Bill Moyers: The 'Crony Capitalist Blowout'

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public.
[/quote]

And patients cannot get alternative treatments because of what organization?[/quote]

Big Pharma
[/quote

Ohhhhhh… BIIIG PHARMA prevents you from buying foreign drugs?

Big Pharma makes drugs prohibitively expensive?

And how do they do that?[/quote]

Did you even read what I wrote?

[smh23]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I saw some of “Untold History.” Seemed like a bunch of revisionist trash to me.

Here’s a tip: if somebody is constantly characterizing the United States as an aggressor without a single critical word for the superpower that killed 20 million of its own people, that somebody is a hack with his head up his own ass.[/quote]

Sounds like your describing the American neo-cons so often cited on here as credible and intelligent.
[/quote]

I’m not big on neocons either, but at least they don’t seem to have a soft spot for the Soviets.

[smh23]

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I saw some of “Untold History.” Seemed like a bunch of revisionist trash to me.

Here’s a tip: if somebody is constantly characterizing the United States as an aggressor without a single critical word for the superpower that killed 20 million of its own people, that somebody is a hack with his head up his own ass.[/quote]

Have not read or seen or even heard of it, but I resent that every time someone critizises anything, there is always someone who say that _______ were soooooo much worse and the author does not even mention them.

Yeah, Genghis Khan was a bit of a dick, so what?

Is that a license for general assclownery?[/quote]

The US is set up as the bad guy in relation with the Soviets. This is why I equated the two.

[smh23]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I saw some of “Untold History.” Seemed like a bunch of revisionist trash to me.

Here’s a tip: if somebody is constantly characterizing the United States as an aggressor without a single critical word for the superpower that killed 20 million of its own people, that somebody is a hack with his head up his own ass.[/quote]

Sounds like your describing the American neo-cons so often cited on here as credible and intelligent.
[/quote]

But Amen to that avatar.

Girlfriend just looked at my screen and arched an eyebrow, but Amen to that avatar.

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I saw some of “Untold History.” Seemed like a bunch of revisionist trash to me.

Here’s a tip: if somebody is constantly characterizing the United States as an aggressor without a single critical word for the superpower that killed 20 million of its own people, that somebody is a hack with his head up his own ass.[/quote]

Sounds like your describing the American neo-cons so often cited on here as credible and intelligent.
[/quote]

But Amen to that avatar.

Girlfriend just looked at my screen and arched an eyebrow, but Amen to that avatar.[/quote]

Nice ain’t it?

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I saw some of “Untold History.” Seemed like a bunch of revisionist trash to me.

Here’s a tip: if somebody is constantly characterizing the United States as an aggressor without a single critical word for the superpower that killed 20 million of its own people, that somebody is a hack with his head up his own ass.[/quote]

Sounds like your describing the American neo-cons so often cited on here as credible and intelligent.
[/quote]

I’m not big on neocons either, but at least they don’t seem to have a soft spot for the Soviets.[/quote/}

Of course not, they need a bogeyman to scare the public into gratuitous military spending and multi-billion dollar wars.

[SexMachine]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

As if I never reply. This is untrue but untruth is a philosophy you espouse to so if fits.

[/quote]

I’m on going on my experience of the four or five threads you’ve started in PWI recently. If I’ve mischaracterised you then I apologise. The reason the curtness of my reply is the frustration I endure seeing someone post revisionist history - i.e., historical ‘untruths.’

Oliver Stone was instrumental in the film portion of the documentary and the other man was the main historian. You wouldn’t know because you probably didn’t even watch it when you saw that Stone’s name was attached. Another knee-jerk reaction from the sheep who is part of the herd.[/quote]

Actually no, I know more than I need to about Stone and Kuznick’s mini series and book The Untold History of the United States. It’s title is an homage to Howard Zinn’s 1980 notorious revisionist work A People’s History of the United States of America. FrontPage Magazine did a series of eight articles debunking the Stone’s/Kuznick’s work chapter by chapter:

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/david-horowitz/neo-communism-out-of-the-closet/

But you won’t bother to read that will you? Fantasy is more interesting than real history and it serves your ideological agenda.

FrontPage describes Stone’s/Kuznick’s work as:

“…a ludicrous encapsulation of the Kremlin’s view of the Cold War, amplified by the Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, Hamas version of the post-Communist decades.”

They go on to say:

"It is the well-known views of the Communist left that undeniably constitute the Stone-Kuznick version of the events of the last seventy years, and their portrait of the United States. The fact that Henry Wallace, the hero of their malevolent work, was a Communist and Soviet pawn, is a perfect summary of the pathetic Stalinism that is the heart and soul of the world-view of Oliver Stone’s Untold History of the United States…

For those too young to remember, Henry Wallace was a former Vice President who was snookered by American Communists into running for the White House in 1948 as the anti-Cold War candidate of the Progressive Party. The Progressive Party was a political front the Communists had created to help Stalin drag millions of East Europeans into his Soviet gulag and slaughterhouse. Two years later, when the Communists invaded South Korea, a chastened and pathetic Wallace went on television to concede that he had been duped into lending his name to a malevolent cause. Wallace died soon after in disgrace."

---

I’m not sure where I could start with this tome of revisionist crap. Do you really want me to go through this nonsense chapter by chapter? Let’s look at a few of assertions from the book:

1. Had the US been nicer to Stalin in the 1930’s he would never have made an alliance with Hitler.

2. Truman was a warmonger who bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki to terrorise Stalin and thwart his fair territorial plans in Eastern Europe. Japan was actually trying to surrender but Truman went ahead anyway with the bombings to terrorise Stalin into acceding to US/British territorial demands.

3. The Marshall Plan was a deliberate provocation designed to inflame the Stalin.

4. The Berlin Wall was a good thing and done in the best interests of peace.

5. The Korean War started because the Soviet Union was excluded from the peace treaty with Japan and it was an essentially defensive effort by the Soviet Union against the belligerence of Japan. It was also a preemptive war to fend off an invasion of North Korea.

6. The Cuban Missile crisis was America’s fault because the Soviet Union had been pushed to the brink by the US and had a right to deploy missiles in Cuba as a deterrent to a US first strike.

7. The 9/11 attacks were America’s fault because the US twarted Soviet peace efforts in Afghanistan and the US used the 9/11 attacks as a casus belli to wage war ‘against two Islamic nations’

That’s just a small example of some of the stuff in this work. Most people would read those things and laugh because they know how ridiculous and false they are. Do you really need me to explain why they’re so ridiculous? Pick something from the book that you believe and I will explain to you what I think about it. Or just pick one of the numbers above and I’ll explain why it’s untrue.

You can get the “history is written by the victors” version in any mainstream book. They are myths built on slight truths in order to perpetuate American jingoism.

David Horowitz is a clown like all neo-cons. And as such has to manipulate facts to fit his ideology. For a scholarly and critical view of his book titled The Professors try this: http://cdn.publicinterestnetwork.org/assets/woUsLGhMMPR98xFTxvDWyw/Facts_Count-Report.pdf but I’m sure you won’t as you have already been indoctrinated by the propaganda system in the U.S. which is extremely difficult to break from it’s chains. [/quote]

What does Horowitz’s book The Professors have to do with this thread? You’ve completely ignored what I asked you about the content of the film/book. Have you even seen the film? Have you read the book? Do you know anything at all about modern history?

[Xav]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

It is the people’s business when those with too much wealth begin to effect their lives in a negative way.

[/quote]

What are you talking about? Give me an example of what you mean.

[quote]
Who are you to say that it is okay for the minority to subjugate the majority with the power that too much wealth brings?[/quote]

Ah…I never mentioned subjugation or the ‘power that too much wealth brings.’ You’re projecting your delusions onto me. Take a deep breath.[/quote?}

Unfortunately, that is the end result of your assertions and implications but you don’t even know it.

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public[/quote]

Wasn’t the U.S. mainly against stem cell therapy due to ethical, religious concerns?

The Big Pharma enriching themselves to the detriment of the public. I’m sorry to put it this bluntly but are you crazy?? The only way doctors can help people is by doing nothing, giving them drugs or surgery. Big Pharma provides drugs, so how are they detrimental to the public?
Do they enrich themselves? Of course they do! It’s called being paid for what you do. The point of a company is to offer a product that people want and get paid for it. What do you expect, that they distribute drugs for free? Or should pharmaceutical industry be run by the state? That would be interesting. Do you get paid for your work? If so, can I conclude that you’re greedy and enriching yourself? Do you even have the slightest idea how much time and money is needed to develop a single drug for human use?

Why do you make the claim that stem cell therapy is such a wonder cure? It is VERY promising, but that’s not enough to implement something. Hell, the COX-2 selective NSAIDs (Vioxx) were promising too, and we know how that turned out. Even so, let’s suppose the efficiency and safety are proven without doubt, what about cost-effectiveness? In a increasingly socialized medical care system this becomes extremely important. Not every new therapy gets implemented, even when it gives better clinical results.

A huge economic threat to Big Pharma when finding something that works? How did you reach that conclusion? If they find something that works, the demand for this product rises, which means more revenues. You’re right that demand for another product might decrease then, which is compensated by less production. You do realize that in 20-50 years the population will age a huge amount and health expenditure will rise exponentially) Big Pharma will be far from threatened economically, even if tomorrow they find “a cure for cancer”.

In your post you seem to suggest that Big Pharma wants to keep people ill so they continue to buy their products. Am I correct in reaching that conclusion? If that’s the case, why distribute vaccines? Why try to prevent disease?

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

As if I never reply. This is untrue but untruth is a philosophy you espouse to so if fits.

[/quote]

I’m on going on my experience of the four or five threads you’ve started in PWI recently. If I’ve mischaracterised you then I apologise. The reason the curtness of my reply is the frustration I endure seeing someone post revisionist history - i.e., historical ‘untruths.’

Oliver Stone was instrumental in the film portion of the documentary and the other man was the main historian. You wouldn’t know because you probably didn’t even watch it when you saw that Stone’s name was attached. Another knee-jerk reaction from the sheep who is part of the herd.[/quote]

Actually no, I know more than I need to about Stone and Kuznick’s mini series and book The Untold History of the United States. It’s title is an homage to Howard Zinn’s 1980 notorious revisionist work A People’s History of the United States of America. FrontPage Magazine did a series of eight articles debunking the Stone’s/Kuznick’s work chapter by chapter:

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/david-horowitz/neo-communism-out-of-the-closet/

But you won’t bother to read that will you? Fantasy is more interesting than real history and it serves your ideological agenda.

FrontPage describes Stone’s/Kuznick’s work as:

“…a ludicrous encapsulation of the Kremlin’s view of the Cold War, amplified by the Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, Hamas version of the post-Communist decades.”

They go on to say:

"It is the well-known views of the Communist left that undeniably constitute the Stone-Kuznick version of the events of the last seventy years, and their portrait of the United States. The fact that Henry Wallace, the hero of their malevolent work, was a Communist and Soviet pawn, is a perfect summary of the pathetic Stalinism that is the heart and soul of the world-view of Oliver Stone’s Untold History of the United States…

For those too young to remember, Henry Wallace was a former Vice President who was snookered by American Communists into running for the White House in 1948 as the anti-Cold War candidate of the Progressive Party. The Progressive Party was a political front the Communists had created to help Stalin drag millions of East Europeans into his Soviet gulag and slaughterhouse. Two years later, when the Communists invaded South Korea, a chastened and pathetic Wallace went on television to concede that he had been duped into lending his name to a malevolent cause. Wallace died soon after in disgrace."

---

I’m not sure where I could start with this tome of revisionist crap. Do you really want me to go through this nonsense chapter by chapter? Let’s look at a few of assertions from the book:

1. Had the US been nicer to Stalin in the 1930’s he would never have made an alliance with Hitler.

2. Truman was a warmonger who bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki to terrorise Stalin and thwart his fair territorial plans in Eastern Europe. Japan was actually trying to surrender but Truman went ahead anyway with the bombings to terrorise Stalin into acceding to US/British territorial demands.

3. The Marshall Plan was a deliberate provocation designed to inflame the Stalin.

4. The Berlin Wall was a good thing and done in the best interests of peace.

5. The Korean War started because the Soviet Union was excluded from the peace treaty with Japan and it was an essentially defensive effort by the Soviet Union against the belligerence of Japan. It was also a preemptive war to fend off an invasion of North Korea.

6. The Cuban Missile crisis was America’s fault because the Soviet Union had been pushed to the brink by the US and had a right to deploy missiles in Cuba as a deterrent to a US first strike.

7. The 9/11 attacks were America’s fault because the US twarted Soviet peace efforts in Afghanistan and the US used the 9/11 attacks as a casus belli to wage war ‘against two Islamic nations’

That’s just a small example of some of the stuff in this work. Most people would read those things and laugh because they know how ridiculous and false they are. Do you really need me to explain why they’re so ridiculous? Pick something from the book that you believe and I will explain to you what I think about it. Or just pick one of the numbers above and I’ll explain why it’s untrue.

You can get the “history is written by the victors” version in any mainstream book. They are myths built on slight truths in order to perpetuate American jingoism.

David Horowitz is a clown like all neo-cons. And as such has to manipulate facts to fit his ideology. For a scholarly and critical view of his book titled The Professors try this: http://cdn.publicinterestnetwork.org/assets/woUsLGhMMPR98xFTxvDWyw/Facts_Count-Report.pdf but I’m sure you won’t as you have already been indoctrinated by the propaganda system in the U.S. which is extremely difficult to break from it’s chains. [/quote]

What does Horowitz’s book The Professors have to do with this thread? You’ve completely ignored what I asked you about the content of the film/book. Have you even seen the film? Have you read the book? Do you know anything at all about modern history?[/quote]

His book points out his flawed thinking. You posted an article which is supposed to be critical about the Stone documentary and it was written by Horowitz as if he is a credible source. The link I posted dissects Horowitz and his sloppy thinking as it applies to The Professors. This would make me extremely skeptical of actually believing much of what he has to say. He has to bend the truth to fit his ideology. He is a phony and not to be trusted.

Do you know anything about modern history that wasn’t written by the victors?

[orion]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public.
[/quote]

And patients cannot get alternative treatments because of what organization?[/quote]

Big Pharma
[/quote

Ohhhhhh… BIIIG PHARMA prevents you from buying foreign drugs?

Big Pharma makes drugs prohibitively expensive?

And how do they do that?[/quote]

Did you even read what I wrote?[/quote]

Yes, but apparently you did not.

Because BIIIGGGG Pharma cannot do make you do or deny you anything.

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

It is the people’s business when those with too much wealth begin to effect their lives in a negative way.

[/quote]

What are you talking about? Give me an example of what you mean.

Who are you to say that it is okay for the minority to subjugate the majority with the power that too much wealth brings?[/quote]

Ah…I never mentioned subjugation or the ‘power that too much wealth brings.’ You’re projecting your delusions onto me. Take a deep breath.[/quote?}

Unfortunately, that is the end result of your assertions and implications but you don’t even know it.

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public[/quote]

Wasn’t the U.S. mainly against stem cell therapy due to ethical, religious concerns?

The Big Pharma enriching themselves to the detriment of the public. I’m sorry to put it this bluntly but are you crazy?? The only way doctors can help people is by doing nothing, giving them drugs or surgery. Big Pharma provides drugs, so how are they detrimental to the public?
Do they enrich themselves? Of course they do! It’s called being paid for what you do. The point of a company is to offer a product that people want and get paid for it. What do you expect, that they distribute drugs for free? Or should pharmaceutical industry be run by the state? That would be interesting. Do you get paid for your work? If so, can I conclude that you’re greedy and enriching yourself? Do you even have the slightest idea how much time and money is needed to develop a single drug for human use?

Why do you make the claim that stem cell therapy is such a wonder cure? It is VERY promising, but that’s not enough to implement something. Hell, the COX-2 selective NSAIDs (Vioxx) were promising too, and we know how that turned out. Even so, let’s suppose the efficiency and safety are proven without doubt, what about cost-effectiveness? In a increasingly socialized medical care system this becomes extremely important. Not every new therapy gets implemented, even when it gives better clinical results.

A huge economic threat to Big Pharma when finding something that works? How did you reach that conclusion? If they find something that works, the demand for this product rises, which means more revenues. You’re right that demand for another product might decrease then, which is compensated by less production. You do realize that in 20-50 years the population will age a huge amount and health expenditure will rise exponentially) Big Pharma will be far from threatened economically, even if tomorrow they find “a cure for cancer”.

In your post you seem to suggest that Big Pharma wants to keep people ill so they continue to buy their products. Am I correct in reaching that conclusion? If that’s the case, why distribute vaccines? Why try to prevent disease?

No the U.S. was against embryonic stem cells not adult stem cells.

You may think I’m crazy but you are ignorant!

Adult stem cells are used with great effect in other countries whose health care system is not in a stranglehold by Big Pharma.

Yes Big Pharma enriches themselves to the detriment of the public by purposely keeping treatments like adult stem cell therapy out of the market because it’s efficacy is a economic threat to there garbage drug cocktails. They will make plenty of more money by continuing to keep people as customers instead of curing them.

How is Big Pharma connected with disease prevention? 40 years in the war on cancer and all they got is chemo drugs. They deride physicians like Dr. Burzynsk but have virtually nothing to offer the cancer patient. My friend’s wife is an ER doctor and when she was in med school they had 1 semester of nutrition. I know more about nutrition and disease prevention than she does and I’m just a casual reader of the subject.

They can not patent your own stem cells so the profit motive prevents them from allowing this to come to market.

Vet-stem has been in business for since 20002 and have done stem cell work on dogs and horses for that period of time . Often working on thoroughbreds who have ran in the triple crown. All with no side effects! Now tell me from a safety standpoint what drug goes through that kind of preliminary testing? None! And we can’t have it because Big Pharma is keeping it from coming to the market.

You have to travel outside the country for this type of treatment. The American public deserves more than this and it is a shame that we can’t have it because we have a healthcare system that places profits above health.

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public.
[/quote]

And patients cannot get alternative treatments because of what organization?[/quote]

Big Pharma
[/quote

Ohhhhhh… BIIIG PHARMA prevents you from buying foreign drugs?

Big Pharma makes drugs prohibitively expensive?

And how do they do that?[/quote]

Did you even read what I wrote?[/quote]

Yes, but apparently you did not.

Because BIIIGGGG Pharma cannot do make you do or deny you anything.

[/quote]

You are wrong again. You have to travel outside the country in order to receive adult stem cell therapy. According to you that is okay because Big Pharma can not stop you from getting on a plane. You help make my point for me and don’t even realize it.

The American public deserves better than this but this is a consequence of a healthcare system that places profits over health.

[Xav]

I’m not quoting your post Zeppelin to avoid walls of text, it doesn’t seem to work.

If I am not mistaken you claim that the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-embryonic stem cell therapy has been proved, could you back this up?
Also calling me ignorant and then claiming that the only therapy for cancer consists of chemo is quite contra-productive. I have to tell you that there are way more possibilities than only chemo, chemo is more of a last resort therapy and often palliative.

I believe you’re talking about stem cell therapies where your own stem cells are extracted (often from fat indeed) and implanted later on? Could you enlighten me in which therapies exactly this is used? As far I know this is used in certain forms of leukemia, and not a lot more. A lot of research is being done to use this in orthopedics (most notably cartilage regeneration) and as a matter of fact this week very promising results were announced of using autologous stem cells in myocardial infarction rehab.

More importantly, which diseases could these stem cells cure that would otherwise lead to a high consumption of drugs?
I wholeheartedly agree on what you say about nutrition and med school.

One last thing I’d like to ask you is how does Big Pharma exactly keep fat derived stem cells from hitting the market? You said yourself they can’t patent it, not to mention that when using your own stem cells you can hardly speak of the market to begin with.

[system]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
More greed from those who already have too much.
[/quote]

I agree. Those 1% like Moyers who got rich leaching off the taxpayer are disgusting.

[system]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public.
[/quote]

And patients cannot get alternative treatments because of what organization?[/quote]

Big Pharma
[/quote]

Big Pharma only has the power to stop competitors because of “protections” created by Big Government.

[orion]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

You are wrong again. You have to travel outside the country in order to receive adult stem cell therapy. According to you that is okay because Big Pharma can not stop you from getting on a plane. You help make my point for me and don’t even realize it.

The American public deserves better than this but this is a consequence of a healthcare system that places profits over health.[/quote]

So, how is Big Pharma making sure that noone is swooping in and simply offers those services?

[orion]

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public.
[/quote]

And patients cannot get alternative treatments because of what organization?[/quote]

Big Pharma
[/quote]

Big Pharma only has the power to stop competitors because of “protections” created by Big Government.[/quote]

Bastard.

Was trying to get him there himself.

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

You are wrong again. You have to travel outside the country in order to receive adult stem cell therapy. According to you that is okay because Big Pharma can not stop you from getting on a plane. You help make my point for me and don’t even realize it.

The American public deserves better than this but this is a consequence of a healthcare system that places profits over health.[/quote]

So, how is Big Pharma making sure that noone is swooping in and simply offers those services?[/quote]

Let me ask you a question. Why is this not available in the U.S.?

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public.
[/quote]

And patients cannot get alternative treatments because of what organization?[/quote]

Big Pharma
[/quote]

Big Pharma only has the power to stop competitors because of “protections” created by Big Government.[/quote]

While that is true it is also true that it is done at the behest of these behemoth Big Pharma corps.

[orion]

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

Let’s take Big Pharma for example. You can not get fat derived stem cell therapy in the U.S. because it works so much better than the garbage drug cocktails that they invent it would mean a huge economic threat to them. So the American public has to suffer because the greedy pharmaceutical companies want to make them customers in which they can enrich themselves to the detriment of the public.
[/quote]

And patients cannot get alternative treatments because of what organization?[/quote]

Big Pharma
[/quote]

Big Pharma only has the power to stop competitors because of “protections” created by Big Government.[/quote]

While that is true it is also true that it is done at the behest of these behemoth Big Pharma corps.
[/quote]
Oh noez, they will threathen the government with the most powerful military that ever was with what exactly?