pharmesuticals creating Fake diseases?

Are there any disorders or disease forthat matter that are just propganda.pseudo-Sicknesses that don't exist or for the drug companies to make x amount of money on fake illnesses.

Interesting question. I wouldn't mind hearing some theories...

Oh, interesting question. I've never thought of that before... However, I've always been suspicious of drug companies. They don't have our best interests in mind. I don't trust them to give me a "cure" since their entire business is 'disease.' After all, if they cured all our diseases, how would they make their money?

I wouldn't be even a little surprised if they just make up sicknesses for us to think we have... Then we look at the "symptoms" and go, "Hey, I have that!" and we believe it, and our mind makes it real. Then we get placebos for outrageous prices and we think we're fixed... Fake cure for a fake disease.

Neat theory.

they poison us with heavy metals in our drinking water

Originally posted by Xenopathic_Investigator
they poison us with heavy metals in our drinking water

They sure do. They put floride in the water. Last time I checked, floride does more harm than good, besides isnt it a major ingredient in Nerve Gas.

peace

[edit on 6-6-2005 by Serum39]

Fake disease? I would not put it like that, but in a manner yes. You are told that you need to take drugs for every little ailment these days.

News flash: Everyone gets depressed or tired or run-down at times. There is nothing wrong with you as it is all part of the normal process. No one is happy 100% of the time and if they are then they are probably pretty heavily medicated to be that way.

Most of that 'diseases' that we see commercials for these days are just aspects of being a chemical machine that we have to deal with if we are an organic life form.

Pharma companies exagerate these realities in order to get you believing there is a problem with you that should be medicated. Just go out and excerice and eat right. Having a better attitude about it makes the world of difference.

good to hear some theories on this one, since it has probably effected everyone on this whole board at some point in their lives. I think that if it isn't 'fake' diseases, then at the bery least they play on our insecurities and make us 'feel' like we need it. They have made something for every possible 'symptom' to boost sales and stay in the market. Even the natural remedies I think have overdone it.

basically i feel that the human body's ability to fix itself and clean toxins has been stepped on. it's alot harder for our bodies to repair damage when your placing more in there that is worse for yuo, to 'cure' you. I try not to even take headache tables because I would rather work through it on my own without that help. it isn't hard to do.

M@

It has been going on for decades, i for sure have been aware of it for the past 5 years or so. People are prescribed medications they do not really need all the time, it is just part of the pharmacutical buissness strategy. They make a lot of money on misinformed patients. It is not the doctors, but it is the pharmaceutical companies.

I agree with that, but further to that I have heard that doctors have taken money from companies to exclusively push their product at every opportunity.

I would like to hear from people in the industry or, for that matter doctors themselves. Does this actully go on?

M@

I happen to be an expert on the lives and professions of Doctors. I have lived with 2 of them my entire life. Although I suspected that they recieve money for pushing drugs, I have never heard of someone doing it. I'm sure that it happens somewhere in the system, but definetly not all the time.

Doctors in fact are getting screwed because of liberals who are pushing for higher taxes. Doctors have to pay somewhere along and upwards of 200,000 a year for malpractice insurance. And that is all happening cause selfish people decide they can sue Doctors left and right.

There is a book out there, I can't think of the name of it, written by a doctor who talks about how MDs are hired by the companies to run clinical trials for new medications. Recently, the cholesteral levels for "safe" levels was right after one of the companies came out with a new medication for it. Coincedentally, 9 of the 10 docs that wrote the report and did the recommendations also were on the panel that tested the medication.

Making up diseases... hmm, mental health diseases I am inclined to agree.
Anyone want to tell me what "Oppositional Defience Disorder(ODD)" is supposed to mean? I work in a medical capacity, and see admits for that all the time. The number of 5, 6, 7 year olds being admitted for ADD, ODD, and related disorders. Personally, I am of the opinion that if a 5 year old is being admitted, then parents need to as well.

Many of the other illnesses I think half of them are just the results of the garbage we stuff our bodies with. Is it really an illness, or just treating medication side effects with more medication that creates more side-effects.

Thanks for that Adriande. I think it would be a minority og md's actually taking money from comapnies but I really do think it happens. Just out of curiosity, how do you think young children aquire ADD? I mean, my younger brother used to throw amazing tantrums when he was a kid, and this was before ADD was so widely common. Anyway, basically we found he had an allergic/chemical reaction to orange juice, and once he stopped drinking it it went away...

Do yuo all think parwents are doing enough to keep their kids healthy body and mind?

M@

Originally posted by Disaster_Boy
I agree with that, but further to that I have heard that doctors have taken money from companies to exclusively push their product at every opportunity.

I would like to hear from people in the industry or, for that matter doctors themselves. Does this actully go on?

M@

Is this where I wave my "I'm from the pharma industry" flag?

Alrighty. Yes, doctors are sometimes given incentives to prescribe drug A over drug B (when both treat the same illness). Drug companies are in this to make money, don't forget - and it's in their best interests if Doctor Bob prefers their drug over that of their next competitor. It's questionable ethically, but generally speaking we'd be talking about only drugs which treat the same disease. It's not as if they'd be paid more for giving Percocet when ibuprofen would be more appropriate, for example.

This puts doctors however in a bad situation that's not helped by the insurance companies. If anything, it's those at whom I'd be more angry. For example:

Jill has (disease A). Drug 51 would be ideal for her situation, but sadly because it's a new name brand and hasn't gone generic yet, her insurance company won't pay for it. So, she has a choice - pay out of pocket, or make do with something less effective. Jill's doctor will try and give her samples when he can (this is so common that it's generally considered the norm), but his hands are tied - he knows that Drug 52 isn't quite as good, and that Jill really would be better with Drug 51, but there's not much he can do until the drug goes generic....and if, down the line, the pharmaceutical company can prove to the FDA that their Drug 51 has a new indication, then they'll be able to keep the patent indefinitely, and prolong the agony, so to speak. Insurance companies can make things very, very difficult for doctors and patients.

Now, in terms of safety, most people don't know that by the time the drug reaches the public (ie, after it's received FDA approval), it's been tested on less than 2000 human patients on average - and usually a lot less. Within the industry, it's at this point where the real side effects are noted - that is, during post-approval drug trials (usually studying efficacy versus a similar drug, etc etc). That's when you really start to see the real numbers for various side effects, complications, etc. We only have to look at the likes of Phen-Fen, Vioxx and the like to see that FDA approval doesn't necessarily imply safety.

The truth is, drugs are a risky business. Though drug research costs can run into millions per drug, much of this cost has to be offset by increasing drug prices. Also, factor in the cases where millions are spent on drug trials, and the drug is not approved by the FDA, or simply gets dropped (for whatever reason) at some point of the procedure. The "wasted" millions have to be made up somewhere. Bottom line? It's a business.

Now...moving on to made-up diseases. I've really never seen any evidence of this - trust me when I say that there are enough legitimate diseases and conditions out there to keep the industries very, very happy for a very long time. On the other hand, there are drugs being prescribed for "conditions" that probably don't need chemical treatment, and it's certainly true that some conditions are over-diagnosed and over-treated. ADD is a notorious example of this. One of the biggest tragedies of our time is that 3 and 4 year olds are being fed Ritalin when they need nothing more than adequate stimulation and perhaps more dilligence paid to dietary needs. Whilst both ADD and ADHD are legitimate concerns.....I heavily doubt that they're anywhere near as common as we've been led to believe.

One other thing - doctors aren't really "hired" by drug companies. They are paid, yes....but usually the trials are what is called "double-blind". This means that some patients will be given the drug, and some will be given either placebo, or an alternative - neither the doctor nor the patient know which one is being given until the trial is over.

It's common to find doctors publishing reports based upon clinical trials where they were directly involved - this on it's own is not proof or evidence of any underhandedness, although it's happened before (again, I'll refer to Phen-Fen - anyone interested to learn more might want to read Alicia Mundy's Dispensing With The Truth; whilst it's Hollywood-ized to a great extent, there aren't actually any untruths told). Very simply, we as a society have elevated drugs and doctors to an almost deity-like status - and if that's to change, then we have to change it ourselves by taking charge of our own healthcare and not following blindly what we're told. We get second opinions before we have surgery, but very few of us do the same thing when we're handed a prescription.

I hadn't realised this post had turned into a treatise...so I'll stop for now. If anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to try and help.

(FWIW - I worked with Wyeth (as an independant contractor) as part of the task force dealing with Phen-Fen class action claims, and worked on various other clinical trials prior to this.)

think in today's world, work occupying lots of time, Fast food (not just McDs but Family micromeals and meals from a box) we are opting for easy and quick. Not to mention the cost of organic grown and healthy snacks (soy chips, granola etc) is so much more than the 2 for $3 jumbo chips. Go to school athletic events. Watch some of the best players and count how many of them are overweight. If they are getting so much excersise running around all the time, how can they be so overweight? And why are so many overweight children ALSO malnurished.

We all know that if you let a child sit down and eat a bag of Oreo double-stuff then you will be peeling them off the walls in 20 minutes time. And we know the nutritional value of the Oreos is next to zero. Look at the nutritional content of soups, boxed meals, frozen dinners. The values are very low in real nutrients and very high in salt and Sugar (Ragu spagetti sauce contains 21 g of sugar in one jar).

How many people recall when Twinkies first started putting expiration dates on them? They used to have a several year shelf life but people were disturbed by that so they reduced the time to a couple months. If the chemicals that they are putting into foods can cause that, what is it doing to our bodies?

Plus, I have seen many kids that are "ADD", they are bouncing off the walls and parents yelling at them to calm down. They spend 8-10 hours at school, 1-2 hours doing homework, 1 hour with "dinner" then they only have 1-4 hours for themselves. What to do? Sit in front of the t.v. But how many kids DO ask to go out or to the park and the parents are too busy, or don't want them to go out because they can't keep a constant watch on them. How often do they let the kids run around with the neighborhood kids building forts, racing bikes and generally just wearing themselves out until they practically drop.

I'm not really blaming parents. I am blaming a society that wants quick and easy. Instant gratification. We don't want to deal with problems and find the cause, we just want to treat it with medication and make it go away. If we don't see it, it doesn't exist right?

Also, we are in a strange limbo. Women wanted equal right, we got them. But now most of us are forced into a 2-4 job household. But if most people SERIOUSLY sat down and calculated dollar costs (day-care, babysitters, travel, vehicle expense) and the cost of "hearth and home" they would find the second job earns is less than what is being spent to have it. Does that mean the woman should stay home. Nope. I don't. I work, my husband stays at home. I argue with people all the time over it. I can earn more money and I HATE being at home all day. I go stir-crazy. He thrives in it. And after all, women wanted equal rights. If I have the right to choose to be a home-maker, shouldn't he?

Thanks for the honesty tinkle. I wasn't actually expecting anyone from the pharma industry as may be a little 'close to home'. Postsliek this tend to make me a bit sad, cause it seems kids just don't get the attention they need, and ti all just snowballs. Who is to blame for it? is it the parents? The doctors, the companies... the government?? All? I think we as a race of humans have become lazy and forgootten what it is really like to work hard. Just because technology has made things simpler does it mean we should base erverything on it?

restless legs syndrome.

Psychiatry: Pseudoscience. Fact. They even admit it. read page 81 of the DSM IV. They admit that there is in fact no medical or chemical test for the disease known as ADHD.

Read into that what you want. The more you read the more holes you see in their research. (or what passes for research)

And if you think that is as deep as it goes......dig deeper. It's not a conspiracy, these guys are just a little stupider than most. I actually feel sorry for them.

In the words of Paul Keating (ex Australian treasurer.... Get a job)