|
|
|
|
|
by bossyTeacher
969 days ago
|
|
treatment > cure That's the equation for big pharma. Now tell me you don't see a problem with this. If you don't, I will help, a treatment is more profitable. And you know what's even more profitable? Knowing that someone might need your treatment in the near future or far future. Because you can extract even more profit from the person. Yes, this means that you would get screened early but it also means that your healthcare costs would be much higher compared to now where most people (apart from US) only experience healthcare costs when they become old. Business models for early payment of potential treatments to offset the costs (don;t think hn crowd, think real people with real, see low, salaries) would likely become a reality. Now imagine being super healthy but 1/3 of your salary goes out to accommodation costs and another 1.5/3 goes to this futurist version of healthcare. It would absolutely devastate most people. Remember most people don't make the high salaries most HN folks make, they live paycheck to paycheck with barely enough to make ends meet. At this point, what's the point of working in cures when treatments are much better? This is like academics only working on original research, gets you a field where most of the studies cannot be replicated |
|