Maybe SOME Good News from the FDA

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote=“Zeppelin795, post:40, topic:224450”]
The revolving door favors profits over health by design. It ought to be illegal to work for both Big Pharma and the FDA.[/quote]

In what way does this affect the field of regenerative medicine?

[quote=“Zeppelin795, post:40, topic:224450”]
No company should be allowed to market drugs without having done solid verifiable studies on their safety, but they do anyway. How many people have died using “approved drugs”? What evidence has been buried that these drugs were harmful so that Big Pharma can make more money?[/quote]

Because a few people break the rules (arguendo), we should abolish the rules altogether?

How many more people will die if we permit the 90%+ safety / efficacy failures market approval?

What do you think is a better means of weeding out smaller competition: the cost of phase II/III studies or the cost of the lawsuits that will arise from the 90%+ safety / efficacy failures flooding the market?

I think our healthcare system leaves a lot to be desired, but I’d rather get treated for a gunshot wound here than a hangnail anywhere else.

1 Like
42

Then how are either supposed to retain the services of talented people with the education and qualifications required for the types of positions that people who do what you are complaining about?

It’s not like there are a bunch of people with multiple postgrad and doctoral degrees just sitting around and waiting for their ship to come in.

And what about that same talent pools freedom to work and apply themselves where ever they like? One of my nieces works at the FDA. Who are you to say she can’t work in private industry ever? She’s a hard working and brilliant young woman, and you want to limit her options in this world because WHY?

Because she worked somewhere!

4 Likes
43

Public news sources consolidate their opinion in an effort to keep the donations flowing.

You have this romantic view of the press that never existed. Ever.

You think leftist bias isn’t heard? lmao…

The Real News is nothing more than leftist confirmation bias. It’s Brietbart Left. That’s all it is.

The fact you are trying to insinuate it is anything other than just other biased news source is beyond hilarious, considering the fact you can’t go 3 posts without attacking someone’s “ideology”.

Being this dumb and paranoid.

How many people have died from skin cancer given to them from the sun?

You don’t know any lawyers on a personal basis do you?

Jesus Christ. You think they are all just “paid off” by the “evil big phama” to not sue the living fuck out of companies with billion dollar cap positions? lmao

Being this dumb. Knowing no doctors, or anyone involved in research.

Being this dumb and paranoid…

44

A gunshot wound is an acute wound. Much different than a chronic or degenerative disease. A better question is how many people would die given a relaxation of the rules vs. how many people die today with the rules in place and the profit motive as the main concern for the major shareholders.

And it is a way of business for Bog Pharma not just a few bad apples.

If Big Pharma can’t patent stem cells and it is found that they work better they will have their lackeys in the FDA drag their knuckles for the approval process in order to keep it off the market rather than negatively affect their bottom line. So the public has to suffer so the shareholders can make more money. Absolutely disgusting.

It is already being done in other countries with great success and the public has to go outside the country to have this treatment done.

45

This is a scurrilous charge you’re leveling–that the FDA is putting the desires of Big Pharma ahead of the well-being of the American public. Do you have any actual evidence to back this up? (Note that the fact a given treatment is approved in another country does not qualify as evidence of Pharma/FDA collusion in the US.)

2 Likes
46

Hi Zep,

[quote=“Zeppelin795, post:44, topic:224450”]
A better question is how many people would die given a relaxation of the rules vs. how many people die today with the rules in place and the profit motive as the main concern for the major shareholders.[/quote]

What’s your answer to your improved question?

[quote=“Zeppelin795, post:44, topic:224450”]
If Big Pharma can’t patent stem cells and it is found that they work better they will have their lackeys in the FDA drag their knuckles for the approval process in order to keep it off the market rather than negatively affect their bottom line.[/quote]

What are your thoughts on patent no. 9,474,787?

1 Like
47

Who are the shareholders?

What, in your mind, is the likely hood that the american public and “the shareholders” are the same people?

48

In reality it’s about 100%. I can’t imagine there is a single 401k index that isn’t in a pharma or two. And know there is about zero pensions not in them. (Boomers are aging etc…)

So that means, Zep will say 0%.

2 Likes
49

Of the many things he does not know, I guarantee this is one of them.

1 Like
50

It is an obvious conflict of interest. What about the freedoms of the public not to be taken advantage of?

She has the choice from the beginning. Either Big Pharma or the FDA but not both for obvious reasons.

51

Corporate news sources are much more powerful and the one you defer to even though they have the corporate interest at heart all the while it comes at your detriment.

Ideology is at the heart of many issues and for you to deny it is disingenuous.

Explain why profits over health is not by design and/or detrimental to the public?

Not sure how many people have died by skin cancer given to them by the sun but I bet it is less than the deaths caused by pharmaceuticals designed to make a profit. Is the sun a business entity designed to make a profit above all else?

If it isn’t about profit and is about health, explain?

So Big Pharma is out to cure disease and not suppress symptoms as a means to achieve their fundamental business goals? Explain and try not to fall back on your go to comeback: name calling.

52

My hunch is far less people will die with more competition.
I’m not familiar with that patent #bodybuilding

Will look into it.

53

The public are not the major shareholders. The elite are.

54

Hi Zep,

The patent is titled “Mesenchymal Stem Cells for the Treatment of CNS Diseases.” It was published this year, on 25Oct2016,

I’m more curious as to how you would reconcile this approval with your assertion that Big Pharma can’t patent stem cell technology.

4 Likes
55

Not my detriment. I can and actually do read, so I’m not really “beholden” to any of it.

Didn’t deny it, said it’s hilarious you use it as a personal attack every 3 posts.

Because profits are infinitely easier in other fields?
Because there are significantly less hurdles to jump through in other industries?

The idea that pharma is some giant conspiracy to keep the masses sick to make money is so completely devoid of logic and reality that to even refute the claim boarders on giving it legitimacy.

That the idea that 1000’s upon 1000’s of people are involved from board rooms, to research labs, in a quest to limit the benefits their products provide in such a specialized way in order to “boost” profits above actually fixing issues is so far fetched one would have to imagine Huxley’s lab made these people in order for them to do it every day.

lol

No. But you’re woefully missing the point. Which I admit I expected.

They wouldn’t be making a product to be sold on the healthcare market if it wasn’t about health.

Making money doesn’t = evil.

Yes for those that can be cured, yes. Most can’t though. You have any idea how much $ one would make on a cure for the common cold, let alone other more significant issues?

And why on Earth are you speaking as if symptom suppression is a bad thing?

Let’s also not ignore plenty of drugs were developed to do one thing, and ended up being very good at another, so they get used as “suppression of symptoms”, which again, isn’t a bad thing, lol.

Every name I call you is deserved.

56

My dentist makes a profit from putting a filling in my tooth.

He must be suppressing my health by drilling out that cavity and putting in the filling.

What an evil fucker.

I’m done going to see him. I’ll go to a hospital in Socialist Utopia in Venezuela to get my teeth checked!

2 Likes
57

They will sprinkle some stem cells in there and your tooth will just grow right back.

Dat shit is better than fairy dust!

58

Maybe they have now found a way It will most likely not become an approved therapy unless Big Pharma can make money from it. Until then it will stay out of reach for the public who wants to try it, instead of taking drugs to suppress symptoms. This is evidenced by the people who actually travel outside the U.S. to have this therapy administered.

59

Wow you can read. Congratulations. But you constantly defend corporate news sources to keep alive your ideology. You keep trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. It is what is required to keep your worldview alive. As evidence and truth have no part in your view so you can feel safe and right.

Big Pharma will do whatever makes them the most money, period. No matter what the cost.

Profits are above everything, so if Big Pharma can make more money off of selling drugs than having the FDA approve a procedure that will take from their bottom line, that is something they will do. The revolving door comes in quite handy for this. It’s really quite simple.

When you have no answer you either name-call or type an lol to pretend you are above everything. You are so transparent it is quite amusing.

It is about making profit no matter what the externalities are. And it is about suppressing symptoms not about health. Big difference

Would drug companies make more money keeping the status quo or would a cure make more money?

You are like the toothless version of The Bumble from Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer. Just a big, dumb goon.

60

You don’t understand the issue. You just think you do.

Are England and Australia socialist utopia’s? Explain why they have a form of single-payer healthcare and spend far less than the U.S. with better overall outcomes.