Good news regarding Lime disease
Connecticut
Research done by a professor at University of New Haven leads in a new direction in combating the bacteria responsible for the Lyme disease. Let us hope that big pharmaceutical companies do not interfere in bringing an affordable solution to those affected by the disease.
Six - thanks for this link. I had read about this previously and wondered how accurate it was and if it was even a valid article. Several great discoveries started out as a pursuit to cure some of ailment and ended up for a different purpose. The blue pill started out as a blood pressure med, and now it's used to raise the BP of older men,....not that I would know ;o
"Let us hope that big pharmaceutical companies do not interfere in bringing an affordable solution to those affected by the disease." In what way would the Pharmaceutical companies interfere with bringing out an affordable solution?
The Pharmaceutical companies are Regulated by the FDA. The FDA has more to do with the cost of drugs than the Pharmaceutical companies do to a point. The mountain of regulations and procedures imposed by the FDA is mind boggling. Just consider this, a given drug company may be working on 10 drugs at a given time, Over the course of 15 years, nine of them may be scrapped for one reason or another maybe 1 is worked through to become a viable drug. to develop those 15 drugs, consider the expenses associated with paying for scientists to discover the compound, Project managers, auditors, all sorts of administrators, Doctors, Hospitals and medical centers, Travel possibly world wide to conduct clinical trials at various Hospitals and medical centers and paying for their staff. All while following the strict protocol guidelines of the FDA. There is much more to it than this but this will give good insite. Now consider the cost associated with the 9 failed drugs, In view of the fact that pharmaceutical companies are businesses, they exist to turn a profit. Do you really think they would stay in business if they never recovered the cost associated with trying to develop the drugs that failed? Every drug that is brought to market is also paying for the bunch that never made it.
Right. If the previous vaccine had made money, it wouldn't have been pulled. There is a ton of misinformation on Lyme disease and the cure is so simple that the vaccine didn't stand a chance. You get Lyme disease, you take doxy for 28 days, problem solved. But things get bad when it goes undiagnosed. Hunters and outdoors people know to check, but suburban moms going to the mailbox do not.
I must start a portable suburban mom tick check station...free....
@bb: When creating profit for the sake of profit takes front stage in order to fatten the purse for the few, everything else becomes secondary. Pharmaceutical companies in US are know for medication price gouging, unlike their counterparts in other countries who often deliver the same drug to those in need at a significantly lower price. It is also possible, given a low profit margin, to bury a beneficial treatment just to deliver a stronger bottom line by following a drug with an increased commercial value. The decision to bring a drug to the market is made by the pharmaceutical company, regardless of the FDA bureaucracy which comes later into play.
Haha Notme, here's a relevant video for you (for once.)
notme, don't you worry. I will help you with that tick station.
"The decision to bring a drug to the market is made by the pharmaceutical company, regardless of the FDA bureaucracy which comes later into play."
The FDA bureaucracy comes into play the very second a drug is under development. There is an exact protocol that needs to be followed complete with detailed records that can be followed and reviewed by FDA. inspectors. Do you know that there are departments within the drug companies whos sole mission is to ensure that the FDA protocols are followed? It's called regulatory compliance. They audit every facet of the process including clinical trials to ensure that the correct procedure is followed. If it isn't followed to the letter, the drug doesn't pass.
The FDA provides approval as to whether they will let the drug come to market, it is their decision. If the drug doesn't prove to be significantly different than other drugs that are used for a similar problem on the market, it it doesn't get approved. The whole process is controlled by the FDA. Consider this, other countries don't have the regulations imposed on them that our FDA applies to the US drug companies, fewer restrictions fewer expenses, lower costs. The other issue, When a drug is first approved, there is a patent on it that only lasts 7 years. The company has 7 years to make their money back on the development of the drug. Then everyone who can put a compound together can reap the benefit of all the years of R&D and expense and make the same drug for a fraction of the cost. Price gouging? that's usually the opinion of the uniformed. Drug companies like many other businesses are not non profit by choice. They exist to make a profit. If a given drug doesn't turn out to be profitable, what would you suggest they do about it? It's not just the Pharmaceutical industry, Out of control government regulations in all industries choke the people they are meant to help. It drives prices to extreme levels, Pick an industry and if you dig into the regs they have to abide by you will see the source of much of the cost on the consumer end.
"When creating profit for the sake of profit..." What exactly does that mean? Like I said before, Companies are in business to create profit. They really don't need any other reason. They really don't owe anyone an explanation as to why they are making a profit.
@bb: A common characteristic shared by socialism, communism, and capitalism, is that all, sooner or later, seem to have more active inspectors than the actual number of productive workers. Funny how that works. Maybe we should revisit The Animal Farm book in order to clarify the inspector development process in our quest to balance the equation. We definitely and desperately need some aerial surveys performed.
I thank you for painting a clearer picture for everyone. However, tacit acceptance of a burdening, corrupt and rotten system does not excuse anyone from placing profit before a basic human need, nor does it eliminate responsibility for decisions based on fattening the bottom line. The pharmaceutical companies use different mechanisms to determine market profitability for all the drugs considered for research. They move forward from there considering the most profitable drugs which will produce the most money in the next 7 years. During this evaluation process some drugs are left behind even though they can be effective in curing an illness.
I perfectly understand the profit concept you are writing about but there is a significant difference between decency and greed. If a pharmaceutical company considers the most profitable drug based not only on recovering the initial investment in research and development but also on creating a healthy profit then I do not see how such decisions can be without bias. See, one can make a huge profit selling a small number of the same product for a high price in a short period of time, while another will earn more in the long run by selling the same product for a lower price.
I think we all can agree that breathing clean air, drinking clean water, nourishment, receiving healthcare, adequate housing are few basic human needs which should never be placed behind "a company purpose is to generate a profit" excuse.
Sounds like you want a government run drug company. Or I suppose there is always room for someone to start a non profit pharmaceutical company. Developed strictly for humanitarian purposes. Good Luck with that.
Yes yes, i will use that song to luuure them into my fiendishly innocent duct taped encrusted chamber...(add miniecal laugh of your choosing)..err, ahhh,ya thatll work dude
Why are we one of the only two countries that allow direct to consumer prescription drug advertising?! I'm not a dr. Idk what drugs are good for me. Not to mention most of the side effects are worse than the ailment itself. Fuck big pharma. Fuck drugs.
We just make tools and we have an audit process to be ISO certified and we have several internal audits every year and an external ISO audit annually. We have more stringent regulations for doing business in Europe where their requirements are much more complicated. I don't know if there's any for profit business that doesn't have government regs they are required to meet. I would agree that drug companies are at the top of list for regs though. The unique problem with drugs is you have a captive customer, if you need the drug you need the drug!
https://youtu.be/tymWpEU8wpM
What a lot of people don't realize or forget, pharma companies have scientists doctors, RN's, statisticians, clinicians, pharmacists and countless other high cost employees they have to keep paying and giving incentives to work there. It's all well and good to think the pharma companies are charging too much and it's understandable. However consider that when you need a drug, you need it. You want it to be developed by a knowlegable company with the best people working for them, that takes money. The development process can take a decade or more with no revenue generated during the development. Many pharma companies can go years without any viable drugs in their pipeline. Yet they still pay their employees and keep the doors open doing research trying to find the next viable drug. It wouldn't be beneficial to anyone if they closed their doors during the down years because they were giving the drugs away they developed. Like I said before, the cost associated with developing one drug that passes fda approval is staggering, especially whe considering the cost of all the candidates that didn't make it and the years of paying teams to discover a candidate. Generally any drug is a trade off, they aren't worse than the disease they are designed to cure or help. But they often have bad or acceptable side effects that can make it seem like it. You will never get a drug that doesn't have potentially bad side effects, the question is what is acceptable?
Bob, you can't compare the amount of regs involved . Just imagine being regulated to the point that a hammer takes you 10 years to build.
How would Stanley tools handle having to rely on A version of the fda that approved a tool you developed to be able to produce and sell? Suppose it took 10 years to develop a new type of screwdriver, the fda version decided after 10?years that it wasn't different enough from others on the market to giv approval for development? Then top that off with any pattents you own are only good for 7 years allowing anybody to manufacture the same tools you spent 10 years developing? They build them at a fraction of the cost because they didn't have to go through the development process? Dobyou really think the cost of a stanley screwdriver would remain at $5.00 or whatever they sell them for?
bb - Stanley also has several high paying positions in engineering, product development, marketing, process engineering, environmental/health/safety, etc. Not to mention the advertising costs where we sponsor NASCAR, NHRA, Moto GP, PBR, MLB, Soccer, etc. I can't say we spend more or less than the pharm industries in overhead cost, but it's cost we have to absorb and earn against. All businesses have material, labor and overhead that make up their financial statements and their profits are based upon how well they control those 3 things, and the prices they charge for the products they sell; no difference for pharma or tools.
Our patents also expire but more importantly we have to innovative long before the patents runs out or we lose the business. Customers are always looking for the better product. Just look at the cellphone industry and there's a great example. And if someone else develops a better tool then the patent doesn't really come into play. If you don't lead the pack you're left in the dust.
And Depot, Lowes and Walmart are always demanding lower costs and don't care about inflation, fuel surcharges, import duties, rising steel prices, anti-dumping regulations, etc, etc.
I'm not trying to say Stanley is in the same boat as the drug industry (we are on the same ocean), just that ALL companies face the same type of problems, just in varying degrees. At the end of the day we need to make a profit for our shareholders and we play the game according to the rules handed to us. I can't say if the prices charged for drugs are fair because I think that's a subjective question, but some companies have been found guilty of inflating pricing in the recent past and I think that's what upsetting to some people because it's viewed as profits ahead of people's health.
SixLomaz,
" tacit acceptance of a burdening, corrupt and rotten system does not excuse anyone from placing profit before a basic human need, nor does it eliminate responsibility for decisions based on fattening the bottom line. "
Are you talking about a free market economy? The only system on earth that works for wealth, rather than taking it by force? What is so corrupt about seeing a need and filling it in a free exchange, for wealth? Profit is only wrong when it is maligned. Human Government must always "take" before it gives, and only gives what it has taken from others. You are wrong about capitalism it doesn't create inspectors, government does. Government today in the United States, is out of balance and in opposition to the rights and responsibilities of its citizens. Ignoring the Constitution has consequences we all are suffering for.
When it comes to curing diseases, the greatest market is where the greatest need is. In your humble opinion, what "basic" need of humanity has not been met?
Also, health care is not a God given right under government protection. If that were so, how can the government justify killing millions of unborn citizens. On the one hand it is advocating care for life, and on the other it is destroying innocents. The government has a place in protecting citizens from clearly proven fraudulent, dishonest or unsafe business practices. When government backs the theories of global warming or human evolution, it overreaches its intended purposes and becomes tyrannical.
Perhaps the book "Fahrenheit 451" would interest you.
Some things to consider. If there is a need the drug company will develop it. But a non profitable drug is one where sales is not there. (No need). A good example of this was the lymrix vaccine. This was a prevention, not a cure. As such people just didn't buy it. Like any business if they will develop it if there is a need. Sales determines that also they have to consider whether they have a reasonably good shot at getting fda approval. They aren't going to spend the time and money on a drug they don't believe will pan out, no matter how much need there is.
Bob... of course that's how businesses work, that's my point. Pharma companies have unique challenges that other companies don't have, that has to be considered when you complain about the cost of drugs. Unless you know what exactly the profit margines are all your doing is guessing . And complaing about something that may not be valid.
@bb: Far from me looking for more government involvement. I have lived enough time in both socialist/communist and capitalist societies to understand that none of them are a viable solution for bringing humanity forward. Shared collective ownership is a failure and consumerism follows closely on the same path, while all treat their citizens as an exploitable resource and promote corruption. Anything ending in "ism" is bad medicine. It is rather sad as we all talk about ethics and yet we easily succumb into temptation. All I am asking and hoping for is more common sense, the cure for our ailments, which usually comes from proper and thorough education at home and in school. It will take few generations to shake this plague off. Changing direction must be a collective effort if we are asking for a long lasting viable and sustainable solution. A basic need is a basic need no matter where you live, who you are, religion, etc. To commercialize / restrict / condition access to a basic need for any reason is criminal and against natural law.
@Wild Bill: What free market economy are we talking about here? The free market economy in this part of the world died in 1929. What we have today is an evolved form of looting. Take drinking water for example. This is a basic necessity without which life is not possible. To gain access to this resource today we all have to pay. Do you really believe this basic need is fulfilled in accordance with the natural laws? I did read few times Fahrenheit 451, the temperature at which paper burns. I also enjoyed reading The Animal Farm and Wool. The social constructs we live under today do not follow natural laws and are not appropriate for human development. Socialism, communism, and capitalism are slowly crumbling as we can all see through the increasing cracks in their carefully painted deceitful exterior veneer. Sooner or later they will have to be replaced if we are to survive as a species on this planet.
What about lemon disease, since we already talked about "Lime" disease? :)
Well, that was my typo and I have no way of correcting the title. Of course we can talk about lemons and diseases if you want. They are a natural source of vitamin C and a great help when one needs to boost their body's vitamin C level. I for one eat them raw in times of need, skin and flesh. notme here is your queue. Bring some lemon YouTube videos to this thread please.
Sorry six, just noticed the typo. I do it ALL THE TIME myself and don't see my mistake until after the thread is 6 deep. I'll be surprised if notme finds a lemon song. "Put the lime in the coconut and drink it all up" is all I got.
https://youtu.be/Zyhu2ysqKGk
C'mon now bob,....lol
Or maybe you want to get funky with prince..lol
https://youtu.be/JUMbJ1l0ar4
"Sooner or later they will have to be replaced if we are to survive as a species on this planet."
God has a plan involving the replacement government, and the destruction of this planet is scheduled, so a new earth will take it's place. It can all be found in the owner/operators manual, the Bible = Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth.
