• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Brazil has 129 swineflu deaths

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    84% return? That is a lot. How do you work that out?
    Jeez everyone would be in pharma if that was true

    I'm guessing Alf, that business is not your strong point.
    BigPharma is the most profitable business in the World - why do you think Rumsfield is very much on this game - he switched from selling Weapons to Saddam to becoming a Medicene Man .

    You dont have to be a Havard graduate to understand why - its such a lucrative business and its the way to go if you want to earn a BIG FAST BUCK ... if you cant see whats behind this racket of Swine Flu then you have a lot less business acumen than I have.


    The argument in defence of this system offered by Big Pharma is simple, and sounds reasonable at first: we need to charge large sums for "our" drugs so we can develop more life-saving medicines. We want to develop as many treatments as we can, and we can only do that if we have revenue. A lot of the research we back doesn't result in a marketable drug, so it's an expensive process.

    But a detailed study by Dr Marcia Angell, the former editor of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, says that only 14 per cent of their budgets go on developing drugs – usually at the uncreative final part of the drug-trail. The rest goes on marketing and profits. And even with that puny 14 per cent, drug companies squander a fortune developing "me-too" drugs – medicines that do exactly the same job as a drug that already exists, but has one molecule different, so they can take out a new patent, and receive another avalanche of profits.
    Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 5 August 2009, 12:00.

    Comment


      #22
      And to show you the kind of caring business that BigPharma is - get a load of this - after which ask yourself - can I ever trust these Government Approved Pushers ??



      Although it's not the goal of the individuals working within the system, the outcome is often deadly.

      The drug companies who owned the patent for Aids drugs went to court to stop the post-Apartheid government of South Africa producing generic copies of it – which are just as effective – for $100 a year to save their dying citizens.

      They wanted them to pay the full $10,000 a year to buy the branded version – or nothing. In the poor world, the patenting system every day puts medicines beyond the reach of sick people.
      Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 5 August 2009, 12:10.

      Comment


        #23
        Sorry Alf, I spent most of my career in Big Pharma clinical trials. And while they're not saints, they're not demons either.

        Fact: Without big Pharma your life expectancy would be about 20 years less.

        Also you didn't really explain the 84% return figure.
        Hard Brexit now!
        #prayfornodeal

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by sasguru View Post
          Sorry Alf, I spent most of my career in Big Pharma clinical trials.
          So folks, it appears they've hooked the lab rat's nerve system to a keyboard simulator and just logged it onto here.

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by Old Greg View Post
            So folks, it appears they've hooked the lab rat's nerve system to a keyboard simulator and just logged it onto here.
            It's not a bad life.
            Hard Brexit now!
            #prayfornodeal

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by sasguru View Post
              Sorry Alf, I spent most of my career in Big Pharma clinical trials. And while they're not saints, they're not demons either.

              Fact: Without big Pharma your life expectancy would be about 20 years less.

              Also you didn't really explain the 84% return figure.

              Fact: Without big Pharma your life expectancy would be about 20 years less.

              Can you show me the evidence to back this up ?

              By the way Im almost 50 and have never, in my life - taken prescription , anti-biotic or commercial over the counter BigPharma drugs .

              My mother was a nurse and she saw the damage that BigPharma can do, even Death in some cases - I was warned against BigPharma's products from an early age.

              So Ive just let my own immune system deal with illness - or use natural remedies - for example a couple if years ago I was suffering from a lot of stomach-wind - a very unpleasant condition - this was resolved quickly by taking natural Charcol tablets from the chemist - carbon neutralised the acidic condition very rapildly.

              BigPharma must hate people like me - they cant wrangle money out of me !
              Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 5 August 2009, 13:24.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock View Post
                BigPharma must hate people like me - they cant wrangle money out of me !
                Goody for you - lets hope you don't get diabetes or hypertension or suchlike anytime soon.
                In the old days diabetes (which is very prevalent) meant you would die at 40, now you have your normal lifespan - thanks to pharma.
                Pharma is the only reason average lifespans are increasing (at least in the West) in spite of worse diet and more drinking than in the 30s/40s/50s.

                Don't confuse you lucky health situation with that faced by the masses.
                Hard Brexit now!
                #prayfornodeal

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by sasguru View Post
                  Goody for you - lets hope you don't get diabetes or hypertension or suchlike anytime soon.
                  In the old days diabetes (which is very prevalent) meant you would die at 40, now you have your normal lifespan - thanks to pharma.
                  Pharma is the only reason average lifespans are increasing (at least in the West) in spite of worse diet and more drinking than in the 30s/40s/50s.

                  Don't confuse you lucky health situation with that faced by the masses.
                  Binge drinking is going to drastically shorten the lives of many UK teenagers - many whom will not live to see 30.

                  Shocking.

                  As for my rude health - well true wealth is health - blow that and you've lost everything.
                  Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 5 August 2009, 14:22.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock View Post
                    Binge drinking is going to drastically shorten the lives of many UK teenagers - many whom will not live to see 30.

                    Shocking.

                    As for my rude health - well true wealth is health - blow that and you've lost everything.

                    WHS !!

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Eeeh! Swine flu again. Have I mentioned wasps recently? And jam?
                      bloggoth

                      If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
                      John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X