Cures and Capitalisim

[Alex K]

While pharma corporations are as bad as any corporation, I don't find this conspiracy theory credible, at least not as taking place on a large scale. The scientists working for them are ordinary people with families and values, after all, not some shady impersonal robots. Also, a company inventing a cure say for HIV would make such an insane amount of money from that, they'd do that and then move on to something else. It's not like there aren't plenty of diseases left. Also, enough diseases have been eradicated and cured by pharmacological products. That being said, no, we can't trust pharma corporations to do what's best for mankind, they need to be strictly regulated and receive strong incentives to do what's right.

[Cato]

But why would they cure cancer for a low cost when they could treat it for somones whole life at a high cost and cash of more money from it.

This is all a bit conspiratorial. The IP laws in the U.S., and in most other places, protect those that are first to market. Anyone producing a cure for cancer would make a windfall. Most of the cost associated with treating cancer is in services, not drugs, so it would take a bit of collusion to enact it.

Another aspect of your cancer scenario that falls flat is the idea of treating it for 'someone's whole life'. 'Whole life' isn't that long for most cancer patients. Far better to cure the cancer and then bilk them for the other 100 prescriptions they'll need when they become octogenarians. Not to mention that the conspiracy would have to include all other pharmaceutical companies and universities globally actively conducting research in this endeavor. Doesn't make much sense.

There's also a $1M check (Nobel) and prestige of having been the one to have discovered a cure for cancer.

[paulpablo]

While pharma corporations are as bad as any corporation, I don't find this conspiracy theory credible, at least not as taking place on a large scale. The scientists working for them are ordinary people with families and values, after all, not some shady impersonal robots. Also, a company inventing a cure say for HIV would make such an insane amount of money from that, they'd do that and then move on to something else. It's not like there aren't plenty of diseases left. Also, enough diseases have been eradicated and cured by pharmacological products. That being said, no, we can't trust pharma corporations to do what's best for mankind, they need to be strictly regulated.

I agree with the bit about people with values but would a cure for HIV make a company rich?

Wouldn't they be ethically inclined to pass on the info of the cure to every medical facility over the world for little cost?

This isn't a rhetorical question I genuinely don't know how the cure business works.

[ScienceAf]

But why would they cure cancer for a low cost when they could treat it for somones whole life at a high cost and cash of more money from it.

Reasons of empathy, wanting to gain a heroic reputation, nobel prizes and so on.

From how I imagine cancer research works, they probably have a lot of scientific minds on the job, the more people you have the less likely it is that they're all going to be able to keep a secret.

So another question I would ask is do you think it's realistic for large communities of scientists to know the cure for cancer but keep it a secret to earn money, without anyone letting the secret slip say for money, or fame, or the heroic status they will get?

Plus in places like England where I live the treatments they have for cancer do sometimes save people's lives from cancer, so then surely these treatments that save people's lives wouldn't exist if this conspiracy theory were true?

Those are my thoughts anyway.

No i don't think its exactly easy to hide it but maybe there's some people on the inside or what ever.

Eitherway if it was possible maybe they would be hiding it for a while till the cures get leaked somhow.

[ScienceAf]

While pharma corporations are as bad as any corporation, I don't find this conspiracy theory credible, at least not as taking place on a large scale. The scientists working for them are ordinary people with families and values, after all, not some shady impersonal robots. Also, a company inventing a cure say for HIV would make such an insane amount of money from that, they'd do that and then move on to something else. It's not like there aren't plenty of diseases left. Also, enough diseases have been eradicated and cured by pharmacological products. That being said, no, we can't trust pharma corporations to do what's best for mankind, they need to be strictly regulated and receive strong incentives to do what's right.

Good point.

[paulpablo]

Reasons of empathy, wanting to gain a heroic reputation, nobel prizes and so on.

From how I imagine cancer research works, they probably have a lot of scientific minds on the job, the more people you have the less likely it is that they're all going to be able to keep a secret.

So another question I would ask is do you think it's realistic for large communities of scientists to know the cure for cancer but keep it a secret to earn money, without anyone letting the secret slip say for money, or fame, or the heroic status they will get?

Plus in places like England where I live the treatments they have for cancer do sometimes save people's lives from cancer, so then surely these treatments that save people's lives wouldn't exist if this conspiracy theory were true?

Those are my thoughts anyway.

No i don't think its exactly easy to hide it but maybe there's some people on the inside or what ever.

Eitherway if it was possible maybe they would be hiding it for a while till the cures get leaked somhow.

I'd agree to just make 1 million in profit for a cure for HIV and all I'd ask is that a statue of me be erected in several major cities in the world.

It has to be bronze. sheltered from pigeon shit and I'm dressed like a roman gladiator, symbolically fighting HIV.

[Alex K]

While pharma corporations are as bad as any corporation, I don't find this conspiracy theory credible, at least not as taking place on a large scale. The scientists working for them are ordinary people with families and values, after all, not some shady impersonal robots. Also, a company inventing a cure say for HIV would make such an insane amount of money from that, they'd do that and then move on to something else. It's not like there aren't plenty of diseases left. Also, enough diseases have been eradicated and cured by pharmacological products. That being said, no, we can't trust pharma corporations to do what's best for mankind, they need to be strictly regulated.

I agree with the bit about people with values but would a cure for HIV make a company rich?

Wouldn't they be ethically inclined to pass on the info of the cure to every medical facility over the world for little cost?

This isn't a rhetorical question I genuinely don't know how the cure business works.

I'm not an expert, but would the situation for a cure for XY be much different from, say, how vaccines are sold?

[ScienceAf]

No i don't think its exactly easy to hide it but maybe there's some people on the inside or what ever.

Eitherway if it was possible maybe they would be hiding it for a while till the cures get leaked somhow.

I'd agree to just make 1 million in profit for a cure for HIV and all I'd ask is that a statue of me be erected in several major cities in the world.

It has to be bronze. sheltered from pigeon shit and I'm dressed like a roman gladiator, symbolically fighting

If I got a statue of me erected it would be one made out gold and dressed like a pharmacist counting pills.

[Excited Penguin]

Those fucking pharmacists and their pill counting, man, I tell you.

[paulpablo]

I agree with the bit about people with values but would a cure for HIV make a company rich?

Wouldn't they be ethically inclined to pass on the info of the cure to every medical facility over the world for little cost?

This isn't a rhetorical question I genuinely don't know how the cure business works.

I'm not an expert, but would the situation for a cure for XY be much different from, say, how vaccines are sold?

I've never thought about how vaccines are sold since I've never had one that wasn't free or at least subsidized. But yes you're most likely right.