(no subject)

Feb 09, 2007 15:16

The easy solutions to cervical cancer and tobacco addiction are "don't have promiscuous sex" and "don't smoke." But until people behave perfectly, there is a huge price to pay - in dollars, in personal misery and in scientific integrity.
Drug Research That's Well Funded, if Not Well Founded
This article started off with what seemed to be the right idea... Sure, prescription drugs cost a lot of money and a big part of that cost goes to cover advertising and lobbying. I have no doubt that Merck has increased prices even more to make up for the Vioxx debacle. Do companies submit somewhat questionable scientific "proofs" to support the company's products? Of course they do, that's fairly common practice and it's hardly privileged information.
But to suggest that people who smoke or choose to practice, well within their rights and liberties, promiscuous sex have just about single-handedly destroyed scientific integrity and caused untold amounts of personal anguish..? I'm not really suggesting that the best way to stop smoking is to take a pill (especially not one such as the well-known antidepressant Wellbutrin), but attacking something as significant as the HPV vaccine?! Is making an anti-cancer vaccine that can save women's lives mandatory and therefore more available, such a bad thing? Why not go as far as say that women who choose to exercises their right to have sex with whomever they wish deserve to get cancer and suffer? Gah!

science, drugs

Previous post Next post
Up