(24-03-2022, 06:34 PM)harm_less Wrote: There are currently practitioners using a wide variety of off-patent drugs in off-label applications to combat cancer which is not dislike the way ivermectin is being promoted in some quarters to (rightly or wrongly) combat COVID. In both cases the use of cheap alternatives to derive a desired result is denying pharmaceutical companies of potential income so is of course criticised by them and definitely not going to be viewed positively in the unlikely event that research is carried out on the efficacy of such substances in those applications.
That sounds a lot like desperate cancer patients prepared to pay a lot of money for less conventional treatments, after exhausting established treatments, to less reputable medical professionals, to stave off their inevitable death...
and regarding
Quote:use of cheap alternatives to derive a desired result is denying pharmaceutical companies of potential income
I'm not so sure that is the case at all, big pharma have had decades of higher prices to recover their development costs, they know well in advance that patents are expiring. The only implication I can really see for big pharma is that decision of whether to keep supplying the drug themselves in a competitive market. I guess most do...
But in regard to Ivermectin and Covid, any drug for mass distribution has to be considered safe for the treatment intended, but it seems clear to Merck at least that this is not the case. You would have to be a brave CEO to go against the advice of the company that actually developed it I would have thought
https://www.merck.com/news/merck-stateme...-pandemic/
This world would be a perfect place if it wasn't for the people.
Sharesies | Buy Crypto | Surfshark VPN | Cloud Backup
Sharesies | Buy Crypto | Surfshark VPN | Cloud Backup