Breaking: Drug Company Pfizer Abandons All Alzheimer's And Parkinson's Research

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

The Pharma industry always defends their high prices because of all of the costs of research and development and to keep the pipeline going. This is just sick, now they are showing their true colors, they never cared, and all it has ever been about is the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

It is always about the money. Why is this so surprising or even bad? Greed is what drives innovation.

Imagine a world where everyone was given unlimited funds and never had to worry about bills? Let me ask you, do you think a world like that would drive innovation more than a world where people withheld doing the right thing in order to make money/to slowly roll out new features/to keep shareholders happy/etc?

Greed only drives innovation to an extent. If everyone on this planet was simply trying to create a better world without purposely doing things with the focus on making money, THAT would drive innovation so much more than greed.

Unfortunately we seem to be bound to this fake reality of rules, limitation, fake energy/power restraints, etc. We are clearly living in a game and everything here is meant as a competition to either win or lose...and a ride on a roller coaster of nonsense along the way.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JAGStorm

The problem I have with this is the idea that people want to not accept that sometimes people make bad decisions and do bad things because they decide to do it and not because something beyond their control made them do it.

It's called attempting to abandon personal responsibility.

Yep the scrambling to blame what Aaron Hernandez did on CTE proves your point. Also the doctor that self-diagnosed OJ Simpson as having it.

Maybe just wishful hippy thinking,
But maybe they see the inevitable legalization and further research of plant (Cannabis) based medicines as the writing on the wall, and will shift their focus.

But like all good things that big business gets their hands on, probbaly not for the best.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

Maybe they found a complete cure and shelved the research so as to only allow a select few the privilege.

After all old people are living far too long these days anyways by "There" standard.

a reply to: FlukeSkywalker

So there is a market for Alzheimer's research and development. It's a large one.

Someone will be competing for that money. Pfizer didn't drop out because the money wasn't there. They likely dropped out because they were getting outcompeted for that money.

Husband works for an animal pharma company. They do not concern themselves overmuch with the ovine market. That does not mean no one there cares at all for the welfare of sheep and goats, it just means that other companies in the market are far more competitive, so husband's company doesn't invest much into ovine R&D, preferring instead to concentrate in those sectors of the market where they do excel.

a reply to: NobodyToldMe

It is probably similar to claiming insanity, we all know there are truly insane people, and of course so people use the sytem to try to get out of crimes, however that does not discredit that there are truly insane people.

When people get alzheimer's one thing is that is commonly reported is that violence is there, when these people were never ever violent in their lives before. Talk to any nurse, or people that care for the elderly.

I recently watched a documentary on a man that was a serial killer. He was for all accounts normal until a car accident and brain injury. His wife said his entire personality changed, he became violent etc.
I think there is so much more to study regarding this.

a reply to: JAGStorm

That much is true and medications can also tip you over.

I had a grandmother who turned violent thanks to her Alzheimer's, and I had another relative who had a form of dementia (not Alzheimer's) who was cycled onto a medication that provoked a violent outburst.

But I still worry that too many are looking for reasons to explain why people turn criminal in ways that remove their personal responsibility at the same time.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

I wonder if this wasn't just a profit move, but maybe some secret cure that was discovered which completely reversed Alz and Park's diseases and so Pfizer quickly shut down the lab which discovered the findings. There are always 2 sides to every story.

Nicotine patches would be my guess. There was a study done a couple years ago which showed increased/improved cognitive function in aging adults wearing nicotine patches, and just a few weeks ago I read of another study starting with nicotine patches for Alzheimer's patients, I believe -- maybe it's both Alzheimer's and Parkinson's patients. But I do know nicotine patches have shown really remarkable improvements for some people.

ETA: I had to look it up... Here's the announcement from Vanderbilt University about the new study. It's for pre-Alzheimer's patients...

Study explores nicotine patch to treat mild cognitive impairment

originally posted by: FlukeSkywalker

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

The Pharma industry always defends their high prices because of all of the costs of research and development and to keep the pipeline going. This is just sick, now they are showing their true colors, they never cared, and all it has ever been about is the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

It is always about the money. Why is this so surprising or even bad? Greed is what drives innovation.

Imagine a world where everyone was given unlimited funds and never had to worry about bills? Let me ask you, do you think a world like that would drive innovation more than a world where people withheld doing the right thing in order to make money/to slowly roll out new features/to keep shareholders happy/etc?

Greed only drives innovation to an extent. If everyone on this planet was simply trying to create a better world without purposely doing things with the focus on making money, THAT would drive innovation so much more than greed.

Unfortunately we seem to be bound to this fake reality of rules, limitation, fake energy/power restraints, etc. We are clearly living in a game and everything here is meant as a competition to either win or lose...and a ride on a roller coaster of nonsense along the way.

I can also imagine a world where every woman is a ten and does things I can't write about here, but that doesn't mean that world is going to exist.

Do some people do things out of curiosity with no desire for financial rewards? Yes. However, the reality is that even the best ideas and inventions require capital and investment to make a reality.

Companies have to make choices. That is all Pfizer is doing. It doesn't mean Merck, Abbott or some other pharma company isn't investing in Alzheimer research. Pfizer apparently has decided that isn't their core strength so they will reallocate that money to other drugs and cures.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

Ah one of the founding companies of the opioid crisis is pulling out of beneficial research. Nice.

Doping people up has been on the to do list for far too long to ever really stop. Also its a VERY profitable enterprise.

Selling drugs always is. Thats why the government and big pharma love their relationship.

It's all about profit. Like cancer, it is more profitable to maintain the illness than cure it. Various areas of the health care industry are making a mint running nursing homes and memory care centers.

I know this for a fact. My mother had Dementia and died recently. We spent a fortune for services, et al.

Follow the money.

originally posted by: ketsuko
It may also be that they were getting skunked in Alzhiemer's research too. If they were too far behind, then there was no profit incontinuing because other companies were far enough ahead to make it too much of a time and money sink to continue trying to catch up.

Thats actually likely the case.

There are some very intresting treatments coming up the pipeline in other companys in the biotec area.

Pfizer have lagged behind say GSK in biotec.

So Pfizer likely threw in the towel due to there research being at this point pointless.

Assuming that other companies have more developed research in neuroscience, it makes sense to put your aces in their places and push progress as far as you can within your own bailiwick.

a reply to: Boadicea

That is fascinating! I heard before that most Parkinson's patients don't smoke.

www.neurologyadvisor.com...

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Assuming that other companies have more developed research in neuroscience, it makes sense to put your aces in their places and push progress as far as you can within your own bailiwick.

As someone who was in that industry. I can say Pfizers lagged behind in that area.

Other areas they are ahead, just not in this.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

Sounds to me that they're admitting that they're not scientific leaders in this research (then who is?), and so they're going to put their money in places where they can make a better impact.

Yes...*gasp!*...businesses care about their shareholders as well as their customers, so if this move translates well to both, then there's no problem. Of course, you purposefully chose to keep "and patients" not bolded in your quote.

In any event, we could only be so lucky that they found cures, because that would mean that they are out there, and if so, someone will leak the info or rediscover it as well. Somehow, though, I think that this is just a business move, which is appropriate for a business.

ETA: I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who understood this possibility.

I don’t see what the big deal is, Pfizer is a business, not a charity. They can do what they want. You wouldn’t force another company to make things that they weren’t making a profit on would you?



If anything, this opens up that field of study for Another company

This is what happens when a company whose purpose is to produce and sell drugs is researching how to cure something. It's not really in their best interests to succeed unless their 'cure' involves a lifetime regimen of their drugs. Which in my opinion isn't really much of a cure.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: seasonal

I have my theories, but sugar isn't one of them (but I do think it is a main issue in cancer).

aluminum, exposure to chemicals something along those lines.

My Grandma had alzheimers in her final years, she didn't work with Aluminum and the only chemicals she used, other than cleaning were in here role as a confectioner....

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

Sounds to me that they're admitting that they're not scientific leaders in this research (then who is?), and so they're going to put their money in places where they can make a better impact.

Yup which is why they would not have made the descion lightly as that would likely hit stocks as it shows a lagging behind.


I can promise people some evil monopoly guy CEO was not sitting in his chair twirling his mustache making descions like this at random.

It would have taken months to come to this conclusion and gone through a number of boards and panels.