My Daughter Just Got a Job With Big Pharma

a reply to: dollukka

I agree. They will let out things to "help manage" the most common or costly diseases, but those ones should have been cured a LONG time ago. I just wish there was a DIY for curing things like type 1 diabetes! I have always thought in the back of my mind that it is probably a lot simpler than they make it sound. Cures are something that need to be open-sourced. The people that open-source them should protect themselves VERY well.

I can't wait for the revolution in personal health. I know of several ways to grow new beta cells, and shutting of those auto-inflammatory T Cells would make a world of difference. I am betting it is a pretty simple therapy. It's probably so simple, that people could figure it out with certain combinations of natural ingredients. What the medical system needs is the doctor or researcher that finds a DIY method, and to have them post it up on Pastebin or something like that. If they knew the right person, they could do it almost invisibly.

I bet she quits within five years after seeing how her research has been twisted and finding that what she has been doing is unnecessary since they already know what is causing the problem that is causing the disease. She should be able to know why this is happening after a few years, learning it from a senior researcher mentioning it while they are discussing something.

It would be better to eliminate the problem ever happening than to go through a treatment after the body is already damaged.

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: windword

No single person is responsible for the crimes of a corporation. In that industry there is massive human misery being rolled out on a daily basis.

Pharma is the 3rd or 4 leading cause of death in the US and UK.

Corporations are not people. They are better.

Wrong again as ususal.
www.ons.gov.uk...

www.cdc.gov...

Do you work on the "repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth" mantra?

a reply to: Pardon?

I still maintain that there should be a cure for (by now)

1. Diabetes Type 1

2. Diabetes Type 2

3. All forms of Cancer

4. All forms of heart disease

Why is there not? We have science that almost baffles the mind. Yet "we" cannot cure these diseases? BS! Should've been cured a long time ago...There's money involved in people remaining "sick". The medical "establishment" will cure NO disease EVER!

originally posted by: InFriNiTee
a reply to: Pardon?

I still maintain that there should be a cure for (by now)

1. Diabetes Type 1

2. Diabetes Type 2

3. All forms of Cancer

4. All forms of heart disease

Why is there not? We have science that almost baffles the mind. Yet "we" cannot cure these diseases? BS! Should've been cured a long time ago...There's money involved in people remaining "sick". The medical "establishment" will cure NO disease EVER!

They're getting there with diabetes.
Remember, a century ago you would have had a very short life as a diabetic.
www.diabetes.co.uk...

Several cancers can effectively be cured if diagnosed early enough.
How many kids die of childhood cancers these days?
Not that many compared with even 20 years ago.
Prostate cancer can be cured.
Breast and cervical cancer can be cured.
Skin cancer can be cured.
The overall mortality rate from cancer has dropped by 20% over the past decade alone.

Cardiac ablation can cure dangerous arrhythmias which would have killed you 30 years ago.
Revascularisation halts the progression of coronary artery disease.
New heart valves can be implanted via the femoral vein or artery.
Heart failure can be improved by implanting resynchronisation devices.
If all that fails you can have a heart transplant.

Everything I've mentioned above would have severely limited your lifespan only a few decades ago.
Medicine has improved exponentially over the past few decades.


You do realise that people who own these corporations along with the medical and scientific staff looking to improve therapies etc would be affected by one or all of these diseases?
Why would they not want a cure?

originally posted by: InFriNiTee
I still maintain that there should be a cure for (by now)

I still maintain that

1. Pro Wrestling is real
2. Supermodel should love me
3. I should have a 50000 Gb internet connection
4. Cars should run on soda.

Mean while the real world doesn't run on what people not in those industries maintain.
It takes time, skill, funding, luck , repetition among multiple other things to accomplish those targets.

As for your "The medical "establishment" will cure NO disease EVER!" this might be the most illogical and wrong thing I have ever read on ATS .

a reply to: Pardon?

Well cancer is a lot different disease than diabetes. Cancer patients without good treatment die off quite soon but you can hold diabetics being diabetics and using big pharma´s GMO insulin like whole lifetime. In cancer there is no continuity with medicines and leaves only one option and that option is to get patient well, with diabetes continuity of using drugs goes on with whole lifetime of the patient. So it is a big market there.

I guess you have not observed diabetes research during years, ideas and possible cure and seen them all buried under ground. What happened to xenotransplant idea ( porcine islet cells ) ( somewhat still going on but not getting research funds to continue ) when its possibilities were in highest as a cure.. Swine Flu happened... and investments in research were pretty much closed.

Dr Faustman has been on diabetes research for decades, she has cured type 1 diabetes with different methods ( now she has cured type 1 in adults with vaccine and patients were diabetes free for a week.. but it is a start ) Faustman has always struggled with big Pharmas and seen THAT bad side what comes to closing funding for every promising potential cures.

Meanwhile type 1 diabetics keeps using GMO insulin and risking their lives for cancer, there are many studies which links GMO insulin to cancer and lot of evidence too.. seek Lantus and cancer, Levemir cancer.. etc

Pharmas has no goal or will to cure type 1 diabetes nor type 2


Something to browse
ISLET.ORG

originally posted by: dollukka
a reply to: Pardon?

Well cancer is a lot different disease than diabetes. Cancer patients without good treatment die off quite soon but you can hold diabetics being diabetics and using big pharma´s GMO insulin like whole lifetime. In cancer there is no continuity with medicines and leaves only one option and that option is to get patient well, with diabetes continuity of using drugs goes on with whole lifetime of the patient. So it is a big market there.

I guess you have not observed diabetes research during years, ideas and possible cure and seen them all buried under ground. What happened to xenotransplant idea ( porcine islet cells ) ( somewhat still going on but not getting research funds to continue ) when its possibilities were in highest as a cure.. Swine Flu happened... and investments in research were pretty much closed.

Dr Faustman has been on diabetes research for decades, she has cured type 1 diabetes with different methods ( now she has cured type 1 in adults with vaccine and patients were diabetes free for a week.. but it is a start ) Faustman has always struggled with big Pharmas and seen THAT bad side what comes to closing funding for every promising potential cures.

Meanwhile type 1 diabetics keeps using GMO insulin and risking their lives for cancer, there are many studies which links GMO insulin to cancer and lot of evidence too.. seek Lantus and cancer, Levemir cancer.. etc

Pharmas has no goal or will to cure type 1 diabetes nor type 2


Something to browse
ISLET.ORG

I've had a quick look at what Faustman is doing and has done and from what I can see it's still very much experimental and as yet unproven. She's only done a phase I trial which is little mote than a feasibility exercise.
She's only just starting with the phase II trials now.
www.healthline.com...
There's loads of other preliminary research which initially looks promising but fails for one reason or another.
Is that a reason to suggest that no-one is looking for a cure?
You do realise that any company which does come up for a cure would be able to charge whatever they wanted and would completely control the market?

Also, giving insulin is quite an easy fix for diabetes, some of the proposed "cures" are extremely invasive and their risks outweigh their benefits.

Here's what I found regarding insulin and cancer.
www.medscape.com...
Without a shadow of a doubt the benefit of insulin far outweighs any tiny risk.
Not having insulin is far, far worse.


You obviously have an issue with GMO.
That means I have to take the rest of what you post with a pinch of salt.

originally posted by: Pardon?


You obviously have an issue with GMO.
That means I have to take the rest of what you post with a pinch of salt.

I have type 1 diabetic son and i am looking for cure, wishing some day to see it and it bothers me that only option is GMO at the moment and seeing all the cures coming and go due big Pharma´s politics to keep diabetics sick and consuming.

originally posted by: dollukka

originally posted by: Pardon?


You obviously have an issue with GMO.
That means I have to take the rest of what you post with a pinch of salt.

I have type 1 diabetic son and i am looking for cure, wishing some day to see it and it bothers me that only option is GMO at the moment and seeing all the cures coming and go due big Pharma´s politics to keep diabetics sick and consuming.

I have a type 1 diabetic Dad who's alive because of insulin.
He's in his eighties. He's been on insulin since the early 1970's.
That means he's been having insulin produced by bacteria most of the time he's been on it.
Until there IS a real cure I'm happy for him to continue with it.

There's nothing to worry about the GM aspect of it.

www.geneticliteracyproject.org...

a reply to: windword

Well...it could go several ways...As this is actually ATS and not some group hug venue, i'll say it.

When the 'good pharma outfit' your daughter is working for turn on her for finding a cure and not just a treatment, don't say you were not warned with the 1000's of pages here and elsewhere hammering home that single, business orientated, but crystal clear point...Pharma are not in the medicine business, they are in the money making business.

Cures don't make small pharma into big pharma...treatments do.

She'd better not find a cure, or she and you might regret it.

Hopefully, i'm completely wrong.

originally posted by: windword
She has her degrees in immunology, microbiology, biochemistry, molecular chemistry and genetic engineering. She specializes in immune deficiency diseases and cancer. She's been working for renown hospitals and for a globally recognized university lab for the past several years. Her student loans are massive, and while her heart has always been in academia, she couldn't resist the salary increase and the opportunity to be a trail blazer in this new and up in coming technology.

I can't tell you what company she's working for, due to her "Confidentiality Agreement", or even what exactly she'll be doing. But I can tell you this, she'll be taking an ill patients blood and isolating the T-cells. The T-cells are the Gestapo of your body. They find "bad guys" and do away with them; no arrests, no lawyers, no trial or jury of their peers, "BANG, YOUR DEAD" right on the spot, no questions asked. Sometimes, however, the T-cells get confused and think that things like your kidneys' or your colon cells are bad guys, and they go on the attack. This is what we know as "Immune Deficiency Disease".

What she will be tasked with is taking those confused T-cells and returning them to their wholesome selves, through genetic engineering. Then she'll put them in some kind of culture medium, allowing them to grow and reproduce, then shoot them back into the ill patient's blood stream. Hopefully, the healthy wholesome T-cells can now do the job that they were intended to do, and all will be well in the patient's world!

Cool huh? Now, she's given a base starting salary, but her job security, salary raises and bonuses are completely dependent on the success of her work. And, that's the purpose of this thread. It's not the fact that I'm the proudest parent on the face of the planet and wanted to brag, even though that's true. Nope, it's because I wanted to let you all know this.............................

NOT ALL BIG PHARMA WANTS TO KEEP YOU SICK AND ADDICTED!.

Soon, the USA is going to have access to a vaccine for lung cancer, thanks to Cuban medical research scientists. And now this too! Of course, right now the treatments my daughter will be working on are not for ordinary people like you and me. A colleague of mine opined, when I told her about this, "So, that how Magic Johnson does it!" I don't know about that, but anything is possible! My sister was concerned about reproduction after such treatment, but I'm pretty sure that T-cells and reproductive "gamma" cells don't interact.

So, comment, don't comment, I can't really tell you much more than I already have. I just wanted to share some medicinal hope with you all today.

Peace!

Then why isnt this just given out freely to the public, research and all............. Sure they want to help and save the world. If you or the state can pay.

A healthy life at a cost. Honestly you can stick all that brag where the sun doesnt shine.

a reply to: flice

Then why isnt this just given out freely to the public, research and all............. Sure they want to help and save the world. If you or the state can pay.

A healthy life at a cost. Honestly you can stick all that brag where the sun doesnt shine.

What do you do for a living, and why don't you do it for free?

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: windword

Well...it could go several ways...As this is actually ATS and not some group hug venue, i'll say it.

When the 'good pharma outfit' your daughter is working for turn on her for finding a cure and not just a treatment, don't say you were not warned with the 1000's of pages here and elsewhere hammering home that single, business orientated, but crystal clear point...Pharma are not in the medicine business, they are in the money making business.

Cures don't make small pharma into big pharma...treatments do.

She'd better not find a cure, or she and you might regret it.

Hopefully, i'm completely wrong.

You're usually wrong so you won't have to hope much.

I'm still waiting for them to turn on me and some of my colleagues for our part in finding a curative procedure for atrial fibrillation which has cost the pharma companies billions.

I think the aluminium in your foil hat must be leaking into your brainz.

originally posted by: flice
Then why isnt this just given out freely to the public, research and all............. Sure they want to help and save the world. If you or the state can pay.

Common sense would say that paying researchers , paying for the infrastructure that supports those researchers , paying for equipment, paying for samples, paying for space all cost money.

If they gave it out for free then you might get 1 of those things listed above..

a reply to: Pardon?

Quite an intelligent post...unusually light on the patronising and arrogant tone, and even could be marginally considered as being worth reading...gold star for you my lad.

Besides, a couple of million people with AF is more or less comparing apples with oranges isn't it? They're simply not in the same revenue raising town, never mind ball park.

You have to produce a carrot now and again for the donkeys, or else they'll become obstinate...the recent ad campaigns to drum up public fundraising goodwill for heart disease requires certain 'accommodations' from pharma or that donkey just won't budge an inch.

Besides, your contribution to a 'curative', (well done btw) for AF, a condition that also happens to spontaneously go away on it's own..or with hard exercise..or with using certain drugs like caffeine..or digitalis..and several other common and CHEAP methods for treatment is hardly going to cost big pharma much profit, much less cause a lot explaining and red faces at the next pharma shareholders meeting is it?

Quite where you get 'it's already cost pharma billions' from is a mystery. Compared to what we WERE discussing before you decided to have an unprovoked pop..and blow your own trumpet while doing so... cancer, is orders of magnitude greater as an earner than AF ever was, is or could be.

As an aside, the 'curative' you mention, is being advised against for many patients as it carries a hefty risk to life..basically killing a part of the heart will do that sometimes..so in many cases, your contribution could actually become a contribution towards killing more than is saved. Remember when i mentioned the CHEAP and often effective drugs and methods that have been found to restore normal heartbeats? They don't involve zapping part of the heart into necrosis to work..just a FYI.

You're not the only one who can get snotty around here mate.

a reply to: opethPA

Unless it makes them a boatload of money. Dr. Salter said just what I said regarding diabetes. He said "They just don't want a cure, there's not enough money in that." Years ago that statement was sanitized from the internet, but I KNOW he said it.

a reply to: windword

Congratulations to your daughter!

Best of luck to her in her new job. I too believe that some things big pharma does are good.

$16 billion was spent on treating A Fib in the US alone last year.
While it's far less than cancer-related treatments it's not an insignificant number in anyone's books.
2.5-3 million people are affected by it in the US alone.
That's about 1-1.5% of the overall population (if you just take the adult population into account, the percentage is far greater).
The number of people with A Fib is increasing every year (partly due to lifestyle and partly due to people living longer).
It's the leading cause of strokes worldwide.
Transient (or more properly, paroxysmal) A Fib can be arrested with lifestyle changes but the more often someone has these the greater the chance they will have more. The mantra is "A Fib begets A Fib".
It's quite rare for someone to have a single episode of A Fib and never have it again.
Paroxysmal A Fib will lead to persistent A Fib which will lead to permanent A Fib.
Pharma control can be extremely impactful on daily life with most people having to take high doses of blood thinners like Warfarin and/or aspirin as well as side-effect laden anti-arrhythmics which can often be refractory (i.e. they don't work).
They're quite unpleasant and some of the anti-arrhythmics are very expensive.

So where on earth do I get that pharma has lost billions from?
The technique we use has the best chance of working if the A Fib is found reasonably early.
An average age group would be in their 50's for this.
Prior to this technique this age group would be on drugs for the rest of their lives, call it another 30 years.
Add to that now it's has a very good success rate in permanent A Fib and I'm probably being quite conservative with the numbers.
Here's an old breakdown of A Fib costs.
circoutcomes.ahajournals.org...
You could probably add another 10 or 15% onto that now.

This technique has been used widely for over a decade.
So just do the maths.

Where you get that it's "advised against in many patients" is beyond me.
And please show me where "it carries a hefty risk to life".
The cohort of patients who can be successfully cured is growing year by year.
It's predicted that in less than 5 years it will be the primary therapy.

Just so you know, caffeine provokes A Fib.
That means it makes it worse.
If you have A Fib, you will be strongly advised against taking anything which contains caffeine.
Digitalis is a family of plants and is quite poisonous.
I have to assume you means digoxin which is derived from the plant (or used to be anyway).
And digoxin only controls the ventricular rate response to A Fib i.e. the symptoms, it doesn't cure A Fib at all.

Going back to the thread though, you jumped in with the old (and frankly worn-out) trope that "big pharma will get you if you find a cure as it will cost them money".
The reason for my response is quite clear.
Rather than "blowing my own trumpet" it's to demonstrate that you're talking nonsense.

And given the alternative methods you mentioned in your post regarding treating A Fib I think I've demonstrated that very well.

5 degrees? How long was she a student? She must be over 35 !

She may love the salary, but when you've put that much work into your education, the driving force should be to do good for the world, not to make money.

When you work for Big Pharma, it's all about the money, not what you can do for humanity.

Great she got a good job that pays well, but I would have hoped that someone with that much brainpower might use their phenomenal intelligence to bring progress to the world, not to make a ton of money.

It's not very honorable.