 |
 |
On 2 October, Ken Aidekman wrote: "The thought that drug companies would prefer that diseases not be cured so that they can continue profiting from pharmaceutical sales is cynical..." I agree. Ambrose BIerce, in his Devil's Dictionary, defines cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision. "...and unproductive." ... "Paranoia about hidden motives can only hurt us." The profit motive is anything but a hidden motive. Mr. Aidekman points out a number of excellent ways in which the drug companies can profit from and even despite the progress that would be made by further NIH funding. I hope that they do make reasonable profits on the drugs that they develop for Parkinsonism and related problems. But let us also remember that if we are to be productive, we must keep our eyes unplucked and open, because there is a potential conflict of interest here. (There is also a conflict of interest between doctors and drug companies, as brought out on a Marketplace commentary on public radio this morning. I am trying to get a transcript of the commentary, even though it deals with gall bladders, because I think it would be of interest to the list.) It was good to know that Dupont Pharma and Somerset Pharmaceuticals were among major sponsors of the Unity Walk. I commend them for that. But still John Cottingham's posting of 3 October, "The Grinches Who Stole Christmas," was right on the mark. Where was the rest of medical establishment when we needed it most? Art Hirsch [log in to unmask] Lewisville, TX