HAZE Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 This would be great if it's true.http://my.webmd.com/content/Article/110/109462.htm?z=1727_00000_5024_hv_03 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebdead Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything but we've had the cure for HIV since 1999. ' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tastey Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 lol, love the linguistics "that flushes HIV out of its most remote hiding places in the body."caleb, you are a conspiracy theorist, who by the way doesn´t know much about economics. otherwise you´d know that if there actually was a cure, the money would be in a firm developing that cure, getting it patented, FDA-approved and on the market. that firm would instantly have such a strong market share it could easily push it´s big competitors off the market or if it´s a small firm, get so frigging big overnight it wouldn´t be funny. there is so much money to be made from this, if there was a cure, it would be marketed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elevatedflow Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 lol, love the linguistics "that flushes HIV out of its most remote hiding places in the body."caleb, you are a conspiracy theorist, who by the way doesn´t know much about economics. otherwise you´d know that if there actually was a cure, the money would be in a firm developing that cure, getting it patented, FDA-approved and on the market. that firm would instantly have such a strong market share it could easily push it´s big competitors off the market or if it´s a small firm, get so frigging big overnight it wouldn´t be funny. there is so much money to be made from this, if there was a cure, it would be marketed.wrong ...You dont need to know anything about economics to know that if there was a cure, it wouldnt be known .. why you ask ... because the outcry for all of humanity to have the cure at its fingertips would out weight any type of profitable opportunity... you basically would be forced by everyone in the world to give it away free or else you would look like hitler... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tastey Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 wrong ...You dont need to know anything about economics to know that if there was a cure, it wouldnt be known .. why you ask ... because the outcry for all of humanity to have the cure at its fingertips would out weight any type of profitable opportunity... you basically would be forced by everyone in the world to give it away free or else you would look like hitler... are you really serious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ou812 Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 Also, do you not think that it is more profitable to keep people on 20 different medications for the next 40 years to just keep them able to cope with it, or give them one dose of a cure and lose out on all that revenue of them purchasing drug cocktails for the next several decades to stay alive with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAZE Posted September 12 Author Report Share Posted September 12 And of course, population control.I thought we'd never see a cure to AIDS. I hope this is true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 Also, do you not think that it is more profitable to keep people on 20 different medications for the next 40 years to just keep them able to cope with it, or give them one dose of a cure and lose out on all that revenue of them purchasing drug cocktails for the next several decades to stay alive with it?just an idea...maybe the people who own those companies would be worried about someone else finding the cure, patenting it and stealing away all those billions of dollars...or..maybe the people/company/whatever who own the cure would would rather flood the market with the cure.. make their billions and get out and enjoy the rest of their lives.. as compared to sweating it out and seeing if anyone else makes a cure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebdead Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 Also, do you not think that it is more profitable to keep people on 20 different medications for the next 40 years to just keep them able to cope with it, or give them one dose of a cure and lose out on all that revenue of them purchasing drug cocktails for the next several decades to stay alive with it?wow this is a great fucking point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tastey Posted September 12 Report Share Posted September 12 just an idea...maybe the people who own those companies would be worried about someone else finding the cure, patenting it and stealing away all those billions of dollars...or..maybe the people/company/whatever who own the cure would would rather flood the market with the cure.. make their billions and get out and enjoy the rest of their lives.. as compared to sweating it out and seeing if anyone else makes a cure...or..think about if just one guy of that firm that remotely knows anything about such a theoretical cure would get out and go to the competition... he´d get millions and millions just to give them a very general idea about the treatment and they´d start experimenting in that direction...there is just waaaaaaaaaay too much money to be made to keep something like this secretyou can turn a small company into a multi-million dollar proposition that either makes you rich by taking it through the IPO process or is bought out by a company such as johnson & johnson to plug into their distribution and marketing channels. that is where ANYONE with a workable treatment heads.let me repeat that: if you have a workable treatment that can pass tests of efficacy and repeatability you WILL take it to FDA to get approved and become a multi-millionaire. anything that is not currently undergoing FDA approval must be quackery. if it worked, someone would put the capital behind it, gambling on the big jack-pot of becoming stinking rich. if something is currently going through FDA approval, there may be something to it, and it deserves investigation, even if it is not currently approved and avaliable to you from your local medical practitioner.some quacks say there green tee cures cancer or licking some frogs will cure AIDS. if there were an active ingredient in green tea that actually helped, someone would have isolated it, put it through clinical trials and made their millions. health care is a gold mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ou812 Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 or..think about if just one guy of that firm that remotely knows anything about such a theoretical cure would get out and go to the competition... he´d get millions and millions just to give them a very general idea about the treatment and they´d start experimenting in that direction...there is just waaaaaaaaaay too much money to be made to keep something like this secretyou can turn a small company into a multi-million dollar proposition that either makes you rich by taking it through the IPO process or is bought out by a company such as johnson & johnson to plug into their distribution and marketing channels. that is where ANYONE with a workable treatment heads.let me repeat that: if you have a workable treatment that can pass tests of efficacy and repeatability you WILL take it to FDA to get approved and become a multi-millionaire. anything that is not currently undergoing FDA approval must be quackery. if it worked, someone would put the capital behind it, gambling on the big jack-pot of becoming stinking rich. if something is currently going through FDA approval, there may be something to it, and it deserves investigation, even if it is not currently approved and avaliable to you from your local medical practitioner.some quacks say there green tee cures cancer or licking some frogs will cure AIDS. if there were an active ingredient in green tea that actually helped, someone would have isolated it, put it through clinical trials and made their millions. health care is a gold mine.I don't think you are appreciating what kind of a 400 lb. gorilla the pharmaceutical industry is. Do you realize how many alternative medicine, herbal remedies and other various practices and and procedures have been squashed and kept in the dark by the pharmaceutical giants over the last several decades??? You'd be amazed.You mentioned something about one guy knowing remotely how to cure such and such. Believe me, if such a scenario existed, said individual would be silenced with the quickness. Do you think the pharmaceutical giants would allow a dent to their multi-billion dollar industry like that?Healthcare is a goldmine in deed, but do you understand the difference between getting one drug out there in one shot and wiping something like this out, as opposed to pulling in continued revenue over years and years for simply treating it? What do you think they would allow to happen first? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howienewport Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 There's always been a cure, it's called "death" and it makes all your pain go away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 I don't think you are appreciating what kind of a 400 lb. gorilla the pharmaceutical industry is. Do you realize how many alternative medicine, herbal remedies and other various practices and and procedures have been squashed and kept in the dark by the pharmaceutical giants over the last several decades??? You'd be amazed.You mentioned something about one guy knowing remotely how to cure such and such. Believe me, if such a scenario existed, said individual would be silenced with the quickness. Do you think the pharmaceutical giants would allow a dent to their multi-billion dollar industry like that?Healthcare is a goldmine in deed, but do you understand the difference between getting one drug out there in one shot and wiping something like this out, as opposed to pulling in continued revenue over years and years for simply treating it? What do you think they would allow to happen first?scary thought.. these guys are fucking hundred millionaires.. is there really a need for that much money?? aside from buying more companies it is damn near impossible to spend that much money... i think after about.. oh say 20 million you and everyone you know is living comfortably for the rest of their lives along with all the toys anyone could possibly dream of...i really hope your statement isn't true.. i still have some faith in humanity and i would like to leave it that way... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolahotass Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 Also, do you not think that it is more profitable to keep people on 20 different medications for the next 40 years to just keep them able to cope with it, or give them one dose of a cure and lose out on all that revenue of them purchasing drug cocktails for the next several decades to stay alive with it?yeah but can the insurance companies continue to eat the cost of the medication? Those protease inhibitors and anti-viral drugs are costly ($350+ to $750+) for a monthly supply.. and most patients are on at least three drugs... And thats not counting the free drugs given at clinics for those that do not have insurance. The government cannot deny an hiv infected person medication. Thats the problem with hiv.. it hides in the body... if this drug can awaken these dorment cells and have the meds disable them, there is hope for those infected with the virus. Modern medicine is making it easier for people to live long, healthy lives, but ulitmately, a cure would be fantastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tastey Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 I don't think you are appreciating what kind of a 400 lb. gorilla the pharmaceutical industry is. Do you realize how many alternative medicine, herbal remedies and other various practices and and procedures have been squashed and kept in the dark by the pharmaceutical giants over the last several decades??? You'd be amazed.You mentioned something about one guy knowing remotely how to cure such and such. Believe me, if such a scenario existed, said individual would be silenced with the quickness. Do you think the pharmaceutical giants would allow a dent to their multi-billion dollar industry like that?Healthcare is a goldmine in deed, but do you understand the difference between getting one drug out there in one shot and wiping something like this out, as opposed to pulling in continued revenue over years and years for simply treating it? What do you think they would allow to happen first?what you are missing here is this: for that to work you would need collusion to have merc agree to not obsolete johnson & johnsons gold mine with a new product that is better than j&js old one, stelaing away the market from j&j to merc. collusion can work in industries with a high degree of market concentration where companies agree to share the pie and not compete. pharmaceuticals is not such an industry. there is a extremely low market concentration. collusion is impossible in such conditions and competition high, because any attempt at collusion would fall over immdiately because the payoff from breaking out of the collusion is too high. that is technical economics that i could take pages of writing to explain. if you want to understand the theory, look it up on the internet. enough to say that given the market structure, you need not worry about collusion in pharmaceuticals. the only way a cure can be held back is if a company patents both the old tech and the new tech, both at the same company and decides there is more money in the old tech. that is the only way it can happen. the odds of that happening are extremely small. as for a company purchasing the tech from the developer to prevent its release ... could happen, but given it has been through FDA approval, that would be public and a scandal. and there is no way a company can go around buying every penny-stock bio-tech with a potential at "desktop research"... there is a risk reward profile that would make that an extremely unprofitable activity. have a look at how many biotech penny stocks there are that trade in over-the-counter (otc)markets. there are thousands and thousands of them, each thinking they are going to hit the jackpot with a newly approved treatment. that is where the majority of advances come from. it is an extremely diffuse market, and everyone wants to hit the jack-pot. nature of the beast.as for vaccines fucking up the revenue stream for cures, that also assumes collusion. not going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebdead Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 what you are missing here is this: for that to work you would need collusion to have merc agree to not obsolete johnson & johnsons gold mine with a new product that is better than j&js old one, stelaing away the market from j&j to merc. collusion can work in industries with a high degree of market concentration where companies agree to share the pie and not compete. pharmaceuticals is not such an industry. there is a extremely low market concentration. collusion is impossible in such conditions and competition high, because any attempt at collusion would fall over immdiately because the payoff from breaking out of the collusion is too high. that is technical economics that i could take pages of writing to explain. if you want to understand the theory, look it up on the internet. enough to say that given the market structure, you need not worry about collusion in pharmaceuticals. the only way a cure can be held back is if a company patents both the old tech and the new tech, both at the same company and decides there is more money in the old tech. that is the only way it can happen. the odds of that happening are extremely small. as for a company purchasing the tech from the developer to prevent its release ... could happen, but given it has been through FDA approval, that would be public and a scandal. and there is no way a company can go around buying every penny-stock bio-tech with a potential at "desktop research"... there is a risk reward profile that would make that an extremely unprofitable activity. have a look at how many biotech penny stocks there are that trade in over-the-counter (otc)markets. there are thousands and thousands of them, each thinking they are going to hit the jackpot with a newly approved treatment. that is where the majority of advances come from. it is an extremely diffuse market, and everyone wants to hit the jack-pot. nature of the beast.as for vaccines fucking up the revenue stream for cures, that also assumes collusion. not going to happen.hahhahahahaha lolllllllllll wow you're a fucking moron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebdead Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 where'd you graduate from? montclair business school of economics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebdead Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 btw, it's MERCK NOT MERC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamsamurai Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 hooray for unprotected sex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stymie Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 george bush invented aids to kill black people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolahotass Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 george bush invented aids to kill black peoplethanks kanye...lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted September 13 Report Share Posted September 13 it wasnt the government, catholics invented aids to try to scare people into not having pre-marital sex.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.