Your question is flawed. Pharmaceutical companies make drugs, socialised medicine administers the drugs. Only 22 percent of new drugs developed in the past 20 years were actually significant, and marketing expenditures are outpacing R&D expenditures 2:1. In other words, the principle for the success of drug manufacturing in the US compared to anywhere else in the world is due not to radical innovation, but heightened marketing.
I do know that insulin and 3TC (an aids drug) were invented in Canada, though. I also would not be surprised to learn that the US gov't coffers more funding and/or tax credits to their pharmaceutical industry than anyone else. They are, after all, your biggest lobbiest.
I do know that insulin and 3TC (an aids drug) were invented in Canada, though. I also would not be surprised to learn that the US gov't coffers more funding and/or tax credits to their pharmaceutical industry than anyone else. They are, after all, your biggest lobbiest.
Found this for you:
"According to NIH [National Institutes of Health], taxpayer-funded scientists conducted 55 percent of the research projects that led to the discovery and development of the top five selling drugs in 1995." "Rx R&D Myths: The Case Against the Drug Industry's R&D 'Scare Card,'" Public Citizen report, July 23, 2001.
_______
In other words, you the taxpayer pay for much of the R&D while the pharmaceutical companies then horde the trademarks and market the products under their own brands. You pay to make the product, they profit from it. You also forfeit your right, thanks to Medicare, to have your gov't negotiate the prices of the drugs they buy for you. Who needs lube, eh?
"According to NIH [National Institutes of Health], taxpayer-funded scientists conducted 55 percent of the research projects that led to the discovery and development of the top five selling drugs in 1995." "Rx R&D Myths: The Case Against the Drug Industry's R&D 'Scare Card,'" Public Citizen report, July 23, 2001.
_______
In other words, you the taxpayer pay for much of the R&D while the pharmaceutical companies then horde the trademarks and market the products under their own brands. You pay to make the product, they profit from it. You also forfeit your right, thanks to Medicare, to have your gov't negotiate the prices of the drugs they buy for you. Who needs lube, eh?
Patriot National health care plan (Basic)
All people applying for HC must submit to full physical.
If smoker you got 30 days to quit.If nicotine is found in system..no insurance
If overweight applicant must lose poundage according to docs recomendations..no compliance,no insurance.
If drinker or drugger. 1 time rehab with follow up testing.Failed test.No insurance.
All applicants will be required to have minimum physical endurance testing based on present health conditions.If failed.Excersise program to be given to applicant, and will be retested at prescribed intervals...no improvment,no insurance.
Instead of free insurance (free of course except for taxpayers).
You earn your insurance,through basic common sense.
All people applying for HC must submit to full physical.
If smoker you got 30 days to quit.If nicotine is found in system..no insurance
If overweight applicant must lose poundage according to docs recomendations..no compliance,no insurance.
If drinker or drugger. 1 time rehab with follow up testing.Failed test.No insurance.
All applicants will be required to have minimum physical endurance testing based on present health conditions.If failed.Excersise program to be given to applicant, and will be retested at prescribed intervals...no improvment,no insurance.
Instead of free insurance (free of course except for taxpayers).
You earn your insurance,through basic common sense.
Would agree somewhat with Patriot's version of insurance.....just not quite the extreme that violating the rules would disqualify someone for insurance....
I would install a system based more so on the healthy people who are taking care of themselves paying the lowest premiums.....the ones who let thier body go to shit would have to pay more.....pay for your own lifestyle of choice through higher premiums or earn a cheaper premium by staying fit....
I'm not fat by any means, but I'm not into the fitness craze either, so my premiums would place me more in the middle of the pack....but why should active people get hosed because someone else weighs 400 pounds and is about 3 cheeseburgers short of a heart attack?
I would install a system based more so on the healthy people who are taking care of themselves paying the lowest premiums.....the ones who let thier body go to shit would have to pay more.....pay for your own lifestyle of choice through higher premiums or earn a cheaper premium by staying fit....
I'm not fat by any means, but I'm not into the fitness craze either, so my premiums would place me more in the middle of the pack....but why should active people get hosed because someone else weighs 400 pounds and is about 3 cheeseburgers short of a heart attack?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Marco:
Would agree somewhat with Patriot's version of insurance.....just not quite the extreme that violating the rules would disqualify someone for insurance....
I would install a system based more so on the healthy people who are taking care of themselves paying the lowest premiums.....the ones who let thier body go to shit would have to pay more.....pay for your own lifestyle of choice through higher premiums or earn a cheaper premium by staying fit....
I'm not fat by any means, but I'm not into the fitness craze either, so my premiums would place me more in the middle of the pack....but why should active people get hosed because someone else weighs 400 pounds and is about 3 cheeseburgers short of a heart attack? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wish my carrier would institute yearly physicals to determine premiums in conjunction with prior year usage. Too many people would complain about privacy violations which would necessitate the alternate system for those unwilling to submit to the physical.
Unfortunately, I work with one of those walking heart attacks. He's supposed to exercise just 15 minutes/day on a treadmill and watch his diet but it's the same thing every day fettucine alfredo, pizza, burgers and fries and no exercise. I can't decide if he has a death wish or if he just doesn't give a damn.
I often wonder why they don't fire him because he's absent at least 3-4 months every year. Then I see him "fall" in the parking lot and "pull" a muscle. There were 4 witnesses so we know he didn't pull anything. Now the stress of 350 lb falling on his rib may have bruised or even cracked it but x-rays would clear that up in 2 seconds whereas pulls are a lot harder to disprove. How convenient that he's off for 5 weeks and was released just in time to take vacation for his fishing trip to Canada. It's fvckin' a$$holes like him that will ruin that as a benefit to the rest of us.
Sorry for the rant but it's better that I do it here than at the workplace where I'm likely to offend many with my candor.
Would agree somewhat with Patriot's version of insurance.....just not quite the extreme that violating the rules would disqualify someone for insurance....
I would install a system based more so on the healthy people who are taking care of themselves paying the lowest premiums.....the ones who let thier body go to shit would have to pay more.....pay for your own lifestyle of choice through higher premiums or earn a cheaper premium by staying fit....
I'm not fat by any means, but I'm not into the fitness craze either, so my premiums would place me more in the middle of the pack....but why should active people get hosed because someone else weighs 400 pounds and is about 3 cheeseburgers short of a heart attack? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wish my carrier would institute yearly physicals to determine premiums in conjunction with prior year usage. Too many people would complain about privacy violations which would necessitate the alternate system for those unwilling to submit to the physical.
Unfortunately, I work with one of those walking heart attacks. He's supposed to exercise just 15 minutes/day on a treadmill and watch his diet but it's the same thing every day fettucine alfredo, pizza, burgers and fries and no exercise. I can't decide if he has a death wish or if he just doesn't give a damn.
I often wonder why they don't fire him because he's absent at least 3-4 months every year. Then I see him "fall" in the parking lot and "pull" a muscle. There were 4 witnesses so we know he didn't pull anything. Now the stress of 350 lb falling on his rib may have bruised or even cracked it but x-rays would clear that up in 2 seconds whereas pulls are a lot harder to disprove. How convenient that he's off for 5 weeks and was released just in time to take vacation for his fishing trip to Canada. It's fvckin' a$$holes like him that will ruin that as a benefit to the rest of us.
Sorry for the rant but it's better that I do it here than at the workplace where I'm likely to offend many with my candor.
My whole point guys and dolls is that,why should I pay probably another 15% in taxes that goes for subsidizing a junkies lifstyle....Why should I be the 150th in line behind junkies,winos,perverts,AIDS infested derilicts not to mention criminal aliens to see a doctor....You think fucking John Kerry waits in line to have his prostrate massaged??...I think not.But then again in his case they may not find balls either.
Oh by the way these cocsuckers get treated regardless now or not wether they have their own ins....look at the inner cities that shoot each other daily...they still get treated at emergency rooms.
The whole uninsured thing is a bunch of bullshit anyway...I know guys making 50-100 K a year with kids who are to fucking stupid to buy insuranse for their families...why is that my fault.
If your going to have a national plan,you should have strict guide lines.
On the other side of the coin you have people who will go to a doctor 3 times a week for a hangnail or a cold...the whole thing is flawed.
Oh by the way these cocsuckers get treated regardless now or not wether they have their own ins....look at the inner cities that shoot each other daily...they still get treated at emergency rooms.
The whole uninsured thing is a bunch of bullshit anyway...I know guys making 50-100 K a year with kids who are to fucking stupid to buy insuranse for their families...why is that my fault.
If your going to have a national plan,you should have strict guide lines.
On the other side of the coin you have people who will go to a doctor 3 times a week for a hangnail or a cold...the whole thing is flawed.
I know a system that would be far better tahn sicialized medicine and cheaper! It's the US insurance system with tort limits.
What percentage of premiums goes directly to cover tort?
It ain't the drug companies that are killing a great system - it's the ambulance chasing lawyers.
What percentage of premiums goes directly to cover tort?
It ain't the drug companies that are killing a great system - it's the ambulance chasing lawyers.
The US system is the most expensive in the world guys.
15% of GDP.
Even crazier is the fact that even though you are the most expensive, you don't even cover all your population.
And that 15% is 15% of the richest place on the planet.
private sector economies of scale?
private sector efficiency?
or private sector price gouging.
15% of GDP.
Even crazier is the fact that even though you are the most expensive, you don't even cover all your population.
And that 15% is 15% of the richest place on the planet.
private sector economies of scale?
private sector efficiency?
or private sector price gouging.
Please,
The FDA restricts and allows medicines depending on what suits pharmaceutical companies.
Marijuana for example is a proven pain killer that is cheap to cultivate and virtually side effect free, yet they'd rather have us taking chemical based pain killers.
Aids victums that are lucky enough to have the financial means travel to Europe for the newest most modern medicines.
Hell even the abortion pill, abortion is legal in the States but the pill isn't???
The FDA restricts and allows medicines depending on what suits pharmaceutical companies.
Marijuana for example is a proven pain killer that is cheap to cultivate and virtually side effect free, yet they'd rather have us taking chemical based pain killers.
Aids victums that are lucky enough to have the financial means travel to Europe for the newest most modern medicines.
Hell even the abortion pill, abortion is legal in the States but the pill isn't???
Switzerland has a system regarded by many economists and experts as the best in the world and they are home to plenty of drugmakers. They have a hybrid system that acts like a PPO with the patients required to take on some of the cost. This feature is extremely important, without it there is a lack of restraint by the public to demand service from the system. In the end the mix costs more than some countries, but about 50% less than the US system on a per capita basis.
This method somewhat mirrors the Bush plan. Make a few changes to it and I would say Bush's plan for health care is quite good. One of the rare things I have to agree with him on.
http://www.settlement.org/cp/english/switzerland/health.html
http://www.switzerland-4you.com/news/2004/07_sickness-insurance.htm
This method somewhat mirrors the Bush plan. Make a few changes to it and I would say Bush's plan for health care is quite good. One of the rare things I have to agree with him on.
http://www.settlement.org/cp/english/switzerland/health.html
http://www.switzerland-4you.com/news/2004/07_sickness-insurance.htm
After looking into it, it appears that Canada's patent laws are the principle reason for low drug-development initiatives here. Pfizer Canada, for example, has a habit of patenting any drug discoveries by their Canadian labs under US jurisdiction, then using the trademark protection laws here, which are stricter than those of our patents. Apparently, our patent laws are the worst of the G7s despite improvements over the past decade.
