Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

FrankGSterleJr
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:41 pm

Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by FrankGSterleJr »

Whenever Canada’s federal government promises universal medication coverage (the last such promise was made following the last election, October 2019) the pharmaceutical industry reacts with threats of abandoning their Canada-based research and development, etcetera, if the government goes ahead with its ‘pharmacare’ plan. Why? Because the universal medication coverage would negatively affect the industry’s plentiful profits. Of course profits would still be great, just not as great, which apparently bothers the industry greatly.

Once again promised universal medication coverage was conspicuously yet quietly missing from the federal budget, released a couple weeks ago. Thus we continue being the world’s sole nation that has universal healthcare but no similar coverage of prescribed medication, however necessary. Recouping research and development costs is typically cited by the powerful industry to justify its exorbitant prices and stiff resistance to universal medication coverage public plans, the latter which it's doing in Canada. However, according to a Huffington Post story (“Pharmaceutical Companies Spent 19 Times More On Self-Promotion Than Basic Research: Report,” updated May 8, 2013), a study conducted by the British Medical Journal found that for every $19 dollars the pharmaceutical industry spent on promoting and marketing new drugs, it put only $1 into its R&D.

A late-2019 Angus Reid study found that about 90 percent of Canadians — including three quarters of Conservative Party supporters specifically — champion universal medication coverage. Another 77 percent believed this should be a high-priority matter for the federal government. The study also found that, over the previous year, due to medication unaffordability, almost a quarter of Canadians decided against filling a prescription or having one renewed. Not only is medication less affordable, but many low-income outpatients who cannot afford to fill their prescriptions end up back in the hospital system as a result, therefore costing far more for provincial and federal government health ministries than if the medication had been covered. So, in order for the industry to continue raking in huge profits, Canadians, as both individual consumers and a taxpaying collective, must lose out huge. And our elected representatives, be they federal Liberals or Conservatives, seem to shrug their figurative shoulders in favor of the pharmaceutical industry — yet again.

Considering it is such a serious health affair for so many people, impressed upon me is the industry lobbyists’ potent influence on our top-level elected officials — manipulation that our mainstream news-media apparently fail to even try to fully expose, let alone condemn — for the sake of large profit-margin interests.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Gary Childress »

The problem is that we are all constantly told that "socialized medicine" will bring economic ruin and therefore we must vote to maintain the status quo in order to have a "healthy" economy so that we can continue to afford to have medical innovation and such. I don't know how true that is, but it seems to be the prevailing wisdom among some.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by henry quirk »

The problem, Frank, is the State.

Tryin' to lay blame on one aspect of the State is like layin' blame only on the serial killer's hands.

-----

Gary,

There's nuthin' at all wrong with any form of socialized medicine as long as everyone involved is on board for it.

The problem (for the socializers) is: not everyone is on board.

So: why don't those who want socialized medicine just go ahead and do it, and leave the folks who don't want it alone?

If 50% or more of the population want commie healthcare, then why don't they pool their resources, reap the benefits, and laugh at all the neanderthals like me who aren't included and who are keelin' over?

Could it be that mebbe less than 50% of the population want commie-care? Could it be the folks who press for commie-care do so not becuz it's so all-fired better than a free market system, but becuz a commie-care is all about central planning (control) while a free market system is, by definition, uncontrollable?
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Gary Childress »

henry quirk wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:43 pm The problem, Frank, is the State.

Tryin' to lay blame on one aspect of the State is like layin' blame only on the serial killer's hands.

-----

Gary,

There's nuthin' at all wrong with any form of socialized medicine as long as everyone involved is on board for it.

The problem (for the socializers) is: not everyone is on board.

So: why don't those who want socialized medicine just go ahead and do it, and leave the folks who don't want it alone?

If 50% or more of the population want commie healthcare, then why don't they pool their resources, reap the benefits, and laugh at all the neanderthals like me who aren't included and who are keelin' over?

Could it be that mebbe less than 50% of the population want commie-care? Could it be the folks who press for commie-care do so not becuz it's so all-fired better than a free market system, but becuz a commie-care is all about central planning (control) while a free market system is, by definition, uncontrollable?
Calling it "commie-care" is not a valid argument, Henry.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by henry quirk »

Gary Childress wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 4:33 pm
henry quirk wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:43 pm The problem, Frank, is the State.

Tryin' to lay blame on one aspect of the State is like layin' blame only on the serial killer's hands.

-----

Gary,

There's nuthin' at all wrong with any form of socialized medicine as long as everyone involved is on board for it.

The problem (for the socializers) is: not everyone is on board.

So: why don't those who want socialized medicine just go ahead and do it, and leave the folks who don't want it alone?

If 50% or more of the population want commie healthcare, then why don't they pool their resources, reap the benefits, and laugh at all the neanderthals like me who aren't included and who are keelin' over?

Could it be that mebbe less than 50% of the population want commie-care? Could it be the folks who press for commie-care do so not becuz it's so all-fired better than a free market system, but becuz a commie-care is all about central planning (control) while a free market system is, by definition, uncontrollable?
Calling it "commie-care" is not a valid argument, Henry.
No, callin' it commie care doesn't affect the argument at all.

But, okay...

There's nuthin' at all wrong with any form of socialized medicine as long as everyone involved is on board for it.

The problem (for the socializers) is: not everyone is on board.

So: why don't those who want socialized medicine just go ahead and do it, and leave the folks who don't want it alone?

If 50% or more of the population want socialized healthcare, then why don't they pool their resources, reap the benefits, and laugh at all the neanderthals like me who aren't included and who are keelin' over?

Could it be that mebbe less than 50% of the population want socialized-care? Could it be the folks who press for socialized-care do so not becuz it's so all-fired better than a free market system, but becuz a socialized-care is all about central planning (control) while a free market system is, by definition, uncontrollable?

Better?
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Gary Childress »

henry quirk wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 4:58 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 4:33 pm
henry quirk wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:43 pm The problem, Frank, is the State.

Tryin' to lay blame on one aspect of the State is like layin' blame only on the serial killer's hands.

-----

Gary,

There's nuthin' at all wrong with any form of socialized medicine as long as everyone involved is on board for it.

The problem (for the socializers) is: not everyone is on board.

So: why don't those who want socialized medicine just go ahead and do it, and leave the folks who don't want it alone?

If 50% or more of the population want commie healthcare, then why don't they pool their resources, reap the benefits, and laugh at all the neanderthals like me who aren't included and who are keelin' over?

Could it be that mebbe less than 50% of the population want commie-care? Could it be the folks who press for commie-care do so not becuz it's so all-fired better than a free market system, but becuz a commie-care is all about central planning (control) while a free market system is, by definition, uncontrollable?
Calling it "commie-care" is not a valid argument, Henry.
No, callin' it commie care doesn't affect the argument at all.

But, okay...

There's nuthin' at all wrong with any form of socialized medicine as long as everyone involved is on board for it.

The problem (for the socializers) is: not everyone is on board.

So: why don't those who want socialized medicine just go ahead and do it, and leave the folks who don't want it alone?

If 50% or more of the population want socialized healthcare, then why don't they pool their resources, reap the benefits, and laugh at all the neanderthals like me who aren't included and who are keelin' over?

Could it be that mebbe less than 50% of the population want socialized-care? Could it be the folks who press for socialized-care do so not becuz it's so all-fired better than a free market system, but becuz a socialized-care is all about central planning (control) while a free market system is, by definition, uncontrollable?

Better?
I think most of the people who want medicare for all just want everyone to have access to health care and not just those with means. Will it result in more centralized control is the question you seem to be asking. I don't know. I guess we would have to look at how medicare is working for the elderly in the country to determine that.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Gary Childress wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 4:13 pm The problem is that we are all constantly told that "socialized medicine" will bring economic ruin and therefore we must vote to maintain the status quo in order to have a "healthy" economy so that we can continue to afford to have medical innovation and such. I don't know how true that is, but it seems to be the prevailing wisdom among some.
Sorry, Gary...it's actually the truth. https://www.cihi.ca/en/health-spending

All this for a system in which people cannot get even some life-saving procedures because the wait times are too long, physicians are too few, and equipment is too limited...even without considering COVID.

It's great that it's "free" (at least, at delivery point, though definitely not free later or before, as you can see). It's not great that it's not great health care.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Gary Childress »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 6:01 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 4:13 pm The problem is that we are all constantly told that "socialized medicine" will bring economic ruin and therefore we must vote to maintain the status quo in order to have a "healthy" economy so that we can continue to afford to have medical innovation and such. I don't know how true that is, but it seems to be the prevailing wisdom among some.
Sorry, Gary...it's actually the truth. https://www.cihi.ca/en/health-spending

All this for a system in which people cannot get even some life-saving procedures because the wait times are too long, physicians are too few, and equipment is too limited...even without considering COVID.

It's great that it's "free" (at least, at delivery point, though definitely not free later or before, as you can see). It's not great that it's not great health care.
Nothing to be sorry about. I didn't say it was a false argument. As I pointed out and you affirm, it's the prevailing wisdom. It is what it is, I guess.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Gary Childress wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 6:12 pm Nothing to be sorry about. I didn't say it was a false argument. As I pointed out and you affirm, it's the prevailing wisdom. It is what it is.
But that's the problem, too.

The truth is that government really doesn't do ANYTHING well. That's because they're not working with their own money, but with other people's. There's no penalty for speculating or for getting their plans wrong. It costs them nothing. So they have no efficiency. And they have no fear of getting it wrong.

Now, there are a few things we can't get private industry to do...like, say, defending the country, arresting criminals, paving roads, and running ports. For those things, we just have to live with the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of government management. But for everything we can possibly take out of their hands, we should do it.

They're just no good at anything, really. They are, at the best, a limited, necessary-evil. They are not the answer to anything.

And that's the sad truth.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Gary Childress »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 6:18 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 6:12 pm Nothing to be sorry about. I didn't say it was a false argument. As I pointed out and you affirm, it's the prevailing wisdom. It is what it is.
But that's the problem, too.

The truth is that government really doesn't do ANYTHING well. That's because they're not working with their own money, but with other people's. There's no penalty for speculating or for getting their plans wrong. It costs them nothing. So they have no efficiency. And they have no fear of getting it wrong.

Now, there are a few things we can't get private industry to do...like, say, defending the country, arresting criminals, paving roads, and running ports. For those things, we just have to live with the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of government management. But for everything we can possibly take out of their hands, we should do it.

They're just no good at anything, really. They are, at the best, a limited, necessary-evil. They are not the answer to anything.

And that's the sad truth.
Do you believe that corporations such as the pharmaceutical industry have our best interests in mind?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Gary Childress wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 6:19 pm Do you believe that corporations such as the pharmaceutical industry have our best interests in mind?
No, of course not.

Do you believe the government does? :shock:

Truth is, Gary, the person who keeps your best interests in mind is only you. God can, of course; but no human person is naturally attuned to making Gary Childress's interests a priority.

Everybody else has their own interests going...especially those who will tell you most "compassionately" that they care deeply for you; because they almost always are really wanting to use you to advance those interests. And nothing about that changes when you give them a title like "Minister of the Environment" or "Minister of Health."
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by henry quirk »

I think most of the people who want medicare for all just want everyone to have access to health care and not just those with means.

Then, by all means, such folks ought to reach down deep into their own pockets and shoulder the cost.

Just leave me out of it. I'll shoulder the burden of me and mine.

Ain't that a fair solution, Gary?


Will it result in more centralized control is the question you seem to be asking. I don't know.

I do. It has.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by Gary Childress »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 6:33 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 6:19 pm Do you believe that corporations such as the pharmaceutical industry have our best interests in mind?
No, of course not.

Do you believe the government does? :shock:

Truth is, Gary, the person who keeps your best interests in mind is only you. God can, of course; but no human person is naturally attuned to making Gary Childress's interests a priority.

Everybody else has their own interests going...especially those who will tell you most "compassionately" that they care deeply for you; because they almost always are really wanting to use you to advance those interests. And nothing about that changes when you give them a title like "Minister of the Environment" or "Minister of Health."
OK. So maybe NGOs that are non-profit are the answer?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Is Big Pharma Ethical in Effectively Dictating Health-Affordability to a Nation's Populace (via its government)?

Post by henry quirk »

Do you believe that corporations such as the pharmaceutical industry have our best interests in mind?

No, nor should they have to.

Business, any business, is about makin' a profit for the owner. That's the sum of it. Instead of demandin' they care we should concern ourselves with gettin' products and services that are as advertised for a decent price.

The morality in business isn't in them carin' but in them bein' honest.
Post Reply