NYT Unintentionally Gives the Drug Industry a Reality Check
When a New York Times article revealed that readily-available generic drugs can halve the risk of breast and prostate cancer, how do you think the general public reacted?
Awe that preventing cancer with a pill is possible? Nope. Surprise that their doctors hadn't mentioned this? Not really. Outrage that big bad pharma is trying to make a buck by duping them into taking dangerous drugs? Bingo.
Most biotech and pharma folks probably liked the NYT article, and the fact that the general public apparently did not speaks volumes about just how far this industry has fallen in the court of public opinion. Here's a sample of some of the "top-rated" of the 239 comments on the article:
- To me, the whole idea looks like the wet dream of Big Pharma, nothing more. If they had their way, we all would have to take dozens of pills every single day to keep us "safe" from problems we probably would never have even without the drugs. (140 votes)
- This article should be entitled Big Pharma's Dubious Experiments Rejected by Intelligent People Everywhere Despite Big Media's Support Efforts. (140 votes)
- The tone of the article suggests that it's strange for people not to take these medicines, but why? On their doctors' recommendation, women took hormone replacement for years, the rate of breast cancer skyrocketed, and nobody connected the dots. (112 votes)
- Cancer research has become a racket paid for by the US taxpayers. Big pharma doesn't find cures, it finds lifetime treatments that are taken in monthly payments. (104 votes)
- Companies don't have a vested interest in curing anything. Curing kills their business. Treating cancers keep them in business. This isn't new. (23 votes)
- Medicines to deter cancer not taken, eh? Oh, poor Big Pharma! Imagine all the revenue they're losing because of that faux pas on the part of the populace. (21 votes)
And more important than how we got here, how do we get back?
New York Times photo by Flickr user Joe Shlabotnik, CC