Added: 6 months ago
From: anubis2814
Views: 877
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (55)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Actually it would be very simple for a company like this to exist without govt. If there is a need, there will be someone willing to satisfy that need. If people need someone to test drugs, one would be very smart to start one. If people die/are injured because of untested drugs, this will cause people to demand companies get their drugs tested by a reliable third party. Of course, competition will enforce reliability.

    All that and I didn't even need to steal anyone's money to do it.

  • loved your explanation on what the fda does, and decided to make a video on this topic as well. Would you ever like to come on our clinical trial webshow and explain more?

  • @dansfera I might, I'm just a humble microbiologist with a BS though so I kind of had to research a lot before I made this video, and I had a short stint working in pharmaceuticals. I will definitely watch your channel. I'm now working in cell biology in an Alzheimer's cell and DNA bank.

  • Awesome video. Good to know someone out there has bothered to inform themselves before making radical accusations about the FDA. I'm so tired of FDA conspiracy theorists that believe Big Pharma and the FDA are taking over our lives without even understanding drug research, why FDA laws are what they are, what FDA approval actually means, and how the required research is implemented in actual practice for dosage and administration.

  • Yes. That is a nice fine and dandy essay you read about the FDA. The problem is - we are not allowed access to drugs or treatments unless they are FDA approved. They can waste tax dollars viewing and reviewing drugs and treatments all day long for all I care, but to restrict people from access is taking people's rights away from them and it makes the options that are available more expensive. Big pharm makes huge profits thanks to FDA enforced defacto drug monopolies.

  • @noidonotgofish Well then watch my video "Why some private regulation works" video /watch?v=jM0x5h_m8-U

  • @anubis2814 30 seconds of it was more than enough, its just the same totalitarian rabble as the other videos. The disappointing news for you is that the financial implications of this quakery is that it is headed straight on a road to failure. Debt and deficits are out of control, economic growth is gone and all we have right now is overspending, subsidized by foreign lenders, and artificially low interest rates to keep food on our tables. Sooner or later the chickens will come home to roost.

  • @noidonotgofish And freedom is just tea party code for breaking government and letting the rich get away without paying their share

  • @anubis2814 Au contraire - Its for breaking the current (unsustainable) government practice of heaving our money, often backed with the force of the state and threat of imprisonment, into the hands of a very select and wealthy few. Its either happening directly, eg military industrial complex, or indirectly, eg FDA, Dept of Educat. All of that government overspending has to go somewhere. Our current income disparity is not a manifestation of capitalism but from the obscene bastardization of.

  • @anubis2814 30 secs of it was more than enough, its just the same totalitarian rabble as the other videos. The disappointing news for you is that the financial implications of this quakery is that it is headed straight on a road to failure. Debt and deficits are out of control, economic growth is gone and all we have right now is overspending, subsidized by foreign lenders, and artificially low interest rates to keep food on our tables. It is completely unsustainable, freedom works much better.

  • @anubis2814 (pt2)Think about it, who's INCOME goes up when you lower their tax rate? There are underlying factors causing theirs to increase while others are stagnant or decreasing. The fortunes are often being made in areas where our tax dollars are shoving the prices up. For exmple, 16 of the 20 highest paid NPO execs are in Education, government "investment" at its finest. Same thing happening in health care, for example, its now a felony to save a few bucks ordering meds online. Big pharm<3

  • @noidonotgofish Everything can be done better and I'm all for arguing how, but destroying it is not an option I agree with.

  • @anubis2814 If we must waste our tax dollars on those bureaucratic nightmares, their dictations should be advisory, not law of the land enforced with prison cells. We have the highest incarceration rate on the planet, and even corporate outsourced prisons are in the top 1% earners. People should be free to make their own decisions for their health (including the drug war). There are plenty of commonly used treatments, even in 1st world, that just don't bother to deal with the FDA nightmare.

  • @anubis2814 We have a very serious problem with outrageous health care costs. FDA limiting the options that people can choose for themselves, giving leeway for the chosen few to overcharge, is a huge part of both the economic problem and the government overspending/debt issue. Even for a person to try to save a few bucks by ordering a med from an online pharmacy is now a felon, for his own "safety" of course, but it also suspiciously cuts into big pharma profit margins. Cuts=freedom=prosperity.

  • @noidonotgofish Not true. You are allowed access to drugs and treatments that are not FDA approved. FDA simply prevents them from marketing it with therapeutic claims (or, like dietary supplements, they have to clearly state it's not FDA approved), they can't mail the products, and they can't transport interstate. From there the product is typically under the state's jurisdiction. You typically can take all the alternative treatments you want.

  • Comment removed

  • @noidonotgofish (Pt. 2) For instance, salvia hasn't been approved by the FDA for any indication, nor has it been regulated as a schedule drug. It's thus under state law. You can legally take all the salvia you want as long as you live in a state that permits it. If you believe it'll cure some ailment you have, then by all means you can use it for whatever you believe without the FDA approval. Someone selling saliva simply can't sell it claiming it'll treat this and that without FDA approval.

  • @noidonotgofish (Pt. 3) I highly doubt you want a repeat of the snake oil, sulfanilamide, thalidomide, etc. days when drug marketing was less regulated and almost anyone could pass any combination of products, claim it treats all sorts of ailments, and end up killing or disabling hundreds of consumers. FDA law is constantly changing according to current needs, it's not perfect as it is - that's why there are constant proposals, but eliminating how far it's gone would do much more harm than good.

  • We've been to Europe. Those people WALK. Even if they do take a train or a car, there is more walking involved.

    Curry-eating populations: since Alzheimers has a hereditary aspect, could it be their gene pool that means less of this diease in that group? Wouldn't you look where you check that out, first? Don't get me wrong, I like curry dishes. I just think there are other things that might be more relevant.

  • @curlew0609 I have a link in the bottom bar, and I think its gone through phase 2 trials. They think what turmeric does is to break up the clusters that form causing Alzheimer's and yes they took genetics into account.

  • @anubis2814 Looked at the site. Interesting, but "blood transfusions!?!?!" Doesn't exactly sound like a home remedy. Can we count on you to keep us up-to-date on how the dietary tests come out? Given how many people suffer from Alzheiners, it would be good to know about - how much is needed, how cooking heat or other ingredients affect it, etc.

  • @anubis2814

    The shrinks are the worst. You can't convince them that medications are dangerous no matter what the hellish side effects are, and if you're in a psych ward and the side affects are really bad but the shrink is threatening to keep you for weeks, you're really stuck between a rock and a hard place. I could see if it was somebody with psychotic episodes or something, but being forced to take dangerous meds for simple depression is barbaric.

  • I went to the doctor's office a couple days ago and the doctor was questioning a pharmceutical rep about the effects of a new med as if he didn't know a thing about the medication. I was like, gee that makes me feel safe, I hope he does some research of his own on which medications are best and isn't just going by what the salespeople tell him, and by what kickbacks he's going to get.

  • @Primalxbeast Yeah that's something that really need regulate better.

  • I think what the FDA does is important, however, it should not stop anyone from taking any drug they want. If a drug goes all the way through, then we should expect a low toxicity or death rate, but if a person takes something that is more experimental, then they shouldn't have any guarantees in the lack of negative effects.

  • @TheAtheistPaladin Do you know how many bullshit experts there are out there, who push useless stuff?  Imagine if they could sell dangerous chronic stuff. Or if rumors spread on the inter webs about a miracle drug that never made it through testing and was found to be dangerous. I think you trust people and yourself a bit too much not to fall for that. My "Why do intelligent people still believe in religion?" Series is not just about religion, anyone can fall prey to these mechanisms.

  • @anubis2814 People would spread anecdotal evidence like crazy. Just look at what is happening with the anti-vaxers right now. They don't just hurt their own kids, they also hurt others who can't get the shot. Public health is not just about the individual, its about everyone around them too.

  • @anubis2814 We have division of labor for a reason, because everyone know everything, why we trust our experts, though many will not understand why we trust our experts.

  • @anubis2814

    Yes, things like colloidal sliver have many crack-pot promoters, but that isn't going to stop anything just because its claims are not verified by the FDA. Safety and efficacy is the FDA job but being a nanny for everyone, they are not. The FDA has dragged its feet on drugs that everywhere else in the world it was already considered safe. At that point they are not saving lives by doing that but causing loss of life. Allowing everyone to make there own informed choice is better

  • @TheAtheistPaladin That's the problem, the majority is not informed, nor can they be, people are busy and have things to do. Also learning long term side effects takes time. Yes there are flaws in the FDA, but without it, we would have much worse time on our hands.

  • @anubis2814 On top of that, companies would have a brand new market and reasons to be corrupt because they'd produce these drugs, and probably spread misinformation about the drugs making people clamor for them. There are many indirect untraceable ways to spread information. look at the climate change debacle.

  • @anubis2814

    And that is no different when people argue agaisnt drug and prostitution legalization, and abortion. There will be ways that system could become corrupt or done in ignorance. But no one is forcing you to take or do anything. It the same here. If people don't have the time to understand what they are putting in their body, then why feel bad when the reap what the sow? It like you talk about the greater populous as if they where children. That is belittling .

  • @TheAtheistPaladin Dude some believe that the earth is 6000 years old and man lived with dinosaurs, sorry if I don't have a high opinion of over 50% of the population

  • @anubis2814

    You can't stop someone from making stupid choices. If that is your policy then your work will never be done. Society is not going to collapse just because people are allowed to put whatever substance they wish into their bodies.

  • @TheAtheistPaladin So if something is massively addictive you shouldn't stop them? At that point the person is no longer in charge of their own life. I'm all for legalizing weed, and shrooms, but there should be some level where the person is protected from their own ignorance, especially if its non-reversible. However given a psych eval I think every sound minded person should be allowed to end their life as well, if they are not sound they need help because they are no longer in control.

  • @anubis2814

    Having a intervention for someone that strung out on crack is different from allowing someone to take a drug that hasn't gone through all the safety and efficacy test. A person should still be allowed to manage all his/her own risks, even if all those risks aren't known.

  • @TheAtheistPaladin So by your reasoning do you think drug companies should be able to market these untested drugs to the public? I have a big problem with marketing drugs to any patient, That's something a doctor needs to know. Mind you I also have a major issue with drug rep marketing to doctors if you know anything about that debacle, using gifts and ex-cheerleaders as opposed to informed educated sales persons.

  • @anubis2814

    What should be done is that the person should be informed of where it is in the process and what effects it known to have. From there he/she should be informed that because the drug isn't 100% verified that he/she understands that what happens it at his/her own risk and that they should not take with other drugs. So after all that then they should be allowed to take it if they choose so.

  • I sat through an hour long lecture on this and only learned about step 0 onward, thanks for the pre-animal stufy part. Humans wouldn't be good animal models even without any ethical considerations - we have a long generation time and have few offspring per mate for one thing! Good thing rodents are the opposite and so closely related to us ^_^

  • studies show - animal research leads to a 100% chance of cancer in lab rats.

  • @docdrew87

    what have you got against cancer? it's life! Why do you hate the poor cancer cells :'(

  • @unassumption you have made me feel bad about my post, and i am now championing a new charity that gives cancer to children intentionally. sorry for offending. viva la cancer!!

  • Just an aside....I've worked with FDA investigators before on the manufacturing side, and found them to be very reasonable. They are very cooperative if you are. Even if they find something wrong, unless it is egregious,they just point it out, and give you time to correct it.

  • The French and Italians walk a ton more than Americans do, which probably accounts for their lower obesity rates.

    Good vid. My wife works in pharma, an in my line of work, I've done a number of validation projects related to pharma.

  • @SiriusMined That is a major part of it, I also know that the French traditionally have only 1 big meal a day, and 2 smaller meals. In the US, all 3 meals are big.

  • @anubis2814

    Have you seen ancient streets in italy and france?

    There's no way you can drive a car through them, it's that narrow , so people walk.

    Other reason i think accounts for the quality of food: much less junk food and prefabs.

    Wine may be a co-factor, but i don't think it's the main one though.

  • This is not only a well composed, very informative video, it is also a much needed community service. Thanks!

  • Does the FDA compare new drugs with current drugs? I thought the companies just had to prove it works, not that it works better than what is on the market now.

  • @BrotherAlpha They do, there is no point in releasing a drug that doesn't work as well as a drug that is tested and true, especially if its more expensive. If its cheaper then there would be a reason to release it even if there was a reduced effect.

  • @anubis2814 "They do, there is no point in releasing a drug that doesn't work as well as a drug that is tested and true, especially if its more expensive."

    That would be the point, to extend the patent and get another 12 years without competition.

  • @BrotherAlpha "Does the FDA compare new drugs with current drugs? "

    Yes. If a drug up for approval doesn't show any improvement over existing drugs, it is usually turned down.

  • Well done! If the FDA was more involved in the banning of homeopathic and/or drugs with no actual therapuetic benefit.

  • @dgeypscun If there were you know AJ would have to make a video about how the illuminati is trying to cover up the TRUTH about homeopathy to gain power through our medicines

  • @dgeypscun Though a video by AJ and the puppets about holistic medicine might be a very fun topic. I bet Gary loves to use Horny goat weed haha

  • @anubis2814 There really are groups who believe the FDA is a big government conspiracy to prevent herbs and other other alternative methods that work from being used so they can sell their pricey poison "unnatural" drugs.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more