Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 102 posts

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#91

Post by NotANaN »

shard972 wrote: post #64
NotANaN wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They proved they have no conscience with the Chinese baby formula scandal[1]: putting melamine in baby formula to save a little money, knowing that doing so would be poisoning infant children. "A spokesman said the scale of the problem proved it was 'clearly not an isolated accident, [but] a large-scale intentional activity to deceive consumers for simple, basic, short-term profits.'" [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wik…

How is this racist white supremcist drivel allows to stay on HN? We are 1 human race, there is no difference between skin color. To call out an entire people as cruel and heartless is just so wrong!

I am referring to the "Chinese vendors and mfgs" in the parent comment, not the entire Chinese "race." I called them conscience-less.

In support of my view, I quoted the World Health Organization stating that these people knew what they were doing, and it was done intentionally on a large scale.

In your view, is the World Health Organization fond of writing "racist white supremcist[sic] drivel"?

How is it "racist" or "white supremacist" to express horror at injury and death of Chinese babies? If I were either of those slurs, I would be celebrating this scandal, not expressing horror at it.

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#92

Post by syntaxing »

yadongwen wrote: post #78
syntaxing wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks! Do you know who "Bean Spirit" is? I was going to guess 豆神 but not sure since spirit can be a lot of words.

憨豆精神 if you know chinese.. He was legendary and inspired many ppl including me. Sadly he passed away last year.

Thank you! Such a shame to hear. I will definitely browse the site to read about his legacy.

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#93

Post by seanmcdirmid »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #65
stcredzero wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is not that corrupt yet, thank goodness. However, to respond to the idea in the other comment: That Chinese people, Chinese society, or Chinese culture is somehow the root cause, I think we should be calling out Baidu and the PLA in particular.

Oh, I totally believe those things would happen in the states if we didn’t have much better rule of law than China. It’s a corrupt government, but culture that it is the problem.

“But not culture that is the problem”

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#94

Post by darawk »

averros wrote: post #79
darawk wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and what do you think you get if you don't do those things? The answer is no drugs at all.

This is totally false, as there are other parties which are interested in developing new drugs: academic researchers, insurance companies, and patients. The drug research is paid for by patients and insured as it stands now, but the FDA/pharma cartel monopolized drug development using patents and the hugely expensive approval process. Now, pharmas are interested in profitable drugs which don't as much cure the diseas…

> This is totally false, as there are other parties which are interested in developing new drugs: academic researchers, insurance companies, and patients.

Why would an insurance company be interested in developing new drugs? Health insurance companies don't lose money if you die.

How do you propose that academic researchers fund their work, all the way through the approval point?

> The drug research is paid for by patients and insured as it stands now, but the FDA/pharma cartel monopolized drug development using patents and the hugely expensive approval process.

Do you think the process is expensive because of the pharma companies, or do you think the pharma companies are the way they are because the process is expensive?

> Now, pharmas are interested in profitable drugs which don't as much cure the diseases but rather allow mainenance of chronic conditions for years and years. Actual effective cures are not a priority.

This is a thing people say, but it's not really true. It'd be great if all you had to do to create more cures was snap your fingers and change the incentive structure. But the fact of the matter is that cures are harder to create. Incremental improvements are easier. So you get more of them. Pharma companies do in fact still cure things when they can, see the recent HepC cure.

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#95

Post by darawk »

claudiawerner wrote: post #46
darawk wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and what do you think you get if you don't do those things? The answer is no drugs at all.

Is it? I remember seeing a paper in which they found no empirical evidence that patents actually help in medicine. I'd be interested to know if you have any information on it.

I'm not sure how that could be the case. I'm not familiar with that paper, but I would be curious to see its logic. It's hard to imagine that completely removing the financial incentive to create a thing would engender more of that thing.

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#96

Post by seanmcdirmid »

meds2010 wrote: post #85
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is nowhere near the same thing as the Chinese baby milk melamine scandal, as well as more localized fake baby milk powder scandals. In fact, people go to HK to buy so much baby milk powder that they had prevent export. We are comparing a non defective product that couldn’t be used effectively by a certain populations to outright fraud.

I can see a product designer make the case that if millions are dying, then the product is defective in some way. The rules are different in two different places, but I can see how someone thinks these two cases are similar, both are about corporate greed, and the victims are just statistics. Is it murder if there is something wrong with the product, and you don't pull it? Many people out there believe that it is: ht…

Well, one is against the law and the other is not and, in fact, couldn’t be without serious implications to personal freedom. One messes with the truthfulness of the information an informed consumer has available, the other simply relies on an uninformed consumer. These are not similar at all.

As an analogy, take sugary snacks. Say a snack has lots of sugar but the company claims it is sugar free anyways. In another case, a snack is truthful about its sugar content but the consumer lacks the education (or willpower) to care. Aren’t these completely different problems?

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#97

Post by meds2010 »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #96
meds2010 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see a product designer make the case that if millions are dying, then the product is defective in some way. The rules are different in two different places, but I can see how someone thinks these two cases are similar, both are about corporate greed, and the victims are just statistics. Is it murder if there is something wrong with the product, and you don't pull it? Many people out there believe that it is: ht…

Well, one is against the law and the other is not and, in fact, couldn’t be without serious implications to personal freedom. One messes with the truthfulness of the information an informed consumer has available, the other simply relies on an uninformed consumer. These are not similar at all. As an analogy, take sugary snacks. Say a snack has lots of sugar but the company claims it is sugar free anyways. In another…

It depends on how innocent you think Nestle is. I can understand why someone would conclude that there is some "messing with the truthfulness" going on at Nestle. Both in the product design, and the marketing. It's why a lot of people call it a "scandal." I think this is less about laws for people who compare the two and more about morals. In one you have dozens dead, in the other, the claim is that millions died. Both are about corporations and profit and gaming the system and manipulating consumers, so in that sense, I think it's easy to make the case that they are extremely similar.

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#98

Post by seanmcdirmid »

meds2010 wrote: post #97
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, one is against the law and the other is not and, in fact, couldn’t be without serious implications to personal freedom. One messes with the truthfulness of the information an informed consumer has available, the other simply relies on an uninformed consumer. These are not similar at all. As an analogy, take sugary snacks. Say a snack has lots of sugar but the company claims it is sugar free anyways. In another…

It depends on how innocent you think Nestle is. I can understand why someone would conclude that there is some "messing with the truthfulness" going on at Nestle. Both in the product design, and the marketing. It's why a lot of people call it a "scandal." I think this is less about laws for people who compare the two and more about morals. In one you have dozens dead, in the other, the claim is that millions died. Bo…

I think only a fringe call that a scandal since it doesn't involve outright deception. It all depends on whether you think someone should save people from themselves.

Sugar has probably killed more than millions, which has definitely been driven by corporate profits and gaming the system (substituting sugar for fat). But again, Coke Cola and Mars (and yes, Nestle) haven't been consider a scandal yet.

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#99

Post by meds2010 »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #98
meds2010 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on how innocent you think Nestle is. I can understand why someone would conclude that there is some "messing with the truthfulness" going on at Nestle. Both in the product design, and the marketing. It's why a lot of people call it a "scandal." I think this is less about laws for people who compare the two and more about morals. In one you have dozens dead, in the other, the claim is that millions died. Bo…

I think only a fringe call that a scandal since it doesn't involve outright deception. It all depends on whether you think someone should save people from themselves. Sugar has probably killed more than millions, which has definitely been driven by corporate profits and gaming the system (substituting sugar for fat). But again, Coke Cola and Mars (and yes, Nestle) haven't been consider a scandal yet.

some would call sugar a scandal, probably with valid reasoning too:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sugar-harvard-scandal-nutriti...

And they both clearly involve outright deception. The difference is probably just not as many babies dying. At least not yet, cokes aren't advertised as being healthier than breastfeeding for babies.

Re: In China, Desperate Patients Smuggle Drugs or Make Their Own

#100

Post by seanmcdirmid »

meds2010 wrote: post #99
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think only a fringe call that a scandal since it doesn't involve outright deception. It all depends on whether you think someone should save people from themselves. Sugar has probably killed more than millions, which has definitely been driven by corporate profits and gaming the system (substituting sugar for fat). But again, Coke Cola and Mars (and yes, Nestle) haven't been consider a scandal yet.

some would call sugar a scandal, probably with valid reasoning too: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sugar-harvard-scandal-nutriti... And they both clearly involve outright deception. The difference is probably just not as many babies dying. At least not yet, cokes aren't advertised as being healthier than breastfeeding for babies.

Formula is healthier than brestfeeding in some aspects (much less chance of an iron deficiency). In much of the world, there is no stigma to formula feeding a baby; I think it is mainly the USA that has gone on an aggressive breastfeeding campaign in the last few years.
Post reply on HN