"Mike in Mystic" wrote in message
m...

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
...
Mike in Mystic warbles:

Pharmaceutical companies do nothing of the sort, at least not in
general
and
in actuality not even very often. They spend billions of dollars a
year
funding research to find medicines. They don't HAVE to do that, you
know.

Sure they do. Where do they get their new drugs if they don't?

They are in business to grow revenues. If the government stops them from
doing that freely, then the attractiveness of the business is greatly
reduced. If you add up all the assets of Pfizer (the company I happen to
work for, so I do have some insight here), it is only about 60% of their
market capitalization. The other 40% is from shareholders opinion of our
growth, our future revenues. If the government limits our ability to
grow,
then we become a bad investment.


Just because John Doe from Somewhereville, USA happens to
have a need for a particular drug that the big bad pharma company makes
and
can't afford it doesn't entitle him to get it for free.

Ah, but if he's able to drive to Canada he gets it for less than half
price.

Why is that? Because our marvelous pharmaceutical companies think the
U.S.
is
the font of drug research blessings for the entire world, that's why.

This opinon of yours is so misguided and inaccurate it literally made me
laugh out loud. The pharmaceutical companies are in those markets because
there is a potential to make a profit. Sure, the free market of the US
might bear some of the burden in this system, but if a large enough
population starts going to Canada and reduces profits in the US, all the
pharmaceutical companies are going to do is to either stop offering their
drugs in those markets (this is the most likely scenario), or attempt to
negotiate with those markets for different trade practices. Either way,
consumers going to Canada is only ensuring one thing - that they are
compromising their health by increasing the likelihood that they get duped
by some illegitimate third-party schlepping cheap drugs in front of their
faces.


I recall a CBS 60 Minutes episode many years ago about counterfeit drugs
sold by U.S. wholesalers to U.S. pharmacies. Also, do you remember the
cancer medication that was diluted by a pharmacist in the U.S. to increase
his already obscene profit margins?

Several Republican politicians and pharmaceutical companies raise this dire
warning about the potential of counterfeit drugs from Canadian pharmacies,
but, when asked to cite specific cases, they can't. Can you? If not, then
where is it more dangerous to buy drugs?



In the end, any
price controls and other various forms of government intervention will
simply result in fewer drugs being developed, plain and simple.

Nonsense. Profits may drop if drug prices are stabilized throughout the
world,
but the drug companies are NOT about to stop developing their only
source
of
income.

They might not STOP, but they might have to lay-off hundreds of thousdands
of employees and greatly scale back their research and production
activities. Sort of like the airlines. They didn't stop flying, but they
changed their ways to deal with the situation. I'm sure you're looking
forward to a government controlled airline, too.


personally, the socialistic approach to health care that several
European nations and Canda utilize is horrid.

How?

I only have experience in a limited number of locations personally, but
have
been told first-hand from friends that have dealt with these things. A
friend of mine in England, for example, needed surgery that was deemed
"elective". He was in a great deal of pain, but it wasn't life
threatening.
So, he waited almost a YEAR!! to get the surgery. He looked up the same
surgery and procedures in the US and found he would have likely had the
surgery within a week in the US. For my own part, I was in Quebec on
vacation and came down with a extremely serious illness and had to go to
the
hospital for some blood tests. They had blood analyzers on the
receptionist
counter so that the charge nurse (if that's what they're called) could
analyze samples in between answering phones, filling out paperwork,
checking
in patients, etc. And, they insisted I pay in cash in full before they
would even let me in the phlebotomy chair. And they charged me up the
ass,
thank you very much! But, that's beside the point. My point is that
socialist-run medicine means fewer choices and likely mediocre at best
services. Are you really willing to go that route in the US, just so you
can save some money on prescriptions? I know you'll say "prescriptions
are
one thing, the medical system is another", but I beg to differ. The two
are
related, and it isn't too hard to see how letting the government control
one
aspect will likely lead to them getting their hands on everything.


That's the only good thing I can think of resulting from the aging of
the
over bred generation.

WTF does that mean? Over-bred? Compared to the whining ninnies of
younger
generations, or what? Or are they like German shepherds and we can
expect
hip
displacia at a young age and in many?

I just mean that the burden on our society by the lapsing social security
system, other social systems, un-insured individuals, etc. by the "baby
boomers" scares me to death. I really wonder lately listening to the more
aged of my colleagues and their paranoid, almost terrified, view of their
existences whether our nation will make it through their ability to screw
up
the country. Do you really want a bunch of geriatrics having the power to
influence decision making legislation? Last I checked, only a slim
minority
of the let's say 70+ crowd really thought too much about the future other
than their own. My grandmother lived to be 89 and the last about 10 years
of her life were spent being terrified of anyone under the age of 35. I
guess "they" will have their chance to get all of us "young'uns" back soon
enough.

Mike




Charlie Self

"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the
tranquil
and
steady dedication of a lifetime. "
Adlai E. Stevenson