yup. She starts laughing and says OMG a totally normal person! I love you! And starts laughing some more. I say I guess you dont see very many like me? She says, You are so rare. Everyone is on drugs nowadays”
That says it all. That something is deeply wrong with modern medicine.
I'm 71 and I don't take any drugs other than Vitamin D and B12 and both of those were recommended by my physician. Why would they hospitalize you for a bladder infection, did you ask? That's very unusual bladder infections are routinely treated in the physician's office - I'm not even sure why someone would go the the ER with a bladder infection - maybe I'm missing something here?
You can't think of the answer? They may spend a small fortune but make back a HUGE fortune.
Isn't that obvious?
Do you watch much TV?
No. I do not. I recommend you stop watching so much of it.
Pharmaceutical companies investigate treatments for existing diseases... to make money.
A pharmaceutical company does not pour a fortune into a non-existent disease in hopes that doctors and the FDA will decide it can be a real disease so they can then get doctors to prescribe this drug they spent a fortune creating.
That's the stupidest business plan in the world.
It is extremely expensive to do drug discovery.
Source: myself. I worked in pharma for over a decade.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
No. I do not. I recommend you stop watching so much of it.
Pharmaceutical companies investigate treatments for existing diseases... to make money.
A pharmaceutical company does not pour a fortune into a non-existent disease in hopes that doctors and the FDA will decide it can be a real disease so they can then get doctors to prescribe this drug they spent a fortune creating.
That's the stupidest business plan in the world.
It is extremely expensive to do drug discovery.
Source: myself. I worked in pharma for over a decade.
Thank you. Now we understand.
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.
