- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:28 am to BowDownToLSU
There is not a cure for cancer because cancer is not one disease. Cancer is essentially different for every organ, and each organ has different types of cancer. It isn’t one disease, it is thousands. And we have developed drugs for a lot of these. There is no conspiracy. Cancer sucks, and when you lose a loved one it is easy to focus that anger on someone else. I understand. I’ve been there. I agree that our healthcare and big pharma sucks, but not donating to cancer research is not the answer
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:31 am to GetCocky11
quote:
How dare they have a strict clinical trial process before giving approval.
Every drug ever recalled was first approved by the FDA.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:31 am to Hangover Haven
quote:this. Op left out the biggest culprit.
thank the FDA...
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:36 am to jgoodw318
Sorry to hear that Jake.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:37 am to jgoodw318
Somebody might have a few suggestions.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:38 am to jgoodw318
Your beef should be with the government which heavily regulates drugs and healthcare, artificially raising prices.
Chemo causes cancer. It may be a necessary evil but it sucks
Chemo causes cancer. It may be a necessary evil but it sucks
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:38 am to GetCocky11
quote:
How dare they have a strict clinical trial process before giving approval. That damn FDA...
Such a dumb fricking argument..."Muh research costs billionz"
Let's charge $15000/month so nobody can afford it! I'd rather have zero income then reduced income.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:44 am to flash
quote:
Cancer sucks, but his arrogance and refusal to undergo recommended protocol when first diagnosed hastened his demise.
Then replace than example with Sam Walton, had more money anyway
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:47 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
End of life in America is a fricking joke, anyone that has experienced that with a loved one will confirm.
This.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 9:48 am to jgoodw318
I don’t understand why there is a fence built around our country when it comes to medication.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:03 am to LSUsmartass
quote:
Such a dumb fricking argument..."Muh research costs billionz"
Let's charge $15000/month so nobody can afford it! I'd rather have zero income then reduced income.
Alternative: drug doesn't exist because its not economicly feasible and she's already dead
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:06 am to jgoodw318
Thank the Republican Party. They don’t give 2 shits about your aunt.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:09 am to jgoodw318
I feel you and it sucks, but not long ago you would just have to live with it and die sooner. I know that sounds cold, but these medicines took a shite ton of research and money.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:09 am to Mingo Was His NameO
So it's either 15k or nothing? What sort of niche are they targeting? The top 1%? How many out of that 1% requires their drugs? It's fricking dumb.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:18 am to LSUsmartass
quote:
So it's either 15k or nothing? What sort of niche are they targeting? The top 1%? How many out of that 1% requires their drugs? It's fricking dumb.
Start an ethical, not for profit pharmaceutical company and let me know how it goes.
It's terrible, I know, but what's the alternative?
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:20 am to LSUsmartass
quote:
So it's either 15k or nothing? What sort of niche are they targeting? The top 1%? How many out of that 1% requires their drugs? It's fricking dumb
You obviously don't understand simple economics. They aren't "targeting" anyone, but if only a few thousand people require the drug per year and you spend $500 million to develop it, it has to be expensive to cover the cost. Alternatively, if it were like ibuprofen and millions used it it would be a hell of a lot cheaper.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:22 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
if only a few thousand people require the drug per year and you spend $500 million to develop it
Cost-benefit analysis tells me that it would never have been developed
Stop trying to act smart
This post was edited on 10/20/18 at 11:34 am
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:28 am to jgoodw318
F the environment, F health, F veterans’ benefits — Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and their families have full health coverage, you can be sure. They don’t give a shite about your’s. And yet working class whites continue to vote against their own self-interest and vote for these assholes. You can’t fix STUPID.
Posted on 10/20/18 at 10:30 am to jgoodw318
quote:
Yesterday we found out that her insurance would no longer pay for the drug that she needs to sustain her life. This drug costs $15,000 a month. My aunt is a high school teacher and an employee of the state of Arkansas. Her insurance company, provided by the state, and the state have both pretty much told her tough shite.
I thought Obamacare made this illegal. And how does a state employee get their insurance not to pay for medicine.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News