• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Tuesday Aug 19, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST (date has been pushed). This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Sherdog POTWR: Round 2: The Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
How does the idea that the medical field, and especially big pharma are more interested in return customers than finding cures figure into your idea? I get the feeling you're talking about mundane medical issues rather than finding cures for diseases, as well as the medical field as a whole, but the question should fit into the "for profit" model discussion.

And no, I'm not talking about some grand conspiracy, but as with lightbulbs it makes sense to have a return customer base in a profit oriented business.

If we went completely free market, big pharma would focus on the type of drugs that are actually needed and that people could pay for. If a pharma company wanted to make money they'd have to develop drugs where there was a willing market and for-profit insurance companies would be incentivized to place pressure on the development of cures over treatment since treatment would cost them more money.

There would still be university research.

Under a complete government model, the government would simply allocate a certain amount of money to pay for a cure to X. If you develop the cure first then you get paid, if you don't...you don't.
 
If we went completely free market, big pharma would focus on the type of drugs that are actually needed and that people could pay for. If a pharma company wanted to make money they'd have to develop drugs where there was a willing market and for-profit insurance companies would be incentivized to place pressure on the development of cures over treatment since treatment would cost them more money.

There would still be university research.

Under a complete government model, the government would simply allocate a certain amount of money to pay for a cure to X. If you develop the cure first then you get paid, if you don't...you don't.

The research issue is certainly a complicated one, but I am afraid that it must be considered in isolation of the rest.

Because what do you do with poor people with no coverage that need expensive treatment ?

Do you just send them home ?
 
I cant regularly post due to internet issues, but me and the Secret Muslims are following this election closely. Is it too late to be added as a citizen @Lead ?
 
Well, Jack is not part of the Right wing echo chamber group that likes to start shit threads and then fallate each other.
Yea hes just part of the left that starts shit post and then fingers each others butthole, and then smells it. That's why you guys dont have as many likes, your fingers are too occupied to hit the like button.
 
I'm going to have to politely express my utter disdain for this comment.

There is no better way to make the War Room great than to elect greatness. As the purest embodiment of that characteristic, I am the best choice for President.

In fact, I suspect that my greatness is so...well, great...that some of it will even trickle down to the proletariat. My success actually makes other posters better.
You will do great as long as you focus on finance and stay away from social issues.
 
I cant regularly post due to internet issues, but me and the Secret Muslims are following this election closely. Is it too late to be added as a citizen @Lead ?

I definitely messed up on this one. Everything is locked after round 1. I can be sure you are on next year for sure. You also can still ask candidates questions / endorse ect.
 
Yea hes just part of the left that starts shit post and then fingers each others butthole, and then smells it. That's why you guys dont have as many likes, your fingers are too occupied to hit the like button.

I've been sitting here trying to decide how to come back against this post and I'm having a hard time. It's not like your post was cleaver in anyway, I've heard middle school kids throw more vulgar and nuanced insults at each other. It does have a tinge of coprophilia running trough it. Yes, I know you will have to look that up, but it will be good for you.

No, the reason I think I'm having a hard time responding is simply because this was so lacking in effort or thought I really don't care.
 
How does the idea that the medical field, and especially big pharma are more interested in return customers than finding cures figure into your idea? I get the feeling you're talking about mundane medical issues rather than finding cures for diseases, as well as the medical field as a whole, but the question should fit into the "for profit" model discussion.

And no, I'm not talking about some grand conspiracy, but as with lightbulbs it makes sense to have a return customer base in a profit oriented business.
Is that really the case with big pharmacy, though? The problem with finding cures for diseases is fully understanding the the causes, identifying them, and being able to single them out. Research aims to sort this out, but saying it isn't an easy task is an understatement.

For may diseases they're poorly understood. For others, the pathophysiology of the disease makes it next to impossible to cure with a pill or simple procedure--things like organ dysfunction (diabetes, thyroid conditions, heart failure, etc) and autoimmune disorders. In the case of the latter, for example, a cure at this point would entail hitting the reset button on the immune system, the risk of which heavily outweighs the benefits. In the case of things like cancer, the benefits of this type of therapy most often outweigh the risks.

In things viral illnesses, the pharmaceuticals have focused on vaccines for prevention, which isn't really based on a return customer model. They are also still working on crazy methods to cure some of these viruses like HIV--things like introducing man-made viruses that target HIV in the body. While I'm not up to speed with the most recent advances, I know efforts in the past have failed spectacularly.

I have lots of gripes with big pharm, but I'd say one of the biggest flaws with the for profit model is addressing diseases that almost exclusively affect poverty stricken countries. I wouldn't imagine that creating a vaccine or cure for malaria, for example, would be nearly as profitable as creating a vaccine for herpes, which also affects people in more affluent countries.
 
Is that really the case with big pharmacy, though? The problem with finding cures for diseases is fully understanding the the causes, identifying them, and being able to single them out. Research aims to sort this out, but saying it isn't an easy task is an understatement.

For may diseases they're poorly understood. For others, the pathophysiology of the disease makes it next to impossible to cure with a pill or simple procedure--things like organ dysfunction (diabetes, thyroid conditions, heart failure, etc) and autoimmune disorders. In the case of the latter, for example, a cure at this point would entail hitting the reset button on the immune system, the risk of which heavily outweighs the benefits. In the case of things like cancer, the benefits of this type of therapy most often outweigh the risks.

In things viral illnesses, the pharmaceuticals have focused on vaccines for prevention, which isn't really based on a return customer model. They are also still working on crazy methods to cure some of these viruses like HIV--things like introducing man-made viruses that target HIV in the body. While I'm not up to speed with the most recent advances, I know efforts in the past have failed spectacularly.

I have lots of gripes with big pharm, but I'd say one of the biggest flaws with the for profit model is addressing diseases that almost exclusively affect poverty stricken countries. I wouldn't imagine that creating a vaccine or cure for malaria, for example, would be nearly as profitable as creating a vaccine for herpes, which also affects people in more affluent countries.

The problem is also the need to develop new antibiotics to fight resistant bacteria. The issue is that while these are needed they will also not be widely used save for the cases nothing else works. So it would cost millions to dollars to develop these antibiotics but very little would be produced and used. Meaning the companies could never make a profit on them.
 
The problem is also the need to develop new antibiotics to fight resistant bacteria. The issue is that while these are needed they will also not be widely used save for the cases nothing else works. So it would cost millions to dollars to develop these antibiotics but very little would be produced and used. Meaning the companies could never make a profit on them.
This may surprise you as much as it does me--but we agree. :eek:

Hospitals are going into overdrive trying to limit antibiotic use to delay the inevitable, but I still notice docs throwing fluoroquinolones at every urinalysis they see with any white cells or bacterial growth.

Thank god I got married before antibiotic resistant gonorrhea hit the market. <cheer>
 
Last edited:
Thand god I got married before bacterial resistant gonorrhea hit the market. <cheer>

giphy.gif
 
I definitely messed up on this one. Everything is locked after round 1. I can be sure you are on next year for sure. You also can still ask candidates questions / endorse ect.

No worries. Thanks for all your work on this, it's a cool idea.
 
When our country had a choice to either make America great again or hand it over to the most corrupt, treasonous, war mongering, wall street owned satanic :eek::eek::eek::eek: is political history...Overpressure chose the satanic :eek::eek::eek::eek:.

I cannot vote for him in good conscious.
The @Palis /Dr J ticket was vehemently anti-satanic treasonous :eek::eek::eek::eek:. We would welcome your vote and support, which can both be done with a clean conscious. Our platform is clearly laid out in this thread, more so than any other candidate.

@Palis /Dr J 2016
 
The research issue is certainly a complicated one, but I am afraid that it must be considered in isolation of the rest.

Because what do you do with poor people with no coverage that need expensive treatment ?

Do you just send them home ?

I think you have to decide in advance how you feel about that because it can't be split.

Either you allow government to intervene to ensure the treatment of the poor which, imo, eventually leads to some variation of single payer. Or you accept that poor people will generally live miserable lives and/or die due to the lack of access to healthcare and let the market dictate who gets covered.

Trying to force the market to cover poor people will never work because the market isn't motivated by to give poor people something they can't afford.
 
This may surprise you as much as it does me--but we agree. :eek:

Hospitals are going into overdrive trying to limit antibiotic use to delay the inevitable, but I still notice docs throwing fluoroquinolones at every urinalysis they see with any white cells or bacterial growth.

Thand god I got married before bacterial resistant gonorrhea hit the market. <cheer>
Bacterial resistant?
 
I cant regularly post due to internet issues, but me and the Secret Muslims are following this election closely. Is it too late to be added as a citizen @Lead ?

I definitely messed up on this one. Everything is locked after round 1. I can be sure you are on next year for sure. You also can still ask candidates questions / endorse ect.
1DOVaMC.gif
 
I think you have to decide in advance how you feel about that because it can't be split.

Either you allow government to intervene to ensure the treatment of the poor which, imo, eventually leads to some variation of single payer. Or you accept that poor people will generally live miserable lives and/or die due to the lack of access to healthcare and let the market dictate who gets covered.

Trying to force the market to cover poor people will never work because the market isn't motivated by to give poor people something they can't afford.
I suppose in a free market model the government could still subsidize or provide tax incentives for less profitable research. I also think if we turned towards a free market model for all of healthcare, UBI should enter the conversation. And government might play a role in a more affordable catastrophic type of insurance.
Once UBI is in the picture we might as well go the full monty and look at eliminating a lot of the government influence in education as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top