Better drugs?

[Tarvis]

I was reading something, somewhere, that was talking about some guy on an infomercial(?) that was talking about how drug companies don't want to give out cures for common diseases (cancer, diabetes, HIV, etc etc), because they make more money from prolonging life from these diseases, rather than curing it outright. Of course, he also said he had cures for them in his book, which I doubt work. Regardless, such a thing makes sense. Drug Companies do make more from this, and he's not the only one to make such a point. I think Chris Rock has said something to this effect in one of his stand-ups. While I don't know if they ever did find a cure, I think if they did, they would rather go the above route than actually curing the disease.

DEBATE.

 

[Joe]

I think I saw that infomercial. A lot of what he said was probably bull but I don't doubt if the drug companies didn't care about money we could cure such diseases much more quickly.

 

[Don Francisco]

Ok, first of all I should say that my father is a "high-up" executive of a certain drug company that will go unnamed. Whether you want to take that as my account being biased or it lending useful information from the inside is up to you.
First of all, common consumers think that the executives of these companies just care about making a quick buck. That is completely untrue, if all they did care about was the money they would've become MDs or businessmen. They really care about their work and the patients. When my dad comes home with a new biochemistry book he looks like a young child with a new toy (or me with a new video game).
The thing you need to realize is, the drug industry is insanely competitive. Like, you have no idea. If you studied economics you would know that competition creates a drive for innovation and progress. If one company found a cure for a major disease, why would he keep it? He has the patent for that drug and by releasing it he will gain huge profits and boost his company into the big leagues. Look at Pfizer - Viagra made them billions. Trust me, if they found something, it would get out.
What also annoys me is when people claim the opposite. When people claim that drug companies cut the corners to get drugs like Vioxx out the door quickly. If you had any idea what the FDA (Food & Drug Administration) does... well, it's insane. When the FDA comes to inspect my dad's lab he practically lives at work for that week or so. The restrictions and medical tests that need to be run before the FDA approves a drug are immense. There's no way a drug company could cut corners on that. Sure, sometimes something may happen to certain people who take a certain drug, but it is always something with the specific body of a small minority of people that causes resistance or other adverse side effects for the drug. Not all drugs work the same on all people, which is why there is a lot of research of correlating effectiveness of major drugs with general DNA trends.
I need to go, I may edit to add stuff later.

 

[Logan]

my dad works at caterpillar and kicks so much ass.

he just tells people what to do and if they fuck up, he stabs them and does it for him.

one time a kid got mad at him for leaving a shopping cart in a parking space and he threatened to punch him.

back on topic, drug companies suck. i might kill them one day. except the dudes that make viagra, they're cool.

hell all infomercials suck and lie, except that legends of rock infomercial. holy fuck that was so awesome.

 

[Joe]

My dad's the CEO of some company but I really don't know what the hell he does.

 

[Logan]

get back to school jerk.

 

[Joe]

free period lolz

 

[Patrick]

My dad got fired from his job for punching a guy there. That's the best way to go out.

-

Yoda made good points, if all companies really had the drug one could just patent it and be the only ones and now they're all making millions.

It sounds a lot like pseudo-science to me, like everlasting life on the 60 minutes.

 

[Tarvis]

Viagra is temporary, just like most/all the drugs on the market. Which means people who need it, have to keep buying it.

 

[Tarvis]

Regardless, Drug Companies/Governments/Banks etc etc are all businesses - they are there to make money.

 

[Patrick]

Sure, except for the non profit organizations. Making money is a priority but so is making sure the patients are satisfied or you've lost money.

This reminds me of the "Red Cross Scam" that they didn't really use relief funds for the tsunami or anything like that but kept it for themselves. A girl's mom works at Red Cross and said it wasn't true.

If they were withholding better drugs, we'd be hearing leaks about it instead of reading from someone talking about someone talking on an infomercial.

Can you really imagine the cures for AIDS and the cures to cancers, cures to HEP C, and STD's in our hands?

Not really, since viruses mutate and evolve millions of times faster than anything I've heard of. You can't just keep taking the same pill because the virus would be able to defend against it soon enough. So that would lead to a question: Would it be antibiotics, having to take the pill multiple times or just get a shot and its completely gone?

Either way it mutate to be immune to them, which might be a reason (or at least something they could say)they're holding it for tweaks and backups.

 

[Don Francisco]

Psycho, you're getting messed up. Antibiotics don't do jack against viruses. You probably already know that, but that's just the impression I got from your post. The thing about drug development is, once you find the mechanism that works, it's very easy to tweak it. That's why there's a new flu vaccine every year - the drug companies tweak the mechanism for that flu season's most common flu strand. Well, I'm not sure if I answered your question, but that could be 'cause I don't really understand what you're asking. I mean, whether it's an antibiotic (if its a bacterial disease) or a shot changes from disease to disease. And some diseases like cancer isn't a bacteria or a virus, which is why scientists are stumped on how to stop it.
Travis: Yes, you're right, you can't justly compare Viagra to a cure for cancer. However, notice what you said - they're out for the money. If someone in my dad's lab was on to a cure for cancer, you know they'll patent it ASAP. When it becomes ready for a full-fledged drug they release it and make billions. Why would they hold it back? It seems like you're arguing that STDs and cancer are different because you don't have to continue taking them, but patients are diagnosed with STDs and cancer every day - thus a lasting source of income... well, until the generic drugs come out. But that's a different story.

 

[Tarvis]

My point is, they don't cure anything. They just make it so you can live longer with it. Whether you patent or not there is alot more money to made for people who have to keep buying the drug. It's common sense that millions of people coming back to buy the drug over and over is alot more money than those same million buying it once and that's it. While I don't believe there are cures to most common diseases, I won't ignore the chance there might be somewhere for some disease.

 

[Don Francisco]

That may be true, but you're only looking at one side of it. Let's say that Pfizer comes out with a drug that one must take regularly to keep AIDS at bay. They are making tons of money off it, and their executives may be happy and so they don't put any more money into researching. However, Merck sees the huge market in a treatment for AIDS and they're not getting a cent off it since it's all going to Pfizer. They invest tons of money into finding a better cure for AIDS, possibly one that you do not need to take regularly, and when it comes out they control the market. Now, when you consider that Pfizer is expecting Merck and every other drug company to be researching and becomes so paranoid that as it comes out with the initial drug it is already looking for a better drug, then you have the current drug industry.
The American public needs to get it out of their heads that the CEOs of these companies are all buddies who get together and say, "ooh, let's not make this product." They are competitors, and they'll do anything to steal the market away from the others. Even in markets where it seems like everyone is buddy-buddy, like the oil industry for example, you have countries like Venezuela who are willing to sell their oil to the US but, in Venezuela's specific case, the US refuses to buy due to the political circumstances (I support the US' stance, btw).

 

[Tarvis]

When have they ever made better drugs? Tylenol, Advil, Asprin all do pretty much the same thing with minor differences. It's the same thing with pretty much every other drug out there. What's worse is even when those drugs wear off there is a chance your headache will come back, which is how all drugs work. They provide a temporary "fix". If you think drug companies are any different that drug dealers, you are sadly mistaken. It's all the same, drug companies are just legalized drug dealers. If you watch TV, you see drugs for all kinds of shit. They name off a bunch of things until they name something you have. It's all propaganda.

They can't even cure the common cold. Sure you can take a shot that helps prevent it, but if you get it, you can't cure it with medicine. The medicines help to cure it, but they don't cure it.

Health in America has gone to shit. Most of the common problems we have start in our colon, because of all the crap we eat everyday. If people wouldn't eat 500 mcdonalds/burger king/wendy's hamburgers a week, they would be better off. Hell, one a month is pushing it apparently. But Drug Companies don't tell you that. It doesn't matter if the CEO of Drug Companies are friends or not. They aren't going to do anything that will push people away from the drug market. Making a drug that cures instantly would be retarded business wise. Do you know of any drug that does such a thing? I don't. Every drug I've known/taken/or heard about has always been a temporary fix.

Am I really supposed to believe that with such technological advances, we can't cure <i>anything</i>?

 

[Don Francisco]

Ok, you say "they can't even cure the common cold." The common cold is one of the biggest problems in the drug industry. Not only does it mutate and evolve insanely quickly, but there are many different bacteria that can cause the "common cold." As soon as a drug company could release a drug that could handle the current most popular cold, that cold is long gone. Like they say, "the common cold isn't so common!"

What do you mean "when have they ever made better drugs?" You name all of these catch-all drugs, but that's what they are: they're catch-all. They have an overall positive effect on the human body. Sure these drugs provide a temporary "fix": it's in the nature of how they work. Your "common" headache can be caused by numerous problems. It would be a hassle having to go to the doctor every time you have a headache, have him diagnose the problem, then go to the drug store and search through the hundreds of different kinds of headache medicines for headaches produced by every single cause and then use it to fix that particular headache. Then the next time you get a headache it is most likely a different cause and you have to go through the whole process again. Isn't it much easier to take a drug once a day that will reduce the pain of headaches temporarily every time you have any kind of headache? One of the requirements for developing an effective drug is that it must be simplistic - anyone should have no problem taking it when they need it. It's like "the pill" - it's a cycle of pills but - guess what - most of the pills are placebos! It's just much easier for women to remember to take one pill a day than to remember which day is their "pill day."

The big difference between drug dealers and drug companies is that the products released by the drug companies don't hurt you in the long run. I'm sorry, but you can't compare the negative effects cocaine has on your body long term to taking Advil every time you feel bad.

Every drug you've known taken or heard about has always been a temporary fix? Oh really? Then how about the immunizations you've taken to prevent turburculosis, meningitis, pneumonia, and polio, among countless others. These diseases were the cancer, STD, HIV/AIDs, and Lou Ghering's disease of the past. They used to be deadly, but, believe it or not (*gasp*), drug companies actually created drugs that completely eliminated them from today's society. It's only a matter of time before we find cures for today's plagues (and by a matter of time I mean it could take decades or possibly even centuries), but by that time there will be new plagues. And the cycle goes on.

 

[Logan]

i've got a fever.

and the only prescription, is more COWBELL.

 

[Joe]

omg thread CHANGE TOPIC

 

[Tarvis]

Do you know of any drug that isn't a catch-all drug? Are there any drugs for big diseases? They don't even know what causes headaches.

What about Marijuana? What about Alcohol? What about Cigarettes? <b>There are NUMEROUS "legal" drugs that will kill you over time.</b> Drugs that lower cholestorol, will kill your liver/kidneys over time is just one example. Alot of drugs will kill your liver/kidney over time. You really think cocaine is illegal because the government gives a shit about you? Alcohol and Cigarettes are WAY more dangerous than cocaine, they kill fuckers that don't even drink or smoke, yet they are perfectly legal.

<b>Vaccines are useless for people who already have the disease</b>. That isn't curing shit. While it's great for other people, it's basically telling the people who already have it, tough shit. And those vaccines aren't even 100%. Remember the vaccine for smallpox? Yeah, well apparently it wore off and they didn't even tell the public until a possible outbreak could happen.

 

[Patrick]

Tylenol, Advil, an Aspirin- you're right, that's why the companies say things to make theirs seem better.

Like they say Aspirin does damage to your stomach over time,
but the creators of Aspirin say it lowers chance of breast cancer,
while advil says "it takes 8 tylenol to do that!"

I could see the same things happening for Cancer cures, etc. But maybe there isn't a cure. The Rain Forest provided tons of cures to diseases, but maybe we already destroyed the thing that could have helped us.

As for the common cold, I recently saw something on market that lowered chance by 2/3. If they're hiding the cures to it, it's only a mtter of time until they reveal it. Either that, or they're on their way to curing it.

I think that as companies continue researching and we get more technologically advanced, we would at least be able to cure some side affects that drugs cause, even after all this time.

They at least figured out some causes of headaches, one of which is eyestrain.