The US is spreading ebola and is using Africa as a bio-weapon testing ground

[blue4eva77]

Statistically, we're living the longest lives in the history of mankind and most of the big killers, heart disease, cancer etc. become significantly more probably the older you get. If you're 90, you're far more likely to develop cancer, dementia or heart disease than someone who is 40. I How many has ebola killed this year? A couple of thousand? It's not trivial by any means, but if it was a method of population control, it really needs to be taking bigger bites of the apple than that. Your biggest gripe seems to be that doctors aren't curing everything left,right and centre. But sure, how complex could the human body really be?

The NIH (national institutes of Health) spends $3 billion a year on AIDS research. Alzheimers, which effects 5 times more people, has a budget of just $500 million.

The United States spends $95 billion a year on Medical research. A massive amount of money but it pales in comparison to their annual security defense spending, which is a staggering $640 billion. That $640 billion is more than the next 8 countries combined (China, Russia, Uk, Japan, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia and India.

You could say, well okay, if they have found cures for certain diseases then why are the U.S still spending $95 billion a year on research. A smoke screen perhaps, who knows ? I'm just throwing it out there.

 

[SerenityNigh]

The NIH (national institutes of Health) spends $3 billion a year on AIDS research. Alzheimers, which effects 5 times more people, has a budget of just $500 million.

The United States spends $95 billion a year on Medical research. A massive amount of money but it pales in comparison to their annual security defense spending, which is a staggering $640 billion. That $640 billion is more than the next 8 countries combined (China, Russia, Uk, Japan, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia and India.

You could say, well okay, if they have found cures for certain diseases then why are the U.S still spending $95 billion a year on research. A smoke screen perhaps, who knows ? I'm just throwing it out there.

The US Budget is roughly $3.5T. I don't know what the NIH budget is, but they only allocate roughly $30B annually to medical research. If I did my math(s) correctly, that's a medical R&D rate of less than 1%, not exactly a large expenditure (not to mention that most research is very expensive, so that doesn't go as far as you might presume). I would gladly welcome a larger NIH budget and more investment in medical research.

 

[RAFUH]

The US Budget is roughly $3.5T. I don't know what the NIH budget is, but they only allocate roughly $30B annually to medical research. If I did my math(s) correctly, that's a medical R&D rate of less than 1%, not exactly a large expenditure (not to mention, most research is very expensive, so that doesn't go as far as you might presume). I would gladly welcome a larger NIH budget and more investment in medical research.

As would I. Too much research relys on pharmaceutical companies.

 

[blue4eva77]

The US Budget is roughly $3.5T. I don't know what the NIH budget is, but they only allocate roughly $30B annually to medical research. If I did my math(s) correctly, that's a medical R&D rate of less than 1%, not exactly a large expenditure (not to mention that most research is very expensive, so that doesn't go as far as you might presume). I would gladly welcome a larger NIH budget and more investment in medical research.

Thats my point. Why is there not a larger investment in medical research ?

 

[SerenityNigh]

Thats my point. Why is there not a larger investment in medical research ?

I have never seen any candidate for (US) public office run on a platform of expanding medical research

 

[RAFUH]

I have never seen any candidate for (US) public office run on a platform of expanding medical research

In the current enironment they'd be skewered by the conservative anti-stem cell research crowd.

 

[Ashtonian]

the reason why there is no cure for cancer is money. Pharmaceutical companies would lose billions if people stopped buying their drugs to help keep illnesses like that at pay. Instead of an instant cure they want you to keep having to come back to them and buy their products so there never will be a cure for serious illness. And as those companies have ties to governments world wide, there is no pressure for them to come up with results and they continue growing and growing making more and more money.

 

[ijjysmith]

the reason why there is no cure for cancer is money. Pharmaceutical companies would lose billions if people stopped buying their drugs to help keep illnesses like that at pay. Instead of an instant cure they want you to keep having to come back to them and buy their products so there never will be a cure for serious illness. And as those companies have ties to governments world wide, there is no pressure for them to come up with results and they continue growing and growing making more and more money.

Jesus Christ

 

[Moomin]

the reason why there is no cure for cancer is money. Pharmaceutical companies would lose billions if people stopped buying their drugs to help keep illnesses like that at pay. Instead of an instant cure they want you to keep having to come back to them and buy their products so there never will be a cure for serious illness. And as those companies have ties to governments world wide, there is no pressure for them to come up with results and they continue growing and growing making more and more money.

You are the Xmas gift that keeps giving.

 

[Ashtonian]

Jesus Christ

You are the Xmas gift that keeps giving.

Tell me at what point i am wrong there?

 

[Moomin]

Tell me at what point i am wrong there?

When you started typing.

 

[ijjysmith]

Tell me at what point i am wrong there?

I honestly can't be arsed mate.

 

[Blue 1]

the reason why there is no cure for cancer is money. Pharmaceutical companies would lose billions if people stopped buying their drugs to help keep illnesses like that at pay. Instead of an instant cure they want you to keep having to come back to them and buy their products so there never will be a cure for serious illness. And as those companies have ties to governments world wide, there is no pressure for them to come up with results and they continue growing and growing making more and more money.

Then why do they bother to create vaccines? Surely it would be more lucrative to have sick people buying cures all the time?

 

[Ashtonian]

When you started typing.

So no actual discussion back about it? lol

Think about it, the world isnt all fairy tales and rainbows. Im pretty sure a quick google would get a hell of a lot of stuff that agrees with me.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Tell me at what point i am wrong there?

Well for a start "cancer" isn't just one singular illness and their are chemical cures for certain forms of it, have you heard of chemotherapy?