What's wrong with deregulation to bring the price of Health care down?

[Capt Caveman]

Since I have thousands of years of history supporting my position, I'm pretty ok with it.

LOL. Yes, it would take thousands of years for the the public sector to develop the number of drugs that the private sector develops in a couple of hundred. Did you read the study I posted from The New England Journal of Medicine that Phokus thought public funding was involved with the majority of drug development?

Well, it reported that more than 80% of drug development in the last 40 years is performed by the private sector. Again, sure there would be some innovation but at a snail's pace compared to the private sector.

I've seen many Pharma start-ups come and go in the Biotech corridor that I work in, heck there was a company that's a block from me and only lasted six months b/c they were not able to get additional funding.

Interestingly, I saw this posted today - Cambridge start-up focuses on celiac disease

Thank goodness for the private sector b/c if we left it up to the public sector, research probably wouldn't start for years to decades on this disease.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

LOL. Yes, it would take thousands of years for the the public sector to develop the number of drugs that the private sector develops in a couple of hundred. Did you read the study I posted from The New England Journal of Medicine that Phokus thought public funding was involved with the majority of drug development?

Well, it reported that more than 80% of drug development in the last 40 years is performed by the private sector. Again, sure there would be some innovation but at a snail's pace compared to the private sector.

I've seen many Pharma start-ups come and go in the Biotech corridor that I work in, heck there was a company that's a block from me and only lasted six months b/c they were not able to get additional funding.

Interestingly, I saw this posted today - Cambridge start-up focuses on celiac disease

Thank goodness for the private sector b/c if we left it up to the public sector, research probably wouldn't start for years to decades on this disease.

That is utter bullsheit, most of what we have in the pharmaceutical area was developed by government institutions or with the support of government money.

The small steps that private medicine has taken are few and mostly just to sell maskings for disease rather than actual cures.

Who wants to cure cancer when you can treat it for 60000000x the cash?

 

[Capt Caveman]

That is utter bullsheit, most of what we have in the pharmaceutical area was developed by government institutions or with the support of government money.

The small steps that private medicine has taken are few and mostly just to sell maskings for disease rather than actual cures.

Who wants to cure cancer when you can treat it for 60000000x the cash?

Link? I've provided mine from one of the most renown medical organizations in the world. Do a little research on any of the big pharma companies and you'll find drugs that keep many people alive.

 

[silverpig]

Can you please expand and clearly explain on what you mean by the bold portion of text?

Sorry for the late reply. Lost track of the thread.

First, the US pays more per person for healthcare than many other nations do, yet receives less for their healthcare dollar in terms of health outcomes. Lifespan is shorter, mortality rates for certain things are higher etc.

Every time you have a middle man administering things, you have to pay him. When that middle man needs to advertise to get more business, he has to charge you for it.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Yes, the world NEVER changes nor does society change at all, EVER.

Look, Stalin, you're wrong on this one.

Nor is the modernization necessarily good, or a requirement. I am, in point of fact, correct in my assertions. You may not agree with the outcome of those assertions, but that's a subjective thing which cannot be solved for.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Link? I've provided mine from one of the most renown medical organizations in the world. Do a little research on any of the big pharma companies and you'll find drugs that keep many people alive.

Who developed the cures?

Well, big pharma did not, they develop treatments, not cures because that would be bad for business.

Now if you could keep a cancer at bay (which you can with modern day drugs) that will mean that they will sell drugs for the rest of your life, if they had a cure (which they don't and don't put any research into finding either) then they would have less money to develop all of that REALLY makes them rich.

Don't be a fucking fool, big pharma is not into curing anything, they are in it to make money by any means possible, even if it means killing a few thousand patients every now and again and the FDA are mostly in compliance.

Thank GOD the rest of the world isn't like the US.

 

[PrinceofWands]

It's one thing to make a light bulb in your garage lab, doing stem cell research is a little more difficult. Especially if you're going to actually test a drug or therapy before donating it to the generic drug manufacturers.

As examples of unpaid work, compare The GIMP to PhotoShop, Open Office to MS Office, etc. -- even most rabid open-source advocates will admit that the FOSS apps are second-rate compared to the commercial ones.

Also, realize that the OP isn't just advocating removal of patents and copyrights. As a libertarian anarchist, he also wants to end tax-based funding for things like public universities. The Free Market is king, so only private universities are acceptable.

In that world and without patent protection, only volunteer and charity-funded medical research can take place. And there are no taxation-based grants to those charities, and no patent-and-copyright based billionaires like Bill Gates to set up foundations.

Yet here we are, in a world able to do those things because people did EXACTLY what I said they would do, and because of the market forces and capitalist bullshit that the rest here spew.

A few decades of decadent decay brought about by your thinking, versus 10,000 years of advancement and accomplishment through mine.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Nor is the modernization necessarily good, or a requirement. I am, in point of fact, correct in my assertions. You may not agree with the outcome of those assertions, but that's a subjective thing which cannot be solved for.

No you are not.

Progression is what got us here, progression is what will lead us into the future, trying to hold it back only results in what the Muslim nations have accomplished, to be far behind and a victim in every way.

To not be progressive is to want to live in the past.

 

[PrinceofWands]

LOL. Yes, it would take thousands of years for the the public sector to develop the number of drugs that the private sector develops in a couple of hundred. Did you read the study I posted from The New England Journal of Medicine that Phokus thought public funding was involved with the majority of drug development?

Well, it reported that more than 80% of drug development in the last 40 years is performed by the private sector. Again, sure there would be some innovation but at a snail's pace compared to the private sector.

I've seen many Pharma start-ups come and go in the Biotech corridor that I work in, heck there was a company that's a block from me and only lasted six months b/c they were not able to get additional funding.

Interestingly, I saw this posted today - Cambridge start-up focuses on celiac disease

Thank goodness for the private sector b/c if we left it up to the public sector, research probably wouldn't start for years to decades on this disease.

Yes, and what percentage of those drugs are worthless, were found to cause more problems than they solved for, are have been distributed to such small portions of the population as to make them statistically irrelevant? You act like what all these companies do is a good thing, when MOST of it is nothing but base greed and exploitation.

 

[PrinceofWands]

No you are not.

Progression is what got us here, progression is what will lead us into the future, trying to hold it back only results in what the Muslim nations have accomplished, to be far behind and a victim in every way.

To not be progressive is to want to live in the past.

You mean the Muslim nations that saved most knowledge from the ravagings of christian fundamentalists for a few hundred years? The ones that developed such a huge portion of our scientific framework?

Are you talking about the progress that pollutes the planet past habitable recovery? The progress that congests our cities and leads to social disorders? The progress that exterminates whole species for nothing but the greed and sloth of a few?

See, there's forward thinking, then there's reckless progress. The two are not the same, and NEITHER require the economic bullshit praised by so many on here.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

You mean the Muslim nations that saved most knowledge from the ravagings of christian fundamentalists for a few hundred years? The ones that developed such a huge portion of our scientific framework?

Are you talking about the progress that pollutes the planet past habitable recovery? The progress that congests our cities and leads to social disorders? The progress that exterminates whole species for nothing but the greed and sloth of a few?

See, there's forward thinking, then there's reckless progress. The two are not the same, and NEITHER require the economic bullshit praised by so many on here.

No, i mean the Muslims that are stuck in the middle ages where knowledge is seen as a sin and women are seen as property.

Of course, thats probably the way you like it, no elitists and women should be kept under the whip, right?

In modern society, it's the progressives that are fighting AGAINST pollution, AGAINST trying to destroy species, but you already knew that and you are just trolling by now....

Just piss off.

 

[PrinceofWands]

No, i mean the Muslims that are stuck in the middle ages where knowledge is seen as a sin and women are seen as property.

Of course, thats probably the way you like it, no elitists and women should be kept under the whip, right?

In modern society, it's the progressives that are fighting AGAINST pollution, AGAINST trying to destroy species, but you already knew that and you are just trolling by now....

Just piss off.

Just pointing out what egocentic thinking misses in the equation. Things are seldom as one-sided as you paint them to be, and yes, I'm guilty of it as well.