From: dr_jeff on
David wrote:

<...>

> The difference is that alt supporters admit that there is a problem.
> You, and others like you BELIEVE that the drug companies are your butt
> buddy friends. No sweat, just keep believing and using those drugs.>

Really? Even the New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of the
American Medical Association know drug companies are not perfect and
have conflicts of interest. Drug companies are in business to make
money. Period. They are obligated to their owners (stock holders) and no
one else. Just like Ford is obligated to its stock holders and is in
business to make money for them, not for its costumers. AT&T is in
business to sell cell phone service. ExxonMobil and BP are in business
to sell oil and oil products, not protect the environment to make money
for their stock holders. And alternative medicine makers are also
obligated to their owners and not their costumers. If you think that
alternative medicine or conventional medicine companies are more
interested in protecting the interests of their patients rather than
their stockholders, you're wrong.

The advertising and marketing to doctors is done to sell the drugs
rather than help patients. It is well documented that doctors who get
gifts from drug companies prescribe drugs from those drug companies more
than similar drugs from other drug companies.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/362/8/669
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/303/12/1196
From: David on
dr_jeff wrote:
> David wrote:
>
> <...>
>
>> The difference is that alt supporters admit that there is a problem.
>> You, and others like you BELIEVE that the drug companies are your butt
>> buddy friends. No sweat, just keep believing and using those drugs.>
>
> Really? Even the New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of the
> American Medical Association know drug companies are not perfect and
> have conflicts of interest. Drug companies are in business to make
> money. Period. They are obligated to their owners (stock holders) and no
> one else. Just like Ford is obligated to its stock holders and is in
> business to make money for them, not for its costumers. AT&T is in
> business to sell cell phone service. ExxonMobil and BP are in business
> to sell oil and oil products, not protect the environment to make money
> for their stock holders. And alternative medicine makers are also
> obligated to their owners and not their costumers. If you think that
> alternative medicine or conventional medicine companies are more
> interested in protecting the interests of their patients rather than
> their stockholders, you're wrong.
>
> The advertising and marketing to doctors is done to sell the drugs
> rather than help patients. It is well documented that doctors who get
> gifts from drug companies prescribe drugs from those drug companies more
> than similar drugs from other drug companies.
>
> http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/362/8/669
> http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/303/12/1196

I was refering to the users of each. You knew that though.
From: Al Grimes on

"David" <me(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:WeWdnYQSitU4TYfRnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> Mark Probert-Drew wrote:
>> Several errors there.
>>
>> First, this is Usenet and it pre-dates the Internet.
>>
>> Second, you seem to have a problem as you view people as "betters". I
>> don't. Not even Jan Drew.
>>
>
> Yes, I know it is "Usenet". And you are correct, I do view myself as
> better than you. So?

David <--- views himself way too highly