Can Anyone Give Just One Reason To Trust The Pharmaceutical Industry

The crazy part is before Covid, the Left hated Big Pharma.

Now they are the biggest shills for Big Pharma that the CEOs could've ever hoped to have.

Never thought I'd see the day.

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

So did you miss out on all the Hillary 'pay to play' scandals'? Obama gave a good speech. Julian Assange still sits in the too hard basket.

You will be taken care of by the one who is good for you.

There are ways to die, stab your foot and it will bleed. You can do wrong around here.

a reply to: kwaka

Just extrapolating friend.✌️

a reply to: kwaka

And many families are granted extended time w critical ill family members because of many meds.

That is good. They are evil, not the meds...bad as they may be.*

Or not be...

a reply to: kwaka

We should call them Bourlas, from the tribe of Bourla.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

I find it interesting that many doctors who prescribe treatment and drugs wouldn’t follow the same for themselves.

Most physicians would choose a "no-code" status for themselves if they were terminally ill, but would tend to pursue aggressive treatment for patients facing a similar prognosis

May 28, 2014 - By Tracie White


Most physicians would choose a do-not-resuscitate or “no code” status for themselves when they are terminally ill, yet they tend to pursue aggressive, life-prolonging treatment for patients facing the same prognosis, according to a study from the Stanford University School of Medicine.

med.stanford.edu...

Nope, can’t think of one.

originally posted by: Disgusted123
People take drugs every day. For diabetes, for Aids, for HepC, for infections, to stop organ rejection, and a million other things.

So most people trust the drugs. And you will too if you need them to stay alive. Each and every one of you.

People here rail against drugs and medicine, yet the minute you get sick, off to the emergency room or doctor you go.

Next time, perhaps you should just stay home and let nature take its course. But we all know, you won't. You'll take those pills and get better.

So yes, people trust pharmaceuticals.

😂🤣😂 not all of us bud… on your bike and start a peddling.

a reply to: watchitburn

That graphic is quite flawed. I was born in 86 and I most certainly had MMR and a few others ones from the 2024 side in 1986 and these were required for school if I am recalling right. Not saying they were good or bad...but I never caught anything I was vaccinated for so if they did damage too at least it did something. With these new age vaccines they don't seem to do the...well...vaccine thing. Like preventing infection of the stuff they are supposed to vaccinate against. Also I can get behind the need to prevent things like measles and mumps and rubella as well as polio and the other terribly debilitating and killer afflictions. Things like COVID are not a reason to get vaccinated and for sure not with experimental stuff that was rushed through by money hungry liars.

originally posted by: TimBurr
I haven't trusted the pharmaceutical industry since it nearly killed me when I was twelve. Can anyone here give a reason this industry should be trusted?

I haven't got the mindset to be interested in the technical details, so I don't have an opinion on the following.

“The uptake of a foreign chromosome into your cell equates with nothing less than genetic modification.”

expose-news.com... s-dr-bhakdi/

I look forward to your educated viewpoint.

Back in the 1800's, when Jenner's vaccination against smallpox was being rolled out, there was a lot of press resistance to it on the grounds that 'injecting stuff from cows would make everyone turn into cows'.

After 200 years, that vaccine went on to become the most successful immunization in history and no-one turned into a cow, or even developed cow-like traits.

This linked article is exactly the same argument wrapped up in a few 'sciency' sounding words.

The article, and the alleged 'experts' that informed the article, seem not to know that chromosomes, DNA and RNA are all quite different things.

The mRNA strand used in both Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 immunizations has a short sequence in it that promotes transcription. This sequence was originally isolated from an RNA virus and works for both DNA translation and RNA transcription. It is not DNA. No DNA has been found in the mRNA immunizations.

The mRNA used in the immunizations produces a few spike proteins and is consumed or oxidized in the process. The lipids used to encapsulte the mRNA payload does persist in the fatty tissues of the body for some months, in minute amounts.

Of the many billions of people who have recieved the immunizations, not a single one has turned into 'a spike-protein monster'.

The Expose website is an online disseminator of misinformation specifically set-up in November 2020 to push an anti-vax and COVID-19 conspiracist narrative: The Daily Expose – Bias and Credibility

And in regard to the justification for the pharma industry. The longer lifespans and cures for numerous diseases are justification enough.

What the ꭍỡỡӃ have the anti-vax and anti-government conspiracists and misinformation sources ever done for us?

a reply to: Dalamax

I am with you here...its been so long since I've taken any meds for anything I actually can't remember the last time. If I was home I could say because those bottles are still half full on the medicine cabinet lol. There are some things however which do require meds and even procedures...if I get an infection and it lasts more than a few days without noticeably improving I know I need antibiotics to clear it up. Things like that I get...its when you take a drug for everything and them more to correct side-effects from said drugs...thats what is a problem.

a reply to: chr0naut

That's a lot of words to tell us that you yourself have no clue what is or isn't in these vaccines...but you are happy to fill up a page with words that you agree with from others...all while not actually having a clue yourself.

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
The crazy part is before Covid, the Left hated Big Pharma.

Now they are the biggest shills for Big Pharma that the CEOs could've ever hoped to have.

Never thought I'd see the day.

The left never hated big pharma. Nor do they, or did they, love big pharma.

It is entirely irrelevant to their ideology.

What has happened is that the right-wing have gone full conspiracy-theorist, and have embraced all sorts of 'woo', in their struggle for power through propaganda, rather than through performance.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: chr0naut

That's a lot of words to tell us that you yourself have no clue what is or isn't in these vaccines...but you are happy to fill up a page with words that you agree with from others...all while not actually having a clue yourself.

I have followed the research and was aware of most of what in in the immunizations, from before they were approved for use.

The mRNA immunizations contain mainly ultra-purified water with a suspension of strands of a particular sequence of mRNA encapsuleted in lipid envelopes that forms nano-spheres.

Specifically for Comirnaty:

- Each 0.3 mL dose of COMIRNATY (2023-2024 Formula) is formulated to contain 30 mcg of a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (modRNA) encoding the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant lineage XBB.1.5 (Omicron XBB.1.5).

Each 0.3 mL dose of COMIRNATY also includes the following ingredients:
- lipids (0.43 mg ((4-hydroxybutyl)azanediyl)bis(hexane-6,1-diyl)bis(2-hexyldecanoate),
- 0.05 mg 2-(polyethylene glycol 2000)-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide,
- 0.09 mg 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine,
- 0.19 mg cholesterol),
- 0.06 mg tromethamine,
- 0.4 mg tromethamine hydrochloride,
- 31 mg sucrose.

COMIRNATY does not contain preservatives.
The vial stoppers are not made with natural rubber latex.
The prefilled syringe tip cap and plunger stopper are not made with natural rubber latex.

a reply to: chr0naut

Really because I have yet to see anywhere with and actual list of ingredients. In fact its proprietary and not published at all. That won't keep you from writing another page of words about something you don't actually know about...I mean its not exactly a simple subject. I have worked events for both companies in the US which makes these vaccines...in fact I was at the first meeting in person of the Pfizer sales team last year. I can't talk about it because it would be easy for that to but me in the butt and ruin client relations for me...but lets just say they speak very differently when its just them in a room where everyone has an NDA...

a reply to: TimBurr

You can't just dump all the pharma companies into the same pot. There are some smaller ones that provide necessary medicines at a reasonable price. Some are just providing a service supplying a service to the medical industry. We do not hear much about those smaller companies because they are making a decent product and are not trying to get rich off people.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: chr0naut

Really because I have yet to see anywhere with and actual list of ingredients. In fact its proprietary and not published at all. That won't keep you from writing another page of words about something you don't actually know about...I mean its not exactly a simple subject. I have worked events for both companies in the US which makes these vaccines...in fact I was at the first meeting in person of the Pfizer sales team last year. I can't talk about it because it would be easy for that to but me in the butt and ruin client relations for me...but lets just say they speak very differently when its just them in a room where everyone has an NDA...

Every phial or pre-filled syringe of these immunizations by law must come with a list of contents.

The proprietary part is mainly processes by which they assembled the ingredients, and did so in bulk (it is easy enough to build a few prototypes, but to replicate enough to produce billions of doses takes significant technology).

The actual content details, including the genomic mRNA sequence, are completely in the public domain.

The implication that there are unknown contents is untrue.

And lighting a sales event or two is not really enough to know enough. It's like saying that you know how to make your own Apple watch because your cousin bought one.

It's been said vaccines compromise ones' immune system in some cases. I guess it's a crap shoot with the numbers, but when your child's life is on the line it gets real.

Six of 10 Vaccines Studied Increase Mortality

The improved measles vaccine rolled out in Africa in 1989 was found to double mortality from other diseases in girls. The diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine (DTP) was found to have the same disastrous effect, doubling mortality among children under the age of 5, and girls were again more likely to die

Inactivated (non-live) vaccines — the DTP, pentavalent vaccine, inactivated polio vaccine, H1N1 influenza vaccine and the hepatitis B vaccine — all increased all-cause mortality, especially among girls, even when they offered a high degree of protection against the target disease

GlaxoSmithKline’s antimalarial vaccine Mosquirix, which appears to offer 18% to 36.3% protection against malaria depending on the age group, was found to increase all-cause mortality by 24%

In Phase 3 trials, Mosquirix increased the risk of meningitis 10 fold, as well as the risk for cerebral malaria, and doubled female all-cause mortality

According to bioethicists, the World Health Organization’s malaria vaccine study breaches international ethical standards as they are testing vaccine safety in clinical trials without first obtaining informed consent from parents of child participants in Malawi, Ghana and Kenya

People get so vested in their opinions they have no ability to even consider new information and research.

The problem is, most people never see that data, much less take the time to interpret it and, thus, the lie, through simple repetition, becomes “established fact.” As noted in the Science News DK article:

“For 40 years, Danish researchers ... have shown that vaccines against everything from polio and smallpox to malaria and tuberculosis have both beneficial and harmful health effects that are unrelated to the diseases the vaccines protect against.

Now these researchers have put the research into a historical perspective that they hope can help make the world’s health authorities realize that the relationship between vaccines and disease is not always simple.

In fact, their research shows that some vaccines protect against completely different diseases than those for which they are designed. Unfortunately, other vaccines are associated with excess mortality from unrelated diseases ...

‘What do researchers do when they discover that vaccination opponents are justified in being concerned? No vaccines have been studied for their non-specific effects on overall health, and before we have examined these, we cannot actually determine that the vaccines are safe.

In addition, our research shows that some vaccines actually increase overall mortality, especially among girls, and this is very worrying,’ explains Christine Stabell Benn, Clinical Professor, University of Southern Denmark, Odense.”

[articles.mercola.com...]

Opinions and beliefs should be fluid and open to new information, not adopted as an absolute that turns ones' mind to stone.

a reply to: TimBurr

Lots of "screw big Pharma" on here. It used to be "screw the man" oh the memories!


If anyone here did the Ivermectin route you trusted big pharma. If you'd take nitroglycerin or a aspirin while having that heart attack waiting on the paramedics you trusted big pharma.

Big Pharma yes, took over cause Monsanto left a spot on the devils team. (jk) Ragging on big pharma is always gonna be fun but here's the thing. Once you're diagnosed it's easy to tell the Doc "let me think about it" or just be a unfiltered patient an tell them you prefer drugs from pre-1960.* Older drugs have a proven track record & are usually cheaper.

Dunno how many other people are juggling eighty thousand things before lunch but when you're grinding at work "thinking of everything" is a speck in the rearview mirror. If you don't divert a Doc's brain trail you are just going to get whatever outta them. They're human.

If you go the first route an wanna wait this gives you time to dig up every study and find one or three on older drugs for the condition/disease. Print it out, bring to next visit. I have NEVER had a Doctor react badly to this. Back in the day big pharma rocked out some decent stuff. Just like "How to Train Your Dragon" I think of it as "How to educate your Doctor".

* pick any pre-date you prefer. Some decent stuff was created after 1960 but I prefer to give a older date to curb the Doc's enthuseism till I've researched anything newer.