by cador » Tue 07 Dec 2004, 13:14:49
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PhilBiker', 'Y')ou've all missed what I personally feel is the real issue.
I have no studies and no links or anything go back this belief up except simple observation of the world around me.
There are many factors, but the deep underlying reason medical technology, all medical technology, not jusy Rx drugs, is so expensive is the following: We have reached the point of diminishing returns. Much like with peak oil, we've reached the point where we have to invest huge amounts of effort and massive amounts of money into advancing medical research even a little bit. There will never be another "miracle cure" like the discovery of pennicilin or the Polio vaccene or anything else. We've already found all the "low hanging fruit" in the medical field.
Plus, the whole world is missing the poing. We're toxifying the world with chemicals and we wonder why cancer rates are going up. Instead of researching the new toxicity of the world around us, we're spending umpteen million dollars trying to find a cure for breast cancer.
There will never be a cure for cancer. There will never be a cure for AIDS. There will never be a cure for most things we're working on. When does it end? When does the research into these lost causes end? When do we realize that the medical world has reached the practical end of the line?
I like this post a lot. Perhaps the best thing that people can do is try to live a healthy life. Cancer is really just a symptom of a weak immune system. Yes, many people are born with a weaker immune system than others. As for AIDS, that is largely avoidable unless you're the unlucky recipient of a tainted blood transfusion or you happen upon a crazed madman who is flailing about with an infected needle in public.
All of this medical research is just a futile attempt to cure old age. Life was pretty cruel in pre-industrial times. The technology didn't exist to detect cancer so people just happened to die at a relatively young age. Several years of hard labour in an agricultural economy tends to make people age faster in comparison. We have the luxury of living sedentary lifestyles (at least until peak oil hits us).
I think that ex-Colorado governor Dick Lamm said it best, "the elderly have a duty to die". Although I don't advocate euthanasia, the cost to society to taking care of the elderly is going up at an exponential rate. The social security safety net is basically a pyramid scheme--you need that much more productive members of society to take care of its old. As the elderly population grows while the young population stagnates, their political power will grow as well and they will vote to give themselves even more "free stuff" than they get now. George Bush probably saw the political writing on the wall and decided to give the senior citizens more prescription drugs at the cost of burderning the next generation of taxpayers with even more debt.