Medicine vs. cures

Wagon

I'm fairly sure this has already been posted up here before, but I can't be sure because I never visit. It might belong more in humanities but as it's only a theory, there's no point. Feel free to move or delete as you see fit lads :P

My question is this. Healthcare has advanced significantly over the years but there's still a lot of people relying on expensive medicines and prescriptions for long term illness. ie cancer, H.I.V etc... I've often wondered was there a solution discovered and we aren't being told as medicine companies are making so much money off their products they aren't prepared to announce cures in a hurry? I've heard this mentioned before and I was wondering what's the general census was from the good people in conspiracy theories?

tony 2 tone

Would that not mean keeping a large part of the medical community in the dark? Would be fairly difficult I should think.

Wagon

tony 2 tone wrote: »

Would that not mean keeping a large part of the medical community in the dark? Would be fairly difficult I should think.

Like I said: Theory

Sofa_King Good

tony 2 tone wrote: »

Would that not mean keeping a large part of the medical community in the dark? Would be fairly difficult I should think.

If you look up the various Rockerfeller philantropic institutions as well as control of education and the media its not so hard after all. In fact it has been going on for over a century.

tony 2 tone

It would also mean that most people involved in the research are only interested in money and not the greater good.

Sofa King, can you expand a bit more on your statement.

Kernel

Wagon wrote: »

I'm fairly sure this has already been posted up here before, but I can't be sure because I never visit. It might belong more in humanities but as it's only a theory, there's no point. Feel free to move or delete as you see fit lads :P

My question is this. Healthcare has advanced significantly over the years but there's still a lot of people relying on expensive medicines and prescriptions for long term illness. ie cancer, H.I.V etc... I've often wondered was there a solution discovered and we aren't being told as medicine companies are making so much money off their products they aren't prepared to announce cures in a hurry? I've heard this mentioned before and I was wondering what's the general census was from the good people in conspiracy theories?

Brought this up a few times myself. Here and also in humanities... probably lost in the sands of time. To be brief, it makes sense to me. You can only sell a cure once. A treatment you can sell many times. Corporations exist solely for profit. There are no ethics in a corporation. Apart from profit maximisation = good, deliberately damaging profits = suicide.

The NWO superstates need to fund massive Soviet style government backed research or manhattan projects to tackle the real causes of misery in the world. Imagine building a huge town/city like CERN and filling it with the most intellectual scientific minds on the EU states. Pile in the money and tell them to cure cancer. That would be worthwhile - but it aint being done, ask why.

Kama

A much simpler (and easier documented) conspiracy is the natural outcome of IP/Patent Law in a for-profit system. Big pharms keep newer medicines off the market until the current ones time out, which makes complete sense in terms of profitability, but is fail for people.

But yeh, no money in cures, or in preventative medicine, or to put it less tendentiously, there's a market failure for public health goods.

bonkey

Kama wrote: »

But yeh, no money in cures,

I think you should look again at the medical industry.

There's no end of cures sitting alongside treatments.

Simple example...why are there hip replacements on the market? Why is there so much research and continuous improvement on bone-replacement ceramics etc. ? These don't treat a problem - they are designed to fix.

nyarlothothep

people will always need hip replacements, viruses can be eliminated off the face of the planet. Why did they virtually eliminate smallpox if profit was so important? If its true that certain medicines are being suppressed, I yet again utterly cannot comprehend the mindsets of people who are involved in this. Its completely irrational, outside the narrow context of profit.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

tony 2 tone wrote: »

It would also mean that most people involved in the research are only interested in money and not the greater good.

For the most part, the people involved in research have their hands tied.

The pharmaceutical companies would be pretty ruthless about enforcing NDAs I should think.

tony 2 tone

A cure is only good if people can afford it. And if they can't, it obvious that the govenrment want to get rid of them. Which is every one that isn't in on the jokeplan.

Wagon

tony 2 tone wrote: »

It would also mean that most people involved in the research are only interested in money and not the greater good.

That's why I'm brining it up in the first place though, are people that consumed with profit and making money that they are prepared to sacfrafice their conscience to obtain it? It's widely believed that the electric car has been developed to the point that it would be pretty much have similar performance characteristics to that of a petrol or deisel engine but that oil companies are holding it back so they can drain the last of the fuel in the world and get the most money out of it. It's one theory I can definately believe. The shareholders and senior management and their affiliates couldn't give a **** that it's gradually destroying the planet as long as their making their millions. It's fairly likely that the same could be said for medicine.

Mahatma coat

thats not that big a stretch, have a look at Busses V Trams. one of the proven conspiracies.

look at the costs o medicines and the licencing laws surrounding them

thecommander

Mahatma coat wrote: »

have a look at Busses V Trams. one of the proven conspiracies.

Whats that one?

Kernel

Wagon wrote: »

That's why I'm brining it up in the first place though, are people that consumed with profit and making money that they are prepared to sacfrafice their conscience to obtain it?

I don't think it's necessarily down to the individual though. The corporations R&D departments will determine what projects are being researched. If I'm CEO of a drugs corp that makes billions from AIDS treatment (for example) and R&D submit a request for major funding for an AIDS cure, then I am being negligent in my duty to maximise profit for shareholders if I agree to spend money on a cure. That's the problem with how corporations work.

Remember in India, generic drugs were recently banned and ruthlessly chased by the WTO, because of patent law. That meant that medicine that was affordable for the poor was no longer affordable. Poor people therefore suffered and possibly died because the WTO wanted to ensure maximum profit for the drugs corporations. They didn't care about a population of 1 billion in India.

Kama

Bus Vs Tram I believe references LA, which had an excellent streetcar/light rail network, which was bought up and ''disestablished' by the bus companies. GM, Standard Oil, and a few others who had definite interests in increased auto sales (the trams were owned/run by electricity utilities iirc). The trams had priority, and development of the city took place around these lines of transport accessibility.

There's counter-arguments to this on the relevant Source of All Truth, ofc, chiefly from the ever-devious Cato Institute...

Nick_oliveri

Why would companies that have patents on existing drugs be researching cures rather than treatments? I dont think these companies have morals and I could reference many cases where profit killed people or disfigured them.

I think the monopolisation of healthcare is despicable and completley immoral. Especially for LTI cases which are a constant revenue stream. Got Cancer? Subscribe now...

Kama

To rephrase Proudhon, Intellectual Property is theft...monopolist rentiers tbh, just the rhetoric of market freedoms.

There's clear ground and precedent for any country in need to do generics, justification of mass death to be economically right-thinking seems beyond daft.

Mind you, good globalists don't want too many people in those countries to not get death, one assumes. Population Control And All That...speaking as a card-carrying member of vhemt