The Ice Bucket thread (2 Viewers)

[washingcattle]

Should pharmaceutical companies have to pay for everything for a given disease because they make money off treatments for that disease?

Yes.

 

[washingcattle]

SOLUTION:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Collected from his various toilets around his house ? Hmmmmm.

 

[pete]

Collected from his various toilets around his house ? Hmmmmm.

i'd imagine he lives in something larger than a 3 bed semi, most of which would have 3 bogs these days

 

[nooleen]

You could argue that charity funded research is better because it's not driven by shareholders. Also, the charities work with patient care and education and not just research. Should pharmaceutical companies have to pay for everything for a given disease because they make money off treatments for that disease? There's definitely room for huge improvements in how the pharmaceutical industry works but there's a lot more to funding care for these illnesses than just how much drugs cost to develop and manufacture versus how much profit the companies make. Plus there is only one drug available to slow the progression of ALS, so should the company responsible for developing this drug pay for all patient care?

fair enough, i didn't think of the care aspect - but then crowdfunding healthcare seems even more ridiculous than crowdfunding research.

especially since 'socialised health care' is anathema in the US--but there then has to be a global whip-round to pay for the care of sick people.

edit: basically a lot of people need to cop on and i have many, many half-baked ideas about how that should happen

 

[ann post]

Right.
I meant more that it was ever called that at all is an indication of how brutal it must be.

Fothergill's disease sounds like what they'd call a yeast infection in a Jane Austen book.[/Q

Well it is sorta brutal in fairness. They used to do all sorts. Shock treatment and cutting out bits and leeches and stuff. Medicine used to be mental. Just need to make spliffs legal for me an i'll be grand.

 

[ann post]

i don't understand why charities need to crowdfund disease research when there's a multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry

We come up against this a fair bit.

Our disease is scarcely profitable enough for a multinational to consider curing. Its a bit like politics. Do they want to cure them, or keep them loyal to a brand? If you want to cure things you sorta need to step outside the ruthless profit based model for long enough to think about it.

 

[nooleen]

Just need to make spliffs legal for me an i'll be grand.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[nooleen]

We come up against this a fair bit.

Our disease is scarcely profitable enough for a multinational to consider curing. Its a bit like politics. Do they want to cure them, or keep them loyal to a brand? If you want to cure things you sorta need to step outside the ruthless profit based model for long enough to think about it.

that's where my all-encompassing suggestion of 'everyone needs to stop being pricks' comes in

i've put very little thought into it but i'm immensely proud of it, so i feel those two aspects balance out

 

[washingcattle]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Is every second person in Cork named Sean Lynch ?

 

[Cornu Ammonis]

Yes.

And should doctors, nurses, radiologists, phlebotomists, etc. start paying for patients' drugs because they make money from treating those patients? Should I start paying for all the treatment and drugs because I make money from researching diseases like ALS? What about other parts of the medical industry? The guys who make the beds? The companies who make and maintain the machinery? The architects who design the hospitals? Why is it purely the pharmaceutical industry that's supposed to cough up all the money?

 

[Cormcolash]

I got nominated for this thing yesterday, but I got pissed on by rain for an hour and a half playing football on Sunday, so I did that instead.
Also, I don't feel like pouring a bucket of water over myself, because it's fucking stupid.

 

[washingcattle]

And should doctors, nurses, radiologists, phlebotomists, etc. start paying for patients' drugs because they make money from treating those patients? Should I start paying for all the treatment and drugs because I make money from researching diseases like ALS? What about other parts of the medical industry? The guys who make the beds? The companies who make and maintain the machinery? The architects who design the hospitals? Why is it purely the pharmaceutical industry that's supposed to cough up all the money?

No, and all that is pretty obvious.

The pharmaceutical industry makes the biggest profit so yes making money off peoples diseases begs the question of wether or not a capitalist corporation has a vested interest in holding on to it's customers. From a purely moral standpoint, and not a financial one yes it makes sense that a company which makes staggering profits of selling drugs to treat diseases should also spend it's money on other less profitable aspects of that diseases treatment. In a way what we have with drug companies is a situation where they build the car and expect someone else to pay for the seats and the seat-belts. The idea that health care should be profitable is somewhat staggering to me and the difference between doctors, and hospitals and drug companies is that doctors and hospitals have a code of conduct and deal with people therefore there is a moral obligation on them to do their best for their patients. Drug companies have no such code of conduct and are entirely capitalist economic enterprises.

I can already tell by the tone of your post and the oversimplification of the issue that we're not going to agree on this at all so i'm not bothered going down a long back and forth on the subject. All I'm going to say that if drug companies put a reasonable amount of their profits from selling drugs to treat AIDS and HIV into education in the third world during the 90's the world would be a very different place for an awful lot of people.

 

[pete]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[nooleen]

Rubble Bucket Challenge: Ice Bucket Challenge adapted in solidarity with Gazans whose homes have been destroyed in conflict - Middle East - World - The Independent

 

[nooleen]

watch til the end

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

watch til the end

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Good stuff

Lollies if you're good

 

[Cornu Ammonis]

No, and all that is pretty obvious.

The pharmaceutical industry makes the biggest profit so yes making money off peoples diseases begs the question of wether or not a capitalist corporation has a vested interest in holding on to it's customers. From a purely moral standpoint, and not a financial one yes it makes sense that a company which makes staggering profits of selling drugs to treat diseases should also spend it's money on other less profitable aspects of that diseases treatment. In a way what we have with drug companies is a situation where they build the car and expect someone else to pay for the seats and the seat-belts. The idea that health care should be profitable is somewhat staggering to me and the difference between doctors, and hospitals and drug companies is that doctors and hospitals have a code of conduct and deal with people therefore there is a moral obligation on them to do their best for their patients. Drug companies have no such code of conduct and are entirely capitalist economic enterprises.

And medical instrument and device manufacturers? They're exactly like the pharmaceutical industry in that they make things to treat/help people and make huge profits but never get blamed for anything. You never hear arguments like "Oh those MRI manufacturers, charging millions per machine and thousands for maintenance but never putting money into cancer. It's all just a swizz to keep doctors usingb scanners!" or whatever.

I can already tell by the tone of your post and the oversimplification of the issue that we're not going to agree on this at all so i'm not bothered going down a long back and forth on the subject. All I'm going to say that if drug companies put a reasonable amount of their profits from selling drugs to treat AIDS and HIV into education in the third world during the 90's the world would be a very different place for an awful lot of people.

Actually I mostly agree with you but love to watch you rant. You're like a guy I play football with, if you deliberately wind him up, he gets so worked up and goes and scores a hat trick out of frustration.

 

[David Kronenbourg]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[magicbastarder]

am i the only person wondering how an organisation like MND ireland deal with an influx of cash which is probably more than all other funds they've ever raised in their history?

 

[nooleen]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies