Drug firms 'block' cheap medicine

[Meenzer 14042]

I think Fop should be made to put down a minimum ten line, clear and concise skeleton argument as a 'deposit' or 'guarantee' before being allowed to participate in these arguments anymore. The cheek of him demanding people 'discuss' or 'answer' his questions when he unashamedly ignores well structured arguments at will has meant his credibility has been shot to shit for months now. Tiresome tbh.

I also think the smiley should be replaced with a little photo of Joey Deacon.

[Fop 1]

IMO access to medicine isn't a right. It has to be developed and paid for, while saving lives is nice we can't expect companies not to try and make money off their investment.

True, which is why they have to be brought to heel politically, otherwise they'll try every trick in the book to maximise their profits, no matter the cost to others.

 

Why? As Renton just said, why should pharmaceutical companies be treated any differently? Should the government intervene in the defence industry to keep thier prices down as it may save our soldiers' lives? Where do you stop?

 

Should the government allow the defence industry to sell whatever it wants to whomever wanted it in the name of profit? Where do you start?

 

Yes the government regulates the sale of weapons, it also regulates the sale of drugs and medicines. What's your point?

 

That lines are always drawn, in this case it seems the EU are no longer happy with the underhand tactics the drugs companies are using to get this line pushed their way.

[Fop 1]

I think Fop should be made to put down a minimum ten line, clear and concise skeleton argument as a 'deposit' or 'guarantee' before being allowed to participate in these arguments anymore. The cheek of him demanding people 'discuss' or 'answer' his questions when he unashamedly ignores well structured arguments at will has meant his credibility has been shot to shit for months now. Tiresome tbh.

 

Still the HMS Irony steams merrily along.

[ewerk 26326]

IMO access to medicine isn't a right. It has to be developed and paid for, while saving lives is nice we can't expect companies not to try and make money off their investment.

True, which is why they have to be brought to heel politically, otherwise they'll try every trick in the book to maximise their profits, no matter the cost to others.

 

Why? As Renton just said, why should pharmaceutical companies be treated any differently? Should the government intervene in the defence industry to keep thier prices down as it may save our soldiers' lives? Where do you stop?

 

Should the government allow the defence industry to sell whatever it wants to whomever wanted it in the name of profit? Where do you start?

 

Yes the government regulates the sale of weapons, it also regulates the sale of drugs and medicines. What's your point?

 

That lines are always drawn, in this case it seems the EU are no longer happy with the underhand tactics the drugs companies are using to get this line pushed their way.

 

 

Aye there has been a line drawn for a long time, there is always going to be regulation. Anyways, I'm not going to get drawn into this argument with you. I've seen what it's done to other people, alex had a full head of hair before you signed up.

[ChezGiven 0]

And yes the people that suffer and/or die to guarantee those profits. And the people like Chezzy that try to defend that suffering and deaths in the name of profit.

 

It really is the spectacular stupidity of people that keeps me going in life. Very few of us have the ability to look at the big picture and really understand the complex systems that operate on this planet.

 

This one is amongst the best, making money from people dying. Its so obviously stupid it pains me to point it out but we only make money when people get better, not when they get worse. If a drug is effective, it gets approved, if its cost-effective governments pay for it. The patient gets better and we make money. Hence we profit from people's healthiness. If the drug doesnt work or its too expensive, patients dont get it and no one makes any money. Making money out of sickness would require you to make more money out of making people sicker. I dont really blame you for swallowing vacuous libertarian socialist propaganda though. You're a confused kid.

 

The fact that access to medicines is unequal across the world is a function of the inequality in incomes across the world. The people who dont get the medicines they need are of course no better off than they would have been if the pharmaceutical industry did not exist. They are no worse off either, as without the industry they wouldnt get the medicines either. The industry exists because of the high incomes of the countries it serves. The people who dont get access to medicines because they live in poor countries are no better or worse off because of the industry. The solution lies in the alleviation of global poverty.

[Renton 17765]

IMO access to medicine isn't a right. It has to be developed and paid for, while saving lives is nice we can't expect companies not to try and make money off their investment.

True, which is why they have to be brought to heel politically, otherwise they'll try every trick in the book to maximise their profits, no matter the cost to others.

 

Why? As Renton just said, why should pharmaceutical companies be treated any differently? Should the government intervene in the defence industry to keep thier prices down as it may save our soldiers' lives? Where do you stop?

 

Should the government allow the defence industry to sell whatever it wants to whomever wanted it in the name of profit? Where do you start?

 

Yes the government regulates the sale of weapons, it also regulates the sale of drugs and medicines. What's your point?

 

That lines are always drawn, in this case it seems the EU are no longer happy with the underhand tactics the drugs companies are using to get this line pushed their way.

 

Don't similar things happen with all businesses whether its Microsoft or French farmers?

[Happy Face 29]

Yup, whilst pretending they are "helping" people.

 

 

It's just Chezzy is so funny when he's saying this isn't happening...... yet the EU seem to think it is.

 

Huge corporations in trying to make a profit shocker! This is no different to any other business except that people get much more emotive when it's about healthcare. It's an industry like any other.

 

 

It's not.

 

It saves lives. Time Warner just take your mind off all the death that surrounds you.

 

The better argument would be that the huge profit is an excellent incentive to for companies to keep producing the next life saving drug.

 

Lot's of things save lives, directly or indirectly, and many pharmaceutical products (e.g. Viagra, analgesics) have nothing to do with saving lives. If you're going to keep peddling this idea that pharmaceutical companies should be governed by different rules, please direct me to a system that works better for the patient interest. I think you have partly answered it yourself in the last line mind.

 

You don't believe the health industry is any different to....say.....the porn industry?

[Renton 17765]

And yes the people that suffer and/or die to guarantee those profits. And the people like Chezzy that try to defend that suffering and deaths in the name of profit.

 

It really is the spectacular stupidity of people that keeps me going in life. Very few of us have the ability to look at the big picture and really understand the complex systems that operate on this planet.

 

This one is amongst the best, making money from people dying. Its so obviously stupid it pains me to point it out but we only make money when people get better, not when they get worse. If a drug is effective, it gets approved, if its cost-effective governments pay for it. The patient gets better and we make money. Hence we profit from people's healthiness. If the drug doesnt work or its too expensive, patients dont get it and no one makes any money. Making money out of sickness would require you to make more money out of making people sicker. I dont really blame you for swallowing vacuous libertarian socialist propaganda though. You're a confused kid.

 

The fact that access to medicines is unequal across the world is a function of the inequality in incomes across the world. The people who dont get the medicines they need are of course no better off than they would have been if the pharmaceutical industry did not exist. They are no worse off either, as without the industry they wouldnt get the medicines either. The industry exists because of the high incomes of the countries it serves. The people who dont get access to medicines because they live in poor countries are no better or worse off because of the industry. The solution lies in the alleviation of global poverty.

 

Without sounding too sycophantic, I think that's a brilliant post. Wasted on Fop, of course.

[Happy Face 29]

It really is the spectacular stupidity of people that keeps me going in life. Very few of us have the ability to look at the big picture and really understand the complex systems that operate on this planet.

 

 

 

I don't think I've ever read a more conceited sentence.

 

[Renton 17765]

Yup, whilst pretending they are "helping" people.

 

 

It's just Chezzy is so funny when he's saying this isn't happening...... yet the EU seem to think it is.

 

Huge corporations in trying to make a profit shocker! This is no different to any other business except that people get much more emotive when it's about healthcare. It's an industry like any other.

 

 

It's not.

 

It saves lives. Time Warner just take your mind off all the death that surrounds you.

 

The better argument would be that the huge profit is an excellent incentive to for companies to keep producing the next life saving drug.

 

Lot's of things save lives, directly or indirectly, and many pharmaceutical products (e.g. Viagra, analgesics) have nothing to do with saving lives. If you're going to keep peddling this idea that pharmaceutical companies should be governed by different rules, please direct me to a system that works better for the patient interest. I think you have partly answered it yourself in the last line mind.

 

You don't believe the health industry is any different to....say.....the porn industry?

 

Oh ffs, have you got the Fop virus or something?

[Fop 1]

IMO access to medicine isn't a right. It has to be developed and paid for, while saving lives is nice we can't expect companies not to try and make money off their investment.

True, which is why they have to be brought to heel politically, otherwise they'll try every trick in the book to maximise their profits, no matter the cost to others.

 

Why? As Renton just said, why should pharmaceutical companies be treated any differently? Should the government intervene in the defence industry to keep thier prices down as it may save our soldiers' lives? Where do you stop?

 

Should the government allow the defence industry to sell whatever it wants to whomever wanted it in the name of profit? Where do you start?

 

Yes the government regulates the sale of weapons, it also regulates the sale of drugs and medicines. What's your point?

 

That lines are always drawn, in this case it seems the EU are no longer happy with the underhand tactics the drugs companies are using to get this line pushed their way.

 

 

Aye there has been a line drawn for a long time, there is always going to be regulation. Anyways, I'm not going to get drawn into this argument with you. I've seen what it's done to other people, alex had a full head of hair before you signed up.

And the drugs companies have been using multi-patent methods (and other things) to push it, and the EU has had enough. About time, is all I'm saying (and was saying months ago).

[Fop 1]

It really is the spectacular stupidity of people that keeps me going in life. Very few of us have the ability to look at the big picture and really understand the complex systems that operate on this planet.

 

 

 

I don't think I've ever read a more conceited sentence.

 

 

He can't help it, goes with the territory, the irony is he's not one of the ones that does, no matter that he thinks he is.

[manc-mag 1]

I think Fop should be made to put down a minimum ten line, clear and concise skeleton argument as a 'deposit' or 'guarantee' before being allowed to participate in these arguments anymore. The cheek of him demanding people 'discuss' or 'answer' his questions when he unashamedly ignores well structured arguments at will has meant his credibility has been shot to shit for months now. Tiresome tbh.

 

Still the HMS Irony steams merrily along.

 

On a serious note though that wasn't said for comic effect.

 

Speaking in very general terms, it would cut out the inevitable 10-15 pages where you change the basic premise of your argument as your logic is gradually proved to be defective. Your arguments have become characterised as a complete moveable feast in terms of the underlying premise and a fixed point of reference at the start of the thread would avoid this altogether.

 

Seriously, it's tedious.

Edited November 28, 2008 by manc-mag

[ChezGiven 0]

If you can't deny the truth, flannel for time, and hope it goes away.

 

Brilliant response actually, as it perfectly characterised itself.

 

Indeed. Are you willing to discuss patents now by the way? EU & Fop versus Chezzy.

 

The EU completely supports TRIPS so would it not be EU + me versus Chompsky?

[ChezGiven 0]

It really is the spectacular stupidity of people that keeps me going in life. Very few of us have the ability to look at the big picture and really understand the complex systems that operate on this planet.

 

 

 

I don't think I've ever read a more conceited sentence.

 

 

 

If you've got it, flaunt it.

[Fop 1]

And yes the people that suffer and/or die to guarantee those profits. And the people like Chezzy that try to defend that suffering and deaths in the name of profit.

 

It really is the spectacular stupidity of people that keeps me going in life. Very few of us have the ability to look at the big picture and really understand the complex systems that operate on this planet.

 

Ah Chezzy, bless.

 

 

This one is amongst the best, making money from people dying. Its so obviously stupid it pains me to point it out but we only make money when people get better, not when they get worse. If a drug is effective, it gets approved, if its cost-effective governments pay for it. The patient gets better and we make money. Hence we profit from people's healthiness. If the drug doesnt work or its too expensive, patients dont get it and no one makes any money. Making money out of sickness would require you to make more money out of making people sicker. I dont really blame you for swallowing vacuous libertarian socialist propaganda though. You're a confused kid.

 

So you're telling me that if marginally fewer sales at a much higher price gives better returns than marginally more sales at a much lower price, the drug companies will choose the latter?

 

This is so typical of your "arguments" on this issue, of course your not going to let your entire client base die off, but that's nothing like what is being discussed.

 

Equally of course you are not going to give a toss about some deaths so long as over all profits remind high.

 

 

 

The fact that access to medicines is unequal across the world is a function of the inequality in incomes across the world. The people who dont get the medicines they need are of course no better off than they would have been if the pharmaceutical industry did not exist. They are no worse off either, as without the industry they wouldnt get the medicines either. The industry exists because of the high incomes of the countries it serves. The people who dont get access to medicines because they live in poor countries are no better or worse off because of the industry. The solution lies in the alleviation of global poverty.

 

We're not even talking about world distribution of medicine here, we are talking about the tricks drug companies use in the EU to maximise their profits. And how the EC is saying their are being very naughty about it.

[Fop 1]

That lines are always drawn, in this case it seems the EU are no longer happy with the underhand tactics the drugs companies are using to get this line pushed their way.

 

Don't similar things happen with all businesses whether its Microsoft or French farmers?

Yes, as happened to MS in both the USA and EU as it was employing illegal and pseudo-legal methods for unfair gain (it's not been particularly effective, but that's not the point).

[Fop 1]

The EU completely supports TRIPS so would it not be EU + me versus Chompsky?

Nope, as it come down to exploitation of the system (not whether the system should exist). So EU + Fop versus Chezzy.

[Fop 1]

I think Fop should be made to put down a minimum ten line, clear and concise skeleton argument as a 'deposit' or 'guarantee' before being allowed to participate in these arguments anymore. The cheek of him demanding people 'discuss' or 'answer' his questions when he unashamedly ignores well structured arguments at will has meant his credibility has been shot to shit for months now. Tiresome tbh.

 

Still the HMS Irony steams merrily along.

 

On a serious note though that wasn't said for comic effect.

 

Speaking in very general terms, it would cut out the inevitable 10-15 pages where you change the basic premise of your argument as your logic is gradually proved to be defective. Your arguments have become characterised as a complete moveable feast in terms of the underlying premise and a fixed point of reference at the start of the thread would avoid this altogether.

 

Seriously, it's tedious.

 

Any more tedious than the HMS Irony?

[manc-mag 1]

How desperate is the: smiley btw in the context of a supposedly serious debate?

 

Rhetorical question btw.

[ChezGiven 0]

Fop you said its making money out of sickness. That post was to explain to you that doesnt make sense.

 

I make no apologies for being patronising to you about it either, if you cant get your head round the basics then its fun poking you with the stupid stick.

[ChezGiven 0]

The EU completely supports TRIPS so would it not be EU + me versus Chompsky?

Nope, as it come down to exploitation of the system (not whether the system should exist). So EU + Fop versus Chezzy.

 

You've just shifted position again, as manc-mag predicted some posts ago.

[Fop 1]

How desperate is the: smiley btw in the context of a supposedly serious debate?

 

Rhetorical question btw.

The HMS Irony always is a rhetorical passage.

[Fop 1]

The EU completely supports TRIPS so would it not be EU + me versus Chompsky?

Nope, as it come down to exploitation of the system (not whether the system should exist). So EU + Fop versus Chezzy.

 

You've just shifted position again, as manc-mag predicted some posts ago.

No I haven't, nice try to flannel for time though (and good job at ignoring my points, as usual ).

[Happy Face 29]

Yup, whilst pretending they are "helping" people.

 

 

It's just Chezzy is so funny when he's saying this isn't happening...... yet the EU seem to think it is.

 

Huge corporations in trying to make a profit shocker! This is no different to any other business except that people get much more emotive when it's about healthcare. It's an industry like any other.

 

 

It's not.

 

It saves lives. Time Warner just take your mind off all the death that surrounds you.

 

The better argument would be that the huge profit is an excellent incentive to for companies to keep producing the next life saving drug.

 

Lot's of things save lives, directly or indirectly, and many pharmaceutical products (e.g. Viagra, analgesics) have nothing to do with saving lives. If you're going to keep peddling this idea that pharmaceutical companies should be governed by different rules, please direct me to a system that works better for the patient interest. I think you have partly answered it yourself in the last line mind.

 

You don't believe the health industry is any different to....say.....the porn industry?

 

Oh ffs, have you got the Fop virus or something?

 

To answer your question. No. (proof in itself).

 

I don't see how, as someone working in the industry, you can think it's of no more importance than any other commercial enterprise, or shouldn't be overseen in a way that benefits humanity, which of course it does as it stands. I used a flippant example to contrast that.

 

The argument that phamaceuticals can only be force for good is flawed imo though. All the positives are great, but I still think they peddle over the counter drugs people don't need, with worse side effects that need treatments of their own to balance it out. Then there's anti-depressants for kids and that. But that's another story.

Edited November 28, 2008 by Happy Face