Stacy, I don't think so. Once a drug is off-patent, it's off-patent, and anyone can make it, usually for very little money. It can no longer be a huge income-producer. That's why Big pHarma wants such drugs eliminated - it opens the market for their next 'blockbuster.' The reason physicians prescribe existing drugs 'off-label' (meaning '…
Stacy, I don't think so. Once a drug is off-patent, it's off-patent, and anyone can make it, usually for very little money. It can no longer be a huge income-producer. That's why Big pHarma wants such drugs eliminated - it opens the market for their next 'blockbuster.' The reason physicians prescribe existing drugs 'off-label' (meaning 'not for one of the indications for which it was approved by the FDA') is that it's so expensive to do all of the careful clinical studies to establish the effectiveness of the drug for a new indication that no one does it - it's just prescribed off-label.
All I’m saying with all of this is that Big Pharma is going to try to cash in on old things made new and make it harder for us to do an end run on their system. I’m not saying it’s going to be impossible to do so, they’re just going to try to make it harder than it already is and make as much profit off the whole thing along the way.
Fair point, but I don’t underestimate the industry’s ability to reformulate and rename. That’s how they make money off of their synthetic vitamins, fish oil esters, hormones, and other natural substances that can’t be patented. All they have to do is make a minor change and submit it for approval. There are too many who will not go outside what their doctors order and what their insurers will cover (we take chances there with off-label usage). People here are not afraid to give or take horse drench, but we’re not afraid to go outside the mainstream. Most aren’t. Sorry. Modern medicine always finds a way when there’s money to be made.
There is no such thing as ‘make a minor change and submit it.’ Except for the Covid injection products, the regulatory burden for doing anything related to human subjects research is, well, incredibly burdensome and slow and extremely expensive.
Stacy, I don't think so. Once a drug is off-patent, it's off-patent, and anyone can make it, usually for very little money. It can no longer be a huge income-producer. That's why Big pHarma wants such drugs eliminated - it opens the market for their next 'blockbuster.' The reason physicians prescribe existing drugs 'off-label' (meaning 'not for one of the indications for which it was approved by the FDA') is that it's so expensive to do all of the careful clinical studies to establish the effectiveness of the drug for a new indication that no one does it - it's just prescribed off-label.
All I’m saying with all of this is that Big Pharma is going to try to cash in on old things made new and make it harder for us to do an end run on their system. I’m not saying it’s going to be impossible to do so, they’re just going to try to make it harder than it already is and make as much profit off the whole thing along the way.
Fair point, but I don’t underestimate the industry’s ability to reformulate and rename. That’s how they make money off of their synthetic vitamins, fish oil esters, hormones, and other natural substances that can’t be patented. All they have to do is make a minor change and submit it for approval. There are too many who will not go outside what their doctors order and what their insurers will cover (we take chances there with off-label usage). People here are not afraid to give or take horse drench, but we’re not afraid to go outside the mainstream. Most aren’t. Sorry. Modern medicine always finds a way when there’s money to be made.
There is no such thing as ‘make a minor change and submit it.’ Except for the Covid injection products, the regulatory burden for doing anything related to human subjects research is, well, incredibly burdensome and slow and extremely expensive.
As we saw with Operation Warp Speed. Please refer to my latest comment of the 5th and have a good evening.