Pills and privilege

re: Pills and privilege

David Gerard — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:33:37 GMT

The important thing is to keep the NHS viagra flowing. http://notnews.today.com/2008/08/18/drug-firms-deny-pricing-for-profit/

re: Pills and privilege

Sari Grove — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:06:45 GMT

Perhaps it is time that sick people were treated like any other & the safeguards removed from exempting those who have abused their lives so much that they require medication ... The cry wolf has gone on too long , intellectual property has been discounted sufficiently for those who seek answers wholesale to how they can get better ... For those who truly care about their own health , pharmaceuticals are merely peripheral to their daily goals ... For every emergency drug created to fix a lifetime of abuse , millions of dollars not to mention time & brainpower & neurons on the part of those gifted & caring enough to bother ... Red yeast rice is a statin yes ...the sale of this cheapest alternative anti-coagulant was stifled yes because it stepped on copyright to a drug ... the drug actually originated from the source in question ...put it together , the people stifling the alternatives are the people trying to make a living ...us is them ...the same people who invented the alternative use are controlling its sale ...imagine that, the inventors get to say who gets what when ...that is because statins, or anti-coagulants can cause Alzheimer's disease ...take too much aspirin & you'll forget where your keys went, your email password , what you were saying mid-sentence ...so, drugs are controlled because they are dangerous, & the monetary restriction is one facet of that control... once again, if pharmaceutical companies & doctors are to be scrutinised & accused of greed, then I might hasten to examine the ethics of the patients ...how much was the BMW that you bought & totalled to get that spinal cord injury you want me to fix ? How many times did you take recreational drugs in university & now want me to repair the epilepsy caused by your rampant belief that pot is king ? How much mental energy did you spend trying to sleep with all your female co-workers, costing your company funds, & now needing heavy duty antibiotics to clear up that persistent social disease ? & why should I give you a discount when you didn't give me a discount when you wrote that scathing article attacking my practice ? hmmm ...just a thought...truth is , I think those crying wolf are just haggling ...because that car, boat , airplane , ipod, swimming pool , trophy wife's shoes, private school , lunch was a little pricey & now they need a quick fix & can't afford it...Budget now for the future, both in your use of your body & other natural resources...then , maybe later, you won't need drugs , the best revenge if you are truly miffed at the whole shebang...I could be wrong however...regards, S.G.

re: Pills and privilege

saneish — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:04:04 GMT

What an angry little person Sari is. And somewhat ill-informed. I'd say that the vast majority of people being poisoned by the pharmaceutical companies' products have seen a BMW only as a curiosity from the top of a bus and school was the local Comprehensive. Quit being so jealous dearie and get a life!

re: Pills and privilege

Sari — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:40:57 GMT

angry that you & the author chose to bite the hand that feeds them ...if you are being poisoned by pharmaceutical companies, I suggest you refrain from using any pharmaceuticals or any product that comes from medical labours ... the BMW was a metaphor, I am not a jealous person & my life is quite full which is why I don't sit around insulting people who have devoted their lives to saving people...

re: Pills and privilege

gemma — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:12:19 GMT

Perhaps the reason drug companies get so many privileges is because the pharmaceutical industry has many of its employers as 'consultants', 'advisers' directors etc. on regulation/licencing boards of government health committees. And Sari, scientists developing new drugs are doing it to boost the profits of their funding source; drug companies and its shareholders. As for being devoted to saving lives, remember that official sources admit the majority of drugs do not work in most people and are 4th major cause of death. But they do make billions for the manufacturer and billions in revenue for the government. Also drug companies spend more on marketing their products than research and development! This industry is in business for one purpose only - to make money.

re: Pills and privilege

richard ponsonby — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:09:09 GMT

Think of how much healthier we would be and how much richer if we just abolished all Pharma drugs.

re: Pills and privilege

Connie — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:36:50 GMT

You have terminal illness which can be put into remission or even cured if you take a pharmaceutical drug butcertainly will die if you do nothing and don`t take any medication. What would you do now????? Big pharma has big license and nothing in their rivileges has changed!!!!!!!! Are you going to allow yourself to die now or try for remission or cure???? That's the heart of the dilema. Big pharma has many problems we don't like or want to support that is true but I ask you what about the problems you don't like about your govenrment??? It too has a wide influence on your life and its' quality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why aren't some of life's major problems also fixed??????? and reported as life and death!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

re: Pills and privilege

Graham Ewing — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:42:54 GMT

Bryan made a good point when he commented that the pharmaceutical industry has priveliges and confidentialities in apparent contrast to that granted to the majority of the population. I would also point out that such priveliges apply also to the medical profession where mistakes are protected by profession.

By contrast the truck driver who falls asleep at the wheel is granted no such immunity, the shift worker who hits someone when manoevering a fork-lift truck gets no immunity for his error, etc.

If the laws of the land do not apply in such cases then it renmoves the need for these industries to improve the services and products which they develop, sell or apply. It removes the need to understand in greater detail why their problems arise.

As for pricing, Sir Michael Rawlins is entirely justified to point out that the cost of new drugs is too high. He is not the culprit.

re: Pills and privilege

Andy Lewis — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:03:38 GMT

Bryan, this is a very uninformed and ill argued blog entry. What exactly are these privileges and high levels of privacy and protection offered to pharma companies and denied to others?

You say 'non-drug' competitors are not allowed to bring alternatives to market - especially in cancer care? Can you justify that. The relevant law here is the Cancer Act of 1939 that forbids any advertising o cancer cures - regardless of who they are - it does not give privileges to drugs. The Advertising Standards Authority is merely there to police that adverts are decent, legal and honest. It privileges no-one. All are subject to the same standards - can you substantiate your claim?

Drug companies are subject to the same patent laws as everyone else. But they are disadvantaged by the huge time is takes drugs to get to market. The effective patent protection they get can be less than ten years - during which time, they will do anything to recoup the >$500 million costs of development. There are much easier industries to work in.

In fact, and quite rightly, the pharma companies are probably subject to more legislation and control than any other sector. They are not allowed to advertise to the public in the UK. Only the tobacco companies can perhaps claim similar unfairness. They have to go through stringent licensing via the MHRA and then be approved by NICE in order to sell their wares to the state. This is expensive and time consuming.

In fact, the one big privilege that I can see is that the MHRA give special dispensation to homeopathic pharmas so that they do not have to provide standard evidence of efficacy. They are essentially allowed to lie to the public in a way that all other companies cannot.

You fail to say what laws you would remove or new ones you would add. All in all, this is just a rant against your staw man evil bully boy that alternative medicine uses to promote its own wares.

And, you are missing the real evil points about big pharma. If you want real insight into their real sins, I suggest you read Ben Goldacre's new book, "Bad Science". You might learn a thing or two.

re: Pills and privilege

Tom — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 23:41:23 GMT

Andy Lewis, there you go. Another of your brain farts here?