- 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
re: Goldman Sachs: Curing disease is bad for the Medical-Industrial Complex
Posted on 4/16/18 at 5:25 pm to High C
Posted on 4/16/18 at 5:25 pm to High C
quote:
On the other hand, people are already living too long, and world population will be unsustainable much more quickly if cures are found.
Don't worry, b/c of doctors who over prescribe antibiotics and self medicating idiots who buy them online then use them for ever little sore throat even though they aren't effective against viruses pretty soon we won't have anything to combat the guaranteed to happen super bacteria that will be the next great plague.
0
Posted on 4/16/18 at 5:38 pm to Jim Rockford
Good thing Most Physician’s don’t work for Goldman Sachs
Posted on 4/16/18 at 5:42 pm to Jim Rockford
General public - Goldman Sachs doing business is bad for America.
Posted on 4/16/18 at 5:43 pm to Jim Rockford
They keep making fancy drugs for self caused diseases like AIDS but no drug company will make medicine to help us innocent hangover sufferers
Posted on 4/16/18 at 5:48 pm to Jim Rockford
So it has been foretold...
deep rabbit hole...
Medicine / Health:
Unfortunately a lot of people who do good work in this area (cancer/age extension) are being assassinated.
You can see how it is classified as a national security concern even trivially. Obviously initial stages will expand geriatric population as a proportion of the whole before extending productive lifespan. This creates serious allocation issues in the current system.
—
We are not capable of significant extension of productive lifespan yet. If we stop largely stop death but don't restore vitality it will collapse society.
—
Not overpopulation.
The most promising avenues for life extension are turning back the clock on stem cell lines. We already have a pretty robust ability to do this, but it carries the burden of massively increased cancer risk.
The issue here is that we're in an intermediate stage of being able to prolong life, but not really restore vitality. Cancer cure has to be kept on the shelf otherwise you get a population skew even more heavily towards geriatrics than we have today.
—
Q: What was the big deal with medicating young children? Is it just unmitigated pharmaceutical greed leaking out into society, or is there something even more nefarious at play? ... Was it calculated to have some affect on this generation of adults?
Response:The more false ideas you inject in a young mind the harder it is for it to emerge as a conscious entity.
—
In about 25 years, aging will be 'cured' in practice: the life expectancy will go up >=1 year each year. There will still be unsolved problems, people will still die from trauma, heart attacks without rapid care, novel issues will develop both from unchartered age territory and unexpected consequences of some treatments.
>>80658855 #
Cancer cure in particular is controlled because most life extension technology has this as a side-effect.
It is much harder to extend functional life than to maintain a geriatric state.
—
Not quite, but close.
The most viable short-term techniques will involve a combination of the ability to cure malignant cancer with switching certain stem cell populations back on. Your youth and vitality are largely, not entirely, a function of more active germ lines in your youth that tend to shut down overtime. This protects you from cancer, but isn't necessary if we can provide the same protection via other means.
There are many other significant hurdles that remain to reach anything like a "fountain of youth" beyond this though.
—
Yes. It has been known for many years before cancer became a major problem that dealing with it was a key to extending human longevity. One of the reasons they spread cancer in society was to recruit funding for studying it.
—
Average person will benefit.
Part of the problem here is that wealth is concentrated in the old population and so a lot of R&D goes towards keeping them limping along rather than extending productive life of younger people.
You can't end up in a situation where your population trends towards 100% geriatrics without collapsing society.
Most important thing is to protect your mind. Physical ailments will go away in about 15-20 years
deep rabbit hole...
Medicine / Health:
Unfortunately a lot of people who do good work in this area (cancer/age extension) are being assassinated.
You can see how it is classified as a national security concern even trivially. Obviously initial stages will expand geriatric population as a proportion of the whole before extending productive lifespan. This creates serious allocation issues in the current system.
—
We are not capable of significant extension of productive lifespan yet. If we stop largely stop death but don't restore vitality it will collapse society.
—
Not overpopulation.
The most promising avenues for life extension are turning back the clock on stem cell lines. We already have a pretty robust ability to do this, but it carries the burden of massively increased cancer risk.
The issue here is that we're in an intermediate stage of being able to prolong life, but not really restore vitality. Cancer cure has to be kept on the shelf otherwise you get a population skew even more heavily towards geriatrics than we have today.
—
Q: What was the big deal with medicating young children? Is it just unmitigated pharmaceutical greed leaking out into society, or is there something even more nefarious at play? ... Was it calculated to have some affect on this generation of adults?
Response:The more false ideas you inject in a young mind the harder it is for it to emerge as a conscious entity.
—
In about 25 years, aging will be 'cured' in practice: the life expectancy will go up >=1 year each year. There will still be unsolved problems, people will still die from trauma, heart attacks without rapid care, novel issues will develop both from unchartered age territory and unexpected consequences of some treatments.
>>80658855 #
Cancer cure in particular is controlled because most life extension technology has this as a side-effect.
It is much harder to extend functional life than to maintain a geriatric state.
—
Not quite, but close.
The most viable short-term techniques will involve a combination of the ability to cure malignant cancer with switching certain stem cell populations back on. Your youth and vitality are largely, not entirely, a function of more active germ lines in your youth that tend to shut down overtime. This protects you from cancer, but isn't necessary if we can provide the same protection via other means.
There are many other significant hurdles that remain to reach anything like a "fountain of youth" beyond this though.
—
Yes. It has been known for many years before cancer became a major problem that dealing with it was a key to extending human longevity. One of the reasons they spread cancer in society was to recruit funding for studying it.
—
Average person will benefit.
Part of the problem here is that wealth is concentrated in the old population and so a lot of R&D goes towards keeping them limping along rather than extending productive life of younger people.
You can't end up in a situation where your population trends towards 100% geriatrics without collapsing society.
Most important thing is to protect your mind. Physical ailments will go away in about 15-20 years
Posted on 4/16/18 at 5:55 pm to Jim Rockford
There are abundant opportunities to make loads of cash in the med field without leaving people sick and dying.
Posted on 4/16/18 at 6:16 pm to YungFO
quote:
I think it's about time we put the overall health of humanity as a bigger concern than corporate well being.
I'll take what is emotional slogans that have no basis in reality for 500 Alex!
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:20 pm to Jim Rockford
oh noz they'll only have 4 billion in sales. Cry me a river
Life is more important than money. They've made plenty off the cure. Just start investing in curing other diseases now...there will be a never ending supply of diseases to cure
Life is more important than money. They've made plenty off the cure. Just start investing in curing other diseases now...there will be a never ending supply of diseases to cure
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:23 pm to East Coast Band
quote:
Just think if cancer is cured with a vaccine.
Look at all the billions that go into to cancer research, and cancer centers across America that would be effectively obsolete.
There will still be new cases every year and those will need to be cured.
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:26 pm to East Coast Band
I think they know how to better cure cancer but they'll never reveal it because they make so much money off the expensive chemo treatments
My grandfather who was a very well known doctor in Arkansas would tell me a lot about the problems in medicine. He was one of the good ones, always put the patient first and didn't care about the money. He was one of the best around and charged the least for his services...many times saved lives of people who couldn't afford the care they needed and he would just say pay what you can and let the rest of it go. I Respect the hell out of that man
My grandfather who was a very well known doctor in Arkansas would tell me a lot about the problems in medicine. He was one of the good ones, always put the patient first and didn't care about the money. He was one of the best around and charged the least for his services...many times saved lives of people who couldn't afford the care they needed and he would just say pay what you can and let the rest of it go. I Respect the hell out of that man
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:30 pm to High C
quote:
ONLY $4B this year. Poor things.
Gilead paid $11 billion for Pharmasset, the company that developed the Hep C cure. Profits from successful drugs have to bankroll all the disappointments and outright failures that are the frequent outcome of drug development, which is always hugely expensive, even when it works out.
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:31 pm to Jim Rockford
People who actually believe that someone is holding back on a “cure” for cancer for profits are absolutely nuts.
There are cancer vaccine trials at Sloan Kettering (and I’m sure at MD Anderson and other places) going on now. The news stories of “the guy who cured cancer but got killed by the government” is actually some jackass who did unscrupulous chealation therapy and other noneffective treatments who committed suicide when the governing bodies were investigating their quacky treatments.
There are cancer vaccine trials at Sloan Kettering (and I’m sure at MD Anderson and other places) going on now. The news stories of “the guy who cured cancer but got killed by the government” is actually some jackass who did unscrupulous chealation therapy and other noneffective treatments who committed suicide when the governing bodies were investigating their quacky treatments.
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:33 pm to OweO
But keep donating to cancer research and awareness.
Now you dumb fools will see that they don't want a cure. And having a small % of people getting cured don't mean shite. The majority of people will never be cured in our current pharmaceutical business model.
Now you dumb fools will see that they don't want a cure. And having a small % of people getting cured don't mean shite. The majority of people will never be cured in our current pharmaceutical business model.
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:35 pm to DawgGONIT
LOL
I love these threads. We get to see who the window licking loons are around here.
I love these threads. We get to see who the window licking loons are around here.
Posted on 4/16/18 at 7:44 pm to SeeeeK
Big pet peeve of mine. People talk about a cure for cancer like it’s sitting in a CIA warehouse somewhere. It’d like saying finding a cure for diseases caused by viruses. There’s a lot of ignorance influencing public opinion when it comes to med research
Posted on 4/17/18 at 10:40 am to Jcorye1
it's time to change reality you fossil
Posted on 4/17/18 at 10:49 am to Jim Rockford
And then when they develop a cure you will complain how much the cure costs. It’s simple math. I think this article is just pointing out that cures will cost more than chronic treatments.
If the company spends 1 billion dollars to find a genetic cure for a disease that affects 30,000 people like cystic fibrosis (not a crazy number for genetic engineering)
The cost is $33,333 per patient just for the company to break even
When they charge $50,000 for the cure you will say they are raping the public, only care about profits, and are pricing out poor people
If the company spends 1 billion dollars to find a genetic cure for a disease that affects 30,000 people like cystic fibrosis (not a crazy number for genetic engineering)
The cost is $33,333 per patient just for the company to break even
When they charge $50,000 for the cure you will say they are raping the public, only care about profits, and are pricing out poor people
This post was edited on 4/17/18 at 10:51 am
Posted on 4/17/18 at 10:54 am to Jim Rockford
which is why the medical complex should not be for profit.
Posted on 4/17/18 at 10:55 am to DawgGONIT
quote:
But keep donating to cancer research and awareness.
Now you dumb fools will see that they don't want a cure. And having a small % of people getting cured don't mean shite. The majority of people will never be cured in our current pharmaceutical business model.
Who is “they”?
Do you know how many independent researchers are trying to cure cancer?
And you can’t just lump cancer into 1 group. Every single cancer is completely different. Requires different drugs etc.
What we have now (chemo) is a very blunt instrument. Just like the first antibiotics. They could kill you just as easily as the bacteria could. It was slowly refined and now antibiotics are very selective and effective. The same will happen with cancer, but it’s more complicated because it’s our own cells not a foreign invader.
Since you know so much.... How long should it take to cure cancer?
Posted on 4/17/18 at 11:15 am to Jim Rockford
Who do you feel holds the keys to the kingdom exactly? Who are the ones that know of a cure or the path to that cure?
There are thousands upon thousands that not only work in these industries of treating patients but also have watched our loved ones die from the diseases we combat.
Just curious how prevalent you think that this "secret keeping" is in the healthcare field.
There are thousands upon thousands that not only work in these industries of treating patients but also have watched our loved ones die from the diseases we combat.
Just curious how prevalent you think that this "secret keeping" is in the healthcare field.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News