Ok, so you're saying:

no health insurance
no pharmaceuticals
no doctors?

I'm mean, some kind of plan about of how this works would be helpful.

No health insurance is perfectly doable.

Im talking about the pharmas.

How? Like they did in china or india I imagine.

There is a deadly pandemic and you need vaccines?

They better make it and make it quick! and without biching around and sitting on sctechy patents and letting other nations die. (patents that they actually have no right to own anyways bc it was all state funded research.)

We let the donkey become the garndener. You wouldtnt let epstein or cosby take care of your children, would you? Thats what we did here.

We delegated power to the most sketchy companies who are known to f around with us. We should have made them do it under supervision.

I dont agree. Both left and right have a sizable element that dont trust science at all. Plenty on the left who are into homepathy, anti-vax, anti-GM, anti-chemcials etc etc. They dont trust science anymore than the creationists do, Only when it suits.

I'd agree this is a mega massive problem.

Edit: I'm not at all convinced that a random non vaxed person in th UK is right wing. If anyhting I'd bet they are disproportionally left of center. Possibly significantly so.

This is like the intro to a left wing manifesto

Yea washoe attacks the left then repeatedly takes left wing positions is one of the wonders of this thread.

This issue was first burned into my head back in the 70's when 60 Minutes (I think it was 60 Minutes) released a bomb shell investigation into Big Pharma, and released a bunch of internal "confidential" big Pharma documents they had got their hands on.

The crux of the episode, which should not shock anyone, was that Big Pharma was colluding behind the scenes to attempt to identify areas in which they could influence the medical science and the Professionals to start proscribing more "Preventative Medicines to people" as Big Pharma had determined that "Preventative Medicine was the Future and key to their increasing profits".


The documents spelled out clearly that the main learnings came from Listerine, which was considered an over the counter medicinal product and became Big Pharma's first Billion dollar seller in that area. The key was not in getting people to treat bad breath but to treat the fear of bad breath PREVENTATIVELY so you were not turning off your work colleagues or romantic partners with bad breath.

From those learnings Big Pharma had extensive blue prints of items they deemed would be susceptible to the same type of claims and marketing that you needed to take this to Prevent future issues and not because you had an issue.

It was a huge swing for medicine which prior was seen mainly as something only the already afflicted or sick took as treatment.

If maybe 10% of the populace is sick at any one time that is all you are treating. But 100% of people can be argued to need to take XYZ 'Preventatively".

What really stuck with me was the blue prints were not just on things like Listerine (mostly harmless) but Big Pharma had all of their current Big Med's mapped out and how getting 'safe levels' changed slightly would impact their profits.

So if X is considered safe for Blood Pressure, Diabetes levels, or other key areas where Dr's recommend and proscribe med's then getting the industry to shift it slightly lower just means a whole bunch of people who were told they were 'OK yesterday and do not need med's' suddenly are not ok and 'do need meds'.

They interviewed a Dr who was talking about recent Blood Pressure changes at that time and how the 'guidance had just changed as to what was a healthy level' and how that required him to recommend ongoing medications to patients who he told the day before they were perfectly healthy. He spoke to how he could lose his license if he did not, as it would be seen as negligent since they were now considered in the danger zone.


What he was not saying, AND LETS BE CLEAR ON THAT, is that the change in science was wrong. It absolutely could be well founded and correct. But that does not mean we should not be rightly skeptical.

Changes to Blood Pressure levels was a key target for Big Pharma. Not only did they have all the profits mapped out with each degree of change, they also had mapped out the percent of people who would have serious side effects and thus require secondary meds to manage them and the increase in those profits. A double win for Big Pharma as they got a person who was not considered sick prior to take meds and now they had them legitimately sick (side effect) and requiring more meds. So a non client becomes a double client. they got that change but also had more incremental changes they would push in the future to keep inching it downward and thus obligating more and more people to take meds.

But again (and saying this specifically to you Washoe) you cannot just then assume the science big Pharma buys is wrong. It could be correct.

The issue is with us as a society discouraging skepticism, which is needed to challenge these things and with somehow finding a way to build a fire wall between corporate donations and Universities and other Scientific Researchers.

The law should require any and all science that is influenced in ANY WAY by corporate money at any level to give clear disclosure of exactly what that influence is, and for examiners to put a special level of independent diligence on any such 'corporate touched' research.

without that, the future does in fact, look very bleak for everyone as prescriptions for more and more FUTURE ailments will be pushed.

I didn't say it wasn't, but you'll have to explain how a $300K surgery becomes affordable for most Americans who need one or what happens in ICU after a car wreck and family members can't sell a house to pay the bill and how this all plays out. The doctors and surgeons that I personally know are not going to slash their prices by 90%.

Not sure what you're yapping about. You are free to not take any vaccines; in fact, I know several people who have not.

Interesting.

I live in Canada but have two businesses in the US I am involved with.

I don't delve into peoples vax decisions but it is often offered up. I do not know a lot of anti vaxxers but 100% of the ones I know of tend to be more right wing in their leanings.

I know prior to Trump there were probably a lot more hippie type, natural remedy left leaners, but today I think it is dominated by right leaning derps who really have no issue other than the culture war positioning.

good post, I know about listerine etc. From that point it all went south. Or even before that there were scandals. Humans and corporations what do we expect?

Thats just common sense imo, has nothng to do with left wing. Its the pseudo crazy leftists that mess everything up.

Im not free, I get forced indirectly. I couldnt travel nationally, couldnt even sit in a restaurant or go shopping not even take a train.

now I cant travel internationally without vaxx.

I don't know how deep the rot goes.

That is not so much my issue. It might be more surface or it might run deep.

My concern is what Queens Uni article and the other articles say that we increasingly will not be able to see the rot nor be aware of its existence. So that means we can only really HOPE it does not run deep.

Increasingly Corporate money is outpacing if not replacing the money given to Uni's and Labs and bodies like the FDA, to research and author their studies. A key necessity for their credibly and standing. They must initiate and author research.


Gov'ts are increasingly happy to step down and allow corporate money to carry the burden.

Corporate money can have immense direct and indirect pressure. It can push institutions to look at certain things while not looking at others. To question certain things while turning a blind eye to others.

If you accept all of that and you accept that corporate influence is only moving in one direction and that is 'increasing', then we are left largely to count on 'good will' of the corporations such that they will allow reporting on things that are adverse to their profit interests.

But we can already see that is not the case, as Uni's and other Institutions report increasingly that they know they and the Institutions will be sued relentless by by Pharma if they post even hosnet skepticism to things they get published. Uni's cannot afford these big ligitiation, even in a win, and so increasingly just do not want their faculties to go there. That is hugely dangerous. That even legit critique is being silenced.

and I disagree that we need as clear or specific as you seem to want as that would seem to require we be more akin to experts in these areas of be silent on forums like this. I hold the opposite view and think it is because people like us (the non experts) are mostly silent that makes the experts less likely to raise the issue and face the risk, if they think the masses do not care. As I said at the start, I posted this data before and no one really cared to discuss it, and I find that concerning when I am quoting professionals stating their concerns. As I think they will be less likely to state them if they see them met with silence after but they now face a lawsuit.

Can you share the article?

Done a few times already.

First citation in post 67.

+1 (with one caveat)

My only caveat to my "+1" is that I don't agree that "You are you own best doctor", any more than I would agree with "You are your own best plumber."

#metoo

I noticed people who use the term "libtard" in Forums are usually the same folks who TYPE HALF THEIR POSTS IN CAPS and use a lot profanity and EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!!!!!!!!

What I bolded above -- that's not how this works. You are sensationalizing.

As one who numbers himself among "the creationists", I am a very much pro-science!
The debate is primarily about what science actually is.

+1

Maybe Monteroy will remind us that he doesn't waste time with MAGA-Derp-Lizard People programs like 60 Minutes.

I don't waste time reading his posts for the most part, because derps gonna derp. washoe, his brother from another mother, is more entertaining, though I do like when Cuepee is not a lawyer, but plays one on TV. I generally read some of the replies to him and chuckle a bit, both because of the time they waste and their effort in dealing with a know-nothing-know-it-all. Shame there are no doctors here to be schooled on medicine by him...

Maybe Dr. Demento will chime in. Or maybe even Dr. Hook.

with threads like this acting as a super spreader we need big pharma more than ever

Thank you for sharing, rickroll.

Forced indirectly? What country do you live in? In America, you're free to not get a vax and not patronize a business that requires a vax card.