Big pharma's 'satanic' plot is genocide

[pmbguy]

Look medicine can be free/cheap. Cuba is a good example, however in this specific example you have to take context into consideration. Everything is totally fct in Cuba, but the medical system.

To link in with Anthony, for meds to advance you need money, money to pay for that advancement. If its free somebody has to pay. Subsidising by government with regards to development, production and eventual free distribution will still come at a cost somewhere. This will also reduce the benefit of having pharma competing. The incentive for development would be lost.

[tec0]

I think its total rubbish. Pharmaceutical companies develop products to make money, for no other reason. They are not charities, they are not the salvation army, they spend huge amounts of money and time to develop their products, why should they not profit. Tec, if you lived 100 years ago you would have died from your terrible ailment, you are kept alive artificially because they developed the drugs, pay or die, that's the way of the world.

I don't think I will be viewing another post of you again...

[tec0]

Actually wanted to edit my post but found it edited for me.

I wish a few other post would get the same treatment but I suspect that it is only ok for some people to be harsh. That said I spoke to a friend of mine that lives in another country so I normally only get to chat to him at midnight or near morning hours.

He told me about a system they have in their lab. Basically it can identify every substance within a sample not only what the substance is but the amounts. This enable them to recreate a compound of almost any type.

So since it is all about money... Why not use such systems to duplicate medication and just sent the patent laws to the burner that way we get to produce the medication needed and the money stays within the country.

Simple truth if profit cannot respect life why must life respect profit? Screw that...

If people doesn't have a right to life then why must companies have a right to profit that is basically "there livelihood"

In short it is called mutual respect and if you can't apply that in business then your business will go down the drain. Simple truth if you cannot respect a person why must that person place a order with you? Customer walks find someone else...

And just sometimes the customer gets the stuff they need and start to manufacture thus cutting your business out and removing you from there needs completely...

[AndyD]

It's capitalism, people start business to make money. Pharmaceuticals cost big bucks to research and develop. Not every development gets to market.
Start limiting profit and companies will cut the costs by doing less testing, not a good situation. Or, if a line is not producing profit, I will can it, or limit it, using resources for higher profit lines.

I don't have a problem with the inventor of a product having a time-limited market advantage which allows him to recoup the R&D costs and set himself up in a position to monetize his product. Without this advantage r&d wouldn't be financially viable and invention would be stifled, this is what the copyright, patent and IP system should be doing.

The problem is what the copyright and IP laws have evolved into. The length of time has become way too long and the scope of protection has become way too broad which is now in itself stifling further innovation. It's giving companies who own the 'rights' to products so much protection they can hold the world to ransom for decades for their own excessive financial gain and allowng them to dictate where the product can and can't be used or applied and usually to the detriment of society as a whole. It also allows the perpetuation of outdated business models and monopolies due to the unfair advantage afforded to them.

This is all a result of continuous lobbying and mission creep. Many of these companies will spend far more on lobbying to extend their copyrights and patents on their existing products than they do on R&D of new products because gradually hacking away and getting the laws bent and eventually rewritten in their favour is far more profitable than innovating and brnging new products to market.

The IP needs tightening up, the parts where the company makes small change etc then registers new patent.

With the lobbyists given the amount of free reign they have to basically bribe their way to new laws and the blatant abuse of even the existing laws by the drug cartels going unchecked I don't see any tightening of these laws in the near future. Even enforcing the existing laws and checking the blatant abuse would be a step in the right direction at the moment.

[AndyD]

Actually wanted to edit my post but found it edited for me.

I wish a few other post would get the same treatment but I suspect that it is only ok for some people to be harsh.

I won't censor or any views on a topic that's being debated no matter how harsh they may seem or even how strongly I disagree with them. The only exception might be if there were laws against a particular view (such as preaching holocaust denial, racism, sexism etc) and even this would be sometimes be under duress.

On the other hand comments that are made about another member are removed as soon as their seen or reported. If other members make personal or defamatory comments about yourself the same will apply if they're seen or reported.

I know the issues being discussed are emotive but please address the opinions and not the people making them.

[sterne.law@gmail.com]

The push to shore up IP issues here in SA is seemingly gaining some momentum.
The lobbying aside, there is probably a bit of fear. Every government knows they need the meds, and there must be some fear, ( and probably threats)that if we piss the drug guys off they will say, ok, we won't make that, or we will limit that. The people will turn against government and not the company.
recouping costs, the developer still has certain advantages even if patent period is shortened. They can release their drug into the market as a generic 2/3 years before the patent expires, thus establishing a foothold, and obviously they have a zero development cost which means they can enter at a power price.

On a separate, yet linked issue, is actual pricing. If you see the price through medical aids and compare it to across the counter, the price is huge. Across the counter the meds may be R600, yet dispensed via a medical aid (the customer), it may be R400, as an example.

Having thought of this, perhaps the pricing structures is the thing to look at.

[tec0]

Thankfully it wouldn’t matter for too much longer. Any medication “chronic or otherwise” is effectively treating something that is potentially lethal. Private Hospitals demand large amounts of money and if people can’t pay they get to watch how the people they love die.

I always wonder what happened to our moral responsibility. Remember compassion? For what are we if not human? YES you do get people that are driven by something else but that doesn’t mean they are always right.

But if they want to make the medication inaccessible thousands will die but it will be nothing if you compare their actions before they go. The article hit it on the head... It is going to be hectic... Why? Because the “victims” have literally nothing to lose and if History is any indication then there is a no more dangerous mind then the mind of a person that has nothing left to lose.

[tec0]

On a separate, yet linked issue, is actual pricing. If you see the price through medical aids and compare it to across the counter, the price is huge. Across the counter the meds may be R600, yet dispensed via a medical aid (the customer), it may be R400, as an example.

Having thought of this, perhaps the pricing structures is the thing to look at.

My medical aid refuses to pay for my medication there reasons was never given to me in writing so I cannot tell you exactly why they don't want to pay. My pills cost R600 "that is cash price" What makes me even more angry is the fact that I am dependant on said medication but must go to the doctor every time I need a box of pills. They refuse to give me refills.

[sterne.law@gmail.com]

Well doctors have obligations. But often you can get a 6 th script. It will depend on condition, the meds and potential side effects.
Similarly that sounds like chronic meds, your doctor should complete the form with medical aid.

[AndyD]

.........On a separate, yet linked issue, is actual pricing. If you see the price through medical aids and compare it to across the counter, the price is huge. Across the counter the meds may be R600, yet dispensed via a medical aid (the customer), it may be R400, as an example.

Having thought of this, perhaps the pricing structures is the thing to look at.

I didn't address the pricing issue because whilst it is enextricably linked with the copyright/patent/IP issue it has already started to be addressed as a separate issue by government legislation although thiswas more at the retail end of the chain. But yes, I agree entrely the lack price control of medications plus the fact we've seen time and time again the pharmacutical industries inability to keep their profit margins humane should pave the way for further pricing legislation.

The problem with this entire issue is that general business rules don't apply. Because of the massive amounts of profit involved powerful governments are 'lobbying' or possibly it would be more accurate to say they're dictating what the regulations or lack of them must be to the smaller emerging economy countries in order to leave the door open for the blatant racketeering of these drug cartels. Because of this you can't look at the issue on a standard business level because the environment these companies operate in is not a standard free-market.