English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-09-24 13:38:07 · 11 answers · asked by Wait a Minute 4 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

If a company cures a disease, they loses all profit from treating it, don't they? Don't all pharmaceutical companies today just have drugs to reduce the symptoms?

2006-09-24 13:42:37 · update #1

11 answers

no there is no profit in a cure only a treatment and half the time that doesn't work.

2006-09-24 13:39:34 · answer #1 · answered by conundrum_dragon 7 · 0 0

Awhile back I was either reading or watching something indirectly dealing with this question. Anyway, from that in my opinion drug companies do not have an incentive to cure diseases because they would in fact see their profits fall into the red. I do not have an exact figure readily available, but these companies make billions and billions of dollars every year just within the US, treating peoples' symptoms rather than looking for a cure. Let's use penicillin for an example. Penicillin takes care of the source of the problem therefore treating all symptoms at once. These days you could find a 10-day supply of pills for $10-20, somewhere around there. If penicillin was never mass produced to fight the source of the problem, drug companies today would be giving people medicine that would just take care of the inflamation, swelling, pain, and/or infection, rather than killing off the bacteria and other foreign bodies that invade the site of the wound, or the like. The companies would make people pay $20 for a ten-day supply to reduce the swelling, another $20 for the inflamation, $20 for the pain, and finally, $20 for the infection. There you have it, the companies make four times as much money taking care of the symptoms as opposed to paying for a one-time cure-it-all drug. All in all, if making a profit wasn't a drug company's bottom line, we'd have cures for many cancers, AIDS, and various diseases.

2006-09-24 14:11:59 · answer #2 · answered by Jeremy L 3 · 0 0

I doubt it! The pharmaceutical industry is a multi-billion a year industry... they MAKE more by disguising symptoms rather than curing the causes. They also give huge incentives to medical companies in the form of monetary contributions as well as to directors of departments in hospitals... and many doctors get free use of suites and yachts and other "fringe" benefits for prescribing their brand products. Doctors do not cure. They prescribe medicines that hide and disguise symptoms!

Why do the Philippines, Canada and Mexico patients pay less than Americans? AMERICANS have to subsidize the world? Wait a minute... these are American pharmaceutical companies that get tax reliefs, tax incentives and tax breaks... yet, they take their manufacturing companies overseas where they pay the workers LESS than they would pay Americans here... they're also part of the cause of the loss of Americans jobs and they turn around and charge American poor, disabled and retired and senior citizens MORE???? WHERE is the supposed incentive for finding cures... being known for having found a cure never bought anyone a Mansion or a Ferrari or a few more millions in the bank but keeping people on chemicals..? YES!

2006-09-24 14:57:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Not all medicine is developed by drug companies. Many are developed by people driven by altruistic motives, i.e., to cure a loved one or those who suffer from the same disease that killed a loved one. If the disease is rare, the drug companies don't have a profit incentive to develop and market the medicine. There are many many cures waiting to be put on the market. Unless there is profit in it for drug makers, it doesn't happen in the USA. Other countries might market them however, then US drug companies lose a greater share of the market. This is why there is a campaign to stop foreign drug makers from selling here.
I guess the answer to your question is pretty straight-forward, given these circumstances.

2006-09-24 13:52:24 · answer #4 · answered by water boy 3 · 0 0

Bingo, you get the booby prize for the most provacative question today. Did you know the pharmaceutical conglomerate IG Farbin (the forebears of Bayer Aspirin) supplied 4-1/2 tons of Zclon-B per month to the SS death camps during WW II? ...just a side note to drug company incentives.

2006-09-24 14:44:50 · answer #5 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0 0

God No!
They not only don't want to cure them, they want to create more-as many as they can get away with. And they want to terrorize people into thinking they are sicker then they are and in need of their "pharmeceuticals" It is all about money and greed. Go see the movie "The Constant Gardner" (based on a true story) for just a taste of what goes on in DRUG companies!

2006-09-24 14:48:39 · answer #6 · answered by ontheroadagainwithoutyou 6 · 0 0

in my opinion drug companies benefit on peoples diseases. its not in their interests to find cures for the diseases they treat. diabetes for example. its one of the most common diseases in america. think of all the money that those comp. make off insulin and and all other supplies every month. not to mention doctors benefiting as well.

2006-09-24 13:46:54 · answer #7 · answered by stavs 1 · 0 0

I know this is on the verge of conspiracy theory BUT I think it is the opposite way around. If they cured the disease they wouldn't make money on the pills, would they?

2006-09-24 13:41:35 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 1 0

yes. Wouldn't you like to be known as someone who CURED a decease?

2006-09-24 13:39:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Only one $, otherwise they could care less.

2006-09-24 13:39:59 · answer #10 · answered by Joe B 5 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers