Originally Posted by bonehead

I was not aware that company A and B were the only companies period. I ventured Company B could move on and leach off of another company after sucking company A dry. I still see Microsoft as blatantly stealing from Apple and later from a myriad of other companies through the years. Now it is out to ruin Yahoo because apparently, not enough people have signed up for MSN and all the windows crap that goes with it. I will say that one good thing MS has done is that they ended the days where seemingly every company had its own computer program and now things are more standardized.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Again, I have no problems with patents. I think patents are the correct way as it rewards the effort of having a better product. My argument is that I should not be coerced, lied to or otherwise forced into buying the patented product, especially when it may not be the better product. For instance I feel that if I am thirsty I should be able to get a glass of water, juice, milk, beer etc and cure what ails me. The pharmaceutical companies however, want to create a new disease called "dehydration disease" and want to make a pill I can take instead of a glass of water. Only something approved by the FDA can cure a disease. That is my gripe. Mankind has existed for thousands of years, yet we only have been able to cure/heal ourselves since the adoption of whatever a pharmaceutical company makes and the FDA approves. I call B.S. loud and clear.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Many "new" drugs are bases on natural substances so it stands to reason taking a natural substance, ie non patentable, may work as well as or better than something a pharmaceutical company makes. The FDA should be evaluating these products. They should approve those that work as advertised and eliminate from the shelves those products that are found to be harmful. If it turns out (for instance) that a mixture of honey and spices shrinks tumors better than a $17,000 chemo treatment then so be it. If the honey and spices turns out to be so much snake oil then let the public know. We are entitled to that knowledge. As the current system stands it is not difficult to conceive that the pharmaceutical companies are making money from our poor health. If this is the case then they will deny us information that would allow us to be healthy because they would not make any money from a healthy person. Nor would they ever find a cure, because, again "what sane person would go through the agony and expense of chemo if they were healthy?" With the billions of dollars at stake, it becomes clear to me that pharmaceutical companies have put profits as their first goal and a desire to help people is way down on the list. Pharmaceutical companies should be reined in, but the only entity that can do so , the FDA, is whipping them along. If/when pharmaceuticals come out with a superior product, they should reap the rewards, but we are instead forced to pay a premium for marginal medicines that in the end usually only makes us sicker.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Come on Shek What is really most important. The health of a nation or the bottom line of a pharmaceutical company?