Pharmacies want to keep us sick 🙁 is there ANY truth to this?

[TuscanMum]

There’s a lady I know who posts lots of pharmaceutical conspiracies on a regular basis. Things like, they have a vested interest in keeping us sick so as we continue to need their drugs.

The sane part of me says this is rubbish, can’t be allowed, no way.

But a little part of me wonders.🙁

I have a vested interest in this as I’ve an autoimmune disease and keep trying different types of strong medication that haven’t yet worked but Rheumatologist says it’s not cureable and drugs are necessary.

Met a man, just today, who said his wife has lupus but refuses meds and just manages with diet.

I’d be interested to hear what others think or know about this?

Autoimmune - latest research links it to our gut health. I have a few autoimmune conditions. I have been looking into having a gut friendly diet, eating more healthy, exercise, reducing my stress etc. Quite frankly, doctors are there to just prescribe drugs. I don’t hand the responsibility of my health 100% to doctors , that’s just plain stupid. I do my own research ( I try to keep it to medical journals/ mayo clinic, that kind of thing) and if there is some proof a supplement works, I will give it a try.

However, a lot of the natural health industry is full of bs with no scientific evidence to back up their claims and I feel very sorry for cancer patients that refuse treatment and go on some of these fad diets which shortens their life. My mother died of cancer, it was found too late to offer her chemo and I remember a doctor saying she wouldn’t have chemo and none of the doctors that she knows would either. However, for some cancers, people have chemo and it’s worth it. They are fully cured.

Cancer has been around for centuries. I personally ( I realise this is controversial ) don’t believe cancer will ever be fully eradicated. There is so many forms of it, so not one cure fits all, treatment. I think prevention and catching it early, is really the best hope. So no, I don’t believe there is a secret cure for cancer.

I believe addictive anti-depressants, “ kiddie smarties” and pain killers are over prescribed and that in my eyes is not fully kosher. But that’s due to people wanting the quick fix.

People find conspiracy theories reassuring.
Gives them a sense of being in control, or that someone is in control.
Much nicer than believing that some problems and events are in fact truly very difficult and totally overwhelming, beyond human ability to fix (at least for now).

People are so good at ageing and getting ill, Big Pharma doesn't need to do anything to keep their customer base going strong.

I'm 'thick as fuck' but I know how to kill off 'cancer' cells

I know I shouldn’t ask but how? And why is cancer in quotation marks?

There’s an xkcd for this isn’t there?

I don't believe in this bullshit. Who is Big Pharma anyway? When deluded fools say that Big Pharma wants to keep us sick, who exactly are they referring to? A company? But a company employs several thousands of people. So, several thousands of people conspire in unison against the whole of humanity? And I am sure these company employers have sick family members and relatives too, so why would it be in their interest to keep their loved ones sick too, alongside with strangers?
Or are they referring to the heads of those companies? Who are they? How many of them? Do these heads get together on an annual basis from all the pharmaceutical companies from every single country in the world in a secret meeting and rub their hands together with glee at successfully managing to keep people all over the world sick?
Do you really believe it?

the cure for HIV or cancer the best of luck finding a pharmaceutical company willing to manufactor it

Big pharma is pouring millions into finding cures for cancer, HIV, alzheimers etc. The rates of death from cancer are going down- it isn't because of advances in fish oil. HIV is now a chronic disease for many - not because of advances in diet.

Many people go into medical research and drug development because they want to make a difference to people's lives and health.

"Yeah big pharma wants to keep me sick and give me drugs' (on prescription so a tenner or free)" I don't believe the big pharma conspiracy but you do know the pharmaceutical companies are paid the going rate for meds? The price you pay (or don't) by going through nhs is nothing to do with it, they're paid the total cost or difference by the govt - ie us via taxation. They're not giving them away!

My AD's are £2.28
Pain meds £2.60
Sleeping pills £2.49

for a months supply, just cos I am not personally directly paying that doesn't mean the company producing them aren't paid!

Mine are fairly cheap, others are far more expensive.

But I'm also well aware that pharmaceutical companies are businesses and exist to make money - not something I'm entirely comfortable with and is a result of us living in a capitalist society which I'm also not totally on board with. Certainly big pharma's actions regarding meds for developing nations for fatal disease are appalling!

GP quality varies. Some will just dash off a prescription for anything. Some hate prescribing as a point of principle. The best ones understand there's a balance between natural remedies and treatments and when meds are necessary or a combination of the 2. They also know their individual patients, or at least listen to the patient telling them (directly or indirectly) who is most likely to sensibly follow a diet/exercise/other non-drug treatment regime and who is crap at taking meds regularly.

I also agree the number of people employed/involved directly or indirectly with big pharma no way a secret like that could be kept! Look how quickly it becomes public knowledge when a drug is ineffective or harmful?

Honestly the fast food industry and advertisers of such are doing FAR more harm!

PinotMwah - are you aware that current 'modern medicine' is at least partially based on herbal and other 'quack' medicine? Where do you think aspirin comes from? Atropine? Digitalis?

The relationship between Drs and drug companies where it's TOO close like in USA is decidedly dodgy and I never want that in the U.K.

Flu jabs - correlation is NOT causation. It may have been they were incubating bad colds/flu in run up to jab, side effects in fever and aches. If someone with a cold gets the side effects they may THINK they have the flu but don't.

As an asthmatic I've had the flu jab most years. Never had flu as a result.

Sausagedogs - I feel what you're saying but I think what that poster meant is that depression can have underlying lifestyle CAUSES - NOT that we are choosing to be ill (I hope) which can be true - to a degree. Eg poor diet, lack of sleep, drug & alcohol abuse, lack of exercise, overdoing it can all contribute to depression.

"I do think that we are swapping some diseases and illnesses for others - that's what nature does, finds ways to grow elsewhere" and to prevent growth! I know someone with an (admittedly odd) theory that HIV/AIDS occurred because there hadn't been a major war for several decades - so population getting out of control, nature protecting itself from the main user of resources - a disease which predominantly attacks not only the species using the resources but which inhibits the action responsible for population overgrowth - sex.

I'm struggling to think (or find by googling) an instance since thalidomide where the actual drug was harmful - not affected by cross contamination or other production cock ups. Ineffectiveness is much harder to assess, and less likely to cause a major scandal. Though frankly wouldn't sell! Particularly true in the U.K. Where pharma aren't allowed to advertise prescription only meds to the general public and promotion of products is heavily regulated.

"I have high blood pressure and there is no way in hell that I am treating it solely with diet and "self help" (whatever that means)." Why?!

If that's the best treatment and it works? You'd RATHER take medicines with attendant risks and side effects? Medicines ARE necessary for certain conditions of course, but if there's a treatment that's beneficial and less harmful why wouldn't you try it? In addition to taking my AD's (which keep me alive), I also eat as healthily as I can, try to hydrate properly, exercise when possible, meditate and practice mindfulness when my anxiety doesn't prevent and take vit d supplements. My mum was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and initially was on metformin. Following advice from dr and supported by her excellent practice nurse she changed her diet and she's no longer on the metformin and her dr considers her diabetes reversed. I also have IBS - it makes more sense to avoid triggering foods than to eat them anyway and have to take meds to treat the effects which also incur side effects, or which can't be take preventively.

Type 1 diabetes is a separate condition that does require medication. Type 1 is also an auto-immune disease. Though of course the symptoms of the illness dictate they also be careful with diet and exercise.

TheUser420 - total derail but I'd be very interested to know if your relatives work into genetic factors of drug metabolism inc research into individual response to analgesics and anaesthetics. Reason I ask is I have several family members and me all need more pain relief, more anaesthetic than most people. HCP's are VERY SLOWLY coming round to recognising this, but we still frequently come across hcp's who think we're 'at it' particularly as this group of meds tends to inc opioids. This is despite documented instances proving we're not lying existing. Eg waking during GA surgeries, high doses of sedative medication having no effect where similar doses would knock others right out!

I think as pp said COMPLETELY personalised treatment is probably unrealistic - but I'd settle for HCP's not dismissing the FACT that we're all individuals and to LISTEN to patients. For the fact that SOME people react conversely to certain meds to be recognised.

"One GP said to me that most people would be better off if they cut meds down to what they absolutely couldn’t survive without - that often people take one thing, then get side effects so take a tablet for those, etc etc."

What I have noticed due to having more ageing relatives I'm close to now, is that a big problem that is difficult for anyone to know how to deal with is where patients are on many multiple medications for different conditions! There's research into does drug A contraindicate drug B but it gets far more difficult to know if symptoms are being caused because someone is on 30+ meds a day because they have 6/7 different conditions that require medication!

So we may know drug A + drug B is ok we don't yet know that adding drug C Which is SUPPOSEDLY ok with both drugs A + B actually creates a (4th? 5th?) chemical or chemical reaction that is at best unpleasant at worst dangerous.

I've a relative who is on 3 very strong, necessary drugs for 3 separate but serious conditions. And of course under 3 separate specialists - all blaming the meds they were on for the OTHER conditions for some quite serious worrying side effects/symptoms. WHY there isn't a process where they can meet up to properly discuss and agree a plan to try and figure out which drug was responsible I don't know. The communication is appalling.

There'll never be a cure for cancer as it's essentially a natural process gone awry, the only way to 'cure' it would involve stopping a natural and necessary process altogether.

I don't believe there's a big pharma conspiracy, but I do think it's better to avoid taking medication wherever possible. That natural actions and changes are preferable courses of action at least initially, certainly preventively. Many conditions are avoidable with a healthy lifestyle.

No!

No. New customers are constantly being born.

I had extremely high blood pressure. GP precribed medications and my blood pressure reduced. All great. But GP's attitude (and advice) was "don't worry if your bp rises, there's still more we can give you"

I know they are under time pressures, and I wasn't the sickest person in their waiting room, but that approach did seem to be stacking up a bigger and bigger bill for the NHS (and profits for the pharmaceutical companies).

I imagine that as I get older there are likely to be more things for which I might need medication and I am worried about polypharmacy and the possible drug interactions. I researched everything I could about blood pressure and have implemented my own programme of relaxation, diet, exercise, sleep and support. I now maintain a normal blood pressure without medication.

I was glad of the medication to reduce my bp initially, but once it was under control I have managed to gradually reduce the drugs. My GP was sceptical at first, but now he says I'm his 'model' patient. Actually I'm not really his patient because he didn't have anything much to do with it!

But it took enormous effort, willpower and research to achieve this - to carve out time in my day for meditations, relaxation exercises, walking, yoga, swimming etc; to cut out salt, sugar, caffeine, alcohol and add in salads, veg, beetroot, herbal tea, seeds, nuts; to reduce my weight and my waistline; to change my habits and switch off tv, phone, electronics at least an hour before bedtime. It would be easier to keeps taking the pills!!

There's a MotherJones podcast that describes how Big Pharma created the Opiod addiction epidemic.. They created a product promotion & sales culture which had sleazy strategies, so didn't care if there were negative effects on thousands of patients. There's no evidence of evil coordination by power actors with express goal of creating the wave of addiction. More like they lost a safety-first principle, didn't foresee consequences.

Is that conspiracy or capitalist corporate negligence?

To everyone ridiculing even questioning whether they're trying to keep us sick or not:

If you're still alive in ten to twenty years, you are in for the biggest shock of your lives

I can't wait to see your reactions!

Employees of pharmaceutical companies and their families suffer from the same conditions as everyone else, don't see why they would suffer in silence if there was a cure for cancer etc. Doctors take the same medications as their patients. Of course they want people to take their drugs over other natural remedies...but this doesn't mean they don't work - it's a free market place so they have to be effective in some people for them to keep being sold / recommended. Of course people react to mediccations differently and they won't work for everyone and even big pharma admit their drugs have side effects.

I think it’s only common sense to believe this to an extent. The pharmaceutical companies make huge profits out of illness. You can’t patent aspects of diet. When I researched following a cancer diagnosis, I remember reading that when a doctor came across a natural substance that seemed to have an amazing affect on cancer cells, everyone was really excited until they found out it was a plant. No company was prepared to research or develop it. There is also no money in prevention. Although my oncologist (leading expert in UK in particular type of rare cancer) did recommend to me curcumin (from turmeric) and green tea.

Anyone else remember an old black and white film from the 40s or earlier?. Man invents an “everlasting suit’ from material that will never wear. Suit manufacturer buy the formula off him and patent it. Then destroy it and never use it. They want to clothes to wear out as more money in it.

Of course it's bullshit.

Aside from anything else, if a company did ever invent a cure for cancer, they literally have a licence to print money.

No it’s not true.

Because there’s a never ending supply of patients. If you had a cure for cancer, it would literally be a licence to print money. And people would still be born and get sick, so you keep being able to seek your product,

Pharma has a pretty poor record in many ethical areas (Ben Goldacre’s ‘Bad Pharma’ book is a great read) but honestly, nobody is sitting on a cure for cancer.

Interesting question.
I have MS, the doctors pushed and pushed the drugs because they wanted me for their trials. The drugs have a low success rate. Much lower than HSCT (80% success at halting progression), which I did and stopped the MS.
They could give people HSCT as soon as they were diagnosed but too much money and papers are funded by the drug companies, so a lot of people like myself have to go private.

I do believe that pharmaceutical companies are more interested in profits then helping people.

But without my medication for bipolar disorder I couldn't live the normal life many take for granted. I accept that the downside is my memory is screwed, I can have trouble getting my words out and making decisions quickly and my intelligence is...watered down to the point that my husband was shocked (not in a nasty way) that my IQ is 137. Also that while it doesn't cause weight gain, if I do gain weight for some reason, it is much harder to lose it.

Everything cuts both ways, you can't have the medicines that allow people to live a healthy life without pharmaceutical companies and all they represent.

If this was the case then why would things like TB now be virtually nonexistent 🤔

Pharmaceutical companies do love a good chronic non curable condition. Imagine a patient who will take your drug for years? Lovely.
But they also love a big ticket drug that will do amazing work cheaply ie a vaccine. But anti big pharma nuts think vaccines are a conspiracy too.
Brilliant new treatments for cancer are being discovered all the time.
Pharmaceutical companies aren’t charities though. If there’s no money to be made from something, governments funding university research should fill that gap. With brexit, British scientists will be cut off from eu funding for this. The anti big pharma people probably do overlap to some extent with the pro brexit people. We’re all connected.

Utter tosh, from someone working in big pharma. I do think most of the medical profession rely too heavily on medications rather than holistic lifestyle overhauls but all of the medics I know what the very best for the patient.

Most of that theorising originates in the US, where doctors have a closer relationship with pharmaceutical companies.

Here though, we have the NHS. Doctors do not get rewarded for prescribing expensive drugs! In a nutshell, each NHS trust has a budget for medication costs. When you and I visit the GP for an ailment, that's where the money for the cost of the medication will come from. In this financial climate, there isn't much money to go around.

Any medical practice spending excessive amounts of NHS money is going to be noted, and have their prescribing decisions closely examined. Far from being rewarded with 'commission', they would get a rocket up their arse for any unnecessary prescriptions!

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8446782/Patients-are-denied-high-cost-drugs-by-NHS-trusts.html

I have friends with MS that can't take the drugs for various reasons, they've been given HSCT at Kings.
I met with a specialist who performs HSCT and he told me they would only fund it if I tried and failed two of the DMD's first. They wait until you're properly disabled before they do it.
Whereas if you do it early on and halt progression you won't ever get to that stage.
This guy explains it well chrisselzershsct.wordpress.com/2017/09/09/chris-attempts-science-explaining-hsct-and-why-i-chose-it/

Yes of course. It is hardly news that the pharmaceutical industry creates ever more cures for diseases that are the result of modern lifestyles rather than any other cause.

Doctors do not get rewarded for prescribing expensive drugs!

By publishing papers they make names for themselves though.

I'm not a conspiracy nut at all, but to think some doctors have no vested interest is very naive.