The Great Cancer Hoax: The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down...

[PeterMP]

Profit is one thing, but obscene profit is something else. And don't forget that taxpayers are contributing to R&D through government grants, so the costs that companies directly bear for R&D is not as much as people think. Not to mention that the researchers themselves (MAs, PhD students, and post Docs) are paid low wages for doing this work. The scientists who head up the research are often not the ones in the actual labs but they get the most pay.

The starting salary for an NIH post-doctoral reseacher is over $42,000. The people that are the scientists that head up the projects do a lot of work, even if they aren't in the lab, and they were once upon a time PhD students and post-docs so if you have an issue with how much they are getting paid now, you think of the high pay in the future as just making up for the previous low pay.

The other thing is most government grants aren't going to companies. They are going to Universities, which tend to be public institutions and non-profits. In most cases, there are intellectual intelligence clauses, which mean that anything you develop working for the University from is owned by the University.

This resluts in University owned patents. Those patents can't than be sold to companies (which makes money from the patent they bought ideally), but the University gets the money from the drug companies. The end result is the government, for the most part, is NOT subsidizing R&D by companies. It is subsidizing college education

There is the additional benefit that if something is a result of a patent developed from government funding their are rules related to people working on that technology having to be in this country. So many large Pharma companies from over seas have a large work force in this country.

---------- Post added June-13th-2011 at 02:18 PM ----------

Who says they aren't serious? Arthritis pain is a big deal to the person that has it. That doesn't mean you have to kill 100,000 people like what happened with Vioxx.

Just because acid reflux and ADHD are serious to the person that has it does NOT mean that the potential risk of a drug is worth it. Maybe you feel differently, but I do not.

EDIT: Please read my above posts where I already complimented the FDA of reclassifying their drug to market tracks before responding.

Okay, let's specicially talk about Vioxx. What do you think should have been done differently with respect to Vioxx?